Public reports pack
Argyll and Bute Council · 27 February 2025
Back to Argyll and Bute Council — 27 February 2025 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
Argyll and Bute Council Comhairle Earra-Ghàidheal Agus Bhòid Executive Director: Douglas Hendry Kilmory, Lochgilphead, PA31 8RT Tel: 01546 602127 Fax: 01546 604435 DX 599700 LOCHGILPHEAD 14 February 2025 NOTICE OF MEETING A meeting of ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL will be held ON A HYBRID BASIS IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, KILMORY, LOCHGILPHEAD AND BY MICROSOFT TEAMS on THURSDAY, 27 FEBRUARY 2025 at 10:30 AM, which you are requested to attend. Douglas Hendry Executive Director BUSINESS 1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE 2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST (IF ANY) 3. MINUTES (a) Argyll and Bute Council held on 21 November 2024 (Pages 5 - 10) (b) Special Argyll and Bute Council held on 20 December 2024 (Pages 11 - 18) 4. MINUTES OF COMMITTEES * (a) Policy and Resources Committee held on 5 December 2024 (Pages 19 - 24) (b) Community Services Committee held on 12 December 2024 (Pages 25 - 30) (c) Environment, Development and Infrastructure Committee held on 19 December 2024 (Pages 31 - 38) * (d) Policy and Resources Committee held on 20 February 2025 - to follow The above minutes are submitted to the Council for approval of any recommendations on the items which the Committee does not have delegated powers. These items are marked with an *. Public Document Pack
Page 2
5. NOTICE OF MOTION UNDER STANDING ORDER 13 Learning Estate Investment Programme (LEIP) – Mull Campus, Preferred Site Recommendation The agenda for today’s meeting includes a report on the Learning Estate Investment Programme (LEIP) – Mull Campus, Preferred Site Recommendation. This is an issue of considerable complexity and scale. The reports contain a very high level of detailed information which Members must take time and care to consider fully in order to allow them to take an informed decision on the matter. This motion does not deal with the business of that report, nor its merits. It does recognise that it is essential that Members have sufficient time to consider and scrutinise this information, reflecting the significance of the matter for the current and future generations of children and young people on Mull and the wider island community. To provide the time that detailed consideration of the report deserves and to scrutinise the proposals, I move that: 1. The business of determining the Preferred Site Recommendation for the Mull Campus is not considered today; 2. The report and its appendices are considered instead at a Special Meeting of Argyll and Bute Council, convened solely for the purpose of deciding on a preferred site for the Mull Campus, to be held on Friday 7th March 2025. Moved by: Cllr Jim Lynch Seconded by: Cllr Ross Moreland 6. LEARNING ESTATE INVESTMENT PROGRAMME (LEIP) - MULL CAMPUS - PREFERRED SITE RECOMMENDATION (a) Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Commercial Services and Education (Pages 39 - 66) (b) Appendix 1 - Hub North Scotland Site Selection and Engagement Report (February 2025) - costs redacted (Pages 67 - 118) E1 (c) Appendix 1 - Hub North Scotland Site Selection and Engagement Report (February 2025) - with costs (Pages 119 - 170) (d) Appendix 1A - Community Engagement Analysis (November 2024) https://www.argyll-bute.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2024-11/Mull Engagement Analysis.pdf (e) Appendix 1B - Long List of Sites (October 2024) https://www.argyll-bute.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2025-02/MUL-RYD-00- XX-PP-A-0004-S2-P1_Site Selection Options Appraisal_reduced size_1.pdf (f) Appendix 1C - Short List Site Plans https://www.argyll-bute.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2025-02/MUL-RYD-00- XX-TRP-A-0006-S2-P1 Shortlist Site Layouts.pdf
Page 3
(g) Appendix 1D - Utilities Infrastructure Reports https://www.argyll-bute.gov.uk/education-and-learning/schools/mull- campus-site-selection (h) Appendix 1E - Preliminary Ground Conditions Review https://www.argyll-bute.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2025-02/21252100-WAT- EGT-XX-TN-G-77_P0.02_0.pdf (i) Appendix 1F - Flooding and Drainage Report https://www.argyll-bute.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2025-02/21252100-WAT- GEN-XX-RP-C-92-S3_0.pdf (j) Appendix 1G - Place Diagrams https://www.argyll-bute.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2025-02/MUL-RYD-00- XX-TRP-A-0005-S2-P1_Place Diagrams.pdf (k) Appendix 1H - Transport Considerations Report (January 2025) (Pages 171 - 252) E1 (l) Appendix 1I - Site Abnormal Costs (Pages 253 - 268) E1 (m) Appendix 1J - Wayleaves, Legal and Site Acquisition Risk (Pages 269 - 270) (n) Appendix 1K - Integrated Impact Assessment Report (February 2025) (Pages 271 - 342) E1 (o) Appendix 1L - Valuation Report (January 2025) (Pages 343 - 410) (p) Appendix 2 - Site Scoring Outcome (Pages 411 - 412) 7. BUDGETING PACK 2025/26 Reports by Section 95 Officer Please note that the Budget Pack 2025-2026 relative to the consideration of the foregoing matters has been published separately under a meeting entitled “Budget Pack”. The budget pack will stand alone and will be published here separately from the Policy and Resources Committee and Council agendas. This will enable the same pack to be accessed at all meetings. Please ensure that you have downloaded this to your iPad before coming to the meeting. For assistance with accessing the Budget Pack from your iPad please contact committee.support@argyll-bute.gov.uk. 8. TREASURY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY AND ANNUAL INVESTMENT STRATEGY 2025-26 (Pages 413 - 456) Report by Section 95 Officer 9. 2023/24 COUNCIL ANNUAL REPORT (Pages 457 - 526) Report by Chief Executive 10. DRAFT PROGRAMME OF MEETINGS 2025/26 (Pages 527 - 530) Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Legal and Regulatory Support 11. COUNCIL CONSTITUTION UPDATE 2025 (Pages 531 - 534) Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Legal and Regulatory Support
Page 4
12. HOUSING EMERGENCY - HOUSING NEED AND DEMAND AND SUPPORTING COMMUNITY HOUSING FEASIBILITY WORK (Pages 535 - 544) Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Development and Economic Growth The Council will be asked to pass a resolution in terms of Section 50(A)(4) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 to exclude the public for items of business with an “E” on the grounds that it is likely to involve the disclosure of exempt information as defined in the appropriate paragraph of Part I of Schedule 7a to the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973. The appropriate paragraphs are:- E1 Paragraph 8 The amount of any expenditure proposed to be incurred by the authority under any particular contract for the acquisition of property or the supply of goods or services. Paragraph 9 Any terms proposed or to be proposed by or to the authority in the course of negotiations for a contract for the acquisition or disposal of property or the supply of goods or services. Argyll and Bute Council Contact: Hazel MacInnes, Senior Committee Officer Tel:01546 604269
Page 5
MINUTES of MEETING of ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL held ON A HYBRID BASIS IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, KILMORY, LOCHGILPHEAD AND BY MICROSOFT TEAMS on THURSDAY, 21 NOVEMBER 2024 Present: Councillor Jan Brown (Chair) Councillor John Armour Councillor Gordon Blair Councillor Math Campbell-Sturgess Councillor Garret Corner Councillor Audrey Forrest Councillor Kieron Green Councillor Amanda Hampsey Councillor Daniel Hampsey Councillor Graham Hardie Councillor Anne Horn Councillor Fiona Howard Councillor Mark Irvine Councillor Andrew Kain Councillor Reeni Kennedy-Boyle Councillor Jim Lynch Councillor Luna Martin Councillor Tommy MacPherson Councillor Ian James MacQuire Councillor Dougie McFadzean Councillor Ross Moreland Councillor Gary Mulvaney Councillor Iain Shonny Paterson Councillor Gemma Penfold Councillor Alastair Redman Councillor William Sinclair Councillor Andrew Vennard Councillor Peter Wallace Attending: Pippa Milne, Chief Executive Douglas Hendry, Executive Director Kirsty Flanagan, Executive Director Evan Beswick, Chief Officer – Health and Social Care Partnership David Logan, Head of Legal and Regulatory Support Fergus Murray, Head of Development and Economic Growth Shona Barton, Governance Manager Matt Mulderrig, Development Policy and Housing Manager Prior to the commencement of Business, the Depute Provost, on behalf of the Council, recognised local competitors in Argyll and Bute who had won a number of prizes at the Royal National Mod. The Depute Provost recognised one achievement in particular, which had been a first for Argyll and Bute - Oban Gaelic Choir had taken home the prestigious Lovat and Tullbardine Shield again and in doing so had made Mod history by being the first choir to win the title for four years running. 1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Maurice Corry, Willie Hume, Jennifer Kean, Paul Donald Kennedy, Liz McCabe, Julie McKenzie, Yvonne McNeilly and Dougie Philand. 2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Councillor Gary Mulvaney declared a non-financial interest in items 9 (Housing Emergency – Local Housing Strategy Annual Update) and 10 (Strategic Housing Investment Plan (SHIP) 2025-26 to 2029-30) of the agenda as he was a member of Dunbrittton Housing Association Board. Having reviewed the content of the reports, he did not feel that there was any substantive decision being taken and therefore advised that he would remain in the meeting during the consideration of these items of business. Page 5 Agenda Item 3a
Page 6
Councillor Peter Wallace advised in relation to items 9 (Housing Emergency – Local Housing Strategy Annual Update) and 10 (Strategic Housing Investment Plan (SHIP) 2025-26 to 2029-30) that he had been appointed to the Fyne Homes Management Committee by the Council. Having taken note of the Standards Commission Guidance in relation to declarations (issued on 7 December 2021), with specific reference to section 5.4(c), he did not consider that he had a relevant connection and as such would remain in the meeting. Councillor Mark Irvine declared a non-financial interest in items 9 (Housing Emergency – Local Housing Strategy Annual Update) and 10 (Strategic Housing Investment Plan (SHIP) 2025-26 to 2029-30) of the agenda as he was a member of ACHA Board. Having reviewed the content of the reports, he did not feel that there was any substantive decision being taken and therefore advised that he would remain in the meeting during the consideration of these items of business. Councillor Iain Paterson advised in relation to items 9 (Housing Emergency – Local Housing Strategy Annual Update) and 10 (Strategic Housing Investment Plan (SHIP) 2025-26 to 2029-30) that he had been appointed to the Dunbritton Housing Association Board by the Council. Having taken note of the Standards Commission Guidance in relation to declarations (issued on 7 December 2021), with specific reference to section 5.4(c), he did not consider that he had a relevant connection and as such would remain in the meeting. Councillors William Sinclair and Jan Brown each advised in relation to items 9 (Housing Emergency – Local Housing Strategy Annual Update) and 10 (Strategic Housing Investment Plan (SHIP) 2025-26 to 2029-30) of the agenda that they had been appointed to the ACHA Board by the Council. Having taken note of the Standards Commission Guidance in relation to declarations (issued on 7 December 2021), with specific reference to section 5.4(c), they did not consider that they had a relevant connection and as such would remain in the meeting. Councillor Tommy MacPherson declared a non-financial interest in items 9 (Housing Emergency – Local Housing Strategy Annual Update) and 10 (Strategic Housing Investment Plan (SHIP) 2025-26 to 2029-30) of the agenda as he was an ACHA tenant. Having reviewed the content of the reports, he did not feel that there was any substantive decision being taken and therefore advised that he would remain in the meeting during the consideration of these items of business. Councillor Dougie McFadzean advised in relation to items 9 (Housing Emergency – Local Housing Strategy Annual Update) and 10 (Strategic Housing Investment Plan (SHIP) 2025-26 to 2029-30) of the agenda that he had been appointed to the West Highland Housing Association Board by the Council. Having taken note of the Standards Commission Guidance in relation to declarations (issued on 7 December 2021), with specific reference to section 5.4(c), he did not consider that he had a relevant connection and as such would remain in the meeting. 3. MINUTES The Minutes of the meeting of Argyll and Bute Council held on 26 September 2024 were approved as a correct record. Page 6
Page 7
4. MINUTES OF COMMITTEES (a) Policy and Resources Committee held on 10 October 2024 The Minutes of the meeting of the Policy and Resources Committee held on 10 October 2024 were noted. Arising from item 4 of these Minutes (Financial Reports Monitoring Pack – 31 August 2024) the Council approved the virements over £0.200m during July and August 2024. 5. LEADER'S REPORT The Council gave consideration to a report providing an update on the activities of the Council Leader, Councillor Jim Lynch, for the period 16 September 2024 to 8 November 2024. Decision The Council noted – 1. the content of the submitted report; and 2. that any reports, briefings or copy correspondence referred to in the report could be requested through the Leadership Support Manager, noting that some confidential reports provided by external organisations such as COSLA may be restricted. (Reference: Report by Leader of the Council dated 8 November 2024, submitted) 6. POLICY LEADS REPORT The Council gave consideration to a report providing an update on key areas of activity for each Policy Lead Councillor covering the period 26 September 2024 to 8 November 2024. Decision The Council noted the content of the report. (Reference: Report by Policy leader Councillors dated 8 November 2024, submitted) 7. POLITICAL MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS The Council gave consideration to a report setting out remaining vacancies that had been carried forward from the Council meeting on 26 September; the report also provided an updated Political Composition of the Council. Decision The Council – 1. appointed Councillor Jim Lynch to Ionad Chaluim Chille Ìle (ICCI), The Gaelic Centre, Islay; 2. noted the updated Political Composition of the Council; and Page 7
Page 8
3. noted that Councillor Dougie McFadzean had indicated his intention to step down from the Argyll and Bute Care and Repair Agency, and therefore appointed Councillor Anne Horn to Argyll and Bute Care and Repair Agency. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Legal and Regulatory Support dated 4 November 2024, submitted; and Motion by Councillor Jim Lynch, seconded by Councillor Audrey Forrest, tabled) 8. SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT CONSULTATION ON PROXY VOTING FOR COUNCILLORS The Council gave consideration to a report providing details on the terms of a Scottish Government consultation looking at the idea of making a provision for Local Authority Councillors to have an option for votes to be undertaken by proxy in specific circumstances. The report provided a draft response for agreement by the Council. Decision The Council 1. noted the content of the submitted report; 2. agreed a response to the consultation be prepared for submission to the Scottish Government in consultation with the Leader, Depute Leaders and Leader of the Opposition. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Legal and Regulatory Support dated 25 October 2024, submitted) 9. HOUSING EMERGENCY - LOCAL HOUSING STRATEGY ANNUAL UPDATE The Council gave consideration to a report detailing progress made on the Outcomes within the Local Housing Strategy to date and incorporation of the Housing Emergency Action Plan within the Local Housing Strategy Update. The report also provided detail on progress made in terms of the Council tackling the Housing Emergency in Argyll and Bute and proposed a set of metrics by which progress could continue to be measured. Decision The Council – 1. approved the content of the Local Housing Strategy Annual Update; 2. noted the ongoing activity and progress in relation to addressing the Housing Emergency; and 3. approved the metrics detailed in Section 4.19 of the report which would annually measure progress in tackling the Housing Emergency. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Development and Economic Growth dated October 2024, submitted) Page 8
Page 9
10. STRATEGIC HOUSING INVESTMENT PLAN (SHIP) 2025-26 TO 2029-30 The Council gave consideration to a report outlining the proposed annual Strategic Housing Investment Plan covering the period 2025/26 to 2029/30 and summarised the proposals for the revised Strategic Housing Investment Plan, in line with statutory requirements in the latest guidance. Decision The Council agreed to – 1. continue to speak up for Argyll and Bute, highlighting the issues that will help to ensure that everyone who needs a home can find one that they can afford, in the right place and at the right time; 2. note that the Leader and officers of the Council are meeting with the Local Government Housing and Planning Committee of the Scottish Parliament on Monday 25th November to highlight the housing issues in the area; 3. the SHIP document 2025/26 – 2029/30, submitted to the Scottish Government on 25th October 2024, as the Council’s approved Strategic Housing Investment Plan. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Development and Economic Growth dated November 2024, submitted; and Motion by Councillor Jim Lynch, seconded by Councillor Audrey Forrest, tabled) 11. LOCAL HEAT AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY STRATEGY (LHEES) The Council gave consideration to a report advising on the outcome of the Local Heat and Energy Efficiency Strategy consultation exercise which had received a positive response both in terms of volume of response and general support for the Strategy. Decision The Council – 1. approved the content of the submitted report; and 2. adopted the Local Heat and Energy Efficiency Strategy and Delivery Plan as detailed at Appendix 1 and 2 to the submitted report. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Development and Economic Growth dated 21 November 2024, submitted) 12. HIGHLANDS AND ISLANDS REGIONAL ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP - REGIONAL ECONOMIC STRATEGY The Council gave consideration to a report providing background and context on the development of the Highlands and Islands Regional Economic Strategy through the Highlands and Islands Regional Economic Partnership. Decision Page 9
Page 10
The Council endorsed the Highlands and Islands Regional Economic Strategy to be taken forward by the Highland and Islands Regional Economic Partnership. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Development and Economic Growth dated 28 October 2024, submitted) 13. TIMELINE UPDATE: ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL VISITOR LEVY The Council gave consideration to a report providing an update on the pre-consultation preparatory work for the draft Argyll and Bute Visitor Levy Scheme. Decision The Council – 1. noted the content of the submitted report; and 2. endorsed the requirement for the draft Argyll and Bute Council Visitor Levy Scheme and associated papers to be considered to go out to a 12 week consultation period in January to March 2025 at a Special Council meeting on 20 December 2024 rather than on 21 November 2024. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Development and Economic Growth dated 7 November 2024, submitted) 14. TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (SCOTLAND) ACT 1997 - APPOINTMENT OF CHIEF PLANNING OFFICER A report providing an update on the appointment of a Chief Planning Officer for Argyll and Bute Council was before the Council for noting. Decision The Council noted the appointment of Fergus Murray as Chief Planning Officer for Argyll and Bute Council. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Legal and Regulatory Support dated October 2024, submitted) Page 10
Page 11
MINUTES of SPECIAL MEETING of ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL held ON A HYBRID BASIS IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, KILMORY, LOCHGILPHEAD AND BY MICROSOFT TEAMS on FRIDAY, 20 DECEMBER 2024 Present: Councillor Dougie Philand (Chair) Councillor John Armour Councillor Gordon Blair Councillor Jan Brown Councillor Math Campbell- Sturgess Councillor Garret Corner Councillor Maurice Corry Councillor Audrey Forrest Councillor Kieron Green Councillor Amanda Hampsey Councillor Daniel Hampsey Councillor Graham Hardie Councillor Anne Horn Councillor Fiona Howard Councillor Willie Hume Councillor Mark Irvine Councillor Andrew Kain Councillor Jennifer Kean Councillor Paul Donald Kennedy Councillor Reeni Kennedy-Boyle Councillor Jim Lynch Councillor Luna Martin Councillor Tommy MacPherson Councillor Liz McCabe Councillor Dougie McFadzean Councillor Julie McKenzie Councillor Yvonne McNeilly Councillor Ross Moreland Councillor Gary Mulvaney Councillor Iain Shonny Paterson Councillor Gemma Penfold Councillor Alastair Redman Councillor William Sinclair Councillor Andrew Vennard Councillor Peter Wallace Attending: Pippa Milne, Chief Executive Douglas Hendry, Executive Director Kirsty Flanagan, Executive Director David Logan, Head of Legal and Regulatory Support Carolyn Earl, Interim Head of Financial Services Fergus Murray, Head of Development and Economic Growth Shona Barton, Governance Manager Ishabel Bremner, Economic Growth Manager 1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Ian MacQuire. 2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST There were no declarations of interest intimated. Councillor Yvonne McNeilly joined the meeting during discussion of agenda item 3 (Audited Annual Accounts for the year ended 31 March 2024). 3. AUDITED ANNUAL ACCOUNTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31 MARCH 2024 The Council gave consideration to a report providing an update on the external audit of the Annual Accounts for the Council for the year ended 31 March 2024 and to a recommendation from the Audit and Scrutiny Committee held on 17 December 2024. Decision Page 11 Agenda Item 3b
Page 12
The Council – 1. noted that the audit was substantially complete and that Forvis Mazars have advised the Council that they are expecting to issue an unqualified opinion on the Council’s Annual Accounts for the year ended 31 March 2024; 2. noted Forvis Mazars Annual Audit Report, given in Appendix 2 to the submitted report; 3. authorised for issue, the Council’s Audited Annual Accounts for the year ended 31 March 2024, on the basis that no material changes were anticipated to arise from the follow up letter from Forvis Mazars, otherwise the Audited Annual Accounts would be referred back to Members for approval; and 4. approved for signature the Letter of Representation, included as Appendix 4 to the submitted report. (Reference: Report by Section 95 Officer dated December 2024, submitted) 4. TREASURY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY AND ANNUAL INVESTMENT STRATEGY - MID YEAR REVIEW REPORT 2024/25 The Council gave consideration to the Treasury Management Strategy and Annual Investment Strategy Mid-year Review Report and to a recommendation from the meeting of the Audit and Scrutiny Committee held on 17 December 2024. Decision The Council agreed the recommendation from the Audit and Scrutiny Committee – 1. that the report and the treasury activity during the period 1 April to 30 September 2024 be noted; and 2. that the changes to prudential indicators at set out in paragraph 5.4 of the report are approved. (Reference: Recommendation from meeting of the Audit and Scrutiny Committee held on 17 December 2024 and report by Section 95 Officer dated 29 November 2024, submitted) 5. AUDIT AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE ANNUAL REPORT 2023/24 The Council gave consideration to a report which presented the Chair of the Audit and Scrutiny Committee’s annual overview of the Committees activity during the financial year 2023/24 and a summary of key developments since the commencement of 2024/25. The report set out how the Committee had fulfilled its remit and provided assurances to the Council. Decision The Council endorsed the Annual Report by the Chair of the Audit and Scrutiny Committee. (Reference: Report by Chair of Audit and Scrutiny Committee dated 3 December 2024, submitted) Page 12
Page 13
Councillor Iain Shonny Paterson joined the meeting during discussion of agenda item 6 (Argyll and Bute Council Draft Visitor Levy Scheme). 6. ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL DRAFT VISITOR LEVY SCHEME The Council gave consideration to a report providing a draft Visitor Levy Scheme and all associated paperwork for discussion and which sought approval for the draft Visitor Levy Scheme to go out to a 12 week public consultation in early January 2025. Motion The Council: 1. Notes the report on an Argyll and Bute Draft Visitor Levy Scheme, the related impact assessments and formal consultation documents outlined in Appendices 1, 2 and 3. 2. Notes the Scottish Tourism Alliance (STA) visitor levy policy position as referred to by the Executive Director in her presentation. 3. Acknowledges the feedback provided by all those who took part in the pre-consultation survey and stakeholder workshops and, in addition, the range of views, for and against, shared by local residents and businesses. 4. Agrees the draft Argyll and Bute Council Visitor Levy Scheme formal consultation document (Appendix 3), with reference to all appropriate content (Appendices 1 and 2), to go to a formal, 12-week public consultation in early January 2025. Moved by Councillor Jim Lynch, seconded by Councillor Ross Moreland. Amendment 1 Members having considered the report: 1. Agree to note the content of the paper. 2. Expresses strong opposition to the introduction of any Visitor Levy Scheme within Argyll and Bute, considering the negative economic and administrative impacts such a levy would have on the tourism industry, local businesses, and residents. 3. Rejects the need for any further consultation on the Visitor Levy Scheme, deeming it an unnecessary expense and an undue burden on council resources. 4. Instructs officers to discontinue any plans related to the preparation, consultation, or implementation of a Visitor Levy Scheme. 5. Calls on the Council Leader to strongly advocate to the Scottish Government and other relevant authorities against imposing a Visitor Levy on local authorities, highlighting the potential harm to the tourism-dependent economy of Argyll and Bute. 6. Agrees that no additional council resources or officer time should be allocated to developing or promoting a Visitor Levy Scheme. Moved by Councillor Daniel Hampsey, seconded by Councillor Garret Corner. Amendment 2 Page 13
Page 14
Agree to proceed to consultation on the basis set out in the report subject to 1. agree to a 12month consultation period. 2. to be run in tandem with ongoing engagement with accommodation providers, stakeholders, and with regular reporting on progress to the Council’s Policy and Resources Committee throughout the period of the consultation. This will allow Members, at intervals throughout the 12month period, the opportunity to digest and scrutinise, the much-needed data-based analysis to determine the schemes complexities before making an informed decision to introduce a Visitor Levy or not. Moved by Councillor Tommy Macpherson, seconded by Councillor Fiona Howard. As the meeting was being held on a hybrid basis, the vote required to be taken by calling the Roll and Members voted as follows – Motion Amendment 1 Amendment 2 Cllr Armour Cllr Corner Cllr Howard Cllr Blair Cllr Corry Cllr Macpherson Cllr Brown Cllr A Hampsey Cllr Campbell-Sturgess Cllr D Hampsey Cllr Forrest Cllr Kean Cllr Green Cllr McCabe Cllr Hardie Cllr McNeilly Cllr Horn Cllr Mulvaney Cllr Hume Cllr Penfold Cllr Irvine Cllr Redman Cllr Kain Cllr Vennard Cllr Kennedy Cllr Wallace Cllr Kennedy-Boyle Cllr Lynch Cllr Martin Cllr McFadzean Cllr McKenzie Cllr Moreland Cllr Paterson Cllr Philand Cllr Sinclair Decision The Motion received 21 votes, Amendment 1 received 12 votes and Amendment 2 received 2 votes. The Motion having received an overall majority in terms of those Members present and voting, the Council resolved accordingly. Page 14
Page 15
(Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Development and Economic Growth dated 4 December 2024, submitted) Councillor Amanda Hampsey left the meeting during discussion of agenda item 7 (Learning Estate Investment Programme (LEIP) – Mull Campus Update). 7. LEARNING ESTATE INVESTMENT PROGRAMME (LEIP) - MULL CAMPUS UPDATE The Council gave consideration to a report providing an update on the Learning Estate Investment Programme (LEIP) Mull 2 – 18 campus project which was at site selection stage. Decision The Council - 1. Acknowledged the work done to date to progress this significant project which aims to deliver a new campus for Mull; 2. Welcomed the engagement that has taken place and thanks the residents and communities who have taken time to share and contribute their views; 3. Noted that the possibility of a split-site option for the Mull Campus was raised as part of the engagement work and has been explored in both educational benefit terms and the Scottish Government’s Learning Estate Investment Programme (LEIP) funding metrics; 4. Having regard to the information provided in respect of educational benefits elements and funding metrics, and the advice of the Council’s Chief Financial Officer that a two- site Mull Campus would not be affordable, agreed that the process would continue on a single-site basis for delivery of a new Mull Campus; 5. Noted the unanimous view of the community in Iona in relation to their removal from the scope of the project, and agreed that this is given effect to; 6. Agreed the updated timeline set out in the report in relation to a further paper with recommendations in relation to a site for the Mull Campus being brought forward for consideration by the full Council. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Commercial Services and Education dated 6 December 2024, submitted) 8. APPOINTMENT OF A RECRUITMENT PANEL FOR THE HEAD OF ROADS AND INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES The Council gave consideration to a report inviting the establishment of an Appointments Panel to appoint to the post of Head of Roads and Infrastructure Services. Decision Page 15
Page 16
The Council – 1. agreed to establish an Appointments Panel for the recruitment to the post of Head of Roads and Infrastructure Services; 2. nominated Councillors Jim Lynch and John Armour from the Administration and Councillor Gary Mulvaney from the opposition to the Appointments Panel; and 3. nominated Councillors Audrey Forrest and Ross Moreland from the Administration and Councillor Peter Wallace from the opposition as substitute members. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Legal and Regulatory Support dated 20 December 2024, submitted) 9. REVISION OF ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL'S SHORT-TERM LET LICENSING POLICY The Council gave consideration to a recommendation from the meeting of the Planning, Protective Services and Licensing Committee held on 18 December 2024 in relation to a revised Short-Term Let Licensing Policy. Decision The Council approved the revised Short-Term Let Licensing Policy as per the recommendation from the Planning, Protective Services and Licensing Committee. (Reference: Recommendation from Planning, Protective Services and Licensing Committee held on 18 December 2024; and report by Executive Director with responsibility for Development and Economic Growth dated 2 December 2024, submitted) Councillor Luna Martin left the meeting during discussion of agenda item 9 (Revision of Argyll and Bute Council’s Short-term Let Licensing Policy). The Provost advised that in terms of Section 50(A)(4) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973, the recommendations contained at item 10(b) of the agenda would require him to exclude the press and public should any Member wish to discuss the content of those recommendations on the grounds that they were likely to involve the disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 6 of Part 1 of Schedule 7A to the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973. Having noted that the Council wished to discuss the content of the recommendations contained at item 10(b) of the agenda, the Council agreed that the press and public be excluded for the following item of business. Councillor Amanda Hampsey re-joined the meeting for discussion of agenda item 10 (Oban Airport Business Park). 10. OBAN AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK The Council gave consideration to a recommendation from the meeting of the Policy and Resources Committee held on 5 December 2024 in relation to Oban Airport Business Park. Decision Page 16
Page 17
The Council agreed the recommendation from the meeting of the Policy and Resources Committee held on 5 December 2024 as detailed within item 14(b) of the agenda. (Reference: Recommendation from Policy and Resources Committee held on 5 December 2024; and report by Executive Director with responsibility for Commercial Services and Executive Director with responsibility for Development and Economic Growth dated 28 November 2024, submitted) Page 17
Page 18
This page is intentionally left blank
Page 19
MINUTES of MEETING of POLICY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE held ON A HYBRID BASIS IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, KILMORY, LOCHGILPHEAD AND BY MICROSOFT TEAMS on THURSDAY, 5 DECEMBER 2024 Present: Councillor Audrey Forrest (Chair) Councillor John Armour Councillor Gordon Blair Councillor Math Campbell-Sturgess Councillor Kieron Green Councillor Mark Irvine Councillor Reeni Kennedy-Boyle Councillor Dougie McFadzean Councillor Yvonne McNeilly Councillor Ross Moreland Councillor Gary Mulvaney Also Present: Councillor Maurice Corry Councillor Tommy MacPherson Attending: Kirsty Flanagan, Executive Director Douglas Hendry, Executive Director Carolyn Earl, Interim Head of Financial Services Jane Fowler, Head of Customer and Support Services Jim Smith, Head of Roads and Infrastructure Services Fergus Murray, Head of Development and Economic Growth Shona Barton, Governance Manager Suzanne Mason, Engagement and Communities Lead 1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Amanda Hampsey, Jim Lynch, Liz McCabe and Dougie Philand. 2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST There were no declarations of interest intimated. 3. MINUTES The Minutes of the meeting of the Policy and Resources Committee held on 10 October 2024 were approved as a correct record. * 4. FINANCIAL REPORTS MONITORING PACK - 31 OCTOBER 2024 The Committee gave consideration to a report providing a summary of the financial monitoring reports as at the end of October 2024. Decision The Policy and Resources Committee agreed to – 1. note the revenue budget monitoring report as at 31 October 2024; 2. note the financial risks for 2024-25; Page 19 Agenda Item 4a
Page 20
3. note the capital plan monitoring report as at 31 October 2024 and approve the proposed changes to the capital plan outlined in Appendix 4 of that report; 4. note the reserves and balances report as at 31 October 2024; and 5. recommend to Council that the revenue virements over £0.200m during September and October 2024 are approved. (Reference: Report by Section 95 Officer dated 12 November 2024, submitted) 5. BUDGET OUTLOOK 2025-26 TO 2029-30 The Committee considered a report providing an update to the budget outlook covering the period 2025-26 to 2029-30. Decision The Policy and Resources Committee noted – 1. the current estimated budget outlook position for the period 2025-26 to 2029-30; and 2. that the budget outlook now included new management/operational and policy options presented by officers for consideration as part of the budget in February 2025; and further noted that detailed templates would be provided to Council. (Reference: Report by Section 95 Officer dated 12 November 2024, submitted) 6. SUPPORTING COMMUNITIES FUND - REVIEW AND OUTLINE PROPOSALS The Committee considered a report setting out recommendations from an internal review of the Council’s annual Supporting Communities Fund (SCF) to support improvements for communities applying in 2025/26. Decision The Policy and Resources Committee – 1. noted the findings from the internal review and that further feedback was being gathered from community groups on their experiences to help improvements; 2. agreed the proposed next steps and timeframe for the 2025/26 round of Supporting Communities Fund (SCF); 3. agreed that a detailed paper would come to February 2025 Policy and Resources Committee to consider and agree an improved approach to SCF for 2025/26; and 4. approved that, within 2025/26, officers explore the scope of grants available to community groups in Argyll and Bute through the Council, CPP partners and other funding bodies and consider possibilities for collaboration and realignment. Further to this, to consider the potential format of local decision making for grants available through the council and/ or collaborations. (Reference: Report by Chief Executive dated 4 November 2024, submitted) Page 20
Page 21
7. ENGAGING COMMUNITIES FRAMEWORK - DRAFT The Committee considered a report presenting the Draft Engaging Communities Framework for approval. Decision The Policy and Resources Committee – 1. approved the content of the Engagement Framework; and 2. noted that the Framework would be produced in a user-friendly format, reviewed annually to support learning and development of best practice, and promotion of the Framework and training on its content for staff and elected members is in development. (Reference: Report by Chief Executive dated 5 November 2024, submitted) * 8. VOLUNTEER POLICY AND VOLUNTEER PROCEDURE The Committee gave consideration to a report introducing a new Council wide Volunteer Policy and Procedure. Decision The Policy and Resources Committee agreed – 1. the Volunteer Policy; 2. that PVG costs for volunteers would be covered by existing service budgets; and 3. to forward the Policy to Council for final approval. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Customer Support Services dated 30 October 2024, submitted) 9. OCTOBER 2023 WEATHER EVENT - NOVEMBER 2024 UPDATE The Committee considered a report following up on the report presented to the Policy and Resources Committee on 15 August 2024 in respect of the October 2023 weather event. Decision The Policy and Resources Committee – 1. noted the update on the current position of the projects; and 2. agreed that further updates on the October 2023 Weather Event would be made to the Environment, Development and Infrastructure Committee rather than to the Policy and Resources Committee. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Roads and Infrastructure Services dated 26 November 2024, submitted) Page 21
Page 22
10. RURAL GROWTH DEAL - PROJECT DEVELOPMENT COSTS The Committee considered a report providing an update on the Rural Growth Deal (RGD) and specifically costs associated with the Business Case and Project Development. Decision The Policy and Resources Committee – 1. noted that the total estimated essential development costs to inform Treasury Five compliant Full Business Cases for all projects amounted to £3.183m and these costs required to be incurred in advance of Central Government endorsement at risk to the Council and lead delivery partners; 2. agreed that the Council sets aside a fund from the Priorities Investment Fund to the value of £0.700m that can pay for the development costs for Council projects on the basis that all will be paid back by the end of Year 10; 3. agreed that any cash flow funding requests for projects led by external partners would be brought to the Policy and Resources Committee for approval as and when a request for funding was made and considered on a case by case basis; and 4. delegated to the Internal Programme Board (Chief Executive and Executive Directors) to approve pre-development funding requests relating to Council led projects up to a threshold of £250k per project from the new Fund. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Development and Economic Growth dated 20 November 2024, submitted) 11. CROWN ESTATE FUNDING The Committee gave consideration to a report requesting agreement on additional funding being allocated to Campbeltown War Memorial and permission for Argyll Countryside Trust (ACT) to sell their Eco-Hub which had been part funded through Crown Estates Funding. Decision The Policy and Resources Committee agreed to – 1. allocate additional funding of up to £11,000 to complete the upgrade works at Campbeltown War Memorial from Crown Estate contingency funding; and 2. grant permission to ACT to sell their Eco-Hub, which was part funded through Crown Estates funding in 2021; and agree in principal that the returned proceeds in addition to the remaining 5% retention (anticipated to be £28.5k) are reinvested in the new Kilmory site. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Development and Economic Growth dated 26 November 2024, submitted) Page 22
Page 23
12. CLIMATE CHANGE BOARD UPDATE & DECARBONISATION TRACKER The Committee gave consideration to a report providing an overview of key highlights from the Decarbonisation Plan Tracker, offering a strategic snapshot of recent progress. Decision The Policy and Resources Committee noted the updates contained at Section 5 of the submitted report and the full Decarbonisation Tracker update contained at Appendix A to the submitted report. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Commercial Services dated 7 November 2024, submitted) The Chair ruled and the Committee agreed to take item 14 of the agenda (Policy and Resources Committee Workplan) at this point, before the exclusion of the press and public for item 13 of the agenda (Oban Airport Business Park), to facilitate smooth running of the agenda. 13. POLICY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE WORKPLAN The Policy and Resources Committee Workplan was before the Committee for noting. Decision The Policy and Resources Committee noted the content of the Workplan as at 5 December 2024. (Reference: Policy and Resources Committee Workplan dated 5 December 2024, submitted) The Committee resolved in terms of Section 50(A)(4) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 to exclude the press and public for the following item of business on the grounds that it was likely to involve the disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 6 of Part 1 of Schedule 7A to the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973. * 14. OBAN AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK The Committee gave consideration to a report providing an update on progress of the Oban Airport Business Park project and how it fitted within the wider Lorn Arc Tax Incremental Finance (TIF) Programme. Decision The Policy and Resources Committee agreed the recommendations as contained within the submitted report. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Commercial Services and Executive Director with responsibility for Development and Economic Growth dated 28 November 2024, submitted) Page 23
Page 24
This page is intentionally left blank
Page 25
MINUTES of MEETING of COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE held ON A HYBRID BASIS IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, KILMORY, LOCHGILPHEAD AND BY MICROSOFT TEAMS on THURSDAY, 12 DECEMBER 2024 Present: Councillor Audrey Forrest (Chair) Councillor Gordon Blair Councillor Maurice Corry Councillor Daniel Hampsey Councillor Graham Hardie Councillor Anne Horn Councillor Fiona Howard Councillor Paul Donald Kennedy Councillor Dougie McFadzean Councillor Julie McKenzie Councillor Iain Shonny Paterson Councillor Gemma Penfold Councillor Dougie Philand Margaret Anderson Daniel Semple Reverend Dorothy Wallace, Church Rep Attending: Douglas Hendry, Executive Director Jen Crocket, Head of Education: Wellbeing, Inclusion and Achievement Wendy Brownlie, Head of Education: Performance and Improvement Stuart McLean, Committee Manager Chief Superintendent Gary I’Anson, Police Scotland Superintendent Mark Stirling, Police Scotland Chief Inspector James McArthur, Police Scotland Chief Inspector Lee Page, Police Scotland Group Commander Barrie McCutcheon, Scottish Fire and Rescue Service Station Commander Rob Taylor, Scottish Fire and Rescue Service Charlotte Craig, Business Improvement Manager, Argyll and Bute HSCP Paul Ashworth, Services and Support Manager, Live Argyll Rhona Grant, Team Leader, Live Argyll 1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Amanda Hampsey, Jennifer Kean and Yvonne McNeilly. 2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Councillor Iain Shonny Paterson declared a financial interest in item 6 (Argyll & Bute Health & Social Care Partnership – Annual Performance Report) and item 7 (Argyll & Bute Health & Social Care Partnership – Quarterly Performance Report FQ1 2024/25) as he ran a business which dealt with people with special needs. He advised that he would remain in the meeting during the discussion of these reports. 3. MINUTES The Minute of the Community Services Committee held on 22 August 2024 was approved as a correct record. 4. POLICE SCOTLAND ARGYLL & BUTE PERFORMANCE SUMMARY REPORT - REPORTING PERIOD: APRIL - SEPTEMBER 2024 Chief Superintendent Gary I’Anson presented the Argyll and Bute Performance Summary Report of Police Scotland’s Policing Priorities for Q2 April – September 2024. He also Page 25 Agenda Item 4b
Page 26
provided a briefing on the new Police Scotland 2030 vision and three year business plan and responded to questions asked. Decision The Committee reviewed and noted the content of the report along with the briefing on the new Police Scotland 2030 vision and three year business plan. (Reference: Report for Q2 2024 – 2025 by Divisional Commander for Argyll and Bute, West Dunbarton Division, Police Scotland, submitted) 5. SCOTTISH FIRE AND RESCUE SERVICE - ARGYLL & BUTE PERFORMANCE REPORT Q2 - 1 JUNE - 30 SEPTEMBER 2024 With the aid of power point slides, Group Commander Barrie McCutcheon and Station Commander Rob Taylor presented a report highlighting Scottish Fire and Rescue Service’s review of local performance within Argyll and Bute for Q2 (1 June – 30 September 2024) and responded to a number of questions asked. Decision The Committee reviewed and noted the contents of the report. (Reference: Q2 2024/25 Report by Local Senior Officer, Scottish Fire and Rescue Service, submitted) 6. ARGYLL & BUTE HEALTH & SOCIAL CARE PARTNERSHIP - ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2023/24 A report presenting the Annual Performance Report for the Health & Social Care Partnership for the year 2023/24 was considered. Decision The Committee noted and considered Annual Performance Report for the Health & Social Care Partnership for the year 2023/24 (Reference: Report by Chief Officer, Argyll & Bute HSCP dated 12 December 2024, submitted) 7. ARGYLL & BUTE HEALTH & SOCIAL CARE PARTNERSHIP - PERFORMANCE REPORT FQ1 2024/25 (APRIL - JUNE) A report detailing performance for FQ1 (April – June) 2024/25 for Argyll & Bute Health & Social Care Partnership was considered. Decision The Committee agreed to: 1. acknowledge performance for FQ1 2024/25 (April – June); 2. acknowledge performance update on the National Health & Wellbeing Outcomes and Ministerial Steering Group Integration Indicators; and Page 26
Page 27
3. note Delayed Discharge Sitrep as of 1 July 2024. (Reference: Report by Senior Manager, Performance and Improvement, Argyll and Bute HSCP dated 12 December 2024, submitted) 8. FURNACE PRIMARY SCHOOL - MOTHBALLING A report updating the Committee on the current situation of Furnace Primary School and proposing a number of measures under which the Education Service can monitor the position of the School over the forthcoming year was considered. Decision The Committee agreed that: 1. Furnace Primary School is mothballed on a temporary basis, and that the building be retained for one year on a care and maintenance basis; 2. Officers would conduct a review of the School’s mothballing ahead of the Committee’s December 2025 meeting, at which Members could decide on a continued period of mothballing or request that Officers commence a preliminary exercise to examine the future options for Furnace Primary School; and 3. The community should have pre-arranged access to the building to promote any community functions during the period of mothballing. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Education dated 6 November 2024, submitted) Councillor Iain Shonny Paterson left the meeting at this point. 9. SCHOOL HOLIDAY DATES 2026-2029 A consultation on School Holiday Dates was carried out from 12 August – 4 October 2024 with an aim to set the in-service days for teachers and the holiday dates for pupils across the authority for 2026-2029. The consultation included parents/carers, pupils and staff. The proposed dates, contained within Appendix 1 of this report, were before the Committee for consideration. Decision The Committee agreed the school holiday dates for 2026-2029 contained within Appendix 1 of the report. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Education dated November 2024, submitted) 10. EDUCATION PERFORMANCE DATA ANALYSIS 2023-24 A report giving an overview of essential performance data and outcomes for all students in Argyll and Bute’s ten secondary schools for the 2023-2024 academic session was considered. Page 27
Page 28
Decision The Committee agreed to: 1. consider the information contained in this report; 2. commend the hard work and commitment of pupils and staff in securing these levels of attainment and achievement and recognised the crucial role in such success played by parents and carers in partnership with the schools; 3. note the SQA directive that, because of the different assessment arrangements in place each year over the period 2020-2023, meaningful comparison between results in 2024 and the other years in this period specifically 2020 and 2021, was limited; and 4. note that a further report would come to a future meeting of the Committee once final Insight date for session 2023-2024 was made available in the February 2025 Insight update. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Education dated December 2024, submitted) 11. ANNUAL PARTICIPATION MEASURE 2023-24 A report providing Members with information on the most recent Annual Participation Measure published by Skills Development Scotland in August 2024 covering the period April 2023 – March 2024 was considered. Decision The Committee agreed to: 1. consider the information in relation to the 2023-2024 Annual Participation Measure; 2. note the consistently strong performance of Argyll and Bute as a council area in facilitating the participation of 16 – 19 year olds; and 3. note the change in statistical detail brought about by the revision of 2023 Participation figures to exclude data provided by His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Education dated 12 December 2024, submitted) 12. COMMUNITY LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT: STRATEGIC PLAN FOR CLD IN ARGYLL AND BUTE 2024-2027 A report updating the Committee on the development of the Community Learning and Development (CLD) Strategic Plan for 2024-2027 was considered. Decision The Committee agreed to: 1. note the areas for action identified in the new plan; and Page 28
Page 29
2. consider and approve the CLD Partnership Strategic Plan for 2024-2027. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Education dated 12 December 2024, submitted) 13. EXTERNAL EDUCATION ESTABLISHMENT INSPECTION REPORT A report providing details of all external establishment inspection reports received across Argyll and Bute Education Service during the period August to December 2024 was before the Committee for information. Decision The Committee agreed to note: 1. the contents of this report; 2. that this quarterly report would be presented on an ongoing basis to the Community Services Committee detailing all establishment inspections conducted and published by Education Scotland within that period; and 3. that Ward Members would receive copies of school inspection reports for schools within their area as published by Education Scotland. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Education dated December 2024, submitted) 14. COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE WORK PLAN 2024-2025 The Community Services Committee work plan for 2024-2025 was before the Committee for information. Decision The Committee noted the contents of the work plan. (Reference: Community Services Committee Work Plan 2024-2025, submitted) Page 29
Page 30
This page is intentionally left blank
Page 31
MINUTES of MEETING of ENVIRONMENT, DEVELOPMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE held ON A HYBRID BASIS IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, KILMORY, LOCHGILPHEAD AND BY MICROSOFT TEAMS on THURSDAY, 19 DECEMBER 2024 Present: Councillor John Armour (Chair) Also Present: Councillor Jan Brown Councillor Graham Hardie Councillor Willie Hume Councillor Jim Lynch Councillor Tommy MacPherson Councillor Ian James MacQuire Councillor Luna Martin Councillor Kieron Green Councillor Ross Moreland Councillor Gary Mulvaney Councillor Alastair Redman Councillor William Sinclair Councillor Andrew Vennard Councillor Peter Wallace Attending: Kirsty Flanagan, Executive Director Stephen Hall, Consultant Alan Millar, Performance Manager Hugh O’Neill, Network and Standards Manager Scott Reid, Marine Operations Manager Stuart Watson, Assistant Network and Standards Manager Colin Young, Strategic Transport Delivery Officer Stuart McLean, Committee Manager Colin Buchanan, on behalf of Luing Community Council 1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Andrew Kain. DEPUTATION The Chair intimated that a request for a deputation to be heard by Luing Community Council had been received. It was unanimously agreed to hear from this deputation. The Committee heard from Colin Buchanan, Vice Convener of Luing Community Council, in relation to Marine Operations: Mainland Ferry Service which would be dealt with at Item 9 of the Agenda. The Chair thanked Colin Buchanan and advised that the submission would be considered under item 9 of the Agenda (Marine Operations: Mainland Ferry Service). 2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST There were no declarations of interest. 3. MINUTES The Minutes of the meeting of the Environment, Development and Infrastructure Committee held on 12 September 2024 were approved as a correct record. Page 31 Agenda Item 4c
Page 32
4. ROUTE OPTIMISATION UPDATE The Committee gave consideration to a report providing an update on the Route Optimisation project. The Route Optimisation system will enable existing cyclical activities such as bin collection, grass cutting and gritting, to be tested for efficiency and, where possible, routes remodelled to be more efficient and effective. Decision The Environment, Development and Infrastructure Committee – 1. considered the progress of the Route Optimisation project; 2. noted the delays to the initial progress plan and the new milestones; 3. noted that monthly progress updates would be provided to Elected Members from January 2025 via the RIS Weekly Briefings; and 4. noted that a further update report would be brought back to the next Environment, Development and Infrastructure Committee meeting in March 2025 together with a demonstration of the system. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Roads and Infrastructure Services dated December 2024, submitted) 5. CEMETERY ASSET - ANNUAL REPORT The Committee gave consideration to a report providing the annual update on the current Argyll and Bute “active” cemetery portfolio of 63 sites - number of lairs available for sale and operational timescales within the Cemetery Development programme. The report also confirmed the current list of cemeteries subject to restrictions on the pre-sale of lairs. Decision The Environment, Development and Infrastructure Committee – 1. noted the annual lairs sales figures and remaining availability; 2. noted the updated comments relevant to the Cemetery Development programme; and 3. agreed the updated list of sites, where the pre-sale of lairs is restricted. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Roads and Infrastructure Services dated December 2024, submitted) 6. REVIEW OF ROADS AND INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES - UPDATE The Committee gave consideration to a report providing an update on progress and next steps in relation to the Roads and Infrastructure Service Review, Decision The Environment, Development and Infrastructure Committee – Page 32
Page 33
1. noted the content of the report; and 2. agreed to receive a further report on progress of the Roads and Infrastructure Service Review in March 2025 (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Roads and Infrastructure Services dated December 2024, submitted) 7. SECOND DOMESTIC BIN REVIEW 2024 The Committee gave consideration to a report seeking approval for officers to carry out an online consultation exercise regarding second bins and the criteria that should be considered for these. Paper copies of the consultation will be available in the Council’s Customer Service Points for any person who is not able to complete the consultation online. The report also provided an update on the review of second bins. Decision The Environment, Development and Infrastructure Committee – 1. agreed that officers carry out an online consultation exercise regarding second bins, over a 4 week period in the new year. The criteria that should be considered for these, with the detail of the consultation, being delegated to the Executive Director with overall responsibility for Roads and Infrastructure Services, in consultation with the Policy Lead for Roads, Transport and Amenity Services; 2. agreed that the second domestic bin review be paused to allow consultation to be undertaken on future eligibility of second bins; and 3. noted that a report on the outcome of the consultation would be brought back to a future Committee. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Roads and Infrastructure Services dated December 2024, submitted) 8. WASTE LANDFILL BAN UPDATE The Committee gave consideration to a report providing an update on the progress towards landfill ban compliance. The report also provided an update on financial implications in respect of the landfill ban and other waste issues. Decision The Environment, Development and Infrastructure Committee considered and noted the content of the report. (Reference: Report by the Executive Director with responsibility for Roads and Infrastructure Services dated December 2024, submitted) Page 33
Page 34
9. MARINE OPERATIONS: MAINLAND FERRY SERVICE The Committee gave consideration to a report introducing the “Argyll & Bute Council Mainland Ferries Study – Comparative Analysis of Options for Council-run ferries” carried out by Caledonian Economics (Mainland Ferries Study). Decision The Environment, Development and Infrastructure Committee – 1. thanked the Easdale and Luing Community Council representatives and residents for the high level of engagement and return regarding the questionnaires; 2. discussed the contents and implications of the Mainland Ferries Study, detailed at Appendix 1 to the submitted report; 3. approved the continuation of the feasibility study to progress a business case for the provision of infrastructure options to Easdale, including fixed links; 4. approved the inclusion of options to Luing in the feasibility study to continue to take advantage of economy of scale; and 5. acknowledged the ongoing need to continue to engage with residents and representatives of the communities on the Isle of Luing, Isle of Seil, and Easdale, in relation to council run ferry services and infrastructure. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Roads and Infrastructure Services, dated November 2024, submitted) 10. 20MPH SPEED LIMITS REPORT The Committee gave consideration to a report detailing the support offered by Transport Scotland to progress the 20mph speed limit project. Decision The Environment, Development and Infrastructure Committee- 1. noted the Scottish Government had committed to creating a healthier, greener and safer Scotland and their aspiration is that the introduction of 20mph restrictions could help to contribute to these objectives – this is a national aspiration to be managed through local powers to amend speed limits rather than changing the national legislation; 2. welcomed the additional funding confirmed by Transport Scotland on 14 October 2024 for a Project Officer which would help to gather data necessary to allow the Council to make informed decisions going forward; 3. agreed that no decision would be made regarding the implementation of any speed restrictions at this time; and 4. agreed that as more detailed information becomes available, a further report would be provided to update Elected Members via Committee. Page 34
Page 35
(Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Roads and Infrastructure Services dated 16 November 2024, submitted) 11. TRANSPORT (SCOTLAND) ACT 2019, PART 6 PARKING PROHIBITIONS UPDATE REPORT The Committee gave consideration to a report providing an update on the introduction of enforcement of the parking prohibitions contained in Part 6 of the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019 and seeking agreement to revise the timescales from December 2024 to 3 March 2025. Decision The Environment, Development and Infrastructure Committee – 1. agreed the revised timescale from December 2024 to 3 March 2025; 2. noted the amended process as outlined in paragraph 4.8 of the submitted report; and 3. requested that Officers explore options to identify areas where enforcement may cause traffic management problems and if possible report back to this Committee options to mitigate, including exemptions. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Roads and Infrastructure Services dated 11 November 2024, submitted). 12. ROADS RECONSTRUCTION BUDGET The Committee gave consideration to a report providing an update on future forecast capital funding for roads reconstruction and improvements. Decision The Environment, Development and Infrastructure Committee noted the content of the report including the allocation of the provisional budget set out in the table at paragraph 3.6 of the submitted report. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Roads and Infrastructure Services dated November 2024, submitted) 13. DRAFT ACTIVE TRAVEL STRATEGY FOR CONSULTATION The Committee gave consideration to a report requesting approval to progress to consultation on the draft of the Council’s Active Travel Strategy. The draft Active Travel Strategy has been developed by Officers as instructed by this Committee on 1 June 2023. Decision The Environment, Development and Infrastructure Committee – 1. considered and approved the draft Active Travel Strategy for a period of consultation; and Page 35
Page 36
2. instructed Officers to provide a further report to this Committee on completion of the consultation for members to consider and approve. (Reference: Report by Executive Director with responsibility for Development and Economic Growth dated December 2024, submitted) 14. ENVIRONMENT, DEVELOPMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE WORKPLAN The Environment, Development and Infrastructure Committee workplan was before the Committee for noting. Decision The Environment, Development and Infrastructure Committee noted the content of the workplan. (Reference: Environment, Development and Infrastructure Committee workplan dated December 2024, submitted) VALEDICTORY The Chair acknowledged that Jim Smith, Head of Roads and Infrastructure, had left the Council and noted his thanks on behalf of the Committee for all the work he had carried out during his time with the Council. The Chair recorded his personal thanks for Mr Smith’s support during his term as Shadow Policy Lead, and latterly as Policy Lead. He then welcomed Stephen Hall to the meeting. Mr Hall will take up post as the Interim Head of Roads and Infrastructure from 6 January 2025. 15. NOTICE OF MOTION UNDER STANDING ORDER 13 The following Notice of Motion Under Standing Order 13 was before the Committee for consideration – At its meeting on the 20th September 2024, the Strathclyde Concessionary Travel Scheme (SCTS) Joint Committee approved a new fare structure to come into effect from 1st April 2025. The new model based on half standard fare, with a fare cap set at £2.50 for a single and £4.00 for a return, is applied for wholly rural rail journeys and all ferry journeys. Currently, rail and ferry journeys under approximately 10 (nautical) miles are charged at £1.00 single and £1.50 return. This represents a fare increase of up to 165%, including on lifeline ferry routes and disproportionately impact on the elderly and most vulnerable members of our community. This Council: 1. Expresses deep concern about the fare increases that have been agreed, noting that residents of Argyll and Bute already face higher cost of living associated with rural and island life, and these changes disproportionately impact on the elderly and most vulnerable members of our community. Page 36
Page 37
2. Acknowledges demand and increasing operator fares will require SCTS funding reserves of £0.836M by the end of this current financial year 2024/2025 and that Strathclyde Concessionary Travel Scheme reimbursement costs continue to increase sharply. 3. Urges the Scottish Government to provide additional funding for the SCTS to support older and disabled residents traveling and phase in changes to the pricing over a number of years to mitigate the impact of changing to the new model. 4. Agrees that the Policy Lead for Roads & Infrastructure write to the First Minister, John Swinney MSP to highlight these concerns and request action to support elderly and vulnerable service users. Moved by Councillor Peter Wallace, seconded by Councillor John Armour. Decision The Environment, Development and Infrastructure Committee agreed the terms of the Motion and resolved accordingly. (Reference: Notice of Motion by Councillor Peter Wallace, seconded by Councillor John Armour, submitted) Page 37
Page 38
This page is intentionally left blank
Page 39
ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL COUNCIL COMMERCIAL SERVICES, EDUCATION 27 FEBRUARY 2025 AND FINANCIAL SERVICES LEARNING ESTATE INVESTMENT PROGRAMME (LEIP) MULL CAMPUS – PREFERRED SITE RECOMMENDATION 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 The purpose of this report is to provide sufficient information to allow the Council to make an informed decision on the preferred site for Mull 2-18 Campus. Site selection is the first key decision milestone for the project and will allow the Outline Business Case to be progressed and design development to commence. 1.2 This report describes the site assessment and selection process, the contributing reports and analyses, outlines the relative benefits and challenges of each short- listed site option and makes a recommendation to the Council as to the preferred site, based on the evidence available. 1.3 The site selection phase for the project commenced in August 2024 with a “call for sites”. Eleven possible sites were identified, and four potentially viable options were shortlisted:- • Site 1 – Tobermory Existing School Site • Site 2 – Craignure • Site 3 – Garmony • Site 4 – Tobermory South 1.4 A detailed transport review found that the two Tobermory sites present minimal change to existing arrangements with travel time, distance and carbon emissions for staff and pupils remaining broadly the same. This significantly increases for the two centrally located sites, and in the case of Site 2 – Craignure the aggregate travel time would double, and vehicle miles and carbon emissions would triple. Page 39 Agenda Item 6a
Page 40
1.5 An Integrated Impact Assessment was undertaken to examine the potential impacts to the relevant groups on Mull and its surrounding islands that may result from a Tobermory or a more centrally located site. This highlighted that regardless of site location, the campus has the potential to deliver a range of benefits through the provision of contemporary and high-quality learning, sport and community facilities. 1.6 Many community members feel strongly that a central high school is required to unite young people from the north and south of Mull and to provide an on-island secondary education option for children from the Ross of Mull. However, there is also a strong feeling that early years and primary school education should not be relocated from Tobermory for the families residing there. 1.7 The impact assessment concluded that there are benefits and disbenefits associated with all site options. However, under the constraints of the available funding, it is unlikely that any of the options would be able to provide a fully equal solution for all children and young people living on Mull and the islands. 1.8 All contributing reports and analyses for the short-listed sites were considered as part of a site scoring exercise which assessed each site option against set criteria. The sites and their weighted scores are outlined below, in order of rank. 1. Site 4 Tobermory South, 645 2. Site 2 Craignure, 628 3. Site 1 Tobermory Existing, 625 4. Site 3 Garmony, 546 1.9 Sensitivity analyses were carried out and this demonstrated that site 4 – Tobermory South consistently performed better than the other site options, with the greatest number of cumulative good and very good scores. Site 3 – Garmony consistently performed the worst of the four options and that site is not recommended to be considered further. 1.10 Based on the substantial body of information contained within the Appendices of this report, the recommended preferred site for a new Mull Campus is Site 4 – Tobermory South. 1.11 This option would constitute a proposal to relocate the existing campus, with a statutory consultation legally required under the Schools (Consultation) (Scotland) Act 2010, the outcome of which will be reported back to full Council upon completion of that process. 1.12 Members are asked to consider the contents of this report and supporting Appendices and endorse the site scoring mechanism, criteria and supporting Page 40
Page 41
assessments. After consideration of all the available information and the content of the Integrated Impact Assessments, Members are asked to confirm their preferred site for a new Mull Campus, and agree to progress the Outline Business Case on that basis. Page 41
Page 42
ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL COUNCIL COMMERCIAL SERVICES, EDUCATION 27 FEBRUARY 2025 AND FINANCIAL SERVICES LEARNING ESTATE INVESTMENT PROGRAMME (LEIP) MULL CAMPUS – PREFERRED SITE RECOMMENDATION 2.0 INTRODUCTION 2.1 This report outlines the key information that requires to be considered to identify a preferred site for the Learning Estate Investment Programme (LEIP) Mull Campus project, which has reached the decision milestone for site selection. 2.2 On 25th April 2024 the Council decided to “commence the Business Case, undertake engagement exercises, commence the site selection process and establish governance arrangements, with updates to be brought back to Members at appropriate gateway points”. 2.3 An update was provided to the Council on 20th December 2024, where it was advised that a recommendation of a preferred site for Mull Campus would be brought forward for consideration by the full Council at their next meeting. At that meeting it was unanimously decided that the Council:- “Having regard to the information provided in respect of educational benefits elements and funding metrics, and the advice of the Council’s Chief Financial Officer that a two-site Mull Campus would not be affordable, agrees that the process will continue on a single-site basis for delivery of a new Mull Campus”; and “Notes the unanimous view of the community in Iona in relation to their removal from the scope of the project, and agrees that this is given effect to” 2.4 This report sets out the relevant information and recommendations to enable the Council to decide on the preferred site for a new Mull Campus. Page 42
Page 43
3.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 3.1 It is recommended that the Council: a) Considers the contents of the report and supporting Appendices. b) Endorses the site scoring mechanism, criteria and supporting assessments which is consistent with criteria categories commonly used for site selection on previous Council school projects. c) Confirms Site 4 – Tobermory South as the preferred site for a new Mull Campus and agrees to progress the Outline Business Case on that basis. d) Notes that as the preferred option would constitute a proposal to relocate the existing campus, a statutory consultation would be legally required under the Schools (Consultation) (Scotland) Act 2010, the outcome of which will be reported back to full Council upon completion of that process. e) In making their decision in accordance with recommendation (b), above, Members are specifically requested to have regard to the detail of the Integrated Impact Assessment (Appendix 1K) on the potential impacts to the relevant groups on Mull and its surrounding islands, as detailed therein, recognising that each site presents different benefits and disbenefits to these distinct groups. 4.0 DETAIL 4.1 Background 4.1.1 The Council submitted a bid for Scottish Government LEIP funding in October 2022 for a 2-18 campus on Mull and this was accepted in October 2023. The bid met the LEIP eligibility criteria on condition, with funding provided on a “like for like” basis to replace the existing Tobermory campus. 4.1.2 The potential cost implications of LEIP funding, which requires the Council to pay the full capital cost up front with up to 50% of eligible costs funded by Scottish Government over 25 years, were considered on 25th April 2024 where it was decided that the Council:- “noted the capital and revenue implications of the LEIP / Mull Campus project which were of a strategic financial nature” and Page 43
Page 44
“considered the project to be affordable at this time, and agreed that up to £5m from the previously earmarked LEIP funding be used to commence the Business Case, undertake engagement exercises, commence the site selection process and establish governance arrangements, with updates to be brought back to Members at appropriate gateway points.” 4.1.3 On 20th December 2024 the Council agreed that a new Mull Campus would continue on a single-site basis. It was also agreed to remove Iona from the scope of the project in response to the community’s unanimous request to remain within the catchment area of Oban High School. 4.1.4 The Mull Campus project is being delivered as part of the North Schools Programme, which is a partnership between hub North Scotland ltd and five local authorities to deliver eight schools. Three of these projects, including Mull Campus, are island schools. 4.1.5 The hub North Scotland team have supported the Council throughout the community engagement and site selection phase. The outputs are provided in Appendix 1, with individual reports in Appendices 1A-L. 4.1.6 This report describes the site assessment and selection process, the contributing reports and analyses, outlines the relative benefits and challenges of each short-listed site option and makes a recommendation to the Council as to the preferred site, based on the evidence available. 4.2 Call for Sites and Long List of Options 4.2.1 A call for sites was launched from 27th August to 25th September 2024 to seek suggestions of sites that may be suitable for the new Mull 2-18 Campus. Eleven possible sites were identified, including the existing school site. 4.2.2 The hub North Scotland team undertook a high-level review of each site to consider key constraints such as flood risk, ground conditions, accessibility and site abnormals which could make the sites prohibitive to development. Each site was assessed on its suitability to deliver the brief in terms of size, fit and accessibility, and how it related to the wider context in terms of its ability to safely operate. 4.2.3 A Civil and Structural assessment of topographical and ground condition risks highlighted that some of the sites had substantial level changes and contained very poor marsh and peaty ground, making them unsuitable for development without significant remediation. 4.2.4 A review of Mechanical & Electrical requirements focused primarily on utilities and how easy it would be to service each site. As is typically the case in remote and rural regions, many sites were found to be located a distance away from existing infrastructure. 4.2.5 For each long-listed site an initial review was carried out in terms of any transport impact. Several sites were found to have constrained accesses which would not Page 44
Page 45
be able to accommodate significant amounts of traffic during the delivery of the Mull Campus project or in final operation once the facility is live. 4.2.6 Taking these factors into consideration, four sites were shortlisted as being potentially capable of accommodating the campus requirements. Further detail on the long list of options and reasons for not shortlisting is provided in Appendix 1 (section 2.3.1) and Appendix 1B the Site Selection Options Appraisal report (October 2024). The report was agreed by the project’s Strategic Board in early November 2024. 4.2.7 The four sites shortlisted for further consideration are: 1. Site 1 Tobermory Existing School 2. Site 2 Craignure 3. Site 3 Garmony 4. Site 4 Tobermory South 4.3 Assessment of Short-Listed Options 4.3.1 A detailed set of criteria for assessment were developed jointly by the hub North Scotland technical team and Argyll and Bute Council Project Team1. The hub North team developed an initial draft for consideration, which focussed on technical aspects including site size and capacity to accommodate the brief, technical deliverability (utilities, ground conditions, topography, flood risk), statutory consents and legal aspects, accessibility, sustainability and cost. The assessment process also took into account the feedback from the public engagement exercise as detailed in Table 1 below. The criteria and approach are consistent with other new build school projects delivered across Scotland. 4.3.2 The draft list was reviewed by the Project Team and Strategic Board in September 2024 where it was refined to align with criteria categories commonly used for site selection on previous Council school projects; impact, deliverability, affordability and risk. It was acknowledged that these would need to be expanded further to reflect the unique island context and comparatively wide geographical search area for a project located on Mull, which was recognised as being different from a mainland town location. 4.3.3 As noted in paragraph 4.3.1 above, the additional island factors included taking account of the feedback received from island communities during the community engagement exercise carried out in late September. This is described further in section 4.4 of this report. 4.3.4 To better understand the island infrastructure and transport implications, hub North Scotland carried out a baseline assessment of the transport considerations for the existing 2-18 school in Tobermory. The report included suggested criteria 1 Project Team includes council officers from the following departments; finance, education, commercial services, legal and regulatory support, estates, property, ICT, procurement, communications and health and safety. Page 45
Page 46
to be used in the site assessment exercise. This is described further in section 4.5 of this report. 4.3.5 In October, once the Community Engagement Analysis Report and Transport Considerations baseline reports were available, the draft criteria were reviewed and adjusted to take account of the suggested criteria included in those reports. The revised criteria were reviewed again by the full Project Team, who also discussed suitable weightings for the criteria to reflect their relative importance. To reflect the nature of this project the Educational Benefits were weighted highest as outlined in Table 5 (below). This was presented to the project’s Strategic Board in early November where they confirmed acceptance of the proposals to date and broad agreement to the weightings subject to final adjustments to reflect the importance of educational impact and travel distances, particularly for young children. The criteria and weightings were adjusted and finalised accordingly to allow them to be used to assess each shortlisted site. 4.3.6 A site scoring exercise was subsequently carried out by a team of council officers from education, property, legal, finance, estates, planning, economic development and development & infrastructure services. They were supported by the Mull Campus and hub North Scotland teams. The site scoring was undertaken during two workshops held on 15th November 2024 and 23rd January 2025. During the workshop the technical team and subject matter experts presented the information gathered to inform the scoring of each criterion. The group then collectively agreed on a consensus score from 0-10 for each site for that criterion. 4.3.7 In line with its statutory duties the Council commissioned an Integrated Impact Assessment looking at the potential equality, island communities, economic, children’s rights and wellbeing and Fairer Scotland Duty impacts. 4.3.8 The full suite of reports, impact assessments and the output of the site scoring exercise are included in Appendices 1 and 2. This is the culmination of six months of activity and the volume of information is substantial, therefore a hyperlink has been provided to some of the technical information. Conscientious consideration has been given to all the supporting information when forming the recommendations in this report. 4.4 Community Engagement Analysis 4.4.1 An extensive community engagement exercise was undertaken in September 2024 to ask the community what was important to them when considering a site for the new campus. The outcome was shared with the council in December 2024 and the full Community Engagement Analysis Report (November 2024) is available in Appendix 1A. 4.4.2 The report outlined the communities’ key criteria for site selection, which were incorporated in the criteria and relative weightings used for the site scoring exercise where possible. A summary is included in Table 1. Page 46
Page 47
Table 1 – Communities’ Key Criteria for Site Selection Communities Key Criteria Site Selection Criteria Category 1. Keeping travel time to a minimum Education Impact 2. Keeping families together/ avoiding children going off island Community and Place Impact 3. Providing an equitable solution that offers the best access for as many people as possible, and uniting the north and south populations Community and Place Impact 4. Being able to sustain local populations and economies Community and Place Impact 5. Plenty of outside space for good sports facilities and outdoor activities Education Impact 6. Equitable access to after school clubs Accessibility and Transport Impact 7. Close to existing services such as shops and sports facilities Community and Place Impact 8. Good transport links and plenty of space for parking and safe, accessible drop off Education Impact Accessibility and Transport Impact 9. Providing access to good community facilities such as a library, gym and adult learning on the campus Education Impact 10. The ability to provide more subjects, including vocational subjects, and easier access for teachers to travel to the campus from Oban to provide specialist teaching N/A – range of subject choice is determined by the number of teachers/ pupils and size of school. Digital learning has potential to enable this regardless of school location. 11. The opportunity to develop, or make use of existing, active travel routes so children can walk and cycle to school Accessibility and Transport Impact 12. The ability to retain existing staff and attract new staff, including proximity to affordable housing N/A – report noted that these points are conflicting, would be subjective and difficult to score. 13. Limiting the impact on the existing school and/ or surrounding residents Community and Place Impact 14. Provision of good technology that can support online/ distance learning N/A – assessed at shortlisting stage, a requirement for all sites. 15. Space for future expansion Education Impact Page 47
Page 48
4.5 Transport Considerations 4.5.1 Transport was highlighted by the community as a key consideration due to the unique geography and infrastructure challenges on Mull and the islands. A detailed transport review has been undertaken to assess the baseline for the existing school provision and examine the transport impact of each shortlisted site option. The Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations report (January 2025) is available in Appendix 1H and contains a high-level summary in section 15 of the report. All data presented relates to a single one-way trip. 4.5.2 The following metrics were considered when evaluating the four site options for Mull Campus and these were assessed as part of the site scoring exercise: • Number of user journeys and mode split • Good public transport links to the site and location • Existing safe active travel links to site • Travel times for pupils and staff • Potential impact on public transport network • Ability of existing roads infrastructure to service site • Trips with complex dependencies/ multiple stages and modes of travel • Carbon impact of travel 4.5.3 The report outlines that the two Tobermory sites present minimal change to existing arrangements with travel time, distance and carbon emissions remaining broadly the same. For the centrally located sites the travel time, distance and carbon emissions would increase significantly. The combined totals for all 59 staff and 252 pupils are illustrated in table 2. Table 2 – Combined travel time, miles and carbon emissions (one-way trip) Site 1 Tobermory Existing Site 2 Craignure Site 3 Garmony Site 4 Tobermory South Time minutes (hours/ minutes) 4,488 (74h 48m) 10,799 (179h 59m) 9,229 (153h 49m) 4,810 (80h 10m) Vehicle miles 467 1,553 1,358 453 Carbon emissions (kg CO2E) 156 460 409 152 4.5.4 The total number of trips and modal split for all staff and pupils is shown in figure 1. The Garmony and Craignure site options demonstrate a significant shift away from active travel with approximately 4 additional buses required compared to the baseline. Page 48
Page 49
Figure 1 – Number of one-way trips by mode and site 4.6 Integrated Impact Assessments 4.6.1 The Council have a statutory duty to consider the potential impacts of any change to services or policy before key decisions are made. The Integrated Impact Assessment (IIA) Report (January 2025) examines the economic, island communities, equality, children’s rights and wellbeing and Fairer Scotland Duty impacts on a high-level basis comparing a Tobermory option to a more central location. The report also provides detail at a site-specific level where this was required to inform the site scoring exercise. The IIA is attached in Appendix 1K. 4.6.2 Members are specifically requested to have regard to the IIA findings of the potential impacts on the distinct and unique communities on Mull and the islands, recognising that each site option affects these communities in different ways. A high-level overview is provided in this recommendation report; however Members are strongly encouraged to consider the full detail contained within the IIA before coming to any decision. Community Input 4.6.3 It is ultimately the Council’s duty to undertake the impact assessments, however the communities affected have an important part to play in informing these. A rich body of evidence was already available through the engagement exercises undertaken at the time of submitting the bid for LEIP funding in 2022, and the more extensive engagement undertaken in September 2024 as described in Appendix 1A. Bunessan Primary Parent Council had carried out an independent survey to gather the views and opinions of parents and carers at the school, and gave their permission for the findings to be included in the IIA process. 4.6.4 Over and above this, the chairs of community and parent organisations represented on the Community Sounding Board were invited to co-ordinate a Page 49
Page 50
response to the IIA process. Groups were emailed on 20th December, with engagement proformas issued on 6th January and a virtual briefing session held on 9th January 2025. Responses were requested by 22nd January 2025. In view of the engagement that had already taken place and the limited timescales available, community groups were asked to respond on behalf of their organisation. Taking cognisance of the potential commercial sensitivities, the exact details of short-listed sites were not shared at that point and groups were asked to provide views on the impact of a Tobermory site option and a central site option. 4.6.5 Following the briefing session some community organisations collectively issued a formal response detailing that they would not participate in the impact assessment engagement process at this stage. Concerns were raised around the timing of the impact assessments, the length of the engagement window and the level of detail available of the proposed sites for selection. As a result, the feedback received was minimal, although responses received from three of the organisations were taken into account. These responses along with the information collated from the extensive engagement activities in September 2024, the Bunessan Parent Council independent survey, and a further Pupil Forum Engagement exercise carried out in January 2025 informed the content in the IIA. 4.6.6 Mull Community Council and their Mull Campus Working Group subsequently advised the Mull Campus Team that they are conducting their own detailed survey, which they believe will assist councillors to make an informed decision. 4.6.7 The Mull Campus Team continue to engage with community representatives on the Community Sounding Board. The next meeting is scheduled for 20th February 2025 where the recommendation that is being put to Elected Members will be shared, and input will be sought on how best to provide an update to the communities affected once a decision is made by the Council. The Mull Campus Team wish to express their gratitude to community volunteers for the time and input they have invested in the project to date. Economic Impacts 4.6.8 The economic impact assessment identifies areas of economic benefit where the value is expected to differ depending upon the choice of site location. These include effects on local investment; effects on existing housing stock; impacts on educational attainment; parent/guardian loss of earnings; staff commuting costs and the cost of transport carbon emissions. 4.6.9 The differences in economic impact across the Tobermory and central site options are summarised in table 3 below. This concludes that the economic impact of the Mull Campus project will be £3,147,000 higher if the school were built in Tobermory than would be the case if it were built in a central location. Page 50
Page 51
Table 3 – Difference in economic impact between Tobermory and Central Site Options Summary Difference Investment Lost/Gained Due to Relocation £89,000 Existing Property Values £1,474,000 Students Lifetime Earnings £627,000 Changes to Parents Current Earnings £96,000 Cost of Commuting £640,000 Carbon Cost of Travel £221,000 Total Benefits £3,147,000 Island Communities Impacts 4.6.10 The Islands (Scotland) Act 2018 provides a legal basis for greater decision making at a local level within Scottish Islands and seeks to increase economic prosperity for island communities. Central site location 4.6.11 The potential impacts of a central site location for young people and families living in the South and South West of Mull is summarised below: • Positive impact, bringing unity to the North and South communities. • Community members feel strongly that a central high school option is crucial to reversing current trends of depopulation in the South West. • Stimulate local economic, business and population growth. • Potential to positively impact social outcomes for children and young people by reducing the length of the journey to attend school. • Greater opportunity to interact with a larger cohort of children and young people on the island. 4.6.12 The potential impacts of a central site location for young people and families living in Tobermory and the North of Mull is summarised below: • Increased travel times to school for primary and secondary age children, potentially impacting physical health, sleep and exercise, mental health and academic performance. • 95 children in early years and primary school education would travel daily from Tobermory to a central location. The community were particularly concerned about the negative impact on younger children. • An additional 4 buses would be required to transport pupils daily. Children would no longer be able to walk to school from home. Page 51
Page 52
• Negative impact on the demographic structure of the area with a risk of depopulation if families chose to relocate or leave the island. • Potential loss of revenue for Tobermory-based businesses • Negative impact on parent’s and carer’s working patterns whilst also incurring additional fuel and maintenance costs for private vehicles, which may be unaffordable for some. • Increased vehicle trip generation with an increase in vehicle carbon emissions and potential adverse effects on local road infrastructure. Tobermory site location 4.6.13 The potential impacts of a Tobermory site location for young people and families living in the South and South West of Mull is summarised as follows: • No additional benefit, continue with status quo of local primary schooling and off-island secondary-school attendance. • Children feel tired from long journeys or spending extended periods of time away from home, potentially impacting physical health, sleep and exercise, mental health and academic performance. • Continued risk of depopulation, where families may decide to relocate to avoid the possibility of weekly boarding on the mainland. • 50% of parents in the South West of Mull have stated that they would consider leaving the area if the school is not built centrally. • Concern that previous decision to site the school in Tobermory resulted in generational impacts which shaped social outcomes. 4.6.14 The potential impacts of a Tobermory site location for young people and families living in Tobermory and the North of Mull is summarised as follows: • Positive impact to those who use the existing 2-18 School in Tobermory through the re-provision of enhanced and contemporary facilities. • Modern school could encourage population retention and growth. • No detrimental impact on working parents and carers and established Tobermory-based businesses. • Tobermory site option may be more attractive to recruit and retain teachers, which is currently an issue on Mull. • Supports active travel, children continue to walk to school from home. • Lower vehicle trips. No additional transport-related costs for families. All Site Locations - Health 4.6.15 An extended daily commute of 30 minute to an hour each way for children can have several impacts on physical health, sleep and exercise, mental health and academic performance. This is relevant to pupils in all site option scenarios who Page 52
Page 53
need to contend with longer journey times than their peers in other Argyll & Bute and Scotland locations. All Site Locations – Gaelic Language 4.6.16 The Mull Campus project could result in positive impacts for the use of Gaelic and promotion of Gaelic learning for pupils of all ages and the wider community. Equality Impacts 4.6.17 The Equality Act 2010 requires public authorities to have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation, advance equality of opportunity, and foster good relations between those with a protected characteristic and those without. The duty covers the following protected characteristics: age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation. A summary of the key impacts is provided in the paragraphs below. 4.6.18 It is considered that a central site option would positively impact children and young people and their families living in the South and South West of Mull and bring unity to the North and South communities of the island. During consultation, children and young people from these areas raised that a central site option would be fairer for them as they would not have to travel as far every day and could potentially participate in after school clubs. 4.6.19 However, children and young people from Tobermory and the North of Mull presented concern with a central site option as it would significantly increase their journey time to and from school, reduce their current freedoms and potentially remove their ability to attend after school clubs. They showed preference towards a Tobermory site option as they could continue to walk to school and because the majority currently live in and around Tobermory. 4.6.20 It is considered that all site options would positively impact disabled children as the school would have improved campus facilities, such as enhanced accessibility measures. However, there are potential negative impacts as a result of a central site as some disabled children may not be able to travel by public transport and this would put pressure on family members or caregivers who may not have access to a private car. Children’s Rights and Wellbeing Impacts 4.6.21 The Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014 requires public bodies to consider whether existing and emerging legislation, policy and guidance have an impact on children and young people and to assess what further action is required to ensure compliance with the United Nations Convention for the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). 4.6.22 The following impacts on children’s wellbeing have been considered: • The new campus has the potential to address long-standing accessibility challenges currently identified at the existing Tobermory 2-18 High School site and provide improved learning environments benefitting all Page 53
Page 54
pupils including those with additional needs and enhancing overall pupil wellbeing. • Increased travel times for children from Tobermory to a central site location could negatively affect children’s wellbeing and their ability to participate in extracurricular activities. • Safety, travel arrangements, and minimising disruptions during construction are key priorities raised by parents and pupils. • Some community members have expressed concern around the impact of boarding weekly on the health and wellbeing of secondary aged pupils from the Ross of Mull. There are concerns around the implications of this on children’s mental health and physical wellbeing, including their ability to participate fully in island life. 4.6.23 The following differential impacts were identified for different groups of children and young people: • A Tobermory site option maintains proximity for local children but continues challenges for children from the Ross of Mull, who may need to board off-island for secondary school. • A central site option provides more equitable secondary school access across Mull but disadvantages Tobermory’s younger children, who would face longer daily commutes to early years and primary school attendance. • Parents generally believe that older children can better adapt to longer travel times compared with younger children. • Community members emphasise the need to manage any knock-on effect on nearby primary schools if primary provision at Tobermory is relocated. 4.6.24 While the Mull Campus Proposals have the potential to significantly enhance education and children’s rights on Mull, they also present challenges around travel, wellbeing, and equitable access, particularly for specific groups of children. Ongoing consultation and mitigation strategies will be critical. Fairer Scotland Duty 4.6.25 The Fairer Scotland Duty (FSD) places a legal responsibility on certain public bodies in Scotland to actively consider how they can reduce inequalities of outcome caused by socio-economic disadvantage when making strategic decisions or developing policy. The FSD seeks to tackle socio-economic disadvantage and reduce the inequalities associated with being disadvantaged. It is closely related to issues of poverty which may affect outcomes across health, housing, education and training and employment prospects. Socio-Economic Disadvantage 4.6.26 The North, South West and South of Mull all fall into the least deprived 40% of areas in Scotland, whilst Tobermory performs even better in the bottom 30%. In Page 54
Page 55
terms of overall impact depending on the campus site selection, it is not clear how area deprivation could be affected by either site option. 4.6.27 There is a greater loss to earning and future earning for a central site location compared to Tobermory, which is reflective of the larger population in the Tobermory settlement. 4.6.28 Community feedback has expressed concern around the impact of children attending six years of their schooling off-island, limiting their opportunities to participate fully in family life and community life on the island. 4.6.29 There is a precedent for extended travel times on Mull for secondary school children accessing Tobermory High School from other localities on the island. Inequality of Outcome 4.6.30 Regardless of site location, the Mull Campus project presents a positive opportunity to address challenges in the quality and provision of education on the island through the provision of contemporary and sustainably designed educational facilities that would benefit pupils aged 2-18 in addition to the wider community. 4.6.31 The extent of this benefit is varied depending on whether this is delivered in a central or Tobermory Site location. The reality of the proposals means that there is the potential to affect different groups of children and young people and their communities by virtue of where they live on the island. 4.6.32 There could be negative impact on potential future earnings for children required to undertake longer daily journeys to school. Pupils who must travel further to school are less likely to attend university and may experience a loss of earnings as a result. 4.6.33 There could be higher sensitivity in local communities living near site options in Tobermory and a central site in relation to the provision of or re-provision of sports facilities that might be associated with the Mull Campus proposals. 4.6.34 The project has the potential to affect income both in terms of future earnings for pupils and the earning of parents and carers. IIA Conclusions 4.6.35 The current Tobermory 2-18 school building is in poor condition and is not fully accessible for children and staff with disabilities or additional support needs. A replacement of this facility with a new modern facility will provide a positive impact on education provision. 4.6.36 Many community members across the island feel strongly that a central high school is required to unite young people from the north and south of Mull and to provide an on-island secondary education option for children from the Ross of Mull. However, there is also a strong feeling across the island’s communities that early years and primary school education should not be relocated from Tobermory for the families residing there. Page 55
Page 56
4.6.37 The conclusions of the IIA show that there are benefits and disbenefits associated with all site options. However, under the constraints of the available funding, it is unlikely that either of the campus locations would be able to provide a fully equal solution for all children and young people living on Mull and the islands. 4.6.38 Regardless of site location, the campus has the potential to deliver a range of benefits to the island through the provision of contemporary and high-quality learning, sport and community facilities. It is recommended that the pupils and members of the community are closely involved in shaping the design of the new campus so that it can best meet the needs of people living on Mull and the islands. 4.7 Site Option Appraisal This section provides an indicative site plan for each shortlisted site illustrating how the buildings and external elements could be accommodated on the site. A summary of each site’s strengths and weaknesses is also provided, with more detailed information available in Appendix 1 Site Analysis Report (February 2025). 4.7.1 Site 1 – Tobermory Existing School Site Strengths • Status quo: no change to school location, no statutory consultation required • Keeps nursery and primary provision in Tobermory • Lower transport impact than central options (no change) • Maintains and encourages active travel (currently 30% of primary pupils and 40% of secondary pupils walk to school) • Economic benefit is £3.15m higher than a central island location Page 56
Page 57
• Very good access to community services, local shops and businesses • Close to existing housing and future allocated housing development sites (up to 150 units in the Tobermory area) • No site purchase costs, land already owned by council • Lower revenue cost than central site options Weaknesses • Challenging topography, significant level changes within the site and on approach • Poor roads and footpath infrastructure in surrounding area. • Would be difficult to deliver improvements to current bus drop off arrangements • Tight site with insufficient space for a full size 100m x 60m pitch, although a 7- aside pitch can be accommodated • Potential for significant disruption to existing school during construction activities • Requires use of common good land (which would be reinstated), statutory consultation required, unlikely to be acceptable to the local community • Impact on family life: too far to travel for young people from Ross of Mull, who would likely remain with the current arrangement of boarding away from home when attending High School during the week • Phased construction, demolition and pitches; prolonged construction programme 4.7.2 Site 2 – Craignure Strengths • Can accommodate the full education brief including good quality external space, parking and drop off areas and full-size pitch Page 57
Page 58
• Equity of access, bringing the island together and providing an opportunity for young people across the island to attend the same high school • Potential to positively impact on social outcomes for children and young people living in the South and South West of Mull, providing an option to attend high school and return home to their families daily. • Potential to reverse the depopulation in South West Mull and enable economic development and potential housing in Craignure and the south • Proximity to other community facilities; community hospital and swimming pool • Adjacent land is allocated for future housing development (80 units) with outline planning permission for 97 houses • Potential for shared enabling works and costs with adjacent development site • Low construction programme risk Weaknesses • More children would undertake longer daily journeys to school by bus, doubling the aggregate travel time for pupils overall • Very limited potential for active travel, majority of pupils and staff travel by bus or car • Negative impact for younger and primary school aged children (combined total of 95). No community support for the relocation of the nursery and primary school away from Tobermory. • Potential impact on parents/ carer’s working patterns, increased cost and carbon impact. • Possible adverse effect on local road infrastructure due to increased trip generation involving mainly single-track roads • Economic benefit is £3.15m lower than a Tobermory location • Increase in revenue costs; 4 additional school buses required Page 58
Page 59
4.7.3 Site 3 – Garmony Strengths • Can accommodate the full education brief including good quality external space, parking and drop off areas and full-size pitch • Equity of access, bringing the island together and providing an opportunity for young people across the island to attend the same high school • Potential to positively impact on social outcomes for children and young people living in the South and South West of Mull, providing an option to attend high school and return home to their families daily. • Potential to reverse the depopulation in South West Mull and enable economic development Weaknesses • More children would undertake longer daily journeys to school by bus, doubling the aggregate travel time for pupils overall • Very limited potential for active travel, all pupils and staff travel by bus or car • Negative impact for younger and primary school aged children (combined total of 95). No community support for the relocation of the nursery and primary school away from Tobermory. • Potential impact on parents/ carer’s working patterns, increased cost and carbon impact. • Economic benefit is £3.15m lower than a Tobermory location Page 59
Page 60
• Remote from residential areas and other amenities, closest facility is the rugby club to the north. • No planned development nearby and site has no designation under the Local Development Plan. • No footways or crossing opportunities on nearest road network • Possible adverse effect on local road infrastructure due to increased trip generation involving mainly single-track roads • High enabling costs as no adjacent utilities or roads infrastructure • Increase in revenue costs; 4 additional school buses required 4.7.4 Site 4 – Tobermory South Strengths • Very little change from existing as Tobermory location • Keeps nursery and primary in Tobermory • New site, no impact on existing school operations • Better quality roads and footpath infrastructure in surrounding area with potential to deliver improvements to bus drop off arrangements • Supports active travel; expected to remain broadly similar to the current school site • Lower transport impact than central site options (marginal change) • Economic benefit is £3.15m higher than a central island location • Good access to community services, local shops and businesses • Close to existing housing and to future allocated housing development sites (up to 150 units in the Tobermory area, 112 units in immediate area) Page 60
Page 61
• Lower revenue cost than central site options • Low construction programme risk Weaknesses • Tight site with insufficient space for a full size 100m x 60m pitch, although a 7- aside pitch can be accommodated (there are potential solutions available to provide a full-size pitch elsewhere) • Site purchase costs, land under multiple ownership and likely to be the most expensive of the 3 site options that would require land purchase • Impact on family life - significant travel distances for young people from Ross of Mull, who would likely choose to remain with current arrangement of board away from home when attending High School 4.8 Site Scoring Exercise 4.8.1 Sites were scored by a multidisciplinary team of technical experts, as described in paragraph 4.3.6. The team had access to the information contained within Appendix 1 to enable them to collectively agree a score. Each site was scored 0-10 across set criteria. A description is provided in table 4. Table 4 – Site scoring categories and description Score Category Description 0 Very poor Fails to meet any requirements, performs poorly in all aspects (a score of very poor for deliverability or capable of accommodating the brief is likely to result in the site failing the initial shortlisting) 1 2 Poor Factors or risks that would significantly impact on ability to meet the basic requirements of the brief and/or impact negatively on quality of education provision. Complex or costly solution required. Significant adverse impact. 3 4 5 Satisfactory Meets basic requirements, satisfactory 6 Good Performs well in most aspects, minor issues which can be relatively easily overcome, able to meet essential brief requirements 7 8 Very Good Meets requirements in full, negligible risk / impact, any perceived issues are very minor in nature, potential to provide a very good education solution 9 10 Excellent Ideal site, performs very well in all aspects, fully meets requirements, most cost-effective solution 4.8.2 Once scores were agreed, the weightings were applied to reflect the relative priority of each of the criteria, which resulted in a total weighted score for each site option. The categories and relative weightings were agreed by the project Strategic Board in advance of the scoring exercise and are outlined in table 5. Page 61
Page 62
Table 5 – Criteria Categories and Relative Weightings Used in Site Scoring Criteria Category Weighting Deliverability 15 Impact • Education • Community and Place • Accessibility and Transport • Sustainability 32 8 8 5 Affordability 25 Risk 7 TOTAL 100 4.8.3 The output from the site scoring exercise is attached as Appendix 2 and summarised in table 6. Table 6 – Weighted score and ranking for the shortlisted sites Weighted score Rank Site 1 – Tobermory Existing Site 625 3 Site 2 – Craignure 628 2 Site 3 – Garmony 546 4 Site 4 – Tobermory South 645 1 4.8.4 Site 4 – Tobermory South scores most highly and is ranked 1st. Sites 2 - Craignure and 1 – Tobermory Existing are close behind, with Site 3 – Garmony performing least well. 4.8.5 With the scores for the top three sites relatively close, further sensitivity analysis was carried out. This included removing the scores for each criteria category in turn to check if that had any impact. In all cases, Site 4 – Tobermory South remained the highest scoring option, with Site 3 – Garmony the lowest, suggesting a robust conclusion. 4.8.6 The four site options were also assessed on the number and distribution of very poor to excellent scores to check consistency of performance. This is illustrated in figure 2. Page 62
Page 63
Figure 2 – Number of scores by category for each site option 4.8.7 Figure 2 highlights that Site 4 – Tobermory South has significantly more cumulative good/ very good scores than poor scores, indicating a robust outcome. Site 2 – Craignure is the only other site where the number of cumulative good/ very good scores are greater than the number of poor scores. The number of poor scores for Site 1 – Tobermory Existing is equal to the number of cumulative good/ very good scores. 4.8.8 The site scoring exercise therefore indicates that Site 4 – Tobermory South performs the best of the four site options in respect of the agreed site selection criteria. 4.8.9 Site 3 – Garmony consistently performs the worst of the four options, and it is therefore not recommended that this option be considered further. 5.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 5.1 Of the four sites shortlisted, three are deemed to be potentially viable and the benefits and challenges of each must be carefully considered. There is no definitive site option that will fully satisfy all project requirements and address all the potential impacts on the distinct groups on Mull and its surrounding islands. Regardless of the option chosen, there will be an element of compromise, and it should be acknowledged that a proportion of those groups will be dissatisfied with the outcome. 5.2 Based on the substantial body of information provided in Appendices 1 and 2 of this report, the preferred site for a new Mull Campus is Site 4 – Tobermory South Page 63
Page 64
and that is the option recommended to Members to progress the Outline Business Case on that basis. 5.3 This option would constitute a proposal to relocate the existing campus, and therefore a statutory consultation would be legally required under the Schools (Consultation) (Scotland) Act 2010. 5.4 It must also be noted that as the project progresses through the RIBA2 design stages and more detailed information becomes available, there may be a requirement for the Council to review their position on the preferred site. 5.5 In making their decision in accordance with recommendation (5.2), above, Members are specifically requested to have regard to the detail of the Integrated Impact Assessment (Appendix 1K) on the potential impacts to the relevant groups on Mull and its surrounding islands, as detailed therein, recognising that each site presents different benefits and disbenefits to these distinct groups. 6.0 IMPLICATIONS 6.1 Policy – The Council’s Learning Estate Strategy 2021 sets out an ambition to have Schools in category A or B in terms of suitability and condition. Delivering a new Campus on Mull is the no.1 priority in that strategy to address the suitability and condition of the current campus in Tobermory and is also a Corporate Policy. 6.2 Financial – On 25th April 2024 the Council deemed the project to be affordable at that time. The site scoring exercise examined the potential revenue and capital affordability of each site option, giving cognisance to potential site acquisition and land disposal values, site abnormal costs and transport implications. 6.3 Legal – An Integrated Impact Assessment has been undertaken (Appendix 1K) to demonstrate how the proposals for a new Mull Campus show due regard to the socio-economic, equalities, child rights and island communities duties under the Equality Act 2010, the Fairer Scotland Duty, the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Act 2024, and the Islands (Scotland) Act 2018. 6.4 HR – None at this stage. One of the potentially viable site options would result in a change of base for staff. To be considered once the preferred site has been identified. 6.5 Fairer Scotland Duty: 6.5.1 Equalities - protected characteristics – An equality impact assessment has been carried out to inform this decision. 6.5.2 Socio-economic Duty – An economic impact assessment and Fairer Scotland Duty assessment have been carried out to inform this decision. 2 Royal Institute of British Architects Page 64
Page 65
6.5.3 Islands Duty - An island communities impact assessment has been carried out to inform this decision. 6.6 Climate Change – The carbon impact of travel, embodied carbon and opportunities for sustainable heating solutions were considered as part of site scoring exercise. To be eligible for full LEIP funding the campus will require to meet certain criteria in respect of embodied carbon and operational energy use. 6.7 Risk – Sites were assessed against risk criteria, taking consideration of legal restrictions and site acquisition, construction programme and planning risks. 6.8 Customer Service – A community engagement exercise was undertaken to understand what was important to the communities when considering possible sites. Community groups and parent councils were invited to input their views as part of the integrated impact assessment process. 6.9 The Rights of the Child (UNCRC) – A children’s rights and wellbeing impact assessment has been carried out to inform this decision. Douglas Hendry, Executive Director with responsibility for Commercial Services and Education Kirsty Flanagan, Executive Director with responsibility for Financial Services Audrey Forrest, Policy Lead for Education 6 February 2025 For further information contact: Head of Commercial Services – Ross McLaughlin Head of Education and Lifelong Learning and Chief Education Officer – Jen Crocket Head of Education – Learning and Teaching – Wendy Brownlie Page 65
Page 66
APPENDICES Appendix Title Location Appendix 1 Hub North Scotland Site Selection and Engagement Report (February 2025) * Attached * Mod.Gov * Publicly Accessible 1A Community Engagement Analysis (November 2024) Mull Engagement Analysis 1B Long List of Sites (October 2024) Long-list 1C Short List Site Plans Short List Plans 1D Utilities Infrastructure Reports Appendices - Utilities 1E Preliminary Ground Conditions Review Geotech 1F Flooding and Drainage Report Flooding Drainage 1G Place Diagrams Place Diagrams 1H Transport Considerations Report (January 2025) * Summary Paper Attached * Mod.Gov Transport Considerations * Publicly Accessible 1I Site Abnormal Costs * Mod.Gov * Exempt 1J Wayleaves, Legal and Site Acquisition Risk * Mod.Gov * Exempt 1K Integrated Impact Assessment Report (February 2025) * Attached * Mod.Gov * Publicly Accessible 1L Valuation Report (January 2025) * Mod.Gov * Exempt Appendix 2 Site Scoring Outcome * Attached * Mod.Gov * Publicly Accessible Page 66
Page 67
North Schools Programme Mull Campus – Site Selection Site Analysis Report 06 February 2025 Prepared by: Scott Adams, Project Director Page 67 Agenda Item 6b
Page 68
1 Contents 1.0 Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Report ........................................................................................................................................................... 1 2.1 Scope of Works ....................................................................................................................................... 1 2.2 Community Engagement ......................................................................................................................... 1 2.3 Call for Sites ............................................................................................................................................ 1 2.3.1 Long List .......................................................................................................................................... 1 2.3.2 Short List ......................................................................................................................................... 3 3.0 Site Analysis ................................................................................................................................................ 4 3.1 Site 1 – Existing Tobermory School ........................................................................................................ 6 3.1.1 Deliverability .................................................................................................................................... 6 3.1.2 Educational Impact ......................................................................................................................... 8 3.1.3 Community and Place ..................................................................................................................... 9 3.1.4 Accessibility & Transport ............................................................................................................... 11 3.1.5 Sustainability ................................................................................................................................. 13 3.1.6 Affordability ................................................................................................................................... 14 3.1.7 Risk ............................................................................................................................................... 16 3.2 Site 2 – Craignure .................................................................................................................................. 17 3.2.1 Deliverability .................................................................................................................................. 17 3.2.2 Educational Impact ....................................................................................................................... 19 3.2.3 Community and Place ................................................................................................................... 20 3.2.4 Accessibility & Transport ............................................................................................................... 22 3.2.5 Sustainability ................................................................................................................................. 26 3.2.6 Affordability ................................................................................................................................... 26 3.2.7 Risk ............................................................................................................................................... 28 3.3 Site 3 – Garmony ................................................................................................................................... 29 3.3.1 Deliverability .................................................................................................................................. 29 3.3.2 Educational Impact ....................................................................................................................... 30 3.3.3 Community and Place ................................................................................................................... 32 3.3.4 Accessibility & Transport ............................................................................................................... 32 3.3.5 Sustainability ................................................................................................................................. 36 3.3.1 Affordability ................................................................................................................................... 36 3.3.2 Risk ............................................................................................................................................... 38 Page 68
Page 69
2 3.4 Site 4 – South Tobermory ...................................................................................................................... 39 3.4.1 Deliverability .................................................................................................................................. 39 3.4.2 Educational Impact ....................................................................................................................... 41 3.4.3 Community and Place ................................................................................................................... 42 3.4.4 Accessibility & Transport ............................................................................................................... 43 3.4.5 Sustainability ................................................................................................................................. 46 3.4.6 Affordability ................................................................................................................................... 46 3.4.7 Risk ............................................................................................................................................... 48 4.0 Appendices ................................................................................................................................................ 49 Appendix A – Engagement Report ................................................................................................................. 49 Appendix B – Long List Report ....................................................................................................................... 49 Appendix C – Short List Site Layouts ............................................................................................................. 49 Appendix D – Existing Utilities Report ............................................................................................................ 49 Appendix E – Desktop Geotechnical Report................................................................................................... 49 Appendix F – Flooding and Drainage Report.................................................................................................. 49 Appendix G – Place Plans .............................................................................................................................. 49 Appendix H – Transport Review ..................................................................................................................... 49 Appendix I – Site Abnormals Cost ................................................................................................................ 49 Appendix J – Wayleaves, Legal and Site Acquisition Risk ............................................................................. 49 Appendix K – Integrated Impact Assessment Report ..................................................................................... 49 Appendix L – Valuation Report ....................................................................................................................... 49 Page 69
Page 70
1 1.0 Executive Summary As part of the North Schools Programme, hub North Scotland have supported Argyll and Bute Council with site selection activities for the proposed 2-18 Mull Campus. This report details the analysis of site-options to allow for Argyll and Bute Council to undertake a scored evaluation of short-listed sites. 2.0 Report 2.1 Scope of Works As part of the Site Selection activity we have undertaken the following; • Outlining site requirements to support a call for sites • Supporting with the development of evaluation criteria for site selection • Undertaking screening and assessment of submitted sites for both long-listing and short-listing • Detailed technical analysis of short-listed sites in order to provide suitable information for Argyll and Bute Council to score against evaluation criteria • Community Engagement from 17th-25th September 2024, with output report to capture feedback. • Integrated Impact Assessments capturing socio-economic impacts of site selection. • Valuation of short-listed sites. This report brings together the information gathered and produced during the above activities and is intended to support informed decision-making in terms of selecting a suitable site for the proposed 2-18 Mull Campus. 2.2 Community Engagement A Community Engagement exercise was undertaken between the 17th and 25th September in a range of locations across Mull and Iona, these sessions were set-up to help understand which factors were important to the Community in selecting a site for the new 2-18 Mull Campus. 2.3 Call for Sites Argyll and Bute Council issued a call for sites on 28 August 2024 which outlined the initial criteria for land to site the proposed Mull Campus. The initial request was for sites to be at least 2.3 hectares and provisions of as much information as possible to assess the site. Our team undertook an initial screening of each site to confirm its suitability in terms of area for inclusion within the Long List. 2.3.1 Long List Following the Call for Sites a long list was produced which included ten sites to be reviewed for consideration as to whether they could accommodate the new 2-18 Mull Campus. Our team undertook a high-level review of each site to consider key constraints such as flood risk, ground conditions, accessibility and site abnormals which could make the sites prohibitive to development. An initial focus was given on suitability of each site to deliver the brief in terms of size, fit and accessibility. The Architect initially overlaid a footprint for a comparative project on each option to establish how this would fit. It was then possible to consider how this would sit within a wider site context to deliver an overall site which would be able to safely operate. Our technical team provided commentary relevant to Civil and Structural requirements, such as topographical and ground condition risks. Some of the sites provided through the Call for Sites were found to have substantial level changes and contain very poor marsh and peaty ground, making them unsuitable for development without significant remediation. Page 70
Page 71
� NORTH SCHOOLS PROGRAMME A review of Mechanical & Electrical requirements focused primarily on utility risk and how easy it would be to service each site. As is typically the case in remote regions, there is unlikely to be an extensive network of utility services outwith primary routes and as such many sites were found to be located a distance away from existing infrastructure. For each long-listed site an initial review was carried out in terms of any transport impact. Several sites were found to have constrained accesses which would not be able to accommodate significant amounts of traffic during the delivery of the Mull Campus project or in final operation once the facility is live. Where more detail was provided at the long-listing stage this was also reviewed to understand any additional impact. Examples of this are seen around sites which may already have planning or detailed ground investigation/surveys carried out. The outcome of the long-listed sites was as follows; Site Reference Reason for not short-listing Existing Site (Tobermory) Shortlisted Site 001 (Craignure) Shortlisted Site 003 (Eas Brae) The site is considered to have a significant flood risk and is too constrained to include the full brief. Site 004 (Garmony) Site has significant flood risk and would struggle to accommodate the full brief. Site 005 (Garmony) Shortlisted Site 007 (Tobermory South) Access to the site would be challenging through existing residential area. Ground conditions are boggy/peat and topography of the site varies significantly. Site 008 (Salen) The site has significant flood risk and is constrained by existing infrastructure, including a power line through the site. The ground is also peat over bedrock which would require significant remediation. Site 011 (Tobermory South) Sites constrained and reliant on a 2 site approach. Unlikely to have suitable space to accommodate parking and drop-off/pick-up facilities. Site 012 (Tobermory) The site is too small to capture the full brief and is constrained in terms of adjustments. Access would be difficult and the site varies significantly in terms of levels. Site 013 (Tobermory) Shortlisted Site 014 (Tobermory) Access from the road is very steep and significant level change is seen across the site. Additionally ground conditions are boggy and drainage routes run across the site which restricts development. 2 Page 71
Page 72
3 On conclusion of this exercise it was agreed that three sites, plus the existing Tobermory School site would be progressed to a short-list for a more detailed site analysis. Full details of the long-listing review, which includes the high level analysis of each site, along with the existing Tobermory School site is included in Appendix B 2.3.2 Short List Following the long list review it was agreed that 4no. sites would be short-listed for detailed analysis. These are listed as follows; Site 1 – Existing Tobermory School Site 2 - Development site, Craignure Site 3 - Garmony Site 4 – South Tobermory Page 72
Page 73
4 3.0 Site Analysis • In order to undertake a comprehensive evaluation of the short-listed sites we worked collaboratively with Argyll and Bute Council to set-out evaluation criteria consistent with site selection for comparable projects. This initially focused on key themes of; • Deliverability – A technical review of sites to confirm suitability for building of the new Campus. This was to focus on utilities, ground conditions and flood risk. • Education – A look in to how each site could meet educational requirements through a review of external environments and confirming how each site could cope with adaptation and expansion. Travel times are also to be included. • Community and Place – A view on how each site would impact the region through impact on residents, families and staff/pupils. Consideration should also be given to any impact on the local economy. • Accessibility and Transport – An improved understanding around the impacts of travel and transport against each of the identified sites. This would focus on existing links, including active travel and how the wider infrastructure network would support access to each site. • Sustainability – Consideration around how different sites could have an impact in terms of embodied carbon through existing structures, whilst also looking at carbon related to travel. • Affordability – A review on any site abnormals across various sites, also picking up site acquisition costs and any revenue implications across sites. • Risk – Any consideration around impact to the construction programme, along with any details around wayleaves, legal restrictions and planning risks. Within each of these headings we detailed out information that could be provided to support the evaluation activity. Page 73
Page 74
5 The Strategic Board for the 2-18 Mull Campus project agreed the following Evaluation Criteria; The X in the ‘Report Reference’ above is to be replaced with the number for each site as follows; 1 – Existing Tobermory School 2 – Development Site, Craignure 3 - Garmony 4 – South Tobermory This numbering links to the relevant sections within this report. Criteria Category Report Reference Evaluation Criteria Supplementary Appendix 3.X.1.1 Utility infrastructure - capacity and need for any diversions Appendix D 3.X.1.2 Ground conditions Appendix E 3.X.1.3 Topography Appendix E 3.X.1.4 Flood risk Appendix F 3.X.1.5 Site abnormals - 3.X.1.6 Habitat constraints - 3.X.2.1 Is the site capable of accommodating the brief in full? - 3.X.2.2 Quality of external environment to support outside learning, sports activities etc - 3.X.2.3 Does the site provide capacity for future expansion? - 3.X.2.4 Travel times for ELC and primary school pupils Appendix H 3.X.2.5 Travel times for staff and secondary school pupils Appendix H 3.X.2.6 Access and connectivity to good community facilities and services Appendix H 3.X.3.1 Impact on family life Appendix K 3.X.3.2 Equitable - unites north & south of island Appendix K 3.X.3.3 Sustain and support local economy Appendix K 3.X.3.4 Impact of construction activities on existing school/ residential areas - 3.X.4.1 Good public transport links to site and location Appendix H 3.X.4.2 Existing safe active travel links to site Appendix H 3.X.4.3 Number of user journeys - bus, car, pedestrian (Pupil/ staff mode split) Appendix H 3.X.4.4 Potential impact on public transport network Appendix H 3.X.4.5 Ability of existing (wider) roads infrastructure to service site Appendix H 3.X.4.6 Trips with complex dependencies/ multiple stages and modes of travel Appendix H 3.X.5.1 Potential for re-use of existing infrastructure and buildings (embodied carbon) - 3.X.5.2 Carbon impact of travel (travel distances and mode of transport) Appendix H 3.X.6.1 Costs associated with site abnormals Appendix I 3.X.6.2 Potential acquisition/disposal costs Appendix L 3.X.6.3 Other (revenue) cost implications e.g. pupil transport - 3.X.7.1 Wayleaves, legal restrictions and site acquisition risk Appendix J 3.X.7.2 Construction Programme risk - 3.X.7.3 Planning designation and sensitive receptors - Education Risk Affordability Sustainability Accessibility & Transport Deliverability Community and Place Page 74
Page 75
6 3.1 Site 1 – Existing Tobermory School 3.1.1 Deliverability 3.1.1.1 Utility Infrastructure – capacity and need for any diversions Re-use of the existing school site for the New Mull Education Campus benefits from having existing Utilities infrastructure connectivity supporting the function of the existing school. Whilst existing connections exist, further engagement will be necessary with Utilities companies in respect of any anticipated increased capacities, particularly in relation to electrical infrastructure. We are advised that the existing school has an authorised capacity of 31kVA but that should be nearer 230kVA. Argyle and Bute Council are in the process of requesting an uplift in authorised capacity to reflect the current maximum demand. From the record information we can establish that utilities infrastructure is not present across the area proposed for the new school. There is however a strategy to be developed to maintain utilities to the existing school whilst the new school is constructed. It is anticipated that within that strategy existing Utilities diversions/ protection will be necessary that will affect Electricity, Water and Communications Infrastructure. Potential for positive Business Case for future connection of Net Zero heat networks The existing school site is located in the heart of the most populated settlement on Tobermory. Having the ability to connect the school in an area with the greatest population mass would be advantageous and could also be supported by potentially introducing waste heat energy into the network from businesses such as Tobermory Distillery. 3.1.1.2 Ground Conditions Based on desk study review only, it is envisaged that within Site 1 where raised beach deposits of sand and gravel are recorded to be present a shallow pad or traditional strip foundation design would be suitable. If softer material than expected is encountered a trench fill solution could potentially be adopted. Compressible superficial deposits are unlikely to be present onsite, indicated by the successful construction of the existing school building and associated infrastructure. If made ground is encountered at significant depths within the Site 1 boundary, related to historical quarries and construction on Site, the extraction of contaminated material would be required prior to forming foundations, or potentially piled foundations would be required. If bedrock is present at shallow depths, it is envisaged strip or pad foundations could be utilised bearing directly onto bedrock. The above is based on reasonable assumptions from published information only, and would require to be confirmed following completion of a targeted intrusive ground investigation campaign. The suitability of deposits underlying Site 1 are unknown and therefore the deposits earthworks suitability for reuse cannot be speculated upon prior to an intrusive ground investigation. No site or laboratory testing information is currently available with regards to the strength, density, water content and compressibility. It is therefore recommended that an intrusive ground investigation including in- situ testing and sampling for laboratory testing is conducted to fully assess the reusability characteristics of the underlying geology. Page 75
Page 76
7 It is highlighted that the presence of an igneous dyke (olivine) on the site may result in ‘hard-dig’ / possible need for blasting to facilitate excavation dependant on depth to rock and site levels. 3.1.1.3 Topography Topography imposes constraints on the existing school site, both within the grounds, and on the approaches to it. The existing school boundary area is elevated above land to the south, west and east, with land continuing to rise to the north, where residential properties overlook the school grounds. This present access challenges when approaching from west, east or south, with the only level route into the site coming from the northern edge. Within the school site, the ground slopes from north to south, with significant level changes which impact on the suitability of the existing buildings on site. All accommodate multiple levels internally to deal with the level changes. To avoid decant, developable land is restricted to the eastern part of the site, which comprises the all weather pitch and grass area to its south. This zone is surrounded by level changes - the eastern edge of the site drops down significantly to the level of the children’s play park. Land to the south drops steeply, while there is rocky ground to the north of this area as the land rises. The topography will impact on development primarily in the extent of useable external space available, and accessible routes being limited to coming in from the northern edge. The area of land comprising the pitch and grass area would allow an accessible, two storey solution to be built on site with limited or no internal level changes, as well as a 7 aside pitch. 3.1.1.4 Flood Risk The SEPA flood map indicates that Site 1 is not impacted by flooding from high tides or storm surges, or from fluvial flooding from nearby watercourses. Scottish Water’s infrastructure records indicate that a 228mm diameter vitrified clay combined sewer is located on Erray Road to the north, the likely location of an existing connection to the public sewer network. A 152mm diameter combined sewer is also location on Western Road at its eastern boundary. Scottish Water would need to confirm in a Pre-Development Enquiry response that there is sufficient capacity in their network to service the development of a new Education Campus. This can be offset by understanding what the current flow rate from the existing school provides. There is no public surface water drainage shown on the Scottish Water infrastructure records within the boundaries of the site. There are also no watercourses in the vicinity of the site which surface water runoff could be discharged to. It is therefore considered that the surface water runoff from the existing school facility must be conveyed to the existing public combined sewer network or drained into soakaways or to a combination of these drainage options. Scottish Water will only allow surface water from new development to discharge to the combined sewer network under exceptional circumstances. It is therefore not expected that surface water runoff from any redevelopment of the site will be permitted to be conveyed to the existing combined sewer network. However, if the site currently benefits from a surface water connection to the combined sewer and it can be shown that the amount of hardstanding has not been increased and is attenuated, a connection to the combined sewer may be possible. They may also require use of raingardens/bio retention zones and green roofs to be appropriately considered as well as potential for rainwater harvesting. The requirement to infiltrate surface water runoff to the subsoils will be dependent on Scottish Water permission to discharge surface water to the existing sewers and the rate of any allowance. Page 76
Page 77
8 The appropriate form of SUDS for redevelopment of the site will depend on the method of surface water disposal. Irrespective of the actual form of the SUDS, a significant proportion of the lowest lying area of the site will require to be allocated for the SUDS and this will place a constraint the development proposals. 3.1.1.5 Site Abnormals The key abnormal issues for the existing school site are taking into account the requirement for a tandem build, which will necessitate a phased approach, which will have an impact on programme duration and prelim costs. The area of the site where it is proposed to build the new campus is also designated as King George V land, with a presumption that it is retained for outdoor use. While there would still be an overall balance in the amount of external space provided as part of a new campus, consultation with Fields in Trust will be required to ensure the proposals are acceptable. It is also anticipated there will be a need for retention to the southern edge of the parking area and newly formed 7 aside all weather pitch. 3.1.1.6 Habitat Constraints All sites will require to have habitat and ecological surveys carried out as a matter of course as part of statutory approvals process to identify any protected and invasive species present. From a walkover of the existing school site, the potential for significant habitat impact would appear to be limited, though it is worth noting existing structures increases the possibility of bat roosting. 3.1.2 Educational Impact 3.1.2.1 Is the site capable of accommodating the brief in full? The site area is 2.3 ha. but the existing school must remain in operation during the construction stage, which limits the area of land available for locating the school. There is sufficient space on site to accommodate the new campus brief over two storeys and the levels of parking and servicing required, although parking areas will require significant regrading. Bus drop off may potentially need to maintain the current situation of 14m buses parking on adjacent streets depending on how drop off is prioritised against providing external space. The other limitation of the site is the inability to accommodate a full size 100m x 60m all weather pitch, and the extent of external learning and social space. A seven aside all weather pitch could be accommodated on site. 3.1.2.2 Quality of external environment to support outside learning The BB103 maximum and minimum areas for the pupil roll of the proposed Mull 2-18 campus (31 ELC children, 90 primary learners and 177 secondary learners) is 21,374sqm – 22,847sqm. The existing school site is 23,000sqm. External space is limited on site, although there still exists scope to create external learning environments, the majority enjoying a southerly aspect. The location of the new building as a result of keeping the existing school in operation means that external space will wrap around parking areas, which is less than optimal. The site has limited potential for a quality external learning environment. 3.1.2.3 Does the site provide capacity for future expansion? While the site is constrained, and the area of development restricted to the western part of the site due to the need to keep the existing school operational, there is scope to plan for modest future expansion to the east. This future expansion could extend to two additional standard sized classrooms, one at ground and one at first floor, plus ancillary areas. Locating the expansion at the east allows building servicing to remain operational during any future extension construction period. Page 77
Page 78
3.1.2.4 Travel times for ELC and primary school pupils � NORTHSCHOOLSPROGRAMME The estimated one-way travel times for ELC and Primary pupils are derived from the Transport Review included in Appendix H is shown below. The travel times presented are an aggregate, encompassing the wide range of trips which would be made to the site. Travel time for minor legs of a trip (such as walking to the bus stop, a ferry crossing or travelling by car to access bus stops on the main road) are not accounted for in this analysis. In any case, the nature of these journeys are likely to remain constant across all four sites . 3.1.2.5 SITE COHORT ...... Site 01 - Tobermory Primary 18 22 Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding 153 Travel times for staff and secondary school pupils 280 473 AVERAGE The estimated one-way travel times for Secondary pupils and Staff are derived from the Transport Review included in Appendix H is shown below. The travel times presented are an aggregate, encompassing the wide range of trips which would be made to the site. Travel time for minor legs of a trip (such as walking to the bus stop, a ferry crossing or travelling by car to access bus stops on the main road) are not accounted for in this analysis. In any case, the nature of these journeys are likely to remain constant across all four sites . SITE COHORT ...... Site 01 - Tobermory Site 01 - Tobermory Secondary Staff 0 2,356 0 0 Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding 162 588 695 163 3.1.2.6 Access and connectivity to good community facilities and services 3,106 858 AVERAGE The existing school site is located centrally in Tobermory, the largest settlement on Mull. It is in close proximity to the residential areas which form the catchment for the primary school. It is also nearby residential areas which supply the single largest number of secondary school pupils to Tobermory High School. The school is well served in this location by a range of shops, food and drink offerings and cultural and community facilities. The existing school site is located centrally within Tobermory, and as a result enjoys the potential for easy links with local businesses, community resources and employers. 3.1.3 3.1.3.1 Community and Place Impact on family life In a survey of Bunessan Primary School families, only 5% of respondents said that they would consider sending their children to a high school in Tobermory. During public engagement sessions, a number of parents and young people in the South West of Mull have expressed concerns around their children's ability to fully 9 Page 78
Page 79
10 enjoy family life if they are required to board on the mainland from Monday to Friday. Many respondents have raised concerns about the impact this has on young people during their teenage years which is a significant developmental period. Many members of the community have referenced Article 9 – Children should not be separated from their parents in relation to the current scenario where children from the Ross of Mull are required leave their family homes weekly to board on the mainland in order to attend Oban High School. Many argue that secondary- school aged children are entitled to remain with their families during the week and the current catchment provision does not allow for this. A central site option could allow greater choice for pupils and families living in the Ross of Mull to attend secondary school on the island which would allow children to more fully enjoy all aspects of family life during their time at secondary school. • While the premise of citing Article 9 is important, the Article legally does not apply to the current proposals. However, that should not invalidate the concerns of children, young people and their families who wish to avoid boarding on the mainland as part of the decision-making process. Equitable – best access for as many as possible Further details can be found in the Integrated Impact Assessment Report within Appendix K 3.1.3.2 Equitable – unites north & south of island Retaining education provision in Tobermory would positively impact pupils, families and community members currently utilising the existing Site through the re-provision of enhanced and contemporary facilities. This could also encourage population retention and growth in the area. However, there would be no additional benefit to families living in the South West of Mull, who would likely continue with status quo education arrangements for local primary schooling and off-island secondary-school attendance. This option poses the continued risk of depopulation with the South West of Mull, where families may make decisions to relocate on the basis of their child’s education and to avoid the possibility weekly boarding on the mainland. Site 01 - Tobermory will retain familiar travel patterns as current conditions would largely be unchanged. It is conveniently located within walking distance for most existing housing in Tobermory with 90% of pre-5 and primary school pupils currently living within a 5-minute walking distance as highlighted in Appendix H. Constraints have been noted for the site whereby access for larger vehicles such as HGVs and buses may be challenging. 3.1.3.3 Sustain and support local economy An Economic Impact Assessment has been prepared, this outlines that if the campus was located in Tobermory, the economic benefit would be £3,147,000 higher than would be the case if the campus was built in a central island location. This assessment takes into account investment stimulus acknowledging that schools influence the attractiveness of an area for potential residents and therefore the value of future housing developments. The full Economic Impact Assessment is included in Appendix K. 3.1.3.4 Impact of construction activities on existing school/ residential facilities The existing school is located on central Tobermory, with residential streets to the north on Erray Road and Western Road, and the residential back lane to the south. Back Brae has less residential properties, but falls Page 79
Page 80
11 steeply away from the school site to the west. The surrounding streets are narrow, and will present logistical challenges during the construction phase of the project, with inevitable impact to surrounding residential properties. A tandem build will also impact on the daily operations of the school due to the close proximity of construction activity with associated deliveries and noise. However, a competent contractor can successfully manage operations on a live school site and mitigate impact with appropriate forward planning. 3.1.4 Accessibility & Transport 3.1.4.1 Good public transport to site and location Existing Conditions The morning and afternoon school services current serve the site by way of the bus layby on Erray Road. Tobermory is additional served throughout the day by the 494 and the 95/495. Future Conditions The site could incorporate approximately three bus stances adjacent to the school entrance to enable safe boarding and disembarkation of pupils. Alternatively, as a result of site constraints, the use of the bus bays on Erray Road could continue to be utilised, perhaps with some rationalisation or upgrade. 3.1.4.2 Existing safe active travel links to site Existing Conditions Pedestrian facilities are limited to larger residential streets on the adjacent road network such as Erray Road and Victoria Street. There is also an off-road path between Back Brae and Main Street via Middle Brae and a set of steps. Future Conditions While infrastructure is currently limited, off-site improvement works would likely be a requirement following the standard consultation and transport assessment processes. 3.1.4.3 Number of user journeys – bus, car, pedestrian (Pupil/staff mode split) As there will be little change to travel characteristics the anticipated mode share for the Tobermory site it has been assumed the mode share will remain the same as the results of a hands up survey conducted at the existing Tobermory 2-18 school. For completeness this mode share is presented below; Page 80
Page 81
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Established Behaviour (Tobermory) Primary Site 01 -Mode Share Established Behaviour (Tobermory) Secondary ■Walk ■Taxi ■Bus ■Car ■Ferry Established Behaviour (Tobermory) Staff NORTH SCHOOLS PROGRAMME Currently around 30% of primary-aged pupils walk to the site and 70% are driven to the site. There are also a few trips facilitated by taxi or bus. 40% of secondary-aged currently walk to the site and 45% arrive by bus. A further 15% drive or are driven to the school. 33% of staff walk to the site and the remining 67% currently drive. Based on the expected student cohort and staff numbers, the expected number of trips by each mode is presented below; Site 01 -Multi-Modal Trips SITE COHORT ------ Site 01 - Tobermory Primary 29 2 1 64 0 95 ] Site 01 - Tobermory I Site 01 - Tobermory Secondary Staff 64 20 Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding 0 0 71 22 0 157 0 39 0 As the T obermory site is located on the existing school site no changes to the current bus operations are anticipated. The buses which would be required for secondary school pupils are one bus from Calgary I Dervaig, one bus from Torloisk and Ulva Ferry via Salen and one bus from Lochbuie Crossroads. The annual revisions of the network and its complex dependencies are expected to be broadly in line with existing operations. The below map illustrates the anticipated bus network for Site 01. 12 Page 81
Page 82
13 Site 01 Anticipated Bus Network 3.1.4.4 Potential impact on public transport network As there will be no requirement to amend the bus services associated with school transport there is unlikely to be any impact, positive or negative, on the wider public transport network. 3.1.4.5 Ability of existing (wider) roads infrastructure to service site The site is already a part of the established road network and the site’s vehicular access would remain. The increase in car parking within the site will reduce the instances of on-street car parking occurring on the adjoining residential streets, in turn making it easier for buses to navigate these streets. There can at times be complexities in accommodating and manoeuvring larger vehicles on the site, particularly when multiple vehicles are present at once. Buses which arrive via Argyll Terrace then have to reverse up Erray Road with the aid of a banksman. 3.1.4.6 Trips with complex dependencies/multiple stages and modes of travel Complex dependencies are likely to be broadly similar regardless of the selected site. Further details on this criterion are provided in Section 9.3 of the Transport Review in Appendix H. For pupils who live remotely from the main road network and key population centres, an additional leg of their journey will be required to intersect the bus service. This secondary journey will be facilitated by specific arrangements to them and may include a taxi or short car trip by a parent/carer. 3.1.5 Sustainability 3.1.5.1 Potential for re-use of existing infrastructure and buildings (embodied carbon) There are a range of existing buildings on site with the potential for re-use. However, their suitability is severely impacted by the level changes which occur within most buildings which result in accessibility issues. The ELC building is more recent than other structures and does have re-use potential with appropriate internal reconfiguration, although the external spaces would benefit from upgrading and reorientation. The site also Page 82
Page 83
NORTH SCHOOLS PROGRAMME benefits from existing servicing although it is anticipated that some upgrading of capacity may be required. There is existing pedestrian links and vehicular access to the site, although the gradients present a challenge. 3.1.5.2 Carbon impact of travel (travel distances and mode of transport) The estimated one-way vehicle miles by cohort and vehicle for the Tobermory site are presented below. The values presented in this table represent the driven milage of each vehicle as opposed to each passenger. This accounts for the fact that one bus can carry multiple passengers. Site 01 - Travel Distance (Miles) Site Cohort TOTAL Site 01 - Tobermory Primary Site 01 - Tobermory Secondary 6 0 0 6 0 63 0 63 42 57 303 402 48 ___=] 121 � Site 01 - Tobermory Staff 303 � Site 01 -Tobermory Total 471 � As with any new development of this nature Travel Planning measures have the potential to positively influence travel, particularly among staff members. A Travel Plan would seek to encourage behaviours such as car sharing or public transport usage in order to reduce the number of vehicle miles incurred. Applying the carbon emission assessment methodology outlined in Section 10.7 the estimated carbon emissions for one-way travel (of all vehicles) to the Tobermory site is presented below. Site 01 - Carbon Emissions (Kg Co2e) Site -- Primary 0 Secondary 0 0 67 0 9 79 67 TOTAL 7 I I Site 01 - Tobermory Site 01 - Tobermory Site 01 - Tobermory Site 01 - Tobermory Staff Total 0 0 67 9 12 67 89 156 Any increase in carbon emissions from bus travel may only be temporary. In line with current national policy bus fleets are gradually transitioning to electric and hydrogen systems. A similar transition is likely to occur to the car fleet, as residents increasingly embrace the use of electric cars. 3.1.6 3.1.6.1 Affordability Costs associated with site abnormals The existing school site will have a number of key factors impacting on the construction capital cost associated with this particular site compared to any other. A key difference is the need to construct the site adjacent to a 'live' school, and this adds a further layer of complexity to construction management. Men, plant and materials will need to be organised in a different way from a 'green field' and unfettered site. This may mean phased operations, different working hours and material delivery regime and this will result in impact on programme of works usually increasing the time to build the same building here as opposed to the alternative site options. 14 Page 83
Page 84
� NORTHSCHOOLSPROGRAMME Ground conditions have yet to be fully understood and engineering consultants Waterman have indicated potential for the need to break out rock, which comes at a cost premium, but at this stage is dependent on site investigation and geotechnical reporting. Watermans have also suggested there could logically be the presence of contamination within the site given the central Tobermory location, the existing school site adjacent and the former quarrying on the site. Ground remediation potentially comes at a significant cost, but again is un tested and unquantifiable at this stage and is subject to further reporting. The efficiency of being able to accommodate 71 carparking spaces, bus lay down areas and provide service vehicles to access the new school will differ for each site, either requiring more or less hard standing than the other alternative sites. Site 1 has slightly more hardstanding than the alternative sites so this comes at a potential additional cost, though conversely does not require any new access roads to be built to accommodate the new school. Site levels indicate the need to provide some ground retention works to accommodate the site's natural slope to the south. As a result, an allowance for retaining walls to the southern carparking and the 7 a side pitch has been made here. Flood risk is considered non existent and normal surface water drainage management is anticipated. This site will have the advantage of not requiring any separate drainage system provided the drainage management design can be shown not to increase current surface water discharge into the existing drainage infrastructure. Utilities provision, the site is adjacent to the full suite of utilities provision. Design consultants RYBKA have noted that capacity and ability for the new school to connect to the existing infrastructure will be subject to further design and discussion with utility providers, but at the moment is assumes to have no abnormal cost uplift. Due to the 'live' site and proximity to the retained school, some element of protection and diversion of utilities will be likely and has been assessed here. Summary: Site Site 1- Existing Tobermory School Site CONSTRUCTION CONSTRAINTS GROUND CONDITIONS SITE WORKS FLOOD RISK AND DRAINAGE UTILITIES TOTALS 3.1.6.2 Potential acquisition/disposal costs Argyll and Bute Council are in ownership of the existing Tobermory School site, therefore there would be no assumed acquisition costs. A valuation report has been provided in Appendix L to give an indication. 3.1.6.3 Other (revenue) cost implications e.g. pupil transport Argyll and Bute Council have assumed there would be no adjustment to revenue costs in relation to transport costs if the existing Tobermory school site is selected, as shown below; 15 Page 84
Page 85
Additional revenue Costs Pupil Transport - additional cost Staff Travel-additional cost Total potential additional cost per annum 3.1.7 Risk Detail 4 buses @ f6k per calendar month for 10.5 months 10 journey per week 40 weeks *miles *4Sp per mile less £2.91 per week Site 1 • Site 2 • Existinc Craicnure Toberrnory site 0 221,600 0 69,519 0 291,119 3.1.7.1 Wayleaves, legal restrictions and site acquisition risk Site 3 • Garmony 252,000 58,587 310,587 � NORTHSCHOOLSPROGRAMME Site 4 • Toberrnory south site 0 0 0 Argyll and Bute Council have provided information detailing out ownership, wayleaves, legal restrictions and site acquisition risks within Appendix J. 3.1.7.2 Construction Programme risk The construction programme for the existing Tobermory site is likely to be longer due to requirement for a tandem-build and the need to undertake phased delivery which will likely include construction of a new school, demolition of the existing school and any landscaping/pitch works to be completed. There is also a risk delay due to implications of working within a constrained site and having to adapt methodology. All sites are impacted evenly in terms of reliance on ferry crossings to support construction activities. 3.1.7.3 Planning designation and sensitive receptors The site has no designation under LDP2. The King George V land is designated as an Open Space Protection Area. The site lies at the edge of the Conservation Area so there will likely be a requirement for a Visual Impact Appraisal. Under NPF4 a case for the demolition rather than reissue or refurbishment of the school would also be required. There is no requirement for HSE consultation with this site. 16 Page 85
Page 86
17 3.2 Site 2 – Craignure 3.2.1 Deliverability 3.2.1.1 Utility Infrastructure – capacity and need for any diversions The site is situated to the northern boundary of Craignure and adjacent to Mull and Iona Community Hospital. The utilities record drawings received show that the proposed site is clear of existing utilities with no anticipated abnormal costs for diversions within the proposed site. Existing Electricity (LV and 11kV), Mains Water and Communications infrastructure exists to the south of the site and serves the Hospital, Swimming Pool and Hotel to the south as well as residential units. On the assumption that capacities are available in the existing infrastructure they would need to be extended by approximately 400m to reach the proposed new school and will need to be co-ordinated with the proposed future housing development site arrangement. Alternatively, there is potential to connect into the existing infrastructure along the A849 to the west of the site. Infrastructure would need to extend approx. 400m and may present better opportunities in terms of capacity availability. Potential for positive Business Case for future connection of Net Zero heat networks Opportunities for a supporting a business case at Craignure exist given the close proximity of larger energy consuming facilities such as the Hospital, Swimming Pool and Hotel. At present heat network support to the local community near the Craignure site is limited although this may be increased should the proposed future housing development progress. 3.2.1.2 Ground Conditions Published mapping indicates raised marine deposits are present within Site 2. Raised marine deposits frequently contain soft organic clays which, dependant on thickness, may potentially require more onerous foundation solutions such as piles, or ground improvement, in place of traditional shallow foundations. This is largely speculative however, based on reasonable assumptions from published information only, and would require to be confirmed following completion of a targeted intrusive ground investigation campaign. The stratum recorded to underly Site 2 is predominantly Raised Marine and Beach deposits including sands, gravels, cobles and sites are greater depths. No site or laboratory testing information is currently available with regards to the strength, density, water content and compressibility. It is therefore recommended that an intrusive ground investigation including in-situ testing and sampling for laboratory testing is conducted to fully assess the reusability characteristics of the underlying geology. It is highlighted that the presence of olivine basalt below the northern half of the site may result in ‘hard-dig’ / possible need for blasting to facilitate excavation dependant on depth to rock and site levels. 3.2.1.3 Topography Topography has limited impact on the proposed development site. The site has a gradual but significant fall from southeast to northwest, and is bound at the northern corner by a steep level change which rises up to higher ground at the north, although this step from a natural boundary to the site. The nature of the main fall across the site is gradual, and would not present a significant issue in developing the new campus. Page 86
Page 87
18 It is anticipated that the site would be formed so that parking and the main school building occupy the lower portion of the site to the northwest, with the pitch occupying the higher ground to the southeast. External social space would be used to accommodate the level change in a way which limits the use of any retaining walls. Topography will impact on any potential new access road formed from the west however, as the A848 is at a significantly higher level than the adjacent part of the site. Ensuring appropriate gradients for any new route is a key consideration. 3.2.1.4 Flood Risk The SEPA flood map indicates that Site 2 is not impacted by flooding from high tides or storm surges. The SEPA Flood Map show medium to high risks around the Site 2, but the Site boundary is at "low to no" risk of surface water flooding. The proposed development should incorporate measures for effective surface water management. Specifically, it is essential to intercept, treat, and attenuate surface water before it is discharged in a controlled manner through a new on-site drainage network. Implementing these measures will ensure compliance with local council policy and contribute to effective flood risk management and water quality protection. Scottish Water’s infrastructure records indicate that the nearest location for wastewater disposal is located in the adjacent housing development in Java Place with 100mm diameter uPVC combined sewers discharging towards coastal waters. Scottish Water would need to confirm in a Pre-Development Enquiry response that there is sufficient capacity in their network to service the development of a new Education Campus. It should be noted that offsite improvement works may be required to facilitate a connection to the Scottish Water network but depending on timing, this work may be carried out as part of any planned housing development surrounding the Site. Placement of carrier drains through adjacent land would need to be considered so that it does not cause issues for future development if School site is developed in advance of any housing development. There is no public surface water drainage shown on the Scottish Water infrastructure records within the boundaries of the site. There are also no watercourses in the vicinity of the site which surface water runoff could be discharged to. Scottish Water will only allow surface water from new development to discharge to the combined sewer network under exceptional circumstances. It is therefore not expected that surface water runoff from any redevelopment of the site will be permitted to be conveyed to the existing combined sewer network. A new surface water connection through Java place towards the existing outfall may be considered but again, depending on timing, a surface water connection may have been made by any planned housing development. It should be noted that no records are available for the Mull and Iona Community Hospital surface water discharge and can be assumed that this infiltrates to the ground. Therefore, an appropriate method for treating and disposing of surface water from a new facility on the site would need to be established. Further investigation and consultations are required to establish the feasibility of these options. The investigations that are required to establish if surface water runoff from proposed development can be infiltrated into the subsoils will comprise intrusive ground investigation and insitu testing to determine the suitability of the ground conditions. The requirement to infiltrate surface water runoff to the subsoils will be dependent on Scottish Water permission to discharge surface water to the existing sewers and the rate of any allowance. The appropriate form of SUDS for redevelopment of the site will depend on the method of surface water disposal. Irrespective of the actual form of the SUDS, a significant proportion of the lowest lying area of the site will require to be allocated for the SUDS and this will place a constraint the development proposals. Page 87
Page 88
3.2.1.5 Site Abnormals � NORTHSCHOOLSPROGRAMME The Craignure site has limited abnormals, but there is the need to form a new vehicular access from the A848 to an acceptable standard. The proximity of the helipad servicing the hospital will also need taken into consideration, particularly during the construction phase. 3.2.1.6 Habitat Constraints All sites will require to have habitat and ecological surveys carried out as a matter of course as part of statutory approvals process to identify any protected and invasive species present. Ecological surveys have been carried out in close proximity to the site previously, which identified no evidence of protected species. The site is at low risk of any habitat constraints. 3.2.2 3.2.2.1 Educational Impact Is the site capable of accommodating the brief in full? At 3.27ha, the identified site has sufficient capacity to accommodate the new campus building at two storeys, a full size all weather pitch, external learning areas and associated car parking, servicing and bus drop off areas on site. 3.2.2.2 Quality of external environment to support outside learning The 88103 maximum and minimum areas for the pupil roll of the proposed Mull 2-18 campus (31 ELC children, 90 primary learners and 177 secondary learners) is 21,374sqm-22,847sqm. The Craignure site is 33,000 sqm and is therefore able to accommodate the required amount of external space provision. The site has the capacity to enjoy a broad south facing aspect for secure external learning, sports and social spaces, clearly distinct from carparking, servicing and drop off areas. With good long range views, it has high potential to create good quality external learning environments. 3.2.2.3 Capacity of site for future expansion The Craignure site is large enough to allow for generous future expansion, which we anticipate would be located at the western end of the school to allow the servicing yard and plant areas to remain operational during any future extension construction period. While the extent of any future expansion is unknown at this time, an additional four standard sized classrooms plus supporting spaces would be easily accommodated over two floors. 3.2.2.4 Travel times for ELC and primary school pupils The estimated one-way travel times for ELC and Primary pupils are derived from the Transport Review included in Appendix H shown below. The travel times presented are an aggregate, encompassing the wide range of trips which would be made to the site. Travel time for minor legs of a trip (such as walking to the bus stop, a ferry crossing or travelling by car to access bus stops on the main road) are not accounted for in this analysis. In any case, the nature of these journeys are likely to remain constant across all four sites . SITE Site 02 - Craignure COHORT Primary ...... 70 3,084 140 0 3,294 Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding AVERAGE 19 Page 88
Page 89
3.2.2.5 Travel times for staff and secondary school pupils � NORTH SCHOOLS PROGRAMME The estimated one-way travel times for Secondary pupils and Staff are derived from the Transport Review included in Appendix H shown below. The travel times presented are an aggregate, encompassing the wide range of trips which would be made to the site. Travel time for minor legs of a trip (such as walking to the bus stop, a ferry crossing or travelling by car to access bus stops on the main road) are not accounted for in this analysis. In any case, the nature of these journeys are likely to remain constant across all four sites . 3.2.2.6 SITE COHORT ...... Site 02 - Craignure Site 02 - L.,:raignure Secondary Staff 0 0 5,147 328 0 1,966 Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding Access and connectivity to good community facilities 48 5,523 16 1,982 AVERAGE The Craignure site enjoys the benefit of close adjacency to the Mull Community Pool for enhanced sports provision. It is also close to the Mull and Iona Community Hospital and Isle of Mull Hotel, which has the potential for partner working with secondary pupils. The site is also close to the ferry terminal, which offers advantages for access for visiting staff from the mainland. The Craignure site is in close proximity to the ferry terminal, and directly adjacent to Mull and Iona Community Hospital, Isle of Mull Hotel and the Community Swimming Pool. There is a small number of residential properties to the east of the site, with a planning consent in place for future residential development to the south and east of the proposed school site. The main Craignure settlement is further to the southeast, connected by a pedestrian footpath, which contains housing, a shop and cafe. 3.2.3 Community and Place 3.2.3.1 Impact on family life A central location would allow the majority of high-school pupils living on Mull to attend the same school. This would benefit all young people but in particular allow young people from the Ross of Mull to attend high-school on the island and return home to their families daily. This would bring a significant positive impact to young people in localities who are currently required to board on the mainland. There is also a strong community sentiment that this could help to reverse trends of depopulation in the Ross of Mull and continue to support population growth for young people and families elsewhere on the island. With a central location, journey times would increase for families living in Tobermory (assumed to double in time on average) and families living in South West Mull would still need to undertake longer journey times of approximately 1 hour each way, which is significantly higher than average school journey times across Scotland. This is likely to impact family life for many children, young people and their families who currently live in close proximity to Tobermory High-School or who would be required to undertake longer daily journeys as a result of the central location. This could affect the working patterns of parents who would be required to collect/drop-off children from school or other clubs and activities. 20 Page 89
Page 90
21 A central location option would require more children and young people aged 2-18 to undertake longer daily journeys to school by bus. A number of children and young people in Tobermory Primary and High School have expressed concerns around the implications of daily travel to a central location and the impact this could have on their health and wellbeing, including tiredness, ability to concentrate in school and opportunities to be active either through walking to school or having time to attend afterschool clubs. These impacts could also have a knock-on effect on pupil’s family lives if they are unable to fully participate in family live due to longer travel times, feeling tired or not having their needs met in terms of access to leisure, social opportunities and time to be physically active. 3.2.3.2 Equitable – unites north & south of island West Mull has experienced a depopulation rate of 8% amongst its 0-15 year old age group while North Mull has experienced a depopulation rate of 3% in this age group. Comparatively, the South of Mull has seen a significant increase in population growth for this age group at 36%, while Tobermory has experienced a 15% increase in this age group. A centrally located campus is sensitive to the demographic challenges faced by families living in South West Mull and would benefit families with teenage children attending secondary school in this region. A number of local families have expressed that attending boarding school on the mainland has negatively impacted their children and discourages young people from settling back in the local community in adulthood, increasing worries over depopulation. A centrally sited option is expected to allow all children on Mull to attend the same high school with reduced travel times for many pupils in the South and South West of Mull areas and allow for greater socialising amongst young people on Mull. This could have the potential to strengthen community cohesion amongst young people and their families leading to positive social benefits for all island communities. It would also encourage unity between communities in the North and South of Mull. With a Central site option, there is also the potential for negative demographic implications for those living in Tobermory which is Mull’s largest settlement area. Views expressed from community members suggest that families could choose to move away from Tobermory if early years and primary school provision were removed which could result in depopulation if families choose to leave the island. Both Site 03 Garmony and Site 04 Craignure would lead to increased travel times, distances and carbon emissions, particularly if the catchments are expanded to include the Ross of Mull. Average journey times would increase by approximately 20 minutes for Craignure and 15 minutes for Garmony, necessitating additional bus services in each case. While Craignure offers some potential for active travel with its proximity to an 80-unit residential housing allocation, it is noted that improvements would need to be made footways and cross infrastructure. Garmony lacks nearby housing and has no planned developments at present. There are also limited benefits from improving footways or crossings on the adjacent highway network at this location. 3.2.3.3 Sustain and support local economy An Economic Impact Assessment has been prepared, this outlines that if the campus was located in Tobermory, the economic benefit would be £3,147,000 higher than would be the case if the campus was built in a central island location. This assessment takes into account investment stimulus acknowledging that schools influence the attractiveness of an area for potential residents and therefore the value of future housing developments. The full Economic Impact Assessment is included in Appendix K. Page 90
Page 91
22 3.2.3.4 Impact of construction activities on existing school/ residential facilities Although the Craignure site is open, the site is in close proximity to the Mull and Iona Community Hospital which would be impacted on by adjacent construction operations, with the close proximity of the helicopter landing pad requiring pre-construction dialogue with the Air Ambulance service to mitigate the impact of construction operations. Residential properties around Java Place will not be significantly impacted on by site operations as it is highly likely construction traffic will not access the site along the existing road leading to it. 3.2.4 Accessibility & Transport 3.2.4.1 Good public transport links to site and location Existing Conditions The adjacent Mull and Iona Community Hospital is currently served by the service 95 bus. The 96/496 Craignure to Fionnphort service terminates at the nearby ferry terminal. Future Conditions The site would incorporate approximately four bus stances to enable pupils to board and disembark safely. These bays would ideally be positioned within the site such that bus doors opened directly onto an expansive pedestrian space, thereby removing the needs for pupils to interact with the car park and other trafficked spaces. The primary and secondary school days finish approximately 20 minutes apart. Unlike the morning period, where buses are only present on site for as long as it takes for pupils to disembark, buses are required to be present on site in anticipation of the afternoon school bell. This means it is more likely that several buses would be present on site at once. To avoid a scenario where buses blocked the operation of the car park, bays could be incorporated to the site access road to enable empty buses/coaches for the secondary school to dwell while the primary school buses are boarded. 3.2.4.2 Existing safe active travel links to site Existing Conditions There is currently limited active travel provision in Craignure. Footways which are provided on both sides of the A849 in the 30mph section are narrow. The footway is present on the north side of the road only, beyond the ferry terminal. This footway then stops beyond the entrance to the Mull Community Swimming Pool. There are currently no formal pedestrian crossings on the A849. Future Conditions While infrastructure is currently limited, it is clear that a package of off-site improvement works would be required to ensure the safe integration of the site to the established transport network. The scope of those works would emerge through the detailed Transport Assessment which would accompany and inform a Planning Application. At the time of writing, it seems likely that this package would at least comprise enhancements to existing footways, provision of new links where none are currently present and the delivery of new, safe crossing opportunities. It seems reasonable to assume that the adjacent residential allocation could be developed in a manner which facilitates active travel between Craignure and the school site. Page 91
Page 92
3.2.4.3 Number of user journeys - bus, car, pedestrian (Pupil/staff mode split) � NORTHSCHOOLSPROGRAMME The anticipated mode share for the Craignure site, in a scenario where the catchments do not change, is presented below. For comparative purposes, the forecast mode split is presented in the context of established travel behaviour at the existing Tobermory 2-18 school. 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Established Behaviour (Tobermory) Primary Established Established Site 03- Behaviour Behaviour Craignure (Tobermory) (Tobermory) Secondary Staff Primary ■Walk ■Taxi ■Bus ■Car ■Ferry Site 02 - Indicative Mode Share Site 03- Site 03- Craignure Craignure Secondary Staff The majority of both primary and secondary-aged pupils would be required to travel to the Craignure site by bus for the main leg of their trip. This mode share is based upon existing travel behaviours and the modelling exercise which is outlined in Chapter 9 of the Transport Review in Appendix H. If established pupil and staff cohorts were to transfer to this site, a clear implication would be that those whose existing trip is made on foot would need to select an alternative travel mode. In view of the Council's obligation to provide school buses for pupils whose trip cannot be made on foot, it would seem likely that the majority of existing pedestrian trips would become bus trips. While such a change is likely to cause some disruption in the short-term, the principle established by the existing Tobermory to Salen GMU bus demonstrates that primary school transport over an extended distance is practical and feasible. Importantly, in the context of the Salen GMU service, the Council has been able to understand, and address, concerns which had initially been expressed by parents around the requirement for primary school age children to travel by bus. There will be limited opportunities the Craignure site to support trips on foot with just a handful of secondary school pupils and staff currently residing in Craignure. Should the adjacent site be developed with housing, it is reasonable to anticipate that a larger number of trips by active travel modes would result. Based on the expected student cohort and staff numbers, the expected trips by each mode is presented in below; 23 Page 92
Page 93
Site 02 -Multi-Modal Trips � NORTHSCHOOLSPROGRAMME SITE COHORT ........ Site 02 - Craignure I Site 02 - Craignure Primary 0 2 88 5 0 95 1 Secondary 3 0 143 11 0 1577 Site 02 - Craignure Staff 0 0 58 0 59 ] Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding In order to serve the anticipated 231 pupils travelling by bus a total of approximately 7 buses will be required. It is expected that two buses/coaches would be provided to serve primary pupils travelling from Tobermory to Craignure. These would likely have a capacity of around 45 seats each and would operate as closed-door services, i.e. not open to members of the public. For secondary school pupils, up to five buses (potentially of varying size) would be required. • One smaller bus would collect children from Calgary and Dervaig before operating non-stop to Craignure. This is necessary as a result of a weight restriction on the Calgary road (88073) which prohibits the use of buses with more than 33 seats. • Two buses would collect children from around Tobermory and then collect pupils who live within a reasonable distance of the A849 (such as at Aros or Pennygown) enroute to Craignure. This could be reduced to one bus in the event that a higher-capacity bus/coach was used. • A further bus would originate in Torloisk and collect children from Ulva Ferry and Salen before continuing non-stop to Craignure. • Lastly, in the event that school catchments don't change a minibus or large taxi could collect pupils from communities south of Craignure such as Lochbuie and Lochdonhead. The below map illustrates the anticipated bus network for Site 02. 24 Page 93
Page 94
25 Site 02 Anticipated Bus Network School buses would be funded as school transport where pupils meet Argyll and Bute Council’s requirements in line with the summary which is provided in Section 3.4 of the Transport Review in Appendix H. Notwithstanding the Council’s preparedness to meet the costs of additional bus services, their provision depends on the ability of operators to recruit and retain a sufficient number of drivers, noting the practical operating issues relating to AM and PM-only journeys. 3.2.4.4 Potential impact on public transport network It is likely that additional buses will be required to facilitate pupil transport. The availability of more buses and drivers has the potential enhance general levels of public transport provision on the island, noting that many existing scheduled local bus services arise primarily because of school transport requirements. 3.2.4.5 Ability of existing (wider) roads infrastructure to service site The site is well served by the adjoining A849 although there is currently no formalised access into the site. There is the potential for access to the site to be taken from a new junction formed on the A849. The design of this junction would be subject to technical assessments at an early stage to ensure the suitability of its placement and format in view of road characteristics and adjacent accesses, if applicable. Any new junction would need to comply with driver visibility criteria in line with standard assessment procedures. 3.2.4.6 Trips with complex dependencies/multiple stages and modes of travel Complex dependencies are likely to be broadly similar regardless of the selected site. Further details on this criterion are provided in Section 9.3 of the Transport Review in Appendix H. For pupils who live remotely from the main road network and key population centres, an additional leg of their journey will be required to intersect the bus service. This secondary journey will be facilitated by specific arrangements to them and may include a taxi or short car trip by a parent/carer. Page 94
Page 95
3.2.5 3.2.5.1 Sustainability Potential for re-use of existing infrastructure and buildings (embodied carbon) � NORTH SCHOOLS PROGRAMME The Craignure site is a greenfield site, so there is no scope to re-use existing structures on site. However, if programme aligns, there could be scope for shared servicing and utility arrangements with the proposed adjacent housing development. The close proximity of the hospital and the hotel means that there is existing services infrastructure in close proximity, although the capacity would likely require upgrading. 3.2.5.2 Carbon impact of travel (travel distances and mode of transport) The estimated one-way vehicle miles by cohort and vehicle for the Craignure site are presented in the table below. The values presented in this table represent the driven milage of each vehicle rather than each passenger. This accounts for the fact that one bus can carry multiple passengers. Site 02 -Travel Distance (Miles) SITE Site 03 -Craignure Site 03 -Craignure Site 03 - Craignure COHORT Primary Secondary Staff --- 40 0 0 41 127 0 81 192 1,113 --- TOTAL 162 319 1,113 Site 03 -Craignure Total 40 168 1,386 1,594 The above table shows a modest uplift in the driven vehicle miles particularly among staff. As with any new development of this nature travel planning would seek to encourage behaviours such as car sharing or public transport usage in order to reduce these vehicle miles. The estimated carbon emissions for one-way travel (of all vehicles) to the Craignure site is presented in the table below. Site 02 -Carbon Emissions (Kg Co2e) SITE COHORT ------ TOTAL Site 03 -Craignure Primary 9 43 18 70 - - - = Site 03 - Craignure Secondary 0 135 42 177 - - - = Site 03 - Craignure Staff 0 0 245 245 -- -- - Site 03 - Craignure Total 9 178 305 492 3.2.6 Affordability 3.2.6.1 Costs associated with site abnormals The Craignure school site is located adjacent to Mull and Iona community hospital. There is a helipad adjacent to the site and whilst the full risk of construction next to the helipad needs to be understood, this could present some degree of inflexibility on contractor operations. Most likely this could result in a shut down in operations until an all clear is given and so an allowance for 10 shut downs has been made which equates to around 2.5 working days, though actual frequency of helipad use would need to be reviewed to build a more accurate risk profile for costing. Ground conditions have yet to be fully understood and engineering consultants Waterman have indicated potential for the need to break out rock, which comes at a cost premium, but at this stage is dependent on site investigation and geotechnical reporting. Watermans have also indicated the presence of lacustrine deposits 26 Page 95
Page 96
� NORTHSCHOOLSPROGRAMME which could potentially affect foundation choice and piling alternatives would cost significantly more that pad and strip foundation solutions. However this is subject to further investigation and unproven at this stage. The efficiency of being able to accommodate 71 carparking spaces, bus lay down areas and provide service vehicles to access the new school will differ for each site, either requiring more or less hard standing than the other alternative sites. Site 2 has slightly more hardstanding than Site 3 Garmony, but significantly this site requires a new 264m long access road and junction with the A849 to be built to accommodate the new school. An alternative access could be considered but would be subject to the adjacent housing development and council approvals for same. Site levels indicate no need for ground retention. Flood risk is considered non existent on site but rises to high risk adjacent to the site however normal surface water drainage management is anticipated. A separate drainage system will be required as it is unlikely SEPA will allow connection into any existing combined systems. There are no existing utilities recorded on the site so no protection or diversions required. Design consultants RYBKA have noted that capacity and ability for the new school to connect to the existing infrastructure will be subject to further design and discussion with utility providers, but at the moment is assumes to have no abnormal cost uplift. Abnormal cost will however be incurred as the nearest infrastructure utilities connections are some 400m away from the site either utilising the local residential utilities infrastructure or alternatively the utilities within the A849 might offer a better alternative with more robust capacity, though connections will still be approx 400m from the site. The new junction for the access road will require some lowering of local utilities. Summary: Site SITE 2 • CRAIGNURE CONSTRUCTION CONSTRAINTS GROUND CONDITIONS SITE WORKS FLOOD RISK AND DRAINAGE UTILITIES TOTALS 3.2.6.2 Potential acquisition/disposal costs Argyll and Bute Council are to undertake this directly with landowners. A valuation report has been provided in Appendix L to give an indication of potential costs. 27 Page 96
Page 97
3.2.6.3 Other (revenue) cost implications e.g. pupil transport � NORTHSCHOOLSPROGRAMME Argyll and Bute Council have assumed an increase of £321,519 to revenue costs would be expected if Site 02 - Craignure was selected. This is detailed below by considering additional transport requirements. Additional revenue Costs Pupil Transport - additional cost Staff Travel- additional cost Total potential additional cost per annum 3.2.7 Risk Detail 4 buses @ f6k per calendar month for 10.5 months 10 journey per week 40 weeks *miles *4Sp per mile less £2.91 per week Site 1 • Site 2 • Existinc Craicnure Tobermory site 0 221,600 0 69,519 0 291,119 3.2.7.1 Wayleaves, legal restrictions and site acquisition risk Site 3 • Site 4 • Tobermory Garmony south site 252,000 0 58,587 0 310,587 0 Argyll and Bute Council have provided information detailing out ownership, wayleaves, legal restrictions and site acquisition risks within Appendix J. 3.2.7.2 Construction Programme risk Construction Programme risk at Site 02 - Craignure is assumed to be low based on the land being relatively flat and ready for development. There are minimal constraints or risks to site access due to location near the ferry terminal. All sites are impacted evenly in terms of reliance on ferry crossings to support construction activities. 3.2.7.3 Planning designation and sensitive receptors Under Argyll and Bute's Local Development Plan 2, the site is designated as H4022 - Housing. The area to the south of the housing boundary is noted as Open Space Protection Area. Craignure is noted as an area for significant infrastructure action to help increase resilience in the strategic transport network and deliver opportunities for economic and residential development. This particularly includes a focus on Craignure Ferry Terminal. In September 2022, a detailed planning application for the erection of a residential development comprising 97 residential units and a commercial unit with all associated external works and landscaping was submitted and later approved in December. Part of the proposed application site to the northeast suggested a mixed-use area subject to future detailed applications, which has been proposed to be used for Mull campus. There is no requirement for HSE consultation with this site. 28 Page 97
Page 98
29 3.3 Site 3 – Garmony 3.3.1 Deliverability 3.3.1.1 Utility Infrastructure – capacity and need for any diversions The site is situated to the west of the A849 with very little amenity or residential developments in close proximity to the site. The utilities record drawings received show that the proposed site is clear of existing utilities with no anticipated abnormal costs for diversions within the proposed site. HV Electric overhead lines exist in close proximity to the site. 11KV lines run along the western side of the A849 and to the south11kV overhead lines connect the community hydro schemes 500kVA sub station to the main infrastructure. Access to the site will be constrained as it will require to pass under the overhead lines. This will likely be subject to restrictions imposed by SSE in constructing a new access road and will present a risk for construction traffic. At this stage we would suggest abnormal costs are applied to underground a section of this supply cable as enabling works to minimise the associated risk. If a new junction is formed off the A849 it is anticipated that alterations will be necessary to protect the existing underground water and communications infrastructure introducing further abnormal costs. On the assumption that capacities are available in the existing infrastructure they would need to be extended by approximately 250m to reach the proposed new school. Potential for positive Business Case for future connection of Net Zero heat networks The area around the Garmony site is not heavily populated and very little public amenity facilities in close proximity. There are limited positive elements that could contribute to a business case. 3.3.1.2 Ground Conditions Published mapping indicates raised marine deposits are present below Site 3. Although indicated as Sand and Gravel, raised marine deposits frequently contain soft organic clays which, dependant on thickness, may potentially require more onerous foundation solutions such as piles, or ground improvement, in place of traditional shallow foundations. This is largely speculative however, based on reasonable assumptions from published information only, and would require to be confirmed following completion of a targeted intrusive ground investigation campaign. The stratum recorded to underly Site 3 is predominantly Raised Marine deposits including gravel and shelly sand. No site or laboratory testing information is currently available with regards to the strength, density, water content and compressibility. It is therefore recommended that an intrusive ground investigation including in- situ testing and sampling for laboratory testing is conducted to fully assess the reusability characteristics of the underlying geology. The entirety of Site 3 is underlain by olivine basalt which may result in ‘hard-dig’ / possible need for blasting to facilitate excavation dependant on depth to rock and site levels. 3.3.1.3 Topography The site is expansive and generally level. There is a knoll of higher ground to the north west corner, but as this sits in the flood plain, this would not be an area of land identified for development. Land rises significantly to the west outside the site boundary, but topography is not a major constraint on the developable area of this site. Page 98
Page 99
30 3.3.1.4 Flood Risk The SEPA flood map indicates that Site 3 is not impacted by flooding from high tides or storm surges but is impacted on its northern boundary by fluvial flooding from the watercourse that bounds the northern boundary. It will be necessary to assess the 1:200-year flood event including an appropriate allowance for climate change. No development will be permitted within the flood plain other than landscaped features that do not alter the existing levels and affect flood plain storage. Proposed school buildings sit out with indicative flood extents but Flood Risk Assessment with modelling of watercourse would be required to confirm site constrains for school buildings and the finished floor level. Scottish Water’s infrastructure records indicate that there are no public sewers nearby for wastewater disposal. Wastewater generated by the school would need to be treated at source via a reed bed, or other treatment process, prior to discharge into the watercourse, subject to SEPA approval. Suitable space within the red line boundary of the development would need to be provided for this treatment but is not expected to be an issue. There is no public surface water drainage shown on the Scottish Water infrastructure records within the boundaries of the site. However, there is a watercourse in the vicinity of the site which surface water runoff could be discharged to. The appropriate form of SUDS for redevelopment of the site will depend on the method of surface water disposal. Irrespective of the actual form of the SUDS, a significant proportion of the lowest lying area of the site will require to be allocated for the SUDS and this will place a constraint the development proposals. SEPA approval would not be required for disposal of surface water to the watercourse if drainage complies with their General Binding Rules. A non-return valve would need to be included to restrict flood waters entering the drainage system with overland flood routes considered to ensure surcharging of drainage network during flood event does not pose a risk to school building. 3.3.1.5 Site Abnormals The Garmony site will require a significant upgrade to the junction with the A848, and a new access road into the useable area of the site. The wider site is larger than required, so agreeing final extents and any treatment to land left over needs to be considered. The exact extent of the watercourse flood plain will need to be clarified through FRA modelling. 3.3.1.6 Habitat Constraints All sites will require to have habitat and ecological surveys carried out as a matter of course as part of statutory approvals process to identify any protected and invasive species present. The site contains a range of different natural settings, including grassland, wetland, watercourses and areas of trees. This diversity of natural setting increases the likelihood that there may be some habitat constraints found on the site. 3.3.2 Educational Impact 3.3.2.1 Is the site capable of accommodating the brief in full? The Garmony site is large at 9 ha, although the actual usable area is smaller at approximately 2.4 ha. This useable area has sufficient capacity to accommodate the new campus building at two storeys, a full size all weather pitch, external learning areas and associated car parking, servicing and bus drop off areas on site. Page 99
Page 100
3.3.2.2 Quality of external environment to support outside learning � NORTHSCHOOLSPROGRAMME The 88103 maximum and minimum areas for the pupil roll of the proposed Mull 2-18 campus (31 ELC children, 90 primary learners and 177 secondary learners) is 21,374sqm-22,847sqm. The overall Garmony site is 95,000sqm, although the effective useable area is 37,000sqm. This provides sufficient area to deliver the recommended amount of external space. The site enjoys fantastic long range views, and can be laid out to maximise south facing social, learning and sports spaces and provide good separation from vehicular areas. The site potential for a quality outdoor learning environment is high. 3.3.2.3 Capacity of site for future expansion The Garmony site is large enough to allow for generous future expansion, which we anticipate would be located at the eastern end of the school to allow the servicing yard and plant areas to remain operational during any future extension construction period. While the extent of any future expansion is unknown at this time, an additional four standard sized classrooms plus supporting spaces would be easily accommodated over two floors. 3.3.2.4 Travel times for ELC and primary school pupils The estimated one-way travel times for ELC and Primary pupils are derived from the Transport Review included in Appendix H shown below. The travel times presented are an aggregate, encompassing the wide range of trips which would be made to the site. Travel time for minor legs of a trip (such as walking to the bus stop, a ferry crossing or travelling by car to access bus stops on the main road) are not accounted for in this analysis. In any case, the nature of these journeys are likely to remain constant across all four sites . 3.3.2.5 SITE COHORT ...... Site 03 - Garmony Primary 57 2,623 Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding 117 Travel times for staff and secondary school pupils 0 2,797 AVERAGE The estimated one-way travel times for Secondary pupils and Staff are derived from the Transport Review included in Appendix H shown below. The travel times presented are an aggregate, encompassing the wide range of trips which would be made to the site. Travel time for minor legs of a trip (such as walking to the bus stop, a ferry crossing or travelling by car to access bus stops on the main road) are not accounted for in this analysis. In any case, the nature of these journeys are likely to remain constant across all four sites . SITE Site 03 - Garmony Site 03 - Garmony COHORT Secondary Staff ...... 0 4,479 283 0 4,762 0 0 1,670 0 1,670 Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding AVERAGE 31 Page 100
Page 101
32 3.3.2.6 Access and connectivity to good community facilities The Garmony site is isolated, with the only potential connectivity being with the Isle of Mull Rugby Club pitches. The Garmony site is remote from residential areas and other amenities, with the closest facility being the Isle of Mull Rugby Club and associated pitches to the north. 3.3.3 Community and Place 3.3.3.1 Impact on family life Site 03 – Garmony is impacted similarly to Site 02 – Craignure and is detailed in Section 3.2.3.1 3.3.3.2 Equitable – unites north & south of island This is considered to be similar to Site 02 – Craignure and is detailed in Section 3.2.3.2 3.3.3.3 Sustain and support local economy An Economic Impact Assessment has been prepared, this outlines that if the campus was located in Tobermory, the economic benefit would be £3,147,000 higher than would be the case if the campus was built in a central island location. This assessment takes into account investment stimulus acknowledging that schools influence the attractiveness of an area for potential residents and therefore the value of future housing developments. The full Economic Impact Assessment is included in Appendix K. 3.3.3.4 Impact of construction activities on existing school/ residential facilities The Garmony site has no residential properties in close proximity, with the nearest structures at Argyll Industrial Supplies being over 300m away. The impact of construction activity on existing properties is negligible. 3.3.4 Accessibility & Transport 3.3.4.1 Good public transport links to site and location Existing Conditions The service 95/495 currently stops at the nearby rugby club, although this stop is unmarked. Future Conditions The site would incorporate four bus stances to enable pupils to board and disembark safely. These bays would ideally be positioned within the site such that bus doors opened directly onto an expansive pedestrian space, thereby removing the needs for pupils to interact with the car park and other trafficked spaces. The primary and secondary school days finish approximately 20 minutes apart. Unlike the morning period, where buses are only present on site for as long as it takes for pupils to disembark, buses are required to be present on site in anticipation of the afternoon school bell. This means it is more likely that several buses would be present on site at once. To avoid a scenario where buses blocked the operation of the car park, bays could be incorporated to the site access road to enable empty buses/coaches for the secondary school to dwell while the primary school buses are boarded. Page 101
Page 102
3.3.4.2 Existing safe active travel links to site Existing Conditions NORTH SCHOOLS PROGRAMME There is currently limited active travel provision in Garmony. No footways are present on this section of A849. Future Conditions While infrastructure is currently limited, it is clear that a package of off-site improvement works would be required to ensure the safe integration of the site to the established transport network. The scope of those works would emerge through the detailed Transport Assessment which would accompany and inform a Planning Application. At the time of writing, it seems likely that this package would at least comprise provision of new links where none are currently present. 3.3.4.3 Number of user journeys - bus, car, pedestrian (Pupil/staff mode split) The anticipated mode share for the Garmony site, in a scenario where the catchments do not change, is presented in the table below. For comparative purposes, the forecast mode split is presented in the context of established travel behaviour at the existing Tobermory 2-18 school. Site 03 -Indicative Mode Share 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Established Established Established Behaviour Behaviour Behaviour (Tobermory) (Tobermory) (Tobermory) Primary Secondary Staff Site 04- Garmony Primary ■Walk ■Taxi ■Bus ■car ■ferry Site 04- Garmony Secondary Site 04- Garmony Staff The majority of both primary and secondary-aged pupils would be required to travel to the Garmony site by bus for the main leg of their trip. This mode share is based upon existing travel behaviours and the modelling exercise which is outlined in Appendix H. If established pupil and staff cohorts were to transfer to this site, a clear implication would be that those whose existing trip is made on foot would need to select an alternative travel mode. In view of the Council's obligation to provide school buses for pupils whose trip cannot be made on foot, it would seem likely that the majority of existing pedestrian trips would become bus trips. While such a change is likely to cause some disruption in the short-term, the principle established by the existing Tobermory to Salen bus demonstrates that primary school transport over an extended distance is 33 Page 102
Page 103
� NORTHSCHOOLSPROGRAMME practical and feasible. Importantly, in the context of the Salen service, the Council has been able to understand, and address, concerns which had initially been expressed by parents around the requirement for primary school age children to travel by bus. There will be limited opportunities for the Garmony site to support trips on foot with a very limited number of pupils or staff currently living locally. Based on the expected student cohort and staff numbers, the expected number of trips by each mode is presented in the table below. Site 03 -Multi-Modal Trips SITE COHORT ........ Site 04 - Garmony Primary 0 2 88 5 0 95 l Site 04 - Garmony Secondary 0 0 147 10 0 157 J Site 04 - Garmony Staff 0 0 0 59 0 59 ] Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding In order to serve the anticipated 235 pupils travelling by bus a total of approximately 7 buses will be required. It is expected that two buses/coaches would be provided to serve primary pupils travelling from Tobermory to Garmony. These would likely have a capacity of around 45 seats each and would operate as closed-door services, i.e. not open to members of the public. For secondary school pupils, up to five buses (potentially of varying size) would be required. • One smaller bus would collect children from Calgary and Dervaig before operating non-stop to Garmony. This is necessary as a result of a weight restriction on the Calgary road (B8073) which prohibits the use of buses with more than 33 seats. • Two buses would collect children from around Tobermory and then collect pupils who live within a reasonable distance of the A849 (such as at Aros or Pennygown) enroute to Garmony. This could be reduced to one bus in the event that a higher-capacity bus/coach was used. • A further bus would originate in Torloisk and collect children from Ulva Ferry and Salen before continuing non-stop to Garmony. • Lastly, in the event that school catchments don't change a minibus or large taxi could collect pupils from communities south of Garmony such as Lochbuie and Lochdonhead. The below map illustrates the anticipated bus network for Site 03. 34 Page 103
Page 104
35 Site 03 Anticipated Bus Network Notwithstanding the Council’s preparedness to meet the costs of additional bus services, their provision depends on the ability of operators to recruit and retain a sufficient number of drivers, noting the practical operating issues relating to AM and PM-only journeys. 3.3.4.4 Potential impact on public transport network As discussed in Paragraph 14.2.7 and 14.2.8 of the Transport review in Appendix H, it is likely that additional buses will be required to facilitate pupil transport. The availability of more buses and drivers has the potential enhance general levels of public transport provision on the island, noting that many existing scheduled local bus services arise primarily because of school transport requirements. 3.3.4.5 Ability of existing (wider) roads infrastructure to service site The site is well served by the adjoining A849 although there is currently no formalised access into the site. There is the potential for access to the site to be taken from a new junction formed on the A849. The design of this junction would be subject to technical assessments at an early stage to ensure the suitability of placement and format in view of road characteristics and adjacent accesses, if applicable. Any new junction would need to comply with driver visibility criteria in line with standard assessment procedures. 3.3.4.6 Trips with complex dependencies/multiple stages and modes of travel Complex dependencies are likely to be broadly similar regardless of the selected site. Further details on this criterion are provided in Section 9.3 of the Transport Review in Appendix H. For pupils who live remotely from the main road network and key population centres, an additional leg of their journey will be required to intersect the bus service. This secondary journey will be facilitated by specific arrangements to them and may include a taxi or short car trip by a parent/carer. Page 104
Page 105
Sustainability 3.3.5 3.3.5.1 Potential for re-use of existing infrastructure and buildings (embodied carbon) NORTH SCHOOLS PROGRAMME The Garmony site is an undeveloped site with no existing structures present for reuse. There is also no servicing to the site currently, although overhead power cables run parallel with the western edge of the site. There is currently no pedestrian or adequate vehicle infrastructure to the site that could be re-used. 3.3.5.2 Carbon impact of travel (travel distances and mode of transport) The estimated one-way vehicle miles by cohort and vehicle for the Garmony site, are presented below. The values presented in this table represent the driven milage of each vehicle rather than each passenger. This accounts for the fact that one bus can carry multiple passengers. Site 03 -Travel Distance (Miles) SITE Site 03 - Garmony Site 03 - Garmony Site 03 - Garmony COHORT Primary Secondary Staff ---- 35 0 0 35 123 0 70 159 960 --- TOTAL 140 283 960 Site 03 - Garmony Total 35 159 1,190 1,383 The above table shows a modest uplift in the driven vehicle miles particularly among staff. As with any new development of this nature travel planning would seek to encourage behaviours such as car sharing or public transport usage in order to reduce these vehicle miles. The estimated carbon emissions for one-way travel ( of all vehicles) to the Garmony site is presented in the table below. Site 03 -Carbon Emissions (Kg Co2e) SITE Site 03 - Garmony Site 03 - Garmony Site 03 - Garmony Site 03 - Garmony COHORT Primary Secondary Staff Total Affordability ---- 8 0 0 8 37 130 0 168 15 35 211 262 --- 3.3.6 3.3.6.1 Costs associated with site abnormals TOTAL 60 166 211 437 The Garmony school site is a greenfield site with no likely or obvious restriction to construction of a new building. Ground conditions have yet to be fully understood and engineering consultants Waterman have indicated potential for the need to break out rock over the entirety of the site, which comes at a cost premium, but at this stage is dependent on site investigation and geotechnical reporting. The efficiency of being able to accommodate 71 carparking spaces, bus lay down areas and provide service vehicles to access the new school will differ for each site, either requiring more or less hard standing than the other alternative sites. Site 3 has the smallest footprint in this respect of the 4 sites. However this site also requires a new 260m long access road and a new roundabout to be built to accommodate the new school. Site levels indicate no need for ground retention. 36 Page 105
Page 106
� NORTHSCHOOLSPROGRAMME Fluvial flood risk exists to the northern part of the site. A 1 in 200 year assessment will need to be made to model the risk but an allowance has been included to accommodate some form of flood defence. A separate drainage system would be required as it is unlikely SEPA will allow connection into any existing combined systems. There are significant existing utilities recorded on the site, in particular an existing HV overhead line and 11 kV lines skirt the site to the west and south of the site and site access will most likely need to cross below the HV lines and SSE may impose constraints in constructing the new access road and for works during the construction. The recommendation is to allow abnormal costs for diverting part of the HV lines below ground. Further, some degree of protection to the existing utilities will be required on the site. Design consultants RYBKA have noted that capacity and ability for the new school to connect to the existing infrastructure will be subject to further design and discussion with utility providers, but at the moment is assumes to have no abnormal cost uplift. Abnormal cost will however be incurred as the nearest infrastructure utilities connections are some 250m away from the site either utilising the closest utilities infrastructure. Site SITE 3 • GARMONY CONSTRUCTION CONSTRAINTS GROUND CONDITIONS SITE WORKS FLOOD RISK AND DRAINAGE UTILITIES TOTALS 3.3.6.2 Potential acquisition/disposal costs Argyll and Bute Council are to undertake this directly with landowners. A valuation report has been provided in Appendix L to give an indication of potential costs. 3.3.6.3 Other (revenue) cost implications e.g. pupil transport Argyll and Bute Council have assumed an increase of £310,587 to revenue costs would be expected if Site 03 - Garmony was selected. This is detailed below by considering additional transport requirements. Additional revenue Costs Detail Site 1 • Site 2 • Site 3 • Site 4 • Tobermory Existinc Craicnure Garmony south site Tobermory site Pupil Transport -additional cost 4 buses @ f6k per calendar 0 221,600 252,000 0 month for 10.5 months Staff Travel- additional cost 10 journey per week 40 0 69,519 58,587 0 weeks *miles *4Sp per mile less £2.91 per week Total potential additional cost per 0 291,119 310,587 0 annum 37 Page 106
Page 107
38 3.3.7 Risk 3.3.7.1 Wayleaves, legal restrictions and site acquisition risk Argyll and Bute Council have provided information detailing out ownership, wayleaves, legal restrictions and site acquisition risks within Appendix J. 3.3.7.2 Construction Programme risk If Site 03 – Garmony was selected then initial site investigation would be needed to fully understand site conditions. Following visits to the site it’s expected that an element of remediate would be needed to make the land suitable for development. All sites are impacted evenly in terms of reliance on ferry crossings to support construction activities. 3.3.7.3 Planning designation and sensitive receptors The site has no designation under the Local Development Plan. It is noted as within the countryside area. Page 107
Page 108
39 3.4 Site 4 – South Tobermory 3.4.1 Deliverability 3.4.1.1 Utility Infrastructure – capacity and need for any diversions The site is situated to southern edge of Tobermory with the western boundary adjacent to the A848. The utilities record drawings received show that the proposed site is clear of existing utilities. However, it is evident that 5 overhead power lines exist within the site and located in the vicinity of the proposed car park area in the adjacent sketch. One of the poles appears to have a pole mounted transformer but with no obvious signs that it is connected. As this infrastructure is not shown on record drawings and given the above observations it is assumed that this infrastructure is redundant and can be removed without any significant abnormal cost to the project Existing Electricity (LV and 11kV), Mains Water and Communications infrastructure exists in close proximity to the site. Whilst existing infrastructure exists, further engagement will be necessary with Utilities companies in respect of any anticipated increased capacities. Potential for positive Business Case for future connection of Net Zero heat networks The site is located at the southern edge of Tobermory and approximately ¾ km from the most densely populated part of town. The connection of the school to support a business would be positive but diminishes the further it is away from the most populated areas. It would however help to support any proposals to extend infrastructure to residences and business that are located towards the southern boundary of the town. 3.4.1.2 Ground Conditions At Site 4, superficial deposits have not been recorded within the available mapping, if bedrock is present beneath the topsoil strip, it is envisaged shallow strip or pad foundations could be utilised bearing directly onto bedrock. If Superficial deposits however are present at significant depths at Site 4, more onerous foundations may be required. The above is based on reasonable assumptions from published information only, and would require to be confirmed following completion of a targeted intrusive ground investigation campaign. The suitability of deposits underlying Site 4 are unknown and therefore the deposits earthworks suitability for reuse cannot be speculated upon prior to an intrusive ground investigation. The entirety of Site 4 is underlain by olivine basalt which may result in ‘hard-dig’ / possible need for blasting to facilitate excavation dependant on depth to rock and site levels. 3.4.1.3 Topography Commentary is based on the assumption the additional parcels of land adjacent to the A848 are included as part of the overall site. Given the site is located on the ridge at the southern end of town, topography will play a key role in the design solution. From the western boundary, the site generally slopes down significantly towards the eastern edge defined by the A848, with a significant shelf at the line of the current site boundary. On the Western edge of the site the land falls steeply towards the West. The sloping nature of the site will result in a design solution which has to address the level change, by adopting a stepped floor plan. This is an approach that has been successfully adopted in schools for Argyll Page 108
Page 109
40 and Bute previously, such as Kirn Primary and will deliver a fully accessible learning environment. It is anticipated that retaining walls will be required internally at this level change, and to external areas I conjunction with some rock excavation, particularly around the all weather pitch provision which will add to costs. 3.4.1.4 Flood Risk The SEPA flood map indicates that Site 4 is not impacted by flooding from high tides or storm surges but fluvial flooding is noted from the watercourse near its western boundary, but flooding does not enter Site. Proposed school buildings sit out with indicative flood extents but a Flood Risk Assessment with modelling of watercourse will likely be required from planning to confirm site constrains for school buildings and the finished floor level. It will be necessary to assess the 1:200-year flood event including an appropriate allowance for climate change. Scottish Water’s infrastructure records indicate that there are public sewers nearby for wastewater disposal. Wastewater generated by the school would connect to the foul sewer located within the grass verge between the A848 and Meadhonish cottage. A Pre-Development Enquiry (PDE) would need to be submitted to Scottish Water to ensure capacity is available within their network to allow a connection from the proposed school campus. There is an existing public surface water sewer shown on the Scottish Water infrastructure records located within the grass verge between the A848 and Meadhonish cottage. A Pre-Development Enquiry (PDE) would need to be submitted to Scottish Water to ensure capacity is available within their network to allow a connection from the proposed school campus and what limit surface water would be restricted to. Alternatively, surface water could discharge to the Tobermory River, SEPA approval would not be required for disposal of surface water to the watercourse if drainage complies with their General Binding Rules. A non- return valve would need to be included to restrict flood waters entering the drainage system with overland flood routes considered to ensure surcharging of drainage network during flood event does not pose a risk to school building. The appropriate form of SUDS for redevelopment of the site will depend on the method of surface water disposal. Irrespective of the actual form of the SUDS, a significant proportion of the lowest lying area of the site will require to be allocated for the SUDS and this will place a constraint the development proposals. 3.4.1.5 Site Abnormals The site has a number of abnormals. There are currently overhead powerlines which enter the site and then stop in close proximity to the site boundary, which will need either removed or diverted. The sloping nature of the site means that there will be areas of excavation and retaining walls under the proposed building location, with retaining walls across the external areas on site, particularly between the car park and social areas, and the south and east edges of the 7 aside all weather pitch. Due to limitations in space, 14m long buses will require to be accommodated in a layby formed along the edge of the A848 rather than within the site. 3.4.1.6 Habitat Constraints All sites will require to have habitat and ecological surveys carried out as a matter of course as part of statutory approvals process to identify any protected and invasive species present. The site is bound to the Page 109
Page 110
� NORTHSCHOOLSPROGRAMME east by the A848 which acts as a barrier to coastal species. Elsewhere the land is sloping paddock land at the lower levels, with grassed areas on higher ground, although rock is close to the surface. There is likely to be limited impact from habitat restrictions. 3.4.2 3.4.2.1 Educational Impact Is the site capable of accommodating the brief in full? At 2.1 ha, the site can accommodate the new campus brief, but the change in level on site will dictate a design solution which works with the site levels, being formed over three levels. Car parking can be accommodated on site, but bus drop off would need dealt with by forming a layby adjacent to the site. The other limitation of the site is the inability to accommodate a full size 1 00m x 60m all weather pitch, and the extent of external learning and social space. A seven aside all weather pitch could be accommodated on site. The building and external areas will require a series of retaining walls to deal with the change in level across the site. 3.4.2.2 Quality of external environment to support outside learning The 88103 maximum and minimum areas for the pupil roll of the proposed Mull 2-18 campus (31 ELC children, 90 primary learners and 177 secondary learners) is 21,374sqm-22,847sqm. The South Tobermory site is 20,500sqm, and as is below the recommended minimum area for external space. While the site is too small to provide a full size all weather pitch, the nature of the site topography does create the opportunity for a rich and varied external learning environment, with the site able to be laid out to maximise the external space available, and good separation from parking and service areas. The site has medium potential for a quality outdoor learning environment. 3.4.2.3 Capacity of site for future expansion The site is compact, but scope for future expansion exists by designing the building in such a way that it can be extended by a structural bay to the northwest. This would realise an additional two standard sized classrooms plus supporting space on a single level. This would allow the school to remain operational during construction with limited disruption. 3.4.2.4 Travel times for ELC and primary school pupils The estimated one-way travel times for ELC and Primary pupils are derived from the Transport Review included in Appendix H are shown below. The travel times presented are an aggregate, encompassing the wide range of trips which would be made to the site. Travel time for minor legs of a trip (such as walking to the bus stop, a ferry crossing or travelling by car to access bus stops on the main road) are not accounted for in this analysis. In any case, the nature of these journeys are likely to remain constant across all four sites . 3.4.2.5 SITE COHORT ...... Site 04- South Tobermory Primary 0 80 Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding 150 Travel times for staff and secondary school pupils 440 670 AVERAGE 7 The estimated one-way travel times for Secondary pupils and Staff are derived from the Transport Review included in Appendix Hare shown below. The travel times presented are an aggregate, encompassing the 41 Page 110
Page 111
� NORTHSCHOOLSPROGRAMME wide range of trips which would be made to the site. Travel time for minor legs of a trip (such as walking to the bus stop, a ferry crossing or travelling by car to access bus stops on the main road) are not accounted for in this analysis. In any case, the nature of these journeys are likely to remain constant across all four sites . SITE COHORT ...... AVERAGE Site 04- South Secondary 0 2,110 135 948 3,192 20 Tobermory Site 04- South Staff 0 0 655 293 948 16 Tobermory Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding 3.4.2.6 Access and connectivity to good community facilities While not as centrally located within Tobermory as the existing school site, the South Tobermory site still retains the potential for easy links with local businesses, community resources and employers. The South Tobermory site enjoys the same advantages as the existing Tobermory school site as a result of it's proximity to the primary settlement on island. It is located approximately 900m further south than the existing school site. While it is not as centrally located as the current school site within the wider settlement, the location at the southern end of the town places it close-by areas designated for future residential development. 3.4.3 3.4.3.1 Community and Place Impact on family life It's assumed that this will be the same as siting the proposed campus on the existing Tobermory School site as per Section 3.1.3.1. 3.4.3.2 Equitable - unites north & south of island Retaining education provision in Tobermory would positively impact pupils, families and community members currently utilising the existing Site through the re-provision of enhanced and contemporary facilities. This could also encourage population retention and growth in the area. However, there would be no additional benefit to families living in the South West of Mull who would likely continue with status quo education arrangements for local primary schooling and off-island secondary-school attendance. This option poses the continued risk of depopulation with the South West of Mull, where families may make decisions to relocate on the basis of their child's education and to avoid the possibility weekly boarding on the mainland. Site 04 South Tobermory is walkable from local housing and a proposed residential allocation for 112 new homes offers further potential for active travel to and from this proposed site. Other impacts are expected to remain consistent with baseline conditions for Site Option 01. 42 Page 111
Page 112
43 3.4.3.3 Sustain and support local economy An Economic Impact Assessment has been prepared, this outlines that if the campus was located in Tobermory, the economic benefit would be £3,147,000 higher than would be the case if the campus was built in a central island location. This assessment takes into account investment stimulus acknowledging that schools influence the attractiveness of an area for potential residents and therefore the value of future housing developments. The full Economic Impact Assessment is included in Appendix K. 3.4.3.4 Impact of construction activities on existing school/ residential facilities The South Tobermory site only has one road adjacent to it’s boundary, the A848 to the west. While there are residential properties north and south of the site, the impact on these properties would be minimal as construction traffic would not use residential roads, instead coming directly into the site off the A848. 3.4.4 Accessibility & Transport 3.4.4.1 Good public transport links to site and location Existing Conditions The existing service 95/495 passes the site frontage. There are a pair of bus stops located south of the site at Struan Crescent. Future Conditions The site could incorporate approximately three bus stances adjacent to the school entrance to enable safe boarding and disembarkation of pupils. Alternatively, as a result of site constraints, bus bays could be provided adjacent to the site on the A848. The service 494 bus from Calgary to Tobermory would not have to be significantly diverted from its present route in order to service the South Tobermory Site. 3.4.4.2 Existing safe active travel links to site Existing Conditions There are currently footways on both sides of the A848 between Eas Brae and the site. Footways are provided on at least one side of the road down into the town centre and up into Rockfield Road and the Tobermory Medical Practice. These footways are generally lit and appear to be of a good quality, albeit narrow in some locations. There are currently no footways provided on Dervaig Road or Breadalbane Street, both of which are narrow and unsuitable for pedestrians. There is a pedestrian footway between Argyll Terrace and Eas Brae enabling access between the site and the majority of housing in Tobermory. There are currently no formalised pedestrian crossings on the A848 in the vicinity of the site. Future Conditions While crossing infrastructure is currently limited, off-site improvement works of this nature would likely be a requirement following the standard consultation and transport assessment processes. It seems reasonable to assume that the adjacent residential allocation could be developed in a manner which facilitates active travel between these sites and the school site. Page 112
Page 113
3.4.4.3 Number of user journeys - bus, car, pedestrian (Pupil/staff mode split) NORTH SCHOOLS PROGRAMME The anticipated mode share for the South Tobermory site is anticipated to be broadly similar to that of the existing school site. For comparative purposes, the forecast mode split is presented in the context of established travel behaviour at the existing Tobermory 2-18 school in the graph below. 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Established Established Established Site 02 -South Site 02 -South Site 02 - South Behaviour Behaviour Behaviour Tobermory (Tobermory) (Tobermory) (Tobermory) Primary Secondary Staff Primary ■ Walk ■ Taxi ■ Bus ■ Car ■ Ferry Tobermory Tobermory Secondary Staff The above graph demonstrates that mode share among all cohorts is expected to remain broadly similar. The main difference is the slight increase in bus travel among primary-aged pupils. While this is borne out as a result of the modelling assumptions there are a handful of pupils who live outwith the catchment but on the main A849/A848 road. There is potential, therefore, for these pupils to be transported to the site by bus. Based on the expected student cohort and staff numbers, the expected number of trips by each mode is presented in the table below. Site 04 - Multi-Modal Trips Site Cohort ------ Site 04 - South Primary Tobermory 30 0 5 60 0 95 J Site 04 - South Secondary Tobermory 64 0 70 22 0 157 J Site 04 - South Staff Tobermory 19 0 0 40 0 59 Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding 44 Page 113
Page 114
45 As the Tobermory site is located just 0.7miles from the existing school site no changes to the current bus operations are anticipated. The buses which would be required for secondary school pupils are one bus from Calgary / Dervaig, one bus from Torloisk and Ulva Ferry via Salen and one bus from Lochbuie Crossroads. The annual revisions of the network and its complex dependencies are expected to be broadly in line with existing operations. The map below illustrates the anticipated bus network for Site 04. Site 04 Anticipated Bus Network School buses would be funded as school transport where pupils meet Argyll and Bute Council’s requirements as detailed in Appendix K. 3.4.4.4 Potential impact on public transport network As there will be no material requirement to amend the bus services associate with school transport there is unlikely to be any impact, positive or negative, on the wider public transport network. 3.4.4.5 Ability of existing (wider) roads infrastructure to service site The site is well served by the adjoining A848 although there is currently no formalised access into the site. There is the potential for access to the site to be taken from a new junction formed on the A848. The design of this junction would be subject to technical assessments at an early stage to ensure the suitability of junction placement and format in view of road characteristics and adjacent accesses, if applicable. Any new junction would need to be checked for driver visibility in line with standard assessment procedures. Page 114
Page 115
3.4.4.6 Trips with complex dependencies/multiple stages and modes of travel NORTH SCHOOLS PROGRAMME Complex dependencies are likely to be broadly similar regardless of the selected site. Further details on this criterion are provided in Section 9.3 of the Transport Review in Appendix H. For pupils who live remotely from the main road network and key population centres, an additional leg of their journey will be required to intersect the bus service. This secondary journey will be facilitated by specific arrangements to them and may include a taxi or short car trip by a parent/carer. Sustainability 3.4.5 3.4.5.1 Potential for re-use of existing infrastructure buildings (embodied carbon) The South Tobermory site is undeveloped, with no scope for the re-use of existing structures on site. It benefits from existing footpath infrastructure from the town centre, and has overhead power lines coming into the site. 3.4.5.2 Carbon impact of travel (travel distances and mode of transport) The estimated one-way vehicle miles by cohort and vehicle for the South Tobermory site are presented below. The values presented in this table represent the driven milage of each vehicle as opposed to each passenger. This accounts for the fact that one bus can carry multiple passengers. Site 04 -Travel Distance (Miles) SITE Site 04 -South Tobermory Site 04 -South Tobermory Site 04 -South Tobermory Site 04-South Tobermory COHORT Primary Secondary Staff Total ---- 0 0 0 0 0 62 0 62 37 50 304 390 --- TOTAL 37 112 304 453 The above table shows a minor decrease in the driven vehicle miles compared to existing conditions. This is primarily as a result of marginally shorter trips for those travelling from the south of Mull. The estimated carbon emissions for one-way travel (of all vehicles) to the South Tobermory site is presented below; Site 04 -Carbon Emissions (Kg Co2e) SITE Site 04 -South Tobermory Site 04 -South Tobermory Site 04 -South Tobermory Site 04-South Tobermory Affordability COHORT Primary Secondary Staff Total ---- 0 0 0 0 0 66 0 66 8 11 67 86 --- 3.4.6 3.4.6.1 Costs associated with site abnormals TOTAL 8 77 67 152 The Tobermory South school site is a greenfield site with no likely or obvious restriction to construction of a new building. 46 Page 115
Page 116
� NORTHSCHOOLSPROGRAMME Ground conditions have yet to be fully understood and engineering consultants Waterman have indicated potential for the need to break out rock, which comes at a cost premium, but at this stage is dependent on site investigation and geotechnical reporting. Watermans have also indicated the presence of lacustrine deposits which could potentially affect foundation choice and piling alternatives would cost significantly more that pad and strip foundation solutions. However this is subject to further investigation and unproven at this stage. The efficiency of being able to accommodate 71 carparking spaces, bus lay down areas and provide service vehicles to access the new school will differ for each site, either requiring more or less hard standing than the other alternative sites. Site 4 has the second largest footprint in this respect of the 4 sites. This site requires a new junction to the A849 as well as off site bus lay down zones to the east of the site. Site levels indicate significant changes in topography and much more sloped that the alternative sites with the need to some ground retention works to accommodate the site's natural slope to the south. As a result, an allowance for retaining walls to the eastern boundary with the A849, the carparking area and the MUGA pitch has been made here. In addition Ryder have advised that the preferred location of the school will require it to 'step' up the hill to be efficient with the substructures, however this will introduce retaining walls into the build. Fluvial flood risk exists to the western part of the site. A 1 in 200 year assessment will need to be made to model the risk but an allowance has been included to accommodate some form of flood defence. A separate drainage system would be required as it is unlikely SEPA will allow connection into any existing combined systems. Design consultants RYBKA have noted that capacity and ability for the new school to connect to the existing infrastructure will be subject to further design and discussion with utility providers, but at the moment is assumes to have no abnormal cost uplift. No existing utilities infrastructure on the site recorded so no diversion costs expected. Five overhead power lines cross the location of the proposed carpark, however RYBKA believe the lines may be redundant and can be removed with no significant abnormal cost. A full suite of utilities exist in close proximity to the site so no significant connection runs expected and any increase in capacity to be discussed with Utilities in due course. The existing watermain at the new A849 junction would need to be lowered. Summary: Site SITE 4 • TOBERMORY SOUTH CONSTRUCTION CONSTRAINTS GROUND CONDITIONS SITE WORKS FLOOD RISK AND DRAINAGE UTILITIES TOTALS 3.4.6.2 Potential acquisition/disposal costs Argyll and Bute Council are to undertake this directly with landowners. A valuation report has been provided in Appendix L to give an indication of potential costs. 47 Page 116
Page 117
3.4.6.3 Other (revenue) cost implications e.g. pupil transport � NORTHSCHOOLSPROGRAMME Argyll and Bute Council have assumed there would be no adjustment to revenue costs in relation to transport costs if Site 04 - Tobermory South is selected, as shown below; Additional revenue Costs Pupil Transport - additional cost Staff Travel- additional cost Total potential additional cost per annum 3.4.7 Risk Detail 4 buses @ f6k per calendar month for 10.5 months 10 journey per week 40 weeks *miles *4Sp per mile less £2.91 per week Site 1 • Site 2 • Existinc Craicnure Tobermory site 0 221,600 0 69,519 0 291,119 3.4.7.1 Wayleaves, legal restrictions and site acquisition risk Site 3 • Site 4 • Garmony Tobermory south site 252,000 0 58,587 0 310,587 0 Argyll and Bute Council have provided information detailing out ownership, wayleaves, legal restrictions and site acquisition risks within Appendix J. 3.4.7.2 Construction Programme risk There is not assumed to be any significant Construction Programme risk associated with construction stage as the site is generally accessible. The site will require preparation for development, however this could be done at an early stage to mitigate any impact on the construction end date. All sites are impacted evenly in terms of reliance on ferry crossings to support construction activities. 3.4.7.3 Planning designation and sensitive receptors The site is located at the edge of the settlement area and countryside area. Under LOP 2, it is designated under housing as H4018 - Tobermory 3. It is located across from the business and Industry Area and is close to Tobermory 1 and Tobermory 2 which are designated as housing under the Strategic Masterplan Area. There is no requirement for HSE consultation with this site. 48 Page 117
Page 118
49 4.0 Appendices Appendix A – Engagement Report Appendix B – Long List Report Appendix C – Short List Site Layouts Appendix D – Existing Utilities Report Appendix E – Desktop Geotechnical Report Appendix F – Flooding and Drainage Report Appendix G – Place Plans Appendix H – Transport Review Appendix I – Site Abnormals Cost Appendix J – Wayleaves, Legal and Site Acquisition Risk Appendix K – Integrated Impact Assessment Report Appendix L – Valuation Report Page 118
Page 119
Document is Restricted Page 119 Agenda Item 6cNOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 8, 9 of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973
Page 120
This page is intentionally left blank
Page 121
Mull Education Campus 29/01/2025 Reference number GB01T24G04 MULL EDUCATION CAMPUS TRANSPORT CONSIDERATIONS Page 171 Agenda Item 6k
Page 122
MULL EDUCATION CAMPUS MULL EDUCATION CAMPUS TRANSPORT CONSIDERATIONS IDENTIFICATION TABLE Client/Project owner Hub North Scotland Ltd Project Mull Education Campus Study Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations Type of document Report Date 29/01/2025 File name Mull Education Campus Transport Review_290125.docx Reference number GB01T24G04 Number of pages 82 APPROVAL Version Name Position Date Modifications 1 Author T Foster Consultant 11/11/2024 Checked by Keith McGillivray Associate 11/11/2024 Approved by Keith McGillivray Associate 11/11/2024 2 Author T Foster Consultant 27/11/2024 Minor amendment to carbon emissions Checked by Keith McGillivray Associate 12/12/2024 Approved by Keith McGillivray Associate 18/12/2024 3 Author T Foster Consultant 14/01/2025 Added summary section and removal of Iona from modelling scope Checked by Keith McGillivray Associate 14/01/2025 Approved by Keith McGillivray Associate 14/01/2025 4 Author T Foster Consultant 29/01/2025 Re-ordering site assessment chapters Checked by Keith McGillivray Associate 29/01/2025 Approved by Keith McGillivray Associate 29/01/2025 Page 172
Page 123
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 3/82 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 8 1.1 GENERAL 8 1.2 CONTEXT 8 1.3 DISTRIBUTION AND CATCHMENT DATA 9 1.4 REPORT STRUCTURE 9 2. EXISTING SCHOOL OPERATIONS 10 2.1 BACKGROUND 10 2.2 CATCHMENT 11 2.3 PUPIL AND STAFF NUMBERS 11 2.4 OPERATING HOURS 12 2.5 OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS 12 3. EXISTING TRAVEL OPTIONS AND FACILITIES 13 3.1 WALKING 13 3.2 CYCLING 13 3.3 PUBLIC TRANSPORT 14 3.4 INTEGRATION WITH ORGANISED SCHOOL TRANSPORT 15 3.5 FERRY SERVICES 17 3.6 CAR PARKING 18 3.7 ROAD NETWORK 19 4. STAFF TRAVEL PATTERNS 20 4.1 CATCHMENT 20 4.2 MODE SHARE 20 5. PUPIL TRAVEL PATTERNS 21 5.1 TOBERMORY 2-18 SCHOOL PRE-5 AND PRIMARY PUPIL DISTRIBUTION 21 5.2 MODE SHARE 21 5.3 ISLAND-WIDE PRE-5 AND PRIMARY PUPIL DISTRIBUTION 23 5.4 SECONDARY PUPIL DISTRIBUTION 24 5.5 TOBERMORY HIGH SCHOOL MODE SHARE 25 6. KEY FINDINGS 26 6.1 INTRODUCTION 26 Page 173
Page 124
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 4/82 6.2 DEPENDENCIES AND COMPLEXITIES 26 6.3 HEADLINE STATISTICS 26 7. ASSESSMENT CRITERIA 28 7.1 INTRODUCTION 28 7.2 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA 28 8. FORTHCOMING DEVELOPMENT ON MULL, ULVA AND IONA 30 8.1 INTRODUCTION 30 8.2 FUTURE HOUSING ALLOCATION 30 9. MULL EDUCATION CAMPUS OVERVIEW 31 9.1 INTRODUCTION 31 9.2 SHORTLISTED SITES 31 9.3 OVERALL APPROACH 32 10. FORECAST METHODOLOGY 33 10.1 INTRODUCTION 33 10.2 EXCLUSIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS 33 10.3 MODE SHARE 34 10.4 PERSON AND VEHICLE TRIPS 35 10.5 TRAVEL DISTANCE 35 10.6 TRAVEL TIME 35 10.7 CARBON EMISSIONS 36 11. SITE 01 – EXISTING TOBERMORY SITE 37 11.1 INTRODUCTION 37 11.2 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA – EXISTING SCHOOL CATCHMENTS 37 11.3 CONCLUSION 42 12. SITE 02 - CRAIGNURE 43 12.1 INTRODUCTION 43 12.2 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA – EXISTING SCHOOL CATCHMENTS 43 12.3 SENSITIVITY TEST – REVISED CATCHMENTS 51 12.4 CONCLUSION 55 13. SITE 03 - GARMONY 56 13.1 INTRODUCTION 56 13.2 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA – EXISTING SCHOOL CATCHMENTS 56 Page 174
Page 125
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 5/82 13.3 SENSITIVITY TEST – REVISED CATCHMENTS 64 13.4 CONCLUSION 68 14. SITE 04 – TOBERMORY SOUTH 69 14.1 INTRODUCTION 69 14.2 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA – EXISTING SCHOOL CATCHMENTS 69 14.3 CONCLUSION 76 15. SUMMARY 77 Page 175
Page 126
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 6/82 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Schools on Mull, Iona and the Mainland 8 Figure 2. Tobermory 2-18 School 10 Figure 3. Tobermory 2-18 School Catchments 11 Figure 4. Footways on Erray Road 13 Figure 5. Bus Routes on Mull 14 Figure 6. Connections with the 495 Bus Service 16 Figure 7. Ferry Services on Mull 17 Figure 8. Main Road Links on Mull 19 Figure 9. Distribution of Tobermory 2-18 School Staff 20 Figure 10. Distribution of Tobermory Pre-5 and Primary Pupils 21 Figure 11. Tobermory 2-18 School Pre-5 and Primary Unit Travel Mode Share 22 Figure 12. Island-Wide Distribution of Pre-5 and Primary Pupils 23 Figure 13. Island-Wide Distribution of Secondary Pupils 24 Figure 14. Tobermory 2-18 School Secondary School Travel Mode Share 25 Figure 15. Aggregated Pupil Mode Share 27 Figure 16. Future Housing Allocation 30 Figure 17. Location of Shortlisted Sites 31 Figure 18. Site 01 – Tobermory Indicative Layout 37 Figure 19. Site 01 – Mode Share 38 Figure 20. Site 01 Anticipated Bus Network 39 Figure 21. Site 02 – Craignure Indicative Layout 43 Figure 22. Site 02 – Indicative Mode Share 44 Figure 23. Site 02 Anticipated Bus Network 46 Figure 24. Site 02 – Indicative Mode Share 51 Figure 25. Site 03 – Garmony Indicative Layout 56 Figure 26. Site 03 – Indicative Mode Share 57 Figure 27. Site 03 Anticipated Bus Network 59 Figure 28. Site 03 – Indicative Mode Share 64 Figure 29. Site 04 – Tobermory South Indicative Layout 69 Figure 30. Site 04 – Indicative Mode Share 70 Figure 31. Site 04 Anticipated Bus Network 72 Figure 32. Number of People Trips by Mode and Site 78 Figure 33. Vehicle Miles by Mode and Site 78 Figure 34. Carbon Emissions by Mode and Site 79 Figure 35. People Travel Time by Mode and Site 80 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. CalMac Mainland to Mull Service Summary 17 Table 2. Reliability and Punctuality of CalMac Services to Mull 18 Table 3. Generalised Student Mode Splits 34 Table 4. Site 01 – Multi-Modal Trips 38 Table 5. Site 01 – Travel Time (Minutes) 40 Table 6. Site 01 – Travel Distance (Miles) 41 Table 7. Site 01 – Carbon Emissions (Kg Co2e) 42 Page 176
Page 127
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 7/82 Table 8. Site 02 – Multi-Modal Trips 45 Table 9. Site 02 – Travel Time (Minutes) 48 Table 10. Site 02– Travel Distance (Miles) 49 Table 11. Site 02 – Carbon Emissions (Kg Co2e) 50 Table 12. Site 02 – Multi-Modal Trips 52 Table 13. Site 02 – Travel Time (Minutes) 53 Table 14. Site 02 – Travel Distance (Miles) 54 Table 15. Site 02 – Carbon Emissions (Kg Co2e) 55 Table 16. Site 03 – Multi-Modal Trips 58 Table 17. Site 03 – Travel Time (Minutes) 61 Table 18. Site 03 – Travel Distance (Miles) 62 Table 19. Site 03 – Carbon Emissions (Kg Co2e) 63 Table 20. Site 03 – Multi-Modal Trips 65 Table 21. Site 03 – Travel Time (Minutes) 66 Table 22. Site 03 – Travel Distance (Miles) 67 Table 23. Site 03 – Carbon Emissions (Kg Co2e) 68 Table 24. Site 04 – Multi-Modal Trips 71 Table 25. Site 04 – Travel Time (Minutes) 74 Table 26. Site 04 – Travel Distance (Miles) 75 Table 27. Site 04 – Carbon Emissions (Kg Co2e) 76 Table 28. Summary of Site Metrics 81 Page 177
Page 128
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 8/82 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 General 1.1.1 SYSTRA Ltd (SYSTRA) has been commissioned by Hub North Scotland Ltd (Hub) on behalf of Argyll and Bute Council (A&BC) to examine the transport baseline of the existing Tobermory 2-18 School. This report will also examine sites for A&BC’s proposals to develop a new education campus for pupils aged between 2-18 on the island of Mull. 1.2 Context 1.2.1 The Isle of Mull is an island in the Inner Hebrides on the west coast of Scotland. Tobermory 2-18 School is an education campus providing nursery, primary and secondary school education to pupils aged 2 to 18. It is the only school on Mull that delivers education to S1-6. In addition are another 5 primary schools on Mull and one primary school on the nearby island of Iona. The nearest mainland secondary school is in Oban. 1.2.2 The locations of schools on Mull, Iona and the Mainland are shown in Figure 1. Figure 1. Schools on Mull, Iona and the Mainland 1.2.3 Argyll and Bute Council is currently exploring options for a new 2-18 campus on Mull to replace the existing 2-18 school in Tobermory. At this stage, the location of a new campus has not been identified. Page 178
Page 129
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 9/82 1.2.4 The purpose of this report is to establish a clear understanding of the transport situation and operations relating to the existing Tobermory 2-18 School. In so doing, the report examines travel and transport considerations for pupils and staff, and, through an examination of the local public transport network, it shows a series of dependencies and complexities which arise from the present-day school transport situation. 1.2.5 The Council has decided that the existing Education Campus should be replaced by a new facility. Should the existing 2-18 campus move to a new site, the existing travel patterns, habits and routines would need to change. This report will help Argyll & Bute Council and other stakeholders to understand the implications of a decision to relocate. 1.2.6 A clear objective of the report is to establish a set of suitable criteria against which the suitability of emerging candidate sites for the proposed new education campus can be evaluated. 1.3 Distribution and Catchment Data 1.3.1 This report examines the present distribution of pupils across Mull, Iona and Ulva. Absolute and percentage values which are used throughout the report should be viewed in that context. While there are changes in distribution year on year capturing the picture as it stands creates a baseline which can support subsequent analysis of proposed sites. 1.3.2 SYSTRA has discussed the presentation of geospatial data presented in this report with Argyll & Bute Council. Mindful of data protection considerations all location markers for staff and pupils shown within the figures of this report have been randomly cast within a 500m radius of the true location. 1.4 Report Structure 1.4.1 The remainder of this report is divided into two sections. The first section reviews the baseline transport conditions associated with the existing school site and the islands of Mull, Iona and Ulva more broadly. The section is structured as follows: Chapter 2: Existing School Operations; Chapter 3: Existing Travel Options; Chapter 4: Staff Travel Patterns; Chapter 5: Pupil Travel Patterns; Chapter 6: Key Findings; Chapter 7: Assessment Criteria; and Chapter 8: Forthcoming Development on Mull, Ulva and Iona. 1.4.2 The second section of the report assess each of the shortlisted sites for the proposed Mull Education Campus and details the methodology used. Page 179
Page 130
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 10/82 2. EXISTING SCHOOL OPERATIONS 2.1 Background 2.1.1 The existing Tobermory 2-18 School is located within the town of Tobermory - the largest settlement on Mull. The location of the campus within Mull is shown in Figure 2. Figure 2. Tobermory 2-18 School 2.1.2 The campus is comprised of 3 departments: Pre-5 Unit, catering to pupils aged 2-4; primary school, offering P1-7 education (pupils aged 5-11); and the high school, offering S1-6 education (pupils aged 11—18). UHI Argyll, Tobermory Centre and Tobermory Library are also located within the campus, but these are separately operated entities. 2.1.3 Vehicular access into the site is taken by Erray Road, to the north of the campus, only. There are three pedestrian accesses on Erray Road, one to the north, a second via a set of steps opposite the Tobermory Arts Centre and from the east around the playing fields. Page 180
Page 131
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 11/82 2.2 Catchment 2.2.1 The Pre-5 Unit serves pupils from Tobermory and Dervaig. The primary school currently serves pupils from Tobermory. The high school generally serves pupils in the north and the west of Mull. The extent of the primary and secondary school’s catchments are shown in Figure 3. Figure 3. Tobermory 2-18 School Catchments 2.2.2 Dervaig, Tobermory, Ulva, Salen and Lochdonhead Primary Schools all act as associated primary schools to the Tobermory High School. Subject to a placing request Tobermory High School does accept pupils from the Ardnamurchan peninsula in the Highland Council region. Pupils from Bunessan and Iona Primary Schools typically attend Oban High School. 2.3 Pupil and Staff Numbers 2.3.1 As of the academic year 2024/25 there are 14 pupils in the Pre-5 Unit which has a capacity of 30 pupils. The primary school has a capacity of 116 pupils with 81 pupils currently enrolled. The high school currently has 157 pupils enrolled with a capacity of 222 pupils. The distribution of these pupils will be explored further in Section 5. 2.3.2 There are currently around 5 staff employed in the Pre-5 Unit, 12 staff in the primary school and 42 staff in the high school. This includes the 3 and 15 support staff in the primary and secondary school, respectively. The distribution of staff will be explored further in Section 4. Page 181
Page 132
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 12/82 2.4 Operating Hours 2.4.1 The Pre-5 Unit is currently open between 08:50 – 15:00. The primary school opens at 09:00 and it is understood that staff typically arrive between 08:00 and 09:00. The primary school closes at 15:15, with staff typically leaving between 15:15 and 17:00. The high school is open from 09:05 – 15:40 with staff typically arriving between 07:30 to 09:05 and departing between 15:40 to 18:30. 2.4.2 School drop-off is permitted between 08:45 and 09:00 for the primary school and between 08:45 and 09:05 for the high school. Pick up is at 15.15 for the primary school and 15.40 for the high school. 2.5 Operational Considerations 2.5.1 The adjoining streetscape of the current Tobermory 2-18 School is constrained and often challenging operationally. This is particularly problematic where buses and coaches are concerned. 2.5.2 The 495 bus service is occasionally operated by a 14.1m long double-decker coach. In a UK context, this is among the largest coaches available, with standard vehicles more typically being approximately 12m in length. 2.5.3 The current Tobermory site does not have dedicated bus set down area and the local streetscape was not designed with vehicles of this length, for this purpose, in mind. There can at times be complexities in accommodating and manoeuvring larger vehicles on site, particularly when multiple vehicles are present at once. Buses which arrive via Argyll Terrace then have to reverse up Erray Road with the aid of a banksman. 2.5.4 The staggered pattern of arrivals in the morning means that multiple buses are not present at the school at the same time. During the afternoon departure period, buses are stacked up in preparation for the end of the school day making it more likely that operational issues may present themselves. Page 182
Page 133
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 13/82 3. EXISTING TRAVEL OPTIONS AND FACILITIES 3.1 Walking 3.1.1 The majority of Tobermory is within 1km of the education campus, equating to around a 10 to 15-minute walk. Consideration of walking distances should be viewed in the context of local topography, with a difference of around 50m in elevation between the campus and Main Street. 3.1.2 As a result of the nature of the town, pedestrian facilities are limited to larger residential streets on the adjacent road network such as Erray Road and Victoria Street. There is also an off-road path between Back Brae and Main Street via Middle Brae and a set of steps. The general characteristics of footways on Erray Road are shown in Figure 4. Figure 4. Footways on Erray Road 3.2 Cycling 3.2.1 There are no formalised cycle facilities currently in the vicinity of the campus although cycling is possible via quieter residential roads. A covered bicycle shelter incorporating five Sheffield-style racks (space for up to 10 bicycles) is provided adjacent to the stepped pedestrian access from Erray Road. 3.2.2 Lockers are currently provided for the senior secondary pupils only. Page 183
Page 134
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 14/82 3.3 Public Transport 3.3.1 There are currently 3 public bus services on the Isle of Mull, all of which are operated by West Coast Motors. The 95/495 operates between Craignure and Tobermory, the 96/496 operates between Craignure and Fionnphort and the 494 operates between Tobermory and Calgary. 3.3.2 Both the 494 and 495 stop adjacent to the school – the 95 stops at Tobermory Harbour only. The routes of the 494, 95/495 and 96/496 are shown in Figure 5. Figure 5. Bus Routes on Mull 3.3.3 The 494 operates between Tobermory and Calgary three times per day in each direction. The first inbound service arrives at Tobermory 2-18 School at 08:50 (having departed Calgary at 08:10). The last outbound service leaves the campus at 15:46 and arrives in Calgary at 16:33. Both the first inbound and last outbound coincide with primary and secondary school operating hours and therefore presents a viable mode of travel for pupils living in Calgary or Dervaig to access the school. This is unlikely to be suitable for staff who typically have to arrive before school start and depart after school finish. 3.3.4 The 495 operates between the campus and Craignure once per day in each direction. The inbound service arrives at the campus at 8:52, having left Strathcoil at 7:45. The outbound service leaves the high school at 15:45 and arrives at the terminus at 16:56. As with the 494, the 495 is likely to be viable for pupils and not staff. 3.3.5 The 496 currently runs twice per day eastbound in the AM and one per day westbound in the PM. There is an additional early morning service in each direction on the first school day of the week to take pupils from the south of the island to Oban High School. Page 184
Page 135
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 15/82 3.3.6 The current configuration of the island’s bus network is largely underpinned by school transport requirements. Services which are prefixed by a 4 are supplemented school services organised by Argyll and Bute Council. 3.3.7 During the winter period, these services are almost entirely funded by the Council whereas they operate on a commercial basis during summer months. This largely reflects peaks of tourism activity on the island. 3.4 Integration with Organised School Transport 3.4.1 Due to the dispersed population across Mull, and more broadly in Argyll and Bute, the public transport network is supplemented by a number of ‘closed-door’ school bus services and taxi operations to get pupils to the high school. 3.4.2 The Education (Scotland) Act 1980 requires the education authority (Argyll and Bute Council) to make appropriate provision to assist pupils’ education. Under Section 42 of the Act, the authority must provide free transport or such other arrangements for all pupils up to age 8 who live more than 2 miles from their local school and for all pupils over age 8 who live more than 3 miles from their local school. 3.4.3 The Act also makes provision for a number of exceptional circumstances and special conditions under which the authority may also provide free transport. In the case of schools on Mull and Iona, free transport is provided for all primary-aged pupils who live more than 2 miles from their local school and pupils who live closer than 2 miles but where there is a safety concern associated with other means of travel (e.g. walking or cycling). 3.4.4 Free transport is provided to all secondary-aged pupils who live more than 3 miles from their local school and for those closer than 3 miles where there is a safety concern, as outlined above. 3.4.5 Free transport is also provided to some pupils with additional support needs. 3.4.6 There is currently a closed-door bus service, operated by West Coast Motors, which starts in Torloisk and ends at Tobermory 2-18 School, via Ulva Ferry and Gruline. This service is timetabled to align with a crossing of the Ulva ferry where a small number of pupils are collected. 3.4.7 The timetabling of the 495 is more complex so as to align with two ferries and a taxi. This is illustrated in Figure 6. Page 185
Page 136
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 16/82 Figure 6. Connections with the 495 Bus Service 3.4.8 The Figure summarises the following carefully-planned operation, providing a worked example of the complex interdependencies which are a reality of existing school transport operations: The 495 bus is met by a taxi from Lochbuie at the Lochbuie Crossroads. The bus departs at 07:45, arriving at Craignure for 08:00. In the summer on a Monday and in the winter on any weekday, the first ferry into Craignure arrives before 08:00 and therefore a connection is possible. The first ferry from Lochaline arrives into Fishnish at 08:03 allowing pupils from the Ardnamurchan Peninsular to connect onto the 495 at 08:18. The 495 then continues on to pick up pupils in Salen and arrives at Tobermory 2-18 School at 08:52. 3.4.9 In the event of delays to services connecting with the 495 the bus will typically wait for up to 15 minutes to enable a connection. Instances of pupils being unable to get to school because of cancellations do occur although they are rare. Advances in remote (online) learning opportunities mean that such instances now have a diminished impact on pupil education. 3.4.10 Approximately once per year there is a light-touch review of the organised school services to ensure they best serve pupils and align with other timetables, such those provided by Caledonian MacBrayne. Page 186
Page 137
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 17/82 3.5 Ferry Services 3.5.1 The relevant and regular ferry services on Mull are shown in Figure 7. Figure 7. Ferry Services on Mull 3.5.2 There are 3 car ferry services, all operated by Caledonian MacBrayne, which offer service between the mainland and Mull. Table 1 summarises the typical first sailing departing from the mainland and last sailing departing Mull and average sailings per day for a weekday. The summer timetable is typically operational between the first week in April to the third week in October. The winter timetable then operates for the remainder of the year. Table 1. CalMac Mainland to Mull Service Summary ROUTE SAILING TIME FIRST SAILING LAST SAILING SAILINGS PER DAY Kilchoan – Tobermory (Summer/Winter) 35 mins 0800 1800 / 1600 7 / 3 Oban – Craignure (Summer/Winter) 60 mins 0725 / 0600 2110 / 2200 10 / 6 Lochaline – Fishnish (Summer/Winter) 18 mins 0700 1900 / 1805 14 / 11 3.5.3 On the summer timetable CalMac typically operates the 10-minute Iona to Fionnphort ferry frequently between 0610 and 1830. On the winter timetable the ferry is typically Page 187
Page 138
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 18/82 operated 10 times per day between the same first and last sailing times. The Iona ferry is open to cars but only to those resident on the island or permit holders. Pedals cycles and foot passengers are also permitted. 3.5.4 The Ulva ferry is a small privately run foot and bicycle passenger only ferry. The ferry typically operates on demand Monday to Friday 09:00 to 17:30 from the first week in April to the last full week in October. During the winter there is a school run for the pupils on Ulva twice daily during term time. 3.5.5 All ferry services on Mull are subject to suitable weather and sailing conditions. The reliability of services, which is a metric of how many services were cancelled, and whether the services that did run were punctual is shown in Table 2. The data presented is an aggregate from September 2023 – August 2024 – cancellations are typically worse in the winter months. Table 2. Reliability and Punctuality of CalMac Services to Mull ROUTE RELIABILITY PUNCTUALITY Average Worst Month Average Worst Month Kilchoan – Tobermory 95.2% December – 89.2% 96.5% May – 88.6% Oban – Craignure 94.0% January – 83.1% 88.6% December – 74.5% Lochaline - Fishnish 99.2% December – 96.3% 98.3% March – 92.1% Fionnphort – Iona 95.3% December – 78.3% 95.4% February – 92.3% 3.6 Car Parking 3.6.1 There are currently 6 standard marked car parking spaces and 2 accessible spaces at the school. There is an additional unmarked car parking area with space for approximately 10 cars. 3.6.2 There are ‘No Loading’ and ‘No Stopping’ restrictions on Erray Road between Breadalbane Street and the Erray Road Depot during school pick-up / drop-off time. Adjoining residential streets such as Victoria Street and Breadalbane Street are sufficiently wide enough for on-street parking. Page 188
Page 139
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 19/82 3.7 Road Network 3.7.1 The main road links on Mull are shown in Figure 8. Figure 8. Main Road Links on Mull 3.7.2 Figure 8 highlights the fact that the road network on Mull is largely composed of single- track sections, with some sections of two-way running between Craignure and Salen and over the section of road immediately to the south of Tobermory. 3.7.3 These roads are typically narrow and of varying quality, giving rise to platoons of vehicles and requiring frequent use of passing places. These factors can introduce driver delay and hamper journey time reliability. Page 189
Page 140
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 20/82 4. STAFF TRAVEL PATTERNS 4.1 Catchment 4.1.1 There are currently around 60 staff employed at the site across all three teaching units and in supporting rolls such as administration, janitorial staff and catering staff. The distribution of these staff is shown in Figure 9. Figure 9. Distribution of Tobermory 2-18 School Staff Remaining 18% dispersed across Mull 4.1.2 Figure 9 shows that the majority of staff live within Tobermory (63%). There is also a clustering of staff in Salen, 13%, and in Dervaig, 7%. There are two staff members in Oban, and one each in Lochaline, Kilchoan and Ulva. All of these staff are therefore dependent on ferry services. 4.2 Mode Share 4.2.1 On the 23rd of October 2024 a “hands-up” of staff was conducted. The survey indicated that 20 members of staff walked to the school that day and 39 travelled by private car. Of those that drove 4 also travelled by ferry. The school has also indicated that 4 members of staff regularly car share. Page 190
Page 141
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 21/82 5. PUPIL TRAVEL PATTERNS 5.1 Tobermory 2-18 School Pre-5 and Primary Pupil Distribution 5.1.1 There are currently around 14 pupils at the pre-5 unit and 81 pupils in the primary school located at the Tobermory 2-18 School. The distribution of these pupils is shown in Figure 10 - larger markers represent multiple pupils at the same address. Figure 10. Distribution of Tobermory Pre-5 and Primary Pupils 5.1.2 Figure 10 shows that pre-5 pupils are generally clustered within Tobermory itself (approximately 85%). Around 90% of pupils at the primary school also live within Tobermory and many of them within a 5-minute walk. The remaining pupils live on the west side of the island within a 30-minute drive. 5.2 Mode Share 5.2.1 A “hands-up” survey of pre-5 and primary school pupils was conducted by staff in w/c 30th September 2024. The survey asked pupils “By which mode did you travel to and from school today?”. The results of this survey are presented in Figure 11. Page 191
Page 142
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 22/82 Figure 11. Tobermory 2-18 School Pre-5 and Primary Unit Travel Mode Share 5.2.2 The results of the hands up survey indicate that the majority of both pre-5 and primary pupils arrive to the existing school by car. Just over 15% of pre-5 pupils and up to 40% of primary pupils do walk to the school. Taxis presently play a small role in transporting junior pupils to and from the school. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% To School From School To School From School Pre 5 Primary Mode Share Year Group Tobermory 2-18 School Mode Share Walk Taxi Bus Car Ferry Page 192
Page 143
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 23/82 5.3 Island-Wide Pre-5 and Primary Pupil Distribution 5.3.1 There are currently around 280 pre-5 or primary aged pupils (aged 2-11) on the islands of Mull, Iona and Ulva. There are 6 primary school campuses on Mull and one on Iona, 4 of which have pre-5 units and 2 of which have Gaelic units. The distribution of pre-5 and primary pupils is shown in Figure 12, the colour of each dot corresponds to the catchment shading. The legend also contains the percentage of pupils currently residing in each catchment. Figure 12. Island-Wide Distribution of Pre-5 and Primary Pupils 5.3.2 Figure 12 shows that primary aged pupils are distributed across the island with concentrations in key settlements. The Figure also shows that the majority of pupils live within their respective school catchments. The main exception is pupils at Salen. 5.3.3 The majority of pupils outlying the primary school catchment are those who attend the Salen Primary Gaelic school which is designed to serve the north of the island. This is one of two Gaelic Medium schools on the island, alongside Bunessan which serves the south of Mull and Iona. Page 193
Page 144
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 24/82 5.4 Secondary Pupil Distribution 5.4.1 There are currently 157 pupils enrolled at Tobermory High School. The distribution of these pupils and the 36 pupils who attend Oban High School is shown in Figure 13, the colour of each dot corresponds to the catchment shading. Clusters of pupils and the proportion of the island-wide population is also shown. Figure 13. Island-Wide Distribution of Secondary Pupils Remaining 13% dispersed across the island 5.4.2 Figure 13 shows that secondary aged pupils (11-18) are also distributed across Mull, Iona and Ulva, with concentrations in key settlements, as with primary aged pupils. With few exceptions, pupils attend their catchment school. 5.4.3 Of the total 193 secondary school-aged pupils on Mull, Iona and Ulva, around 40% of them live within Tobermory, 11% within Dervaig, 10% in Salen and 4% around Ulva and Ulva Ferry. 22% currently live with the Oban High School Catchment (8% around Bunessan, 7% on Iona and 7% around Fionnphort). The remaining 13% are dispersed across the island. 5.4.4 Of the 157 pupils at Tobermory High School approximately 50% live within Tobermory, 13% in Salen and 7% in Dervaig. The remaining 30% of pupils live in disparate locations around Mull. Page 194
Page 145
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 25/82 5.5 Tobermory High School Mode Share 5.5.1 As with the pre-5 and primary unit pupils, each secondary class was asked “By which mode did you travel to and from school today?” in a “hands-up” survey conducted by staff in w/c 30th September 2024. The results of this survey are presented in Figure 14. Figure 14. Tobermory 2-18 School Secondary School Travel Mode Share 5.5.2 The Figure shows that cars play a lesser role in the transport of secondary pupils to and from the Tobermory 2-18 school, representing around 14% of mode share on average. Bus is the predominant mode accounting for around 44% of all trips, just greater than walking which has a mode share of 40%. A small number of pupils’ journeys to school currently involve ferries. 5.5.3 The mode split which is revealed by these summary statistics shows that while motorised travel modes account for just a little more than half of the trips which are made by secondary ager pupils, a significant proportion (40%) of pupils currently walk to and from school. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% To School From School To School From School To School From School To School From School To School From School To School From School To School From School S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 Average Mode Share Year Group Tobermory 2-18 School Mode Share Walk Taxi Bus Car Ferry Page 195
Page 146
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 26/82 6. KEY FINDINGS 6.1 Introduction 6.1.1 This report provides an insight into the transport baseline which is associated with Tobermory 2-18 School and with school-age children on Mull, Iona and Ulva as a whole. In so doing, the report examines data related to pupils of all ages and staff who are associated with the facility. Through an examination of postcode data, the report presents a clear understanding of how the home locations of pupils and staff are dispersed around Mull and beyond. 6.1.2 While the datasets reveal concentrations in areas of population density, they also reveal that staff and pupils who travel to and from the school each day include individuals who live in lower population areas where transport facilities and services are less-well developed. 6.2 Dependencies and Complexities 6.2.1 The report identifies that the transport situation which relates to the existing school facility is complex; it includes multi-leg journeys and highlights a series of inter- dependencies between different transport modes. 6.2.2 Notably, the report also highlights that the commercially operated public transport network on the island is, to a large extent, framed by the requirements of school travel. This being the case, any changes in the location of the education campus seems likely to have implications for public transport as a whole. 6.3 Headline Statistics 6.3.1 As of the academic year 2024/25 there are currently 14 pupils in the Tobermory 2-18 School Pre-5 Unit, 81 pupils in the primary school and 157 in the high school. There are a further 36 high school-aged pupils on Mull and Iona who currently attend Oban High School, on the mainland. 6.3.2 The pre-5 and primary pupils at the Tobermory 2-18 school live predominantly in Tobermory, around 90%, with the remaining 10% living in periphery communities such as Glengorm and Salen. Secondary school pupils are distributed more widely across the island. Around 40% of them live within Tobermory, 11% within Dervaig, 10% in Salen and 4% around Ulva and Ulva Ferry. 22% currently live with the Oban High School Catchment (8% around Bunessan, 7% on Iona and 7% around Fionnphort). The remaining 13% are dispersed across the island. 6.3.3 The mode share of pupils at the existing Tobermory 2-18 School, aggregated by primary and secondary age groups, is shown in Figure 15. Page 196
Page 147
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 27/82 Figure 15. Aggregated Pupil Mode Share 6.3.4 The existing school is supported by around 5 staff employed in the Pre-5 Unit, 12 staff in the primary school and 42 staff in the high school. This includes the 3 and 15 support staff in the primary and secondary school, respectively. 6.3.5 The majority of staff live within Tobermory (63%). There is also a clustering of staff in Salen, 13%, and in Dervaig, 7%. There are two staff members in Oban, and one each in Lochaline, Kilchoan and Ulva. All of these staff are therefore dependent on ferry services. The remaining 18% are dispersed across Mull. Currently 34% of staff walk to the school and 66% drive to the school. 30% 41%2%1% 45%67% 14% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Primary Secondary Walk Taxi Bus Car Ferry Page 197
Page 148
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 28/82 7. ASSESSMENT CRITERIA 7.1 Introduction 7.1.1 Matters relating to travel and transport are prominent among members of the community when discussing the question of a possible school relocation. As this report identifies, a decision to relocate the school to a new site would, in some cases, disturb established routines while giving rise to a series of other travel and transport implications. 7.1.2 The remainder of this report examines each of the short-listed school sites to determine how each performs in terms of travel, transport and access. While this includes local accessibility and connectivity, the appraisal also establishes the implications and opportunities when the home locations of staff and pupils are taken into account. 7.1.3 The assessment criteria below are designed to ensure each candidate site is appraised in the context of the island-wide school operations which are summarised in this report. This process will enable the Council to form a clear understanding of the implications and opportunities which arise from development of a given site. This appraisal process is separate from the various detailed analyses which would be required in support of a planning application in support of a selected site. 7.1.4 SYSTRA anticipates that the ‘Application Stage’ is likely to require the preparation of a comprehensive Transport Assessment and Travel Plan. Such a document would set out the detail of any plans which were necessary to develop a given site while ensuring its layout, connectivity and operations were all tailored to the specific requirements of a site and its locality. 7.2 Assessment Criteria 7.2.1 SYSTRA has considered the following metrics when evaluating candidate sites: Number of user journeys and mode split; Good public transport links to the site and location; Existing safe active travel links to site; Travel times for pupils and staff; Potential impact on public transport network; Ability of existing roads infrastructure to service site; Trips with complex dependencies/ multiple stages and modes of travel; and Carbon Impact of travel. 7.2.2 These criteria have been chosen following public consultation events, discussions with the Council and with the wider design team. SYSTRA’s understanding for each of these criteria is presented in the following paragraphs. User Journeys and Pupil Mode Split 7.2.3 The Baseline report presents a breakdown of how pupils travel, whether by active travel, bus, taxi or private car. If trip distance changes materially as a result of the school relocation, it is likely that the means by which people travel may also change. For example, a trip currently made on foot by a pupil whose home is within walking distance Page 198
Page 149
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 29/82 of the school would no longer be practical by that means if the school were relocated to a site outside of walking distance. Good Public Transport Links to the Site and Location 7.2.4 An assessment of the interactions between the site and the present-day public transport network. This section will also identify measures which could be implemented at each site to support journey by pupil transport. Travel Time 7.2.5 As with journey distance, it will be possible to evaluate differences between the overall travel time required for current and potential future trips. Given the nature of road links on Mull, where single track roads are commonplace the consideration of travel time is perhaps more prominent than that relating to overall journey distance. Potential Impact on Public Transport Network 7.2.6 This report highlights that most of the island’s public transport network is shaped around the requirements of school travel. In the event that the school bus network was to change, adjustments to the commercial bus network may occur as a consequence. Ability of Existing Roads Infrastructure to Service Site 7.2.7 This criterion will assess the present roads infrastructure adjacent to each of the sites. Off-site highway upgrades which may be necessary to support the site will also be identified. Complex Dependencies 7.2.8 If a ‘complex dependency’ can be defined as a trip which requires multiple modes and stages, appraisal of alternative sites will help to determine if the share of trips which are ‘complex’ is likely to increase or not. School Travel Emissions 7.2.9 A detailed understanding of pupil and staff home locations, accompanied by a breakdown of how many individuals travel from each location enables a quantification of the total distance travelled by each individual. The extent to which those values may change as a result of a new location being selected can be examined, enabling a comparison between present-day and future situation. 7.2.10 As an extension of changes to the distance travelled and mode used, it seems likely there will be changes in emissions related to school travel. In the baseline conditions, 37% of children travel by means which do not generate carbon emissions and 72 travel by bus. An appraisal of alternative locations will show how associated changes in travel then effect the requirement for vehicle-based trips. Page 199
Page 150
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 30/82 8. FORTHCOMING DEVELOPMENT ON MULL, ULVA AND IONA 8.1 Introduction 8.1.1 The main objective of this exercise is to consider the implications of developing the proposed Mull Education Campus in a location other than the existing site, examining the implications for travel, transport and access when viewed in the context of the Baseline situation. This section observes that the existing housing stock on the Islands is likely to be supplemented by the delivery of new homes over time, changing the absolute number of homes and potentially leading to a change in the overall distribution of homes across the study area. 8.2 Future Housing Allocation 8.2.1 Argyll and Bute Council conduct an annual Housing Land Audit which identifies two classifications of housing allocation sites. The first are ones contained in the Local Development Plan/Local Development 2 (either allocations, or Potential Development Areas that have received planning consent) and Large Windfall Sites, which are sites for 5 units or more that are not in the LDP/LDP2. Secondly, are Small Windfall Sites which are developments of less than 5 units not on LDP identified sites. 8.2.2 The location of housing sites identified in the 2023 Housing Land Audit and the number of units of remaining capacity (for LDP and LWF sites) are shown in Figure 16. Figure 16. Future Housing Allocation Page 200
Page 151
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 31/82 9. MULL EDUCATION CAMPUS OVERVIEW 9.1 Introduction 9.1.1 SYSTRA has worked closely with the Council and other project team members to evaluate the credentials of a long-list of possible locations for a single-site education campus. Following this high-level evaluation, four candidate sites have been shortlisted for further, more detailed evaluation. 9.1.2 The wider project team has worked together to agree suitable assessment criteria against which each of the shortlisted sites can be appraised, with matters relating to transport and access forming an important part of that overall consideration. 9.1.3 Consideration of transport matters related to the shortlisted sites is essentially two-fold, as follows: Matters which relate specifically to the sites and their immediate environs (access, layout and local connectivity) Matters related to travel to and from the sites from within the catchments which are defined in the Baseline review (changes in travel mode split, travel distance and carbon). 9.2 Shortlisted Sites 9.2.1 The locations of the shortlisted sites are shown in Figure 17. Figure 17. Location of Shortlisted Sites Page 201
Page 152
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 32/82 9.3 Overall Approach 9.3.1 Each of the shortlisted sites is evaluated in the sections which follow. The approach taken has sought to ensure that a common methodology has been applied to each of the sites, thereby providing outputs which can be readily compared across each of the sites. 9.3.2 Notwithstanding the physical considerations which relate to each site, the assessment requires evaluation of the extent to which transport routines and provisions would need to change in the event that a decision was taken to develop one particular site. For example, the evaluations which follow show how such a change might prompt an adjustment to travel mode split, overall distance travelled or the transport-related carbon effects that might result from additional mileage being incurred. Outputs such as these are presented in a consistent manner to enable direct comparisons. 9.3.3 The Baseline Evaluation section of this report documents a series of ‘complex dependencies’ which apply to travel to, and within the Island of Mull. These may include the requirement for certain staff members or pupils to travel to the island by ferry, or, for individuals whose home location is detached from the island’s main road network (and hence bus services) to access bus stops by means of a feeder car or taxi trip. In evaluating the overall performance of each site, SYSTRA has assumed that the complex dependencies do not change; that is to say that regardless of the site which may be developed, it will remain necessary for a given individual to complete the first leg of their journey by ferry or feeder car or taxi. Page 202
Page 153
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 33/82 10. FORECAST METHODOLOGY 10.1 Introduction 10.1.1 In order to make an informed assessment of each candidate site against the transport related criteria, it is necessary to understand where end users live, the distance they will be required to travel to a candidate site and the means by which that trip will be made. SYSTRA has developed a consistent methodology to arrive at site-specific forecasts, with each being informed by the observed travel behaviours which are discussed in the Baseline report. In developing those forecasts, it was necessary to make a number of assumptions and qualifications. The purpose of this Chapter is to document and explain those assumptions and any qualifications which apply to the methodology adopted. 10.2 Exclusions and Assumptions 10.2.1 The mode share forecast is representative of the primary mode of travel used to travel to and from the school site. The primary mode of travel is the one used for the longest distance in a given trip. For example, someone who takes the bus to school may also have a 400m walk to the bus stop. In such a case, it is only the bus journey which is of concern. 10.2.2 Similarly, in instances where pupils are taken from their (remote) home by car or taxi to access the bus which forms the main leg of their journey to school, the mode split recorded for this exercise will be recorded as ‘bus’. Existing examples of such trips are evident at Lochbuie. Trips like this are likely to occur regardless of the site selected for a new campus and hence their inclusion within the mode share forecast is academic. 10.2.3 Ferry journeys have also been excluded for the same reason - pupils or staff who live on Iona, Ulva or the mainland will still have to use the ferry to get on to Mull regardless of the site selected. 10.2.4 This forecasting exercise does not account for any strategic changes in population distribution on Mull, Iona and Ulva. It also does not account for any pupils changing school. All sites have been assessed on the assumptions that school catchments would remain the same. 10.2.5 Consideration has been given to the impact of changing the secondary school catchments on the two sites outwith Tobermory (Site 02 – Craignure and Site 03 – Garmony) to include the Ross of Mull. In response to a request from the Iona Community to remain within the catchment area of Oban High School they have been removed from the scope of these additional tests. 10.2.6 SYSTRA has included these additional tests to consider their sensitivity, and it is noted that these are not intended to directly influence the scoring of the sites. The inclusion of these sensitivity tests does not represent a commitment by the council to implement any changes to the school catchments. Such a process would be subject a separate statutory process. 10.2.7 The travel time, distance and carbon emissions associated with pupils from the Ross and Mull and Iona travelling to and from Oban has not been accounted for in the baseline conditions. Page 203
Page 154
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 34/82 10.2.8 The car requirement calculation assumes a pupil occupancy of 1.2. Staff vehicle occupancy is assumed at 1.05, this is based on observed car sharing behaviour as revealed by the staff ‘hands up’ travel survey. 10.2.9 SYSTRA anticipates that regardless of the site selected, Travel Planning measures would be adopted to ensure staff and pupil travel in the most efficient and sustainable way possible. In this context, it would be expected that efforts are made to maximise rates of car sharing, especially between staff – where possible. 10.2.10 For all of the following metrics, values are based on a single one-way trip. It is assumed that travel to and from school will be broadly similar although there may be some variation as a result of wrap-around activities. These have not been accounted for. It is assumed that travel behaviour will not vary significantly day to day across the week. Daily and weekly values could therefore be calculated by multiplying the values stated in this report by 2 and 10, respectively. 10.3 Mode Share 10.3.1 To suitably reflect the available travel modes SYSTRA has developed a range of generalised mode splits which reflect the outcomes of the ‘hands-up’ surveys of existing pupils. Five separate mode split combinations were developed to capture the breadth of circumstances which are evident in the Baseline situation – these capture the different ways that individuals travel according to the location and setting of their home. 10.3.2 The five generalised mode splits are shown in Table 3. Table 3. Generalised Student Mode Splits MODE SPLIT WALK TAXI BUS CAR Primary School - Vehicle 2.5% 95% 2.5% Secondary School - Vehicle 95% 5% Remote Origin - Vehicle 2% 98% Primary School - Walkable 35% 65% Secondary School - Walkable 80% 20% 10.3.3 To calculate an overall pupil mode share for each of the candidate sites the most appropriate of the mode splits has been applied to each age group of pupils travelling from each the residential catchments on Mull and Ulva 10.3.4 The following example considers primary school-aged pupils living in Tobermory. For the existing school site those pupils have been assigned the ‘Primary School - Walkable’ mode split. However, for Site 03 – Garmony, as those pupils would have to travel to that site by vehicle, they are assigned the ‘Primary School - Vehicle’ mode split instead in this instance. Page 204
Page 155
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 35/82 10.3.5 For each of around 11 residential areas (14 in the case of the additional assessments for Sites 2 and 3), such as Tobermory, Calgary, Salen and Ulva, a suitable mode split has been applied to primary and secondary pupils. There are a further two categories (“Within reasonable trip of bus” and “Remote”) which captures the disparate location of pupils who live outwith a residential area. 10.3.6 To produce a mode split for each of the candidate sites, the individual mode splits for each area have been aggregated, taking account of the existing pupil populations in each area. These mode shares are presented within each relevant candidate site chapter. 10.4 Person and Vehicle Trips 10.4.1 Using the mode share for each site and age group and the anticipated pupil count, SYSTRA has sought to calculate the number of pupils travelling by each mode. To inform further calculations relating to journey time, journey distance and carbon emissions criteria an origin must be determined for each vehicle. 10.4.2 To determine the origin of taxi trips, the number of taxis estimated to be required is assigned to the areas with the largest pupil population which require them. Note that only one taxi is assigned to each area. For example, for sites where the campus remains in Tobermory, Tobermory is not assigned a taxi as the Tobermory generalised mode split for both primary and secondary is “Walkable”. Instead, an area such as Salen is assigned one. However, in the instance that the site is located in Craignure then Tobermory would be the first to be assigned a taxi because it has the largest population which requires one. As in this case Tobermory is assigned the “Vehicle” mode split. 10.4.3 The number of buses required for each site is determined based on the anticipated mode share of buses. The configuration of the bus network is informed by the existing conditions and input from Argyll and Bute Council’s School Transport officers. For the purposes of modelling, the origin of each bus route is the first stop on the route. 10.4.4 Cars, similar to taxis, are assigned proportionally to the residential areas which require them. 10.5 Travel Distance 10.5.1 The travel distance from the centre of each residential area to each candidate site has been calculated following the most suitable driving route for a single-direction trip (i.e. a trip TO school). Each vehicle is then assigned a mileage base upon its origin location. The total mileage for each site is an aggregation of all vehicle miles associated with the site. 10.6 Travel Time 10.6.1 The travel time for taxi and car passengers is derived from Google Maps for the average drive time on a Tuesday morning. Tuesday is considered to be a ‘neutral weekday’ in transport assessment terms. The travel time for buses is calculated based upon existing bus timetables. Unlike for travel distance, the total travel time is an aggregation of all passenger journey times, albeit the values presented relate to a single-direction trip. Page 205
Page 156
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 36/82 10.7 Carbon Emissions 10.7.1 The carbon emissions of each vehicle trip are informed by the Transport Analysis Guidance (TAG) Data Book. The assumed split of car fuel types is taken from Table A1.3.9 for the year 2024 and is as follows: Petrol – 51% Diesel – 39% Electric – 11% 10.7.2 While this may not perfectly reflect the proportions of each car type on Mull and Ulva in any instance the proportion of engine types will change with time in line with national policy and changes in buyer habits. 10.7.3 The fuel / energy consumption of each vehicle type (Petrol Car, Diesel Car, Electric Car and Passenger Service Vehicle (PSV)) is calculated as a function of average speed. SYSTRA has assumed the average speed of all vehicles to be 30mph, this is broadly consistent with the average journey times derived from Google Maps. 10.7.4 Carbon dioxide emissions per litre of fuel burnt / kWh used is taken for the year 2024 from Table A3.3 of the TAG Data Book. This, combined with the fuel consumption can be used to derive a value for emissions per mile driven for cars and buses. This value is used to inform the travel related carbon emissions for each site for a single direction trip. Page 206
Page 157
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 37/82 11. SITE 01 – EXISTING TOBERMORY SITE 11.1 Introduction 11.1.1 Site 01 – Tobermory is located on the existing Tobermory 2-18 School site. The indicative site layout is illustrated in Figure 18 below. Figure 18. Site 01 – Tobermory Indicative Layout 11.1.2 Travel habits to the existing site are already established and as such the redevelopment is unlikely to have a measurable impact on pupil and staff travel. The steep nature of Back Brae and the wider area as a whole constrain access as already demonstrated in the baseline section of this report. The site is within 500m of two large windfall (residential) sites, both currently under construction, with a total remaining capacity of 8 units. 11.2 Assessment Criteria – Existing School Catchments Number of user journeys - bus, car, pedestrian (Pupil/ staff mode split) 11.2.1 As there will be little change to travel characteristics the anticipated mode share for the Tobermory site SYSTRA has assumed the mode share to remain the same as the results of the hands up survey conducted at the existing Tobermory 2-18 school. For completeness this mode share is presented in Figure 19. Page 207
Page 158
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 38/82 Figure 19. Site 01 – Mode Share 11.2.2 Currently around 30% of primary-aged pupils walk to the site and 70% are driven to the site. There are also a few trips facilitated by taxi or bus. 40% of secondary-aged currently walk to the site and 45% arrive by bus. A further 15% drive or are driven to the school. 33% of staff walk to the site and the remaining 67% currently drive. 11.2.3 Based on the expected student cohort and staff numbers, the expected number of trips by each mode is presented in Table 4. Table 4. Site 01 – Multi-Modal Trips SITE COHORT WALK TAXI BUS CAR FERRY TOTAL Site 01 - Tobermory Primary 29 2 1 64 0 95 Site 01 - Tobermory Secondary 64 0 71 22 0 157 Site 01 - Tobermory Staff 20 0 0 39 0 59 Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding 11.2.4 As the Tobermory site is located on the existing school site no changes to the current bus operations are anticipated. The buses which would be required for secondary school pupils are one bus from Calgary / Dervaig, one bus from Torloisk and Ulva Ferry via Salen and one bus from Lochbuie Crossroads. The annual revisions of the network and its complex dependencies are expected to be broadly in line with existing operations. 11.2.5 Figure 20 illustrates the anticipated bus network for Site 01. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Established Behaviour (Tobermory) Established Behaviour (Tobermory) Established Behaviour (Tobermory) Primary Secondary Staff Walk Taxi Bus Car Ferry Page 208
Page 159
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 39/82 Figure 20. Site 01 Anticipated Bus Network 11.2.6 School buses would be funded as school transport where pupils meet Argyll and Bute Council’s requirements – details of these requirements are provided in Section 3.4. Good public transport links to site and location Existing Conditions 11.2.7 The morning and afternoon school services currently serve the site by way of the bus layby on Erray Road. Tobermory is additionally served throughout the day by the 494 and the 95/495. Future Conditions 11.2.8 The site could incorporate approximately three bus stances adjacent to the school entrance to enable safe boarding and disembarkation of pupils. Alternatively, as a result of site constraints, the use of the bus bays on Erray Road could continue to be utilised, perhaps with some rationalisation or upgrade. Existing safe active travel links to site Existing Conditions 11.2.9 Pedestrian facilities are limited to larger residential streets on the adjacent road network such as Erray Road and Victoria Street. There is also an off-road path between Back Brae and Main Street via Middle Brae and a set of steps. Page 209
Page 160
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 40/82 Future Conditions 11.2.10 While infrastructure is currently limited, off-site improvement works would likely be a requirement following the standard consultation and transport assessment processes. Travel times for pupils and staff 11.2.11 The estimated one-way travel times for primary and secondary pupils and staff are shown in Table 5. The travel times presented are an aggregate, encompassing the wide range of trips which would be made to the site. It should also be noted that the travel time for the minor leg of a trip (such as walking to the bus stop, a ferry crossing or travelling by car to access bus stops on the main road) are not accounted for in this analysis. In any case, the nature of these journeys is likely to remain constant across all four sites. Table 5. Site 01 – Travel Time (Minutes) SITE COHORT TAXI BUS CAR WALK TOTAL AVERAGE Site 01 - Tobermory Primary 18 22 153 280 473 5 Site 01 - Tobermory Secondary 0 2,356 162 588 3,106 20 Site 01 - Tobermory Staff 0 0 695 163 858 15 Site 01 - Tobermory Total 18 2,378 1,010 1,031 4,438 - Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding Page 210
Page 161
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 41/82 Potential impact on public transport network 11.2.12 As there will be no requirement to amend the bus services associated with school transport there is unlikely to be any impact, positive or negative, on the wider public transport network. Ability of existing roads infrastructure to service site 11.2.13 The site is already a part of the established road network and the site’s vehicular access would remain. The increase in car parking within the site will reduce the instances of on- street car parking occurring on the adjoining residential streets, in turn making it easier for buses to navigate these streets. 11.2.14 There can at times be complexities in accommodating and manoeuvring larger vehicles on the site, particularly when multiple vehicles are present at once. Buses which arrive via Argyll Terrace then have to reverse up Erray Road with the aid of a banksman. Trips with complex dependencies/ multiple stages and modes of travel 11.2.15 Complex dependencies are likely to be broadly similar regardless of the selected site. Further details on this criterion are provided in Section 9.3. For pupils who live remotely from the main road network and key population centres, an additional leg of their journey will be required to intersect the bus service. This secondary journey will be facilitated by specific arrangements to them and may include a taxi or short car trip by a parent/carer. Carbon impact of travel (travel distances and mode of transport) 11.2.16 The estimated one-way vehicle miles by cohort and vehicle for the Tobermory site are presented in Table 6. The values presented in this table represent the driven milage of each vehicle as opposed to each passenger. This accounts for the fact that one bus can carry multiple passengers. Table 6. Site 01 – Travel Distance (Miles) SITE COHORT TAXI BUS CAR TOTAL Site 01 - Tobermory Primary 6 0 42 48 Site 01 - Tobermory Secondary 0 63 57 121 Site 01 - Tobermory Staff 0 0 303 303 Site 01 - Tobermory Total 6 63 402 471 11.2.17 As with any new development of this nature Travel Planning measures have the potential to positively influence travel, particularly among staff members. A Travel Plan would seek Page 211
Page 162
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 42/82 to encourage behaviours such as car sharing or public transport usage in order to reduce the number of vehicle miles incurred. 11.2.18 Applying the carbon emission assessment methodology outlined in Section 10.7 the estimated carbon emissions for one-way travel (of all vehicles) to the Tobermory site is presented in Table 7. Table 7. Site 01 – Carbon Emissions (Kg Co2e) SITE COHORT TAXI BUS CAR TOTAL Site 01 - Tobermory Primary 0 0 9 9 Site 01 - Tobermory Secondary 0 67 12 79 Site 01 - Tobermory Staff 0 0 67 67 Site 01 - Tobermory Total 0 67 89 156 11.2.19 Any increase in carbon emissions from bus travel may only be temporary. In line with current national policy bus fleets are gradually transitioning to electric and hydrogen systems. While SYSTRA is not aware of specific plans to convert the fleet on Mull, such an advancement would of course reduce the carbon impact from bus travel. 11.2.20 A similar transition is likely to occur to the car fleet, as residents increasingly embrace the use of electric cars. 11.3 Conclusion 11.3.1 The following considerations are given to Site 01 – Tobermory: Travel characteristics are mostly known as they are likely to align with present conditions; The site is within walking distance of the most existing housing; and The site is constrained making access for large vehicles (e.g. buses and HGVs during construction) difficult. Page 212
Page 163
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 43/82 12. SITE 02 - CRAIGNURE 12.1 Introduction 12.1.1 Site 02 – Craignure is located to the west of Craignure Bay adjacent to the Mull and Iona Community Hospital. The indicative site layout is illustrated in Figure 21 below. Figure 21. Site 02 – Craignure Indicative Layout 12.1.2 The site sits back from the main A849 which is subject to a 60mph speed limit in the vicinity of the site. It also sits adjacent to a site which has a local plan strategic housing allocation for c. 80 housing units. The site is greenfield in nature and on the basis of preliminary masterplanning work, it is of sufficient size to enable incorporation of necessary car parking and bus facilities. 12.2 Assessment Criteria – Existing School Catchments Number of user journeys - bus, car, pedestrian (Pupil/ staff mode split) 12.2.1 The anticipated mode share for the Craignure site, in a scenario where the catchments do not change, is presented in Figure 22. For comparative purposes, the forecast mode split is presented in the context of established travel behaviour at the existing Tobermory 2- 18 school. Page 213
Page 164
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 44/82 Figure 22. Site 02 – Indicative Mode Share 12.2.2 The majority of both primary and secondary-aged pupils would be required to travel to the Craignure site by bus for the main leg of their trip. This mode share is based upon existing travel behaviours and the modelling exercise which is outlined in Chapter 9. 12.2.3 If established pupil and staff cohorts were to transfer to this site, a clear implication would be that those whose existing trip is made on foot would need to select an alternative travel mode. In view of the Council’s obligation to provide school buses for pupils whose trip cannot be made on foot, it would seem likely that the majority of existing pedestrian trips would become bus trips. 12.2.4 While such a change is likely to cause some disruption in the short-term, the principle established by the existing Tobermory to Salen GMU bus demonstrates that primary school transport over an extended distance is practical and feasible. Importantly, in the context of the Salen GMU service, the Council has been able to understand, and address, concerns which had initially been expressed by parents around the requirement for primary school age children to travel by bus. 12.2.5 There will be limited opportunities the Craignure site to support trips on foot with just a handful of secondary school pupils and staff currently residing in Craignure. Should the adjacent site be developed with housing, it is reasonable to anticipate that a larger number of trips by active travel modes would result. 12.2.6 Based on the expected student cohort and staff numbers, the expected trips by each mode is presented in Table 8. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Established Behaviour (Tobermory) Established Behaviour (Tobermory) Established Behaviour (Tobermory) Site 02 - Craignure Site 02 - Craignure Site 02 - Craignure Primary Secondary Staff Primary Secondary Staff Walk Taxi Bus Car Ferry Page 214
Page 165
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 45/82 Table 8. Site 02 – Multi-Modal Trips SITE COHORT WALK TAXI BUS CAR FERRY TOTAL Existing Conditions Primary 29 2 1 64 0 95 Existing Conditions Secondary 64 0 71 22 0 157 Existing Conditions Staff 20 0 0 39 0 59 Site 02 - Craignure Primary 0 2 88 5 0 95 Site 02 - Craignure Secondary 3 0 143 11 0 157 Site 02 - Craignure Staff 1 0 0 58 0 59 Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding 12.2.7 In order to serve the anticipated 231 pupils travelling by bus a total of approximately 7 buses will be required. It is expected that two buses/coaches would be provided to serve primary pupils travelling from Tobermory to Craignure. These would likely have a capacity of around 45 seats each and would operate as closed-door services, i.e. not open to members of the public. 12.2.8 For secondary school pupils, up to five buses (potentially of varying size) would be required. One smaller bus would collect children from Calgary and Dervaig before operating non-stop to Craignure. This is necessary as a result of a weight restriction on the Calgary road (B8073) which prohibits the use of buses with more than 33 seats. Two buses would collect children from around Tobermory and then collect pupils who live within a reasonable distance of the A849 (such as at Aros or Pennygown) enroute to Craignure. This could be reduced to one bus in the event that a higher- capacity bus/coach was used. A further bus would originate in Torloisk and collect children from Ulva Ferry and Salen before continuing non-stop to Craignure. Lastly, in the event that school catchments don’t change a minibus or large taxi could collect pupils from communities south of Craignure such as Lochbuie and Lochdonhead. 12.2.9 Figure 23 illustrates the anticipated bus network for Site 02. Page 215
Page 166
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 46/82 Figure 23. Site 02 Anticipated Bus Network 12.2.10 School buses would be funded as school transport where pupils meet Argyll and Bute Council’s requirements in line with the summary which is provided in Section 3.4. Notwithstanding the Council’s preparedness to meet the costs of additional bus services, their provision depends on the ability of operators to recruit and retain a sufficient number of drivers, noting the practical operating issues relating to AM and PM-only journeys. Good public transport links to site and location Existing Conditions 12.2.11 The adjacent Mull and Iona Community Hospital is currently served by the service 95 bus. The 96/496 Craignure to Fionnphort service terminates at the nearby ferry terminal. Future Conditions 12.2.12 The site would incorporate approximately four bus stances to enable pupils to board and disembark safely. These bays would ideally be positioned within the site such that bus doors opened directly onto an expansive pedestrian space, thereby removing the needs for pupils to interact with the car park and other trafficked spaces. 12.2.13 The primary and secondary school days finish approximately 20 minutes apart. Unlike the morning period, where buses are only present on site for as long as it takes for pupils to disembark, buses are required to be present on site in anticipation of the afternoon school bell. This means it is more likely that several buses would be present on site at Page 216
Page 167
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 47/82 once. To avoid a scenario where buses blocked the operation of the car park, bays could be incorporated to the site access road to enable empty buses/coaches for the secondary school to dwell while the primary school buses are boarded. Existing safe active travel links to site Existing Conditions 12.2.14 There is currently limited active travel provision in Craignure. Footways which are provided on both sides of the A849 in the 30mph section are narrow. The footway is present on the north side of the road only, beyond the ferry terminal. This footway then stops beyond the entrance to the Mull Community Swimming Pool. There are currently no formal pedestrian crossings on the A849. Future Conditions 12.2.15 While infrastructure is currently limited, it is clear that a package of off-site improvement works would be required to ensure the safe integration of the site to the established transport network. The scope of those works would emerge through the detailed Transport Assessment which would accompany and inform a Planning Application. At the time of writing, it seems likely that this package would at least comprise enhancements to existing footways, provision of new links where none are currently present and the delivery of new, safe crossing opportunities. It seems reasonable to assume that the adjacent residential allocation could be developed in a manner which facilitates active travel between Craignure and the school site. Travel times for pupils and staff 12.2.16 The estimated one-way travel times for primary and secondary pupils and staff are shown in Table 9. The travel times presented are an aggregate, encompassing the wide range of trips which would be made to the site. It should also be noted that the travel time for the minor leg of a trip (such as walking to the bus stop, a ferry crossing or travelling by car to access bus stops on the main road) are not accounted for in this analysis. In any case, the nature of these journeys is likely to remain constant across all four sites. Page 217
Page 168
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 48/82 Table 9. Site 02 – Travel Time (Minutes) SITE COHORT TAXI BUS CAR WALK TOTAL AVERAGE Existing Conditions Primary 18 22 153 280 473 5 Existing Conditions Secondary 0 2,356 162 588 3,106 20 Existing Conditions Staff 0 0 695 163 858 15 Existing Conditions Total 18 2,378 1,010 1,031 4,438 - Site 02 - Craignure Primary 70 3,084 140 0 3,294 35 Site 02 - Craignure Secondary 0 5,147 328 48 5,523 35 Site 02 - Craignure Staff 0 0 1,966 16 1,982 34 Site 02 - Craignure Total 70 8,231 2,434 64 10,799 - Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding 12.2.17 Table 9 shows a general uplift in the total and average travel times for all pupil and staff cohorts. Comparisons of average travel time should be viewed in the context of the wide range of unique travel considerations. Potential impact on public transport network 12.2.18 As discussed in Paragraph 12.2.7 and 12.2.8 it is likely that additional buses will be required to facilitate pupil transport. The availability of more buses and drivers has the potential to enhance general levels of public transport provision on the island, noting that many existing scheduled local bus services arise primarily because of school transport requirements. Ability of existing roads infrastructure to service site 12.2.19 The site is well served by the adjoining A849 although there is currently no formalised access into the site. 12.2.20 There is the potential for access to the site to be taken from a new junction formed on the A849. The design of this junction would be subject to technical assessments at an early stage to ensure the suitability of its placement and format in view of road characteristics Page 218
Page 169
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 49/82 and adjacent accesses, if applicable. Any new junction would need to comply with driver visibility criteria in line with standard assessment procedures. Trips with complex dependencies/ multiple stages and modes of travel 12.2.21 Complex dependencies are likely to be broadly similar regardless of the selected site. Further details on this criterion are provided in Section 9.3. For pupils who live remotely from the main road network and key population centres, an additional leg of their journey will be required to intersect the bus service. This secondary journey will be facilitated by specific arrangements to them and may include a taxi or short car trip by a parent/carer. Carbon impact of travel (travel distances and mode of transport) 12.2.22 The estimated one-way vehicle miles by cohort and vehicle for the Craignure site are presented in Table 10. The values presented in this table represent the driven milage of each vehicle rather than each passenger. This accounts for the fact that one bus can carry multiple passengers. Table 10. Site 02– Travel Distance (Miles) SITE COHORT TAXI BUS CAR TOTAL Existing Conditions Primary 6 0 42 48 Existing Conditions Secondary 0 63 57 121 Existing Conditions Staff 0 0 303 303 Existing Conditions Total 6 63 402 471 Site 02 - Craignure Primary 40 41 81 162 Site 02 - Craignure Secondary 0 100 179 278 Site 02 - Craignure Staff 0 0 1,113 1,113 Site 02 - Craignure Total 40 141 1,373 1,553 12.2.23 Table 10 shows a modest uplift in the driven vehicle miles, particularly among staff. As with any new development of this nature Travel Planning measures have the potential to positively influence travel, particularly among staff members. A Travel Plan would seek to encourage behaviours such as car sharing or public transport usage in order to reduce the number of vehicle miles incurred. 12.2.24 Applying the carbon emission assessment methodology outlined in Section 10.7 the estimated carbon emissions for one-way travel (of all vehicles) to the Craignure site is presented in Table 11. Page 219
Page 170
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 50/82 Table 11. Site 02 – Carbon Emissions (Kg Co2e) SITE COHORT TAXI BUS CAR TOTAL Existing Conditions Primary 0 0 9 9 Existing Conditions Secondary 0 67 12 79 Existing Conditions Staff 0 0 67 67 Existing Conditions Total 0 67 89 156 Site 02 - Craignure Primary 9 43 18 70 Site 02 - Craignure Secondary 0 105 39 145 Site 02 - Craignure Staff 0 0 245 245 Site 02 - Craignure Total 9 149 302 460 12.2.25 Any increase in carbon emissions from bus travel may only be temporary. In line with current national policy bus fleets are gradually transitioning to electric and hydrogen systems. While SYSTRA is not aware of specific plans to convert the fleet on Mull, such an advancement would of course reduce the carbon impact from bus travel. 12.2.26 A similar transition is likely to occur to the car fleet, as residents increasingly embrace the use of electric cars. Page 220
Page 171
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 51/82 12.3 Sensitivity Test – Revised Catchments Number of user journeys - bus, car, pedestrian (Pupil/ staff mode split) 12.3.1 The anticipated mode share for the Craignure site, in a scenario where the secondary school catchments do change to include the Ross of Mull is presented in Figure 24. For comparative purposes, the forecast mode split is presented in the context of established travel behaviour at the existing Tobermory 2-18 school. Figure 24. Site 02 – Indicative Mode Share 12.3.2 The mode share of the Craignure site in the event that the school catchments do change will be broadly the same as if the catchments don’t change. 12.3.3 Based on the expected student cohort and staff numbers, the expected trips by each mode is presented in Table 12. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Established Behaviour (Tobermory) Established Behaviour (Tobermory) Established Behaviour (Tobermory) Site 02 - Craignure Site 02 - Craignure Site 02 - Craignure Primary Secondary Staff Primary Secondary Staff Walk Taxi Bus Car Ferry Page 221
Page 172
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 52/82 Table 12. Site 02 – Multi-Modal Trips SITE COHORT WALK TAXI BUS CAR FERRY TOTAL Existing Conditions Primary 29 2 1 64 0 95 Existing Conditions Secondary 64 0 71 22 0 157 Existing Conditions Staff 20 0 0 39 0 59 Site 02 - Craignure Primary 0 2 88 5 0 95 Site 02 - Craignure Secondary 3 0 164 14 0 181 Site 02 - Craignure Staff 1 0 0 58 0 59 Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding 12.3.4 The primary difference in the number of multi-modal trips if the catchments change is an additional 21 bus passengers and an additional 3 car trips from the Ross of Mull. 12.3.5 In the event of catchments changing, a similar reconfiguration of the bus network will be required to serve the Craignure site, as outlined in Paragraph 12.2.7 and 12.2.8. The key difference is that the minibus/taxi from Lochbuie would instead have to be a full-sized bus/coach originating at the Fionnphort ferry. The characteristics of this bus service would broadly align with the existing 96/496 bus service. 12.3.6 School buses would be funded as school transport where pupils meet Argyll and Bute Council’s requirements in line with the summary which is provided in Section 3.4. Notwithstanding the Council’s preparedness to meet the costs of additional bus services, their provision depends on the ability of operators to recruit and retain a sufficient number of drivers, noting the practical operating issues relating to AM and PM-only journeys. Good public transport links to site and location 12.3.7 The public transport considerations of the site remain consistent regardless of the catchments. See Paragraphs 12.2.11 to 12.2.13 for more details. Existing safe active travel links to site 12.3.8 The active travel considerations of the site remain consistent regardless of the catchments. See Paragraphs 12.2.14 and 12.2.15 for more details. Travel times for pupils and staff 12.3.9 The estimated one-way travel times, if the catchments were to change, for primary and secondary pupils and staff are shown in Table 13. The travel times presented are an aggregate, encompassing the wide range of trips which would be made to the site. It Page 222
Page 173
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 53/82 should also be noted that the travel time for the minor leg of a trip (such as walking to the bus stop, a ferry crossing or travelling by car to access bus stops on the main road) are not accounted for in this analysis. In any case, the nature of these journeys is likely to remain constant across all four sites. Table 13. Site 02 – Travel Time (Minutes) SITE COHORT TAXI BUS CAR WALK TOTAL AVERAGE Existing Conditions Primary 18 22 153 280 473 5 Existing Conditions Secondary 0 2,356 162 588 3,106 20 Existing Conditions Staff 0 0 695 163 858 15 Existing Conditions Total 18 2,378 1,010 1,031 4,438 - Site 02 - Craignure Primary 70 3,082 140 0 3,292 35 Site 02 - Craignure Secondary 0 6,738 360 48 7,146 39 Site 02 - Craignure Staff 0 0 1,966 16 1,982 34 Site 02 - Craignure Total 70 9,821 2,465 64 12,420 - Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding 12.3.10 Table 13 shows an uplift in the total and average travel times for all cohorts. Comparisons of average travel time should be viewed in the context of the wide range of unique travel considerations. Potential impact on public transport network 12.3.11 As discussed in Paragraph 12.2.7 and 12.2.8 it is likely that additional buses will be required to facilitate pupil transport. The availability of more buses and drivers has the potential to enhance general levels of public transport provision on the island, noting that many existing scheduled local bus services arise primarily because of school transport requirements. Page 223
Page 174
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 54/82 Ability of existing roads infrastructure to service site 12.3.12 The adjacent infrastructure considerations of the site remain consistent regardless of the catchments. See Paragraphs 12.2.19 and 12.2.20 for more details. Trips with complex dependencies/ multiple stages and modes of travel 12.3.13 Complex dependencies are likely to be broadly similar regardless of the selected site. Further details on this criterion are provided in Section 9.3. For pupils who live remotely from the main road network and key population centres, an additional leg of their journey will be required to intersect the bus service. This secondary journey will be facilitated by specific arrangements to them and may include a taxi or short car trip by a parent/carer. Carbon impact of travel (travel distances and mode of transport) 12.3.14 The estimated one-way vehicle miles by cohort and vehicle for the Craignure site, should the catchments change, are presented in Table 14. The values presented in this table represent the driven milage of each vehicle rather than each passenger. This accounts for the fact that one bus can carry multiple passengers. Table 14. Site 02 – Travel Distance (Miles) SITE COHORT TAXI BUS CAR TOTAL Existing Conditions Primary 6 0 42 48 Existing Conditions Secondary 0 63 57 121 Existing Conditions Staff 0 0 303 303 Existing Conditions Total 6 63 402 471 Site 02 - Craignure Primary 40 41 81 162 Site 02 - Craignure Secondary 0 127 192 319 Site 02 - Craignure Staff 0 0 1,113 1,113 Site 02 - Craignure Total 40 168 1,386 1,594 12.3.15 Table 14 shows a modest uplift in the driven vehicle miles particularly among staff. As with any new development of this nature travel planning would seek to encourage behaviours such as car sharing or public transport usage in order to reduce these vehicle miles. 12.3.16 Applying the carbon emission assessment methodology outlined in Section 10.7 the estimated carbon emissions for one-way travel (of all vehicles) to the Craignure site is presented in Table 15. Page 224
Page 175
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 55/82 Table 15. Site 02 – Carbon Emissions (Kg Co2e) SITE COHORT TAXI BUS CAR TOTAL Existing Conditions Primary 0 0 9 9 Existing Conditions Secondary 0 67 12 79 Existing Conditions Staff 0 0 67 67 Existing Conditions Total 0 67 89 156 Site 02 - Craignure Primary 9 43 18 70 Site 02 - Craignure Secondary 0 135 42 177 Site 02 - Craignure Staff 0 0 245 245 Site 02 - Craignure Total 9 178 305 492 12.3.17 Any increase in carbon emissions from bus travel may only be temporary. In line with current national policy bus fleets are gradually transitioning to electric and hydrogen systems. While SYSTRA is not aware of specific plans to convert the fleet on Mull, such an advancement would of course reduce the carbon impact from bus travel. 12.3.18 A similar transition is likely to occur to the car fleet, as residents increasingly embrace the use of electric cars. 12.4 Conclusion 12.4.1 The following considerations are given to Site 02 – Craignure: Travel times, distances and carbon emissions will increase over the baseline (more so if the catchments are amended to include the Ross of Mull); Average journey times will increase by approximately 20 minutes; Pupils who currently walk will likely have to be taken to the Craignure site by bus requiring approximately 4 additional buses over the baseline; There is an adjacent allocation for c. 80 housing units, enabling trips by active modes; and Footways and crossing opportunities on the adjacent highway network are limited but could be improved. Page 225
Page 176
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 56/82 13. SITE 03 - GARMONY 13.1 Introduction 13.1.1 Site 03 – Garmony is located in Garmony to the south of the Isle of Mull Rugby Club. The indicative site layout is illustrated in Figure 25 below. Figure 25. Site 03 – Garmony Indicative Layout 13.1.2 The site boundary sits adjacent to the A849, although the school building itself will be set back from the main road due to a large area of boggy land to the north east. In the vicinity of the site the A849 runs as a single carriageway, two-way road subject to the national speed limit of 60mph. The site is greenfield in nature and on the basis of preliminary masterplanning work, it is of sufficient size to enable incorporation of necessary car parking and bus facilities. 13.2 Assessment Criteria – Existing School Catchments Number of user journeys - bus, car, pedestrian (Pupil/ staff mode split) 13.2.1 The anticipated mode share for the Garmony site, in a scenario where the catchments do not change, is presented in Figure 26. For comparative purposes, the forecast mode split is presented in the context of established travel behaviour at the existing Tobermory 2- 18 school. Page 226
Page 177
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 57/82 Figure 26. Site 03 – Indicative Mode Share 13.2.2 The majority of both primary and secondary-aged pupils would be required to travel to the Garmony site by bus for the main leg of their trip. This mode share is based upon existing travel behaviours and the modelling exercise which is outlined in Chapter 9. 13.2.3 If established pupil and staff cohorts were to transfer to this site, a clear implication would be that those whose existing trip is made on foot would need to select an alternative travel mode. In view of the Council’s obligation to provide school buses for pupils whose trip cannot be made on foot, it would seem likely that the majority of existing pedestrian trips would become bus trips. 13.2.4 While such a change is likely to cause some disruption in the short-term, the principle established by the existing Tobermory to Salen GMU bus demonstrates that primary school transport over an extended distance is practical and feasible. Importantly, in the context of the Salen GMU service, the Council has been able to understand, and address, concerns which had initially been expressed by parents around the requirement for primary school age children to travel by bus. 13.2.5 There will be limited opportunities for the Garmony site to support trips on foot with a very limited number of pupils or staff currently living locally. 13.2.6 Based on the expected student cohort and staff numbers, the expected number of trips by each mode is presented in Table 16. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Established Behaviour (Tobermory) Established Behaviour (Tobermory) Established Behaviour (Tobermory) Site 03 - Garmony Site 03 - Garmony Site 03 - Garmony Primary Secondary Staff Primary Secondary Staff Walk Taxi Bus Car Ferry Page 227
Page 178
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 58/82 Table 16. Site 03 – Multi-Modal Trips SITE COHORT WALK TAXI BUS CAR FERRY TOTAL Existing Conditions Primary 29 2 1 64 0 95 Existing Conditions Secondary 64 0 71 22 0 157 Existing Conditions Staff 20 0 0 39 0 59 Site 03 - Garmony Primary 0 2 88 5 0 95 Site 03 - Garmony Secondary 0 0 147 10 0 157 Site 03 - Garmony Staff 0 0 0 59 0 59 Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding 13.2.7 In order to serve the anticipated 235 pupils travelling by bus a total of approximately 7 buses will be required. It is expected that two buses/coaches would be provided to serve primary pupils travelling from Tobermory to Garmony. These would likely have a capacity of around 45 seats each and would operate as closed-door services, i.e. not open to members of the public. 13.2.8 For secondary school pupils, up to five buses (potentially of varying size) would be required. One smaller bus would collect children from Calgary and Dervaig before operating non-stop to Garmony. This is necessary as a result of a weight restriction on the Calgary road (B8073) which prohibits the use of buses with more than 33 seats. Two buses would collect children from around Tobermory and then collect pupils who live within a reasonable distance of the A849 (such as at Aros or Pennygown) enroute to Garmony. This could be reduced to one bus in the event that a higher- capacity bus/coach was used. A further bus would originate in Torloisk and collect children from Ulva Ferry and Salen before continuing non-stop to Garmony. Lastly, in the event that school catchments don’t change a minibus or large taxi could collect pupils from communities south of Garmony such as Lochbuie and Lochdonhead. 13.2.9 Figure 27 illustrates the anticipated bus network for Site 03. Page 228
Page 179
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 59/82 Figure 27. Site 03 Anticipated Bus Network 13.2.10 School buses would be funded as school transport where pupils meet Argyll and Bute Council’s requirements in line with the summary which is provided in Section 3.4. Notwithstanding the Council’s preparedness to meet the costs of additional bus services, their provision depends on the ability of operators to recruit and retain a sufficient number of drivers, noting the practical operating issues relating to AM and PM-only journeys. Good public transport links to site and location Existing Conditions 13.2.11 The service 95/495 currently stops at the nearby rugby club, although this stop is unmarked. Future Conditions 13.2.12 The site would incorporate four bus stances to enable pupils to board and disembark safely. These bays would ideally be positioned within the site such that bus doors opened directly onto an expansive pedestrian space, thereby removing the needs for pupils to interact with the car park and other trafficked spaces. 13.2.13 The primary and secondary school days finish approximately 20 minutes apart. Unlike the morning period, where buses are only present on site for as long as it takes for pupils to disembark, buses are required to be present on site in anticipation of the afternoon school bell. This means it is more likely that several buses would be present on site at Page 229
Page 180
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 60/82 once. To avoid a scenario where buses blocked the operation of the car park, bays could be incorporated to the site access road to enable empty buses/coaches for the secondary school to dwell while the primary school buses are boarded. Existing safe active travel links to site Existing Conditions 13.2.14 There is currently limited active travel provision in Garmony. No footways are present on this section of A849. Future Conditions 13.2.15 While infrastructure is currently limited, it is clear that a package of off-site improvement works would be required to ensure the safe integration of the site to the established transport network. The scope of those works would emerge through the detailed Transport Assessment which would accompany and inform a Planning Application. At the time of writing, it seems likely that this package would at least comprise provision of new links where none are currently present. Travel times for pupils and staff 13.2.16 The estimated one-way travel times for primary and secondary pupils and staff are shown in Table 17. The travel times presented are an aggregate, encompassing the wide range of trips which would be made to the site. It should also be noted that the travel time for the minor leg of a trip (such as walking to the bus stop, a ferry crossing or travelling by car to access bus stops on the main road) are not accounted for in this analysis. In any case, the nature of these journeys is likely to remain constant across all four sites. Page 230
Page 181
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 61/82 Table 17. Site 03 – Travel Time (Minutes) SITE COHORT TAXI BUS CAR WALK TOTAL AVERAGE Existing Conditions Primary 18 22 153 280 473 5 Existing Conditions Secondary 0 2,356 162 588 3,106 20 Existing Conditions Staff 0 0 695 163 858 15 Existing Conditions Total 18 2,378 1,010 1,031 4,438 - Site 03 - Garmony Primary 57 2,623 117 0 2,797 29 Site 03 - Garmony Secondary 0 4,479 283 0 4,762 30 Site 03 - Garmony Staff 0 0 1,670 0 1,670 28 Site 03 - Garmony Total 57 7,102 2,070 0 9,229 - Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding 13.2.17 Table 17 shows a general uplift in the total and average travel times for all pupil and staff cohorts. Comparisons of average travel time should be viewed in the context of the wide range of unique travel considerations. Potential impact on public transport network 13.2.18 As discussed in Paragraph 13.2.7 and 13.2.8 it is likely that additional buses will be required to facilitate pupil transport. The availability of more buses and drivers has the potential to enhance general levels of public transport provision on the island, noting that many existing scheduled local bus services arise primarily because of school transport requirements. Ability of existing roads infrastructure to service site 13.2.19 The site is well served by the adjoining A849 although there is currently no formalised access into the site. 13.2.20 There is the potential for access to the site to be taken from a new junction formed on the A849. The design of this junction would be subject to technical assessments at an early stage to ensure the suitability of placement and format in view of road characteristics and Page 231
Page 182
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 62/82 adjacent accesses, if applicable. Any new junction would need to comply with driver visibility criteria in line with standard assessment procedures. Trips with complex dependencies/ multiple stages and modes of travel 13.2.21 Complex dependencies are likely to be broadly similar regardless of the selected site. Further details on this criterion are provided in Section 9.3. For pupils who live remotely from the main road network and key population centres, an additional leg of their journey will be required to intersect the bus service. This secondary journey will be facilitated by specific arrangements to them and may include a taxi or short car trip by a parent/carer. Carbon impact of travel (travel distances and mode of transport) 13.2.22 The estimated one-way vehicle miles by cohort and vehicle for the Garmony site are presented in Table 18. The values presented in this table represent the driven milage of each vehicle rather than each passenger. This accounts for the fact that one bus can carry multiple passengers. Table 18. Site 03 – Travel Distance (Miles) SITE COHORT TAXI BUS CAR TOTAL Existing Conditions Primary 6 0 42 48 Existing Conditions Secondary 0 63 57 121 Existing Conditions Staff 0 0 303 303 Existing Conditions Total 6 63 402 471 Site 03 - Garmony Primary 35 35 70 140 Site 03 - Garmony Secondary 0 96 162 258 Site 03 - Garmony Staff 0 0 960 960 Site 03 - Garmony Total 35 132 1,192 1,358 13.2.23 Table 18 shows a modest uplift in the driven vehicle miles, particularly among staff. As with any new development of this nature Travel Planning measures have the potential to positively influence travel, particularly among staff members. A Travel Plan would seek to encourage behaviours such as car sharing or public transport usage in order to reduce the number of vehicle miles incurred. 13.2.24 Applying the carbon emission assessment methodology outlined in Section 10.7 the estimated carbon emissions for one-way travel (of all vehicles) to the Garmony site is presented in Table 19. Page 232
Page 183
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 63/82 Table 19. Site 03 – Carbon Emissions (Kg Co2e) SITE COHORT TAXI BUS CAR TOTAL Existing Conditions Primary 0 0 9 9 Existing Conditions Secondary 0 67 12 79 Existing Conditions Staff 0 0 67 67 Existing Conditions Total 0 67 89 156 Site 03 - Garmony Primary 8 37 15 60 Site 03 - Garmony Secondary 0 102 36 138 Site 03 - Garmony Staff 0 0 211 211 Site 03 - Garmony Total 8 139 263 409 13.2.25 Any increase in carbon emissions from bus travel may only be temporary. In line with current national policy bus fleets are gradually transitioning to electric and hydrogen systems. While SYSTRA is not aware of specific plans to convert the fleet on Mull, such an advancement would of course reduce the carbon impact from bus travel. 13.2.26 A similar transition is likely to occur to the car fleet, as residents increasingly embrace the use of electric cars. Page 233
Page 184
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 64/82 13.3 Sensitivity Test – Revised Catchments Number of user journeys - bus, car, pedestrian (Pupil/ staff mode split) 13.3.1 The anticipated mode share for the Garmony site, in a scenario where the secondary school catchments do change to include the Ross of Mull is presented in Figure 28. For comparative purposes, the forecast mode split is presented in the context of established travel behaviour at the existing Tobermory 2-18 school. Figure 28. Site 03 – Indicative Mode Share 13.3.2 The mode share of the Garmony site in the event that the school catchments do change will be broadly the same as if the catchments don’t change. 13.3.3 Based on the expected student cohort and staff numbers, the expected trips by each mode is presented in Table 20. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Established Behaviour (Tobermory) Established Behaviour (Tobermory) Established Behaviour (Tobermory) Site 03 - Garmony Site 03 - Garmony Site 03 - Garmony Primary Secondary Staff Primary Secondary Staff Walk Taxi Bus Car Ferry Page 234
Page 185
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 65/82 Table 20. Site 03 – Multi-Modal Trips SITE COHORT WALK TAXI BUS CAR FERRY TOTAL Existing Conditions Primary 29 2 1 64 0 95 Existing Conditions Secondary 64 0 71 22 0 157 Existing Conditions Staff 20 0 0 39 0 59 Site 03 - Garmony Primary 0 2 88 5 0 0 Site 03 - Garmony Secondary 0 0 167 13 0 0 Site 03 - Garmony Staff 0 0 0 59 0 0 Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding 13.3.4 The primary difference in the number of multi-modal trips if the catchments change is an additional 24 bus passengers and an additional 3 car trips from the Ross of Mull. 13.3.5 In the event of catchments changing, a similar reconfiguration of the bus network will be required to serve the Garmony site, as outline in Paragraph 13.2.7 and 13.2.8. The key difference is that the minibus/taxi from Lochbuie would instead have to be a full-sized bus/coach originating at the Fionnphort ferry terminal. The characteristics of this bus service would broadly align with the existing 96/496 bus service, although continuing further north than it currently does. 13.3.6 School buses would be funded as school transport where pupils meet Argyll and Bute Council’s requirements in line with the summary which is provided in Section 3.4. Notwithstanding the Council’s preparedness to meet the costs of additional bus services, their provision depends on the ability of operators to recruit and retain a sufficient number of drivers, noting the practical operating issues relating to AM and PM-only journeys. Good public transport links to site and location 13.3.7 The public transport considerations of the site remain consistent regardless of the catchments. See Paragraphs 13.2.11 to 13.2.13 for more details. Existing safe active travel links to site 13.3.8 The active travel considerations of the site remain consistent regardless of the catchments. See Paragraphs 13.2.14 and 13.2.15 for more details. Travel times for pupils and staff 13.3.9 The estimated one-way travel times, if the catchments were to change, for primary and secondary pupils and staff are shown in Table 21. The travel times presented are an Page 235
Page 186
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 66/82 aggregate, encompassing the wide range of trips which would be made to the site. It should also be noted that the travel time for the minor leg of a trip (such as walking to the bus stop, a ferry crossing or travelling by car to access bus stops on the main road) are not accounted for in this analysis. In any case, the nature of these journeys is likely to remain constant across all four sites. Table 21. Site 03 – Travel Time (Minutes) SITE COHORT TAXI BUS CAR WALK TOTAL AVERAGE Existing Conditions Primary 18 22 153 280 473 5 Existing Conditions Secondary 0 2,356 162 588 3,106 20 Existing Conditions Staff 0 0 695 163 858 15 Existing Conditions Total 18 2,378 1,010 1,031 4,438 - Site 03 - Garmony Primary 57 2,634 117 0 2,808 29 Site 03 - Garmony Secondary 57 2,622 117 0 2,796 35 Site 03 - Garmony Staff 0 6,130 288 0 6,418 28 Site 03 - Garmony Total 0 0 1,670 0 1,670 - Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding 13.3.10 Table 21 shows an uplift in the total and average travel times for all cohorts. Comparisons of average travel time should be viewed in the context of the wide range of unique travel considerations. Potential impact on public transport network 13.3.11 As discussed in Paragraph 13.2.7 and 13.2.8 it is likely that additional buses will be required to facilitate pupil transport. The availability of more buses and drivers has the potential to enhance general levels of public transport provision on the island, noting that many existing scheduled local bus services arise primarily because of school transport requirements. Page 236
Page 187
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 67/82 Ability of existing roads infrastructure to service site 13.3.12 The adjacent infrastructure considerations of the site remain consistent regardless of the catchments. See Paragraphs 13.2.19 and 13.2.20 for more details. Trips with complex dependencies/ multiple stages and modes of travel 13.3.13 Complex dependencies are likely to be broadly similar regardless of the selected site. Further details on this criterion are provided in Section 9.3. For pupils who live remotely from the main road network and key population centres, an additional leg of their journey will be required to intersect the bus service. This secondary journey will be facilitated by specific arrangements to them and may include a taxi or short car trip by a parent/carer. Carbon impact of travel (travel distances and mode of transport) 13.3.14 The estimated one-way vehicle miles by cohort and vehicle for the Garmony site, should the catchments change, are presented in Table 22. The values presented in this table represent the driven milage of each vehicle rather than each passenger. This accounts for the fact that one bus can carry multiple passengers. Table 22. Site 03 – Travel Distance (Miles) SITE COHORT TAXI BUS CAR TOTAL Existing Conditions Primary 6 0 42 48 Existing Conditions Secondary 0 63 57 121 Existing Conditions Staff 0 0 303 303 Existing Conditions Total 6 63 402 471 Site 03 - Garmony Primary 35 35 70 140 Site 03 - Garmony Secondary 0 123 159 283 Site 03 - Garmony Staff 0 0 960 960 Site 03 - Garmony Total 35 159 1,190 1,383 13.3.15 Table 22 shows a modest uplift in the driven vehicle miles particularly among staff. As with any new development of this nature travel planning would seek to encourage behaviours such as car sharing or public transport usage in order to reduce these vehicle miles. 13.3.16 Applying the carbon emission assessment methodology outlined in Section 10.7 the estimated carbon emissions for one-way travel (of all vehicles) to the Garmony site is presented in Table 23. Page 237
Page 188
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 68/82 Table 23. Site 03 – Carbon Emissions (Kg Co2e) SITE COHORT TAXI BUS CAR TOTAL Existing Conditions Primary 0 0 9 9 Existing Conditions Secondary 0 67 12 79 Existing Conditions Staff 0 0 67 67 Existing Conditions Total 0 67 89 156 Site 03 - Garmony Primary 8 37 15 60 Site 03 - Garmony Secondary 0 130 35 166 Site 03 - Garmony Staff 0 0 211 211 Site 03 - Garmony Total 8 168 262 437 13.3.17 Any increase in carbon emissions from bus travel may only be temporary. In line with current national policy bus fleets are gradually transitioning to electric and hydrogen systems. While SYSTRA is not aware of specific plans to convert the fleet on Mull, such an advancement would of course reduce the carbon impact from bus travel. 13.3.18 A similar transition is likely to occur to the car fleet, as residents increasingly embrace the use of electric cars. 13.4 Conclusion 13.4.1 The following considerations are given to Site 03 – Garmony: Travel times, distances and carbon emissions will increase over the baseline (more so if the catchments are amended to include the Ross of Mull); Average journey times will increase by approximately 15 minutes over the baseline; Pupils who currently walk will likely have to be taken to the Garmony site by bus requiring approximately 4 additional buses over the baseline; The site is located adjacent to a limited number of existing housing and no LDP or LWF housing sites identified in the Housing Land Audit; and There are no footways or crossing opportunities on the adjacent highway network – providing them would deliver limited benefit. Page 238
Page 189
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 69/82 14. SITE 04 – TOBERMORY SOUTH 14.1 Introduction 14.1.1 Site 04 – Tobermory South is located in Baliscate, to the south of Tobermory. The indicative site layout is illustrated in Figure 29 below. Figure 29. Site 04 – Tobermory South Indicative Layout 14.1.2 The site sits adjacent to the A848 which is subject to a 30mph speed limit in the vicinity of the site. The site is a greenfield site, although smaller than the Garmony and Craignure sites, and therefore requires some degree of flexibility for car parking and bus facilities. The site also sits within 500m of four Local Development Plan housing sites and one large windfall (not including the LDP site which the school site occupies) which have a total housing capacity of c. 112 units. 14.2 Assessment Criteria – Existing School Catchments Number of user journeys - bus, car, pedestrian (Pupil/ staff mode split) 14.2.1 The anticipated mode share for the Tobermory South site is anticipated to be broadly similar to that of the existing school site. For comparative purposes, the forecast mode split is presented in the context of established travel behaviour at the existing Tobermory 2-18 school in Figure 30. Page 239
Page 190
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 70/82 Figure 30. Site 04 – Indicative Mode Share 14.2.2 Figure 30 demonstrates that mode share among all cohorts is expected to remain broadly similar. The main difference is the slight increase in bus travel among primary-aged pupils. While this is borne out as a result of the modelling assumptions there are a handful of pupils who live outwith the catchment but on the main A849/A848 road. There is potential, therefore, for these pupils to be transported to the site by bus. 14.2.3 Based on the expected student cohort and staff numbers, the expected number of trips by each mode is presented in Table 24. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Established Behaviour (Tobermory) Established Behaviour (Tobermory) Established Behaviour (Tobermory) Site 04 - Tobermory South Site 04 - Tobermory South Site 04 - Tobermory South Primary Secondary Staff Primary Secondary Staff Walk Taxi Bus Car Ferry Page 240
Page 191
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 71/82 Table 24. Site 04 – Multi-Modal Trips SITE COHORT WALK TAXI BUS CAR FERRY TOTAL Existing Conditions Primary 29 2 1 64 0 95 Existing Conditions Secondary 64 0 71 22 0 157 Existing Conditions Staff 20 0 0 39 0 59 Site 04 – Tobermory South Primary 30 0 5 60 0 95 Site 04 – Tobermory South Secondary 64 0 70 22 0 157 Site 04 – Tobermory South Staff 19 0 0 40 0 59 Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding 14.2.4 As the Tobermory site is located just 0.7miles from the existing school site no changes to the current bus operations are anticipated. The buses which would be required for secondary school pupils are one bus from Calgary / Dervaig, one bus from Torloisk and Ulva Ferry via Salen and one bus from Lochbuie Crossroads. The annual revisions of the network and its complex dependencies are expected to be broadly in line with existing operations. 14.2.5 Figure 31 illustrates the anticipated bus network for Site 04. Page 241
Page 192
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 72/82 Figure 31. Site 04 Anticipated Bus Network 14.2.6 School buses would be funded as school transport where pupils meet Argyll and Bute Council’s requirements – details of these requirements are provided in Section 3.4. Good public transport links to site and location Existing Conditions 14.2.7 The existing service 95/495 passes the site frontage. There are a pair of bus stops located south of the site at Struan Crescent. Future Conditions 14.2.8 The site could incorporate approximately three bus stances adjacent to the school entrance to enable safe boarding and disembarkation of pupils. Alternatively, as a result of site constraints, bus bays could be provided adjacent to the site on the A848. 14.2.9 The service 494 bus from Calgary to Tobermory would not have to be significantly diverted from its present route in order to service the Tobermory South Site. Existing safe active travel links to site Existing Conditions 14.2.10 There are currently footways on both sides of the A848 between Eas Brae and the site. Footways are provided on at least one side of the road down into the town centre and up Page 242
Page 193
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 73/82 into Rockfield Road and the Tobermory Medical Practice. These footways are generally lit and appear to be of a good quality, albeit narrow in some locations. 14.2.11 There are currently no footways provided on Dervaig Road or Breadalbane Street, both of which are narrow and unsuitable for pedestrians. There is a pedestrian footway between Argyll Terrace and Eas Brae enabling access between the site and the majority of housing in Tobermory. 14.2.12 There are currently no formalised pedestrian crossings on the A848 in the vicinity of the site. Future Conditions 14.2.13 While crossing infrastructure is currently limited, off-site improvement works of this nature would likely be a requirement following the standard consultation and transport assessment processes. It seems reasonable to assume that the adjacent residential allocation could be developed in a manner which facilitates active travel between these sites and the school site. Travel times for pupils and staff 14.2.14 The estimated one-way travel times for primary and secondary pupils and staff are shown in Table 25. The travel times presented are an aggregate, encompassing the wide range of trips which would be made to the site. It should also be noted that the travel time for the minor leg of a trip (such as walking to the bus stop, a ferry crossing or travelling by car to access bus stops on the main road) are not accounted for in this analysis. In any case, the nature of these journeys is likely to remain constant across all four sites. Page 243
Page 194
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 74/82 Table 25. Site 04 – Travel Time (Minutes) SITE COHORT TAXI BUS CAR WALK TOTAL AVERAGE Existing Conditions Primary 18 22 153 280 473 5 Existing Conditions Secondary 0 2,356 162 588 3,106 20 Existing Conditions Staff 0 0 695 163 858 15 Existing Conditions Total 18 2,378 1,010 1,031 4,438 - Site 04 – Tobermory South Primary 0 80 150 440 670 7 Site 04 – Tobermory South Secondary 0 2,110 135 948 3,192 20 Site 04 – Tobermory South Staff 0 0 655 293 948 16 Site 04 – Tobermory South Total 0 2,190 940 1,681 4,810 - Note: minor discrepancies as a result of rounding 14.2.15 Table 25 shows that travel times will increase marginally compared to the established travel behaviours associated with the existing Tobermory 2-18 school. This is primarily as a result of longer walking times. Potential impact on public transport network 14.2.16 As there will be no material requirement to amend the bus services associate with school transport there is unlikely to be any impact, positive or negative, on the wider public transport network. Ability of existing roads infrastructure to service site 14.2.17 The site is well served by the adjoining A848 although there is currently no formalised access into the site. 14.2.18 There is the potential for access to the site to be taken from a new junction formed on the A848. The design of this junction would be subject to technical assessments at an early stage to ensure the suitability of junction placement and format in view of road characteristics and adjacent accesses, if applicable. Any new junction would need to be checked for driver visibility in line with standard assessment procedures. Page 244
Page 195
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 75/82 Trips with complex dependencies/ multiple stages and modes of travel 14.2.19 Complex dependencies are likely to be broadly similar regardless of the selected site. Further details on this criterion are provided in Section 9.3. For pupils who live remotely from the main road network and key population centres, an additional leg of their journey will be required to intersect the bus service. This secondary journey will be facilitated by specific arrangements to them and may include a taxi or short car trip by a parent/carer. Carbon impact of travel (travel distances and mode of transport) 14.2.20 The estimated one-way vehicle miles by cohort and vehicle for the Tobermory South site are presented in Table 26. The values presented in this table represent the driven milage of each vehicle as opposed to each passenger. This accounts for the fact that one bus can carry multiple passengers. Table 26. Site 04 – Travel Distance (Miles) SITE COHORT TAXI BUS CAR TOTAL Existing Conditions Primary 6 0 42 48 Existing Conditions Secondary 0 63 57 121 Existing Conditions Staff 0 0 303 303 Existing Conditions Total 6 63 402 471 Site 04 – Tobermory South Primary 0 0 37 37 Site 04 – Tobermory South Secondary 0 62 50 112 Site 04 – Tobermory South Staff 0 0 304 304 Site 04 – Tobermory South Total 0 62 390 453 14.2.21 Table 26 shows a minor decrease in the driven vehicle miles. This is primarily as a result of marginally shorter trips for those travelling from the south of Mull. As with any new development of this nature Travel Planning measures have the potential to positively influence travel, particularly among staff members. A Travel Plan would seek to encourage behaviours such as car sharing or public transport usage in order to reduce the number of vehicle miles incurred. 14.2.22 Applying the carbon emission assessment methodology outlined in Section 10.7 the estimated carbon emissions for one-way travel (of all vehicles) to the Tobermory South site is presented in Table 27. Page 245
Page 196
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 76/82 Table 27. Site 04 – Carbon Emissions (Kg Co2e) SITE COHORT TAXI BUS CAR TOTAL Existing Conditions Primary 0 0 9 9 Existing Conditions Secondary 0 67 12 79 Existing Conditions Staff 0 0 67 67 Existing Conditions Total 0 67 89 156 Site 04 – Tobermory South Primary 0 0 8 8 Site 04 – Tobermory South Secondary 0 66 11 77 Site 04 – Tobermory South Staff 0 0 67 67 Site 04 – Tobermory South Total 0 66 86 152 14.2.23 Any increase in carbon emissions from bus travel may only be temporary. In line with current national policy bus fleets are gradually transitioning to electric and hydrogen systems. While SYSTRA is not aware of specific plans to convert the fleet on Mull, such an advancement would of course reduce the carbon impact from bus travel. 14.2.24 A similar transition is likely to occur to the car fleet, as residents increasingly embrace the use of electric cars. 14.3 Conclusion 14.3.1 The following considerations are given to Site 04 – Tobermory South: The site is walkable from some existing housing, and it is noted nearby and adjacent sites are allocated with up to 112 new residential units; There are some existing footways from adjacent residential catchments; and Travel time, distance and associated carbon emissions are likely to remain broadly similar to the baseline. Page 246
Page 197
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 77/82 15. SUMMARY 15.1.1 The technical assessment presented in the second section of this report has highlighted key considerations for each of the short-listed sites. For ease of comparison these summaries are reiterated below. 15.1.2 The following considerations are given to Site 01 – Tobermory: Travel characteristics are mostly known as they are likely to align with present conditions; The site is within walking distance of the most existing housing; and The site is constrained making access for large vehicles (e.g. buses and HGVs during construction) difficult. 15.1.3 The following considerations are given to Site 02 – Craignure: Travel times, distances and carbon emissions will increase over the baseline (more so if the catchments are amended to include the Ross of Mull); Average journey times will increase by approximately 20 minutes; Pupils who currently walk will likely have to be taken to the Craignure site by bus requiring approximately 4 additional buses over the baseline; There is an adjacent allocation for c. 80 housing units, enabling trips by active modes; and Footways and crossing opportunities on the adjacent highway network are limited but could be improved. 15.1.4 The following considerations are given to Site 03 – Garmony: Travel times, distances and carbon emissions will increase over the baseline (more so if the catchments are amended to include the Ross of Mull); Average journey times will increase by approximately 15 minutes over the baseline; Pupils who currently walk will likely have to be taken to the Garmony site by bus requiring approximately 4 additional buses over the baseline; The site is located adjacent to a limited number of existing housing and no LDP or LWF housing sites identified in the Housing Land Audit; and There are no footways or crossing opportunities on the adjacent highway network – providing them would deliver limited benefit. 15.1.5 The following considerations are given to Site 04 – Tobermory South: The site is walkable from some existing housing, and it is noted nearby and adjacent sites are allocated with up to 112 new residential units; There are some existing footways from adjacent residential catchments; and Travel time, distance and associated carbon emissions are likely to remain broadly similar to the baseline. 15.1.6 A summary of the site-specific metrics (number of trips, vehicle miles, carbon emissions and travel time) are illustrated in Figure 32 to Figure 35, respectively. This is to enable an “at-a-glance” comparison between short-listed sites, broken down by mode. For all of the following metrics, values are based on a single one-way trip. Daily and weekly values Page 247
Page 198
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 78/82 could therefore be calculated by multiplying the values stated in this section by 2 and 10, respectively. Figure 32. Number of People Trips by Mode and Site 15.1.7 The following considerations are given to people trips: The number of trips associated with Tobermory and Tobermory South are broadly similar; Craignure and Garmony will have very few walking trips which most travelling by bus instead; and The southern sites have the opportunity to reduce car trips with fewer primary school aged pupils being driven to school and instead travelling by bus. Figure 33. Vehicle Miles by Mode and Site 0 50 100 150 200 250 Site 01 - Existing Tobermory Site Site 02 - Craignure Site 03 - Garmony Site 04 - Tobermory South Number of Trips Walk Taxi Bus Car Ferry 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 Site 01 - Existing Tobermory Site Site 02 - Craignure Site 03 - Garmony Site 04 - Tobermory South Vehicle Miles Taxi Bus Car Total Page 248
Page 199
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 79/82 15.1.8 The following considerations are given to driven vehicle miles: The number of vehicle miles associated with Tobermory and Tobermory South are broadly similar; Car miles will increase significantly for southern sites; Bus miles will also increase for southern sites due to the additional services required; and Vehicle miles associated with Garmony will be marginally less than Craignure due to being closer to Tobermory. Figure 34. Carbon Emissions by Mode and Site 15.1.9 The following considerations are given to travel related carbon emissions: The carbon emissions associated with Tobermory and Tobermory South are broadly similar; and As with driven vehicle miles the carbon emissions for the southern sites are greater than Tobermory sites with emissions for the Garmony site being slightly less. 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 Site 01 - Existing Tobermory Site Site 02 - Craignure Site 03 - Garmony Site 04 - Tobermory South Carbon Emissions (kg CO2e) Taxi Bus Car Total Page 249
Page 200
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 80/82 Figure 35. People Travel Time by Mode and Site 15.1.10 The following considerations are given to people travel time: The travel associated with Tobermory and Tobermory South are broadly similar although Tobermory South has a slightly greater total as a result of longer walking times; Total travel time for Craignure is approximately double that of Tobermory South; and Travel time for Garmony is slightly less than Craignure, again this is due to the site being closer to Tobermory. 15.1.11 Provided overleaf in Table 28 is a numerical summary of the site-specific metrics providing the means to make an “at-a-glance” comparison. 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 Site 01 - Existing Tobermory Site Site 02 - Craignure Site 03 - Garmony Site 04 - Tobermory South Travel Time (minutes) Taxi Bus Car Walk Total Page 250
Page 201
Mull Education Campus Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations GB01T24G04 Report 29/01/2025 Page 81/82 Table 28. Summary of Site Metrics SITE GROUP TRIPS TIME (MINS) MILES CARBON EMISSIONS (KG CO2E) Walk Taxi Bus Car Ferry Taxi Bus Car Walk Total Taxi Bus Car Total Taxi Bus Car Total Site 01 - Existing Site (Existing Conditions) Primary 30 0 5 60 0 0 87 153 280 520 0 0 42 42 0 0 9 9 Secondary 64 0 69 23 0 0 2,356 160 588 3,104 0 63 57 120 0 67 12 79 Staff 19 0 0 40 0 0 0 700 163 863 0 0 305 305 0 0 67 67 Total 113 0 74 123 0 0 2,444 1,013 1,031 4,488 0 63 404 467 0 67 89 156 Site 02 - Craignure Primary 0 2 88 5 0 70 3,084 140 0 3,294 40 41 81 162 9 43 18 70 Secondary 3 0 143 11 0 0 5,147 328 48 5,523 0 100 179 278 0 105 39 145 Staff 1 0 0 58 0 0 0 1,966 16 1,982 0 0 1,113 1,113 0 0 245 245 Total 4 2 231 74 0 70 8,231 2,434 64 10,799 40 141 1,373 1,553 9 149 302 460 Site 03 - Garmony Primary 0 2 88 5 0 57 2,623 117 0 2,797 35 35 70 140 8 37 15 60 Secondary 0 0 147 10 0 0 4,479 283 0 4,762 0 96 162 258 0 102 36 138 Staff 0 0 0 59 0 0 0 1,670 0 1,670 0 0 960 960 0 0 211 211 Total 0 2 235 74 0 57 7,102 2,070 0 9,229 35 132 1,192 1,358 8 139 263 409 Site 04 – Tobermory South Primary 30 0 5 60 0 0 80 150 440 670 0 0 37 37 0 0 8 8 Secondary 64 0 70 22 0 0 2,110 135 948 3,192 0 62 50 112 0 66 11 77 Staff 19 0 0 40 0 0 0 655 293 948 0 0 304 304 0 0 67 67 Total 113 0 75 122 0 0 2,190 940 1,681 4,810 0 62 390 453 0 66 86 152 Page 251
Page 202
SYSTRA provides advice on transport, to central, regional and local government, agencies, developers, operators and financiers. A diverse group of results-oriented people, we are part of a strong team of professionals worldwide. Through client business planning, customer research and strategy development we create solutions that work for real people in the real world. For more information visit www.systra.com/uk Birmingham Alpha Tower, Crowne Plaza, Suffolk Street Birmingham, B1 1TT T: +44 (0)121 393 4841 Bristol 33 Colston Avenue, Bristol, BS1 4UA Cork City Quarter, Lapps Quay, Cork City Cork, T12 WY42, Republic of Ireland Dublin 2nd Floor, Riverview House, 21-23 City Quay Dublin D02 AY91, Republic of Ireland T: +353 (0) 1 566 2028 Edinburgh Ground Floor, 18 Charlotte Square, Edinburgh, EH2 4DF T: +44 (0)131 460 1847 Glasgow The Centrum Business Centre Limited, 38 Queen Street, Glasgow, G1 3DX T: +44 (0)141 468 4205 Leeds 100 Wellington Street, Leeds, LS1 1BA T: +44 (0)113 360 4842 London One Carey Lane, London, England EC2V 8AE T: +44 (0)20 3855 0079 Manchester 5th Floor, Four Hardman Street, Spinningfields Manchester, M3 3HF Tel: +44 (0)161 504 5026 Newcastle Block C, First Floor, Portland House, New Bridge Street West, Newcastle, NE1 8AL Tel: +44 191 249 3816 Reading Davidson House, Forbury Square, Reading, RG1 3EU T: +44 118 208 0111 Woking Dukes Court, Duke Street Woking, Surrey GU21 5BH T: +44 (0)1483 357705 York Meridian House, The Crescent York, YO24 1AW Tel: +44 1904 454 600 Other locations: France: Bordeaux, Lille, Lyon, Marseille, Paris Northern Europe: Astana, Copenhagen, Kiev, London, Moscow, Riga, Wroclaw Southern Europe & Mediterranean: Algiers, Baku, Bucharest, Madrid, Rabat, Rome, Sofia, Tunis Middle East: Cairo, Dubai, Riyadh Asia Pacific: Bangkok, Beijing, Brisbane, Delhi, Hanoi, Hong Kong, Manila, Seoul, Shanghai, Singapore, Shenzhen, Taipei Africa: Abidjan, Douala, Johannesburg, Kinshasa, Libreville, Nairobi Latin America: Lima, Mexico, Rio de Janeiro, Santiago, São Paulo North America: Little Falls, Los Angeles, Montreal, New-York, Philadelphia, Washington Page 252
Page 203
Document is Restricted Page 253 Agenda Item 6lNOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 8, 9 of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973
Page 204
This page is intentionally left blank
Page 205
Document is Restricted Page 269 Agenda Item 6mNOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 8, 9 of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973
Page 206
This page is intentionally left blank
Page 207
On behalf of Hub North Scotland Ltd (in partnership with Argyll & Bute Council) Project Ref: 332612224 | Rev: FINAL | Date: February 2025 Registered Office: Buckingham Court Kingsmead Business Park, London Road, High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, HP11 1JU Office Address: 3rd Floor, 58 Morrison Street, Edinburgh, EH3 8BP T: +44 (0)131 335 4200 E: info.edinburgh@stantec.com Classification: OFFICIAL Mull Campus Integrated Impact Assessment Report Page 271 Agenda Item 6n
Page 208
Integrated Impact Assessment Report Mull Campus ii Classification: OFFICIAL Document Control Sheet Project Name: Mull Campus Project Ref: 332612224 Report Title: Integrated Impact Assessment Report Doc Ref: Final Date: February 2025 Name Position Signature Date Prepared by: Bren Walters Jenny Keenan Kathleen Morrison Graduate Economist Assistant Consultant Senior Consultant BW JK KM February 2025 Reviewed by: Steven Findlay Senior Associate Economist SF February 2025 Approved by: Kiri Heal Senior Associate KH February 2025 For and on behalf of Stantec UK Limited Revision Date Description Prepared Reviewed Approved V1 28/01/25 Draft for comment KM SF KH V2 29/01/25 Second draft following initial comments KM SF KH V3 03/02/25 Third draft following comments KM SF KH V4 05/02/25 Final Draft KM SF KH This report has been prepared by Stantec UK Limited (‘Stantec’) on behalf of its client to whom this report is addressed (‘Client’) in connection with the project described in this report and takes into account the Client's particular instructions and requirements. This report was prepared in accordance with the professional services appointment under which Stantec was appointed by its Client. This report is not intended for and should not be relied on by any third party (i.e. parties other than the Client). Stantec accepts no duty or responsibility (including in negligence) to any party other than the Client and disclaims all liability of any nature whatsoever to any such party in respect of this report. Page 272
Page 209
iii Classification: OFFICIAL Contents Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................. 1 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 2 1.1 Background ................................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Report Structure ............................................................................................................ 2 1.3 Overview of the Assessment Process ........................................................................... 2 1.4 Integrated Impact Assessment Approach ..................................................................... 3 2 Mull Campus Project ................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Context .......................................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Project Overview ........................................................................................................... 4 2.3 Mull Campus Summary Process ................................................................................... 5 3 Consultation / Engagement ........................................................................................................ 6 3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 6 3.2 Impact Assessment Engagement Activities ................................................................ 10 4 Baseline Assessment ............................................................................................................... 11 4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 11 4.2 Population Change ...................................................................................................... 12 4.3 Education and Qualifications ....................................................................................... 13 4.4 Deprivation .................................................................................................................. 14 4.5 Protected Characteristics ............................................................................................ 15 5 Economic Impact Assessment ................................................................................................ 23 5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 23 5.2 Assessment Approach ................................................................................................ 23 5.3 Economic Impacts ....................................................................................................... 24 5.4 Summary ..................................................................................................................... 30 6 Island Communities Impact Assessment ............................................................................... 32 6.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 32 6.2 Assessment Approach ................................................................................................ 32 6.3 Island Communities Impact Assessment Findings ...................................................... 33 6.4 Summary ..................................................................................................................... 40 7 Children’s Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment .......................................................... 44 7.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 44 7.2 Assessment Approach ................................................................................................ 44 7.3 Pupil Forum Engagement ............................................................................................ 45 7.4 Children’s Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment Findings .................................. 45 7.5 Summary ..................................................................................................................... 49 8 Equality Impact Assessment ................................................................................................... 51 8.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 51 8.2 Assessment Approach ................................................................................................ 51 8.3 Equality Impact Assessment Findings......................................................................... 52 8.4 Summary ..................................................................................................................... 53 Page 273
Page 210
iv Classification: OFFICIAL 9 Fairer Scotland Duty Assessment ........................................................................................... 54 9.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 54 9.2 Assessment Approach ................................................................................................ 54 9.3 Fairer Scotland Duty Findings ..................................................................................... 55 9.4 Summary ..................................................................................................................... 58 10 Conclusion and Recommendations ........................................................................................ 59 10.1 IIA Summary ................................................................................................................ 59 10.2 Recommendations....................................................................................................... 59 11 References ................................................................................................................................. 61 Figures Figure 2.1: Schools on Mull, Iona and the Mainland ............................................................................... 4 Figure 2.2: Project Summary ................................................................................................................... 5 Figure 4.1: Four Study Areas ................................................................................................................ 11 Figure 4.2: Highest Level of Qualification. ............................................................................................. 14 Figure 4.3: Disabled Employment Rates by Local Authority in Scotland .............................................. 18 Tables Table 1.1: Report Structure ..................................................................................................................... 2 Table 4.1: Population Change, 2011-2022............................................................................................ 12 Table 4.2: School Level Attainment ....................................................................................................... 13 Table 4.3: Domains of Deprivation ........................................................................................................ 15 Table 4.4: Age Profiles .......................................................................................................................... 15 Table 4.5: Disability Profiles .................................................................................................................. 16 Table 4.6: Ethnicity Profiles ................................................................................................................... 18 Table 4.7: Sex Profiles .......................................................................................................................... 19 Table 4.8: Marital and Civil Partnership Status Profiles ........................................................................ 19 Table 4.9: Percentage Religion or Belief Reported in Scotland's Census 2022 ................................... 21 Table 4.10: Percentage of people who identified as LGB+, 2022 ......................................................... 21 Table 5.1: Wider LVU Assumptions ...................................................................................................... 25 Table 5.2: Wider LVU Results ............................................................................................................... 25 Table 5.3: Change in Local Housing Value Assumptions ..................................................................... 26 Table 5.4: House Value Results ............................................................................................................ 26 Table 5.5: Educational Attainment Assumptions ................................................................................... 27 Table 5.6: Educational Attainment Results ........................................................................................... 27 Table 5.7: Loss of Earnings Assumptions ............................................................................................. 28 Table 5.8: Loss of Earnings Results ...................................................................................................... 28 Table 5.9: School Staff Cost of Commuting Assumptions .................................................................... 29 Table 5.10: Cost of Commuting Results ................................................................................................ 29 Table 5.11: Carbon Costs Assumptions ................................................................................................ 30 Table 5.12: Carbon Costs Results ........................................................................................................ 30 Table 5.13: Summary ............................................................................................................................ 30 Table 6.1: Key Travel Considerations from Systra (2025) Mull Education Campus Transport Review Report .......................................................................................................................................... 36 Page 274
Page 211
v Classification: OFFICIAL Appendices Appendix A Glossary Appendix B Summary of the UNCRC Articles Page 275
Page 212
vi Classification: OFFICIAL Page 276
Page 213
Classification: OFFICIAL Executive Summary This report entitled ‘Mull Campus: Integrated Impact Assessment Report’ has been prepared by Stantec UK Ltd to demonstrate how proposals for the proposed Mull Campus Development show due regard to the socio-economic, equalities, child rights and island communities duties under the Equality Act 2010, the Fairer Scotland Duty, the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Act 2024, and the Islands (Scotland) Act 2018. The purpose of this report is to support Hub North Scotland Ltd, in partnership with Argyll & Bute Council in exercising its public functions to check and review that equalities implications have been considered within the proposals, including socio-economic inequalities, impacts on island communities and children’s rights and wellbeing. The process has benefitted from consultation to inform the impact assessments with the inclusion of local and contextual knowledge. As a public authority, Argyll & Bute Council must consider equality issues when making certain types of decisions. In addition to considering the impact the Council’s activities might have on people with one or more of the nine protected characteristics as defined under the Equality Act 2010, there is also a requirement for the Council to take into account socio-economic disadvantage, in accordance with the Fairer Scotland Duty, the impact to island communities in accordance with the Islands (Scotland) Act 2018 and the impact to children’s rights and wellbeing under the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014. This report provides an assessment of potential impacts relating to the following domains: Economic impacts (including investment stimulus, existing local housing, educational attainment, loss of earnings, school staff costs of commuting, and vehicle carbon costs). Island communities (including demographic challenges, economic prosperity, unique transport challenges, infrastructure, natural environment, unique social challenges, unique health challenges and the use of Gaelic). Protected characteristics (including age, disability, ethnicity, sex, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, religion or belief, and sexual orientation). Children’s rights and wellbeing (including Children’s Rights and the wellbeing of children and young people). Fairer Scotland Duty (including socio-economic disadvantage and inequality of outcome). Page 277
Page 214
Classification: OFFICIAL 1 Introduction 1.1 Background 1.1.1 Stantec UK Ltd has been commissioned by Hub North Scotland Ltd, in partnership with Argyll & Bute Council (the ‘Client’), to provide consultancy support in developing a number of impact assessments for a range of potential site options for the proposed Mull Campus Development (the ‘Project’). 1.1.2 Public authorities in Scotland have a statutory duty to consider and address various societal needs and rights when developing proposals, policies and decisions. This is to ensure equity, fairness and the promotion of positive outcomes across diverse groups. The impact assessments include, an Economic Impact Assessment, an Island Communities Impact Assessment (ICIA), an Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA), a Children’s Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment (CRWIA) in accordance with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), and a Fairer Scotland Duty (FSD) assessment. 1.2 Report Structure 1.2.1 The report is structured as follows: Table 1.1: Report Structure Section Description Section 1 Introduction to the assessment and the Project Section 2 Description of the Project Section 3 Overview of consultation and engagement Section 4 Baseline characteristics relevant to the overarching assessment domains Section 5 Economic Impact Assessment Section 6 Island Communities Impact Assessment (ICIA) Section 7 Children’s Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment (CRWIA) Section 8 Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) Section 9 Fairer Scotland Duty (FSD) Assessment Section 10 Summary 1.3 Overview of the Assessment Process 1.3.1 The objectives of this report are to integrate the consideration of relevant equality issues and associated impacts into the Project to demonstrate compliance with the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED), the Fairer Scotland Duty (FSD), the Islands (Scotland) Act 2018 and the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014. 1.3.2 The purpose of the impact assessments at this stage is to examine the impact of locating the new campus either in Tobermory or more centrally on Mull. Page 278
Page 215
Classification: OFFICIAL 1.4 Integrated Impact Assessment Approach 1.4.1 This section provides an overview of the approach for each impact assessment. Economic Impact Assessment 1.4.2 The economic impact assessment identifies areas of economic benefit where the value is expected to differ depending upon the choice of site location. These include effects on local investment; effects on existing housing stock; impacts on educational attainment; parent/guardian loss of earnings; staff commuting costs and the cost of transport carbon emissions. The assessment was undertaken based on HM Treasury Green Book economic appraisal guidance, using the Isle of Mull economy as an impact geography. Island Communities Impact Assessment 1.4.3 The Islands (Scotland) Act 2018 provides a legal basis for greater decision making at a local level within Scottish Islands and seeks to increase economic prosperity for island communities. 1.4.4 The guide framing questions are provided in Section 6.2. Equality Impact Assessment 1.4.5 Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 sets out a Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED). This requires public authorities to have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation, advance equality of opportunity, and foster good relations between those with a protected characteristic and those without. The duty covers the following protected characteristics: age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation. The public sector equality duty also covers marriage and civil partnerships, with regard to eliminating unlawful discrimination in employment. 1.4.6 The guide framing questions are provided in Section 7.2. Children’s Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment 1.4.7 The Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014 requires public bodies to consider whether existing and emerging legislation, policy and guidance have an impact on children and young people and to assess what further action is required to ensure compliance with the UNCRC. CRWIAs are one of the general measures of implementation under the Convention. It recommends that all levels of government complete a CRWIA as part of their policy development. 1.4.8 The guide framing questions are provided in Section 8.2. Fairer Scotland Duty Assessment 1.4.9 The FSD places a legal responsibility on certain public bodies in Scotland to actively consider how they can reduce inequalities of outcome caused by socio-economic disadvantage when making strategic decisions or developing policy. This differs from the PSED which considers only reducing inequalities of opportunity. The Duty seeks to tackle socio-economic disadvantage and reduce the inequalities associated with being disadvantaged. It is closely related to issues of poverty which may affect outcomes across health, housing, education and training and employment prospects. 1.4.10 The guide framing questions are provided in Section 9.2. Page 279
Page 216
Classification: OFFICIAL 2 Mull Campus Project 2.1 Context 2.1.1 The Isle of Mull is an island in the Inner Hebrides on the west coast of Scotland. Mull is closely located to the neighbouring islands of Iona, Ulva and Gometra. Iona is located to off the southwest coast of Mull. Ulva and Gometra are both situated off the west coast of Mull and are separated by a narrow strait. Ulva and Gometra are connected to each other by a bridge. 2.1.2 At present, the Tobermory 2-18 School is an education campus providing nursery, primary and secondary school education to pupils aged 2 to 18. It is the only school on Mull that delivers education to S1-6. In addition, there are another 5 primary schools on Mull and one primary school on the nearby island of Iona. The nearest mainland secondary school is in Oban. The locations of schools on Mull, Iona and the Mainland are shown in Figure 2.1. Figure 2.1: Schools on Mull, Iona and the Mainland 2.2 Project Overview 2.2.1 The Project proposes a new 2-18 school and community campus on a single site on Mull, to replace the existing campus buildings in Tobermory which continue to deteriorate. The Project was deemed to be the highest priority across all Argyll & Bute Schools projects of which there are about 90 schools overall. 2.2.2 The new campus will be part funded, up to 50%, by Scottish Government through their Learning Estate Investment Programme (LEIP)1 with the level of funding determined by the 1 The LEIP is the Scottish Government’s flagship programme for investment in education and is now into Phase 3. It is the successor to the ‘Schools for the Future’ programme which saw our Council deliver a number of new builds and substantial refurbishments across our education estate. Page 280
Page 217
Classification: OFFICIAL existing pupil capacity numbers and community facilities at the current Tobermory 2-18 School on a like for like basis. Argyll & Bute Council will fund all other costs and will fund the entire construction costs up front. 2.2.3 In April 2024, Argyll & Bute Council agreed to progress the business case for the Project and commence community engagement and site selection activities, and in December 2024 Councillors reaffirmed that the Project is to proceed as a single site campus. 2.2.4 The projected school roll for the new campus, at the time of submitting the bid for LEIP funding in 2022, was 31 early learning and childcare (ELC), 90 primary and 177 secondary school pupils. 2.2.5 This IIA Report has been prepared to inform a site selection exercise for the Mull Campus Project. Following a call for sites in August 2024, four sites were shortlisted for further consideration and assessment by technical experts and the wider Mull Campus Project Team. Due to commercial sensitivities, at the time of writing the IIA, details about the four site locations were not made available to the public. 2.2.6 The IIA was commissioned on the basis of providing a high-level assessment of either a Tobermory or central site location. However, in response to some assessment criteria, a more detailed assessment has been provided to consider findings from the Mull Campus Transport Review (Systra, 2025) which assessed the following four specific site options: Site 1 – Tobermory (existing school site); Site 2 – Craignure; Site 3 – Garmony; and Site 4 – Tobermory South. 2.2.7 A final decision on the site is due to be made at the next meeting of the Full Council, currently scheduled for the end of February 2025. 2.3 Mull Campus Summary Process 2.3.1 The Project brief, concept design and outline business case activities will take place during 2025, aiming for Outline Business Case approval by the end of 2025. Argyll & Bute Council will then review the updated case and confirm whether they are content to move to Full Business Case development. 2.3.2 The Full Business Case, including more detailed proposals for the campus and costs will be considered again by councillors in late 2026 and approval would allow the campus to move to construction phase. These timescales are estimates and will be reviewed as the Project moves forward, with the community being kept updated of any significant changes. Figure 2.2: Project Summary Source: (Argyll & Bute Council, 2025) Page 281
Page 218
Classification: OFFICIAL 3 Consultation / Engagement 3.1 Introduction 3.1.1 Argyll & Bute Council have an engagement strategy in place for the multiphases of the Project. They have set up a community sounding board and pupil voice group. The Community Sounding Board is formed of community representatives who are impacted by or have an interest in the Project, including groups such as Community Councils, Parent Councils, Community Development Trusts, constituted community groups, education staff, and student voices. The purpose of the group is to advise the Argyll & Bute Council Project Team (the ‘Project Team’) on how best to engage with the community in relation to the Project, share Project updates and information with the group(s) that they represent and feedback the views of the group on their behalf. 3.1.2 Various phases of consultation and engagement have occurred and are detailed below. Pre-Engagement 3.1.3 In 2022, a series of pre-engagement events were held in the local community prior to submitting the bid to the Scottish Government for LEIP funding (Argyll & Bute Council, 2024a). These were held at Tobermory 2-18 School on 11th August, and at Bunessan Primary School on 7th September. There were also a series of pupil engagements led by members of the central education team in each of the primary schools, Tobermory High School and pupils who travel to Oban High School. 3.1.4 There were over 200 written comments and responses provided through the face to face sessions and the online platforms, with a majority confirming support for the Project. 3.1.5 Comments covered a variety of areas, which are categorised: Accessibility (13 comments); Buildings (4 comments); Community (57 comments); Curriculum (45 comments); Hostel (16 comments); Locations (131 comments); Nursery/Pre-5 Unit (1 comment); Outdoor Facilities (35 comments); and Staffing (21 comments). Community Engagement 3.1.6 A series of drop in public engagement sessions were held between 17th-25th September 2024, as part of ongoing engagement with the communities of Mull and Iona. Sessions were held in the following locations: Craignure Hall; Tobermory Scout Hall; Tobermory High School; Salen Church Hall; Salen Primary School; Ulva Primary School; Dervaig Village Hall; Lochdonhead Primary School; Iona Village Hall; and Bunessan Community Hall. 3.1.7 Every session was attended by representatives from the Project Team, as well as an engagement consultant. Attendees were given the opportunity to review information on Page 282
Page 219
Classification: OFFICIAL boards, talk to the Project Team, and feedback their comments anonymously. Comments could also be returned up until 4th October 2024 via email or an online survey. 3.1.8 The purpose of this engagement was to understand what communities and individuals thought were the important factors that should be considered when assessing the potential sites for the campus. Feedback from these sessions was taken into consideration when finalising the site assessment criteria and the relative weightings of each. 3.1.9 A total of 352 respondents contributed comments through various channels: in person (205), online (115), by email (18) and by paper response (14). The majority of respondents were from Tobermory (134), followed by Bunessan and Ross (65) and Craignure (36)2. The majority of respondents were aged 36-45 (77). 3.1.10 Key themes and issues that were raised most frequently across the majority of locations included: Comments about the location of the whole campus, primary provision, and / or high school. Many people felt that primary and / or ELC provision must be kept in Tobermory, meaning that a split site with a more centralised high school was the most commonly requested solution to providing an equitable and accessible campus. Some queried whether a hostel on Mull was a possibility. Concerns about the increase in travel for children if children are to be transported to a location outside of Tobermory. The key issues raised were: o Poor infrastructure such as road conditions, winter weather, lack of buses, access for families without cars; o Wellbeing impact on children spending long portions of their day travelling, especially younger children. Emphasis on length of journey, not distance, due to the nature of roads on Mull; o Environmental impact of increased travel; and o Impact on children who are neurodiverse or have other reasons to avoid long travel such as experiencing travel sickness or bullying. Keeping families together and avoiding children having to leave home through the week to board. There were additional themes around families having the right to choose whether to board or stay at home, and comments about the rights of children to education and a home life. However, those on Iona strongly requested the right to retain access to funded places at Oban High School, regardless of where the campus is located on Mull. The importance of an equitable solution that provides access for as many children as possible. These comments tended to be rooted in a desire for fairness and equity and were often combined with comments about keeping families together and creating more social cohesion between the communities in the north and south. The campus should be easily accessible from good transport networks, with plenty of parking and safe pick up and drop off areas. Active travel is also important to some, with a desire for children to be able to safely walk and cycle to school. Access to good facilities both on campus and close by. This includes space for sports facilities and other outdoor activities such as learning and socialising, space for community facilities such as a library, shops and other activities somewhere near the 2 To note: Location of ‘in person’ attendees is based on the session they attended rather than a stated home address, therefore numbers are approximate. Otherwise, those filling out the online survey chose the location closest to their home, and those emailing were asked to provide an approximate location. Where necessary, these have been assigned to a closest location from the list below for the purposes of analysis. Page 283
Page 220
Classification: OFFICIAL school so children can socialise. This includes equitable access to after school clubs whereby children do not have to rush away to catch ferries or travel long bus journeys. The campus should be able to provide a range of subject areas including vocational subjects, either by space provision and / or by making use of teachers who have easy access from Oban. The power of a campus to create community stability and sustainability, whether by attracting and retaining people to live and work in a location, or by supporting the shops and cafes nearby. For some, this was about a specific location – for example, supporting the stability of the Ross of Mull or avoiding depopulation of the north. For others, it was about the sustainability of Mull and islands as a whole. 3.1.11 More detail on community engagement undertaken in September 2024 can be found within the Mull Campus Community Engagement Report (Ryder, 2024). School Engagement – Staff and Pupils 3.1.12 As part of the community engagement, pupils and staff across Mull and Iona were visited by an Argyll & Bute Education Officer between 17th and 30th September 2024. The schools comprised: Tobermory High School; Tobermory Primary School; Tobermory ELC; Tobermory staff; Salen Primary School; Ulva Primary School; Lochdonhead Primary School; Dervaig Primary School; Bunessan Primary School; Iona Primary School; and Oban High School Hostel. 3.1.13 Sessions took the form of informal workshops, during which attendees were encouraged to talk about what they think is important for a new campus and record their ideas on post it notes. 3.1.14 It should be noted that representatives and community members in Iona requested for the island to be removed from the scope of the Mull Campus Project on the basis that they would like to continue with their existing defined catchment area which includes attendance at Iona Primary School and secondary school attendance and boarding at Oban High School. This decision was agreed unanimously at the Argyll & Bute Council Special Meeting on 20 December 2024. ELC and Primary Schools 3.1.15 Children from Tobermory ELC shared their ideas. The most common request for these children was to have an obstacle course and space for a planting box. 3.1.16 The children from the primary schools on Mull were particularly keen on making the most of outside space, with a football pitch being the most mentioned request (20 mentions) and 12 others requesting basketball. A further 18 requested good play space outside. 16 would like access to a swimming pool. Iona Primary School 3.1.17 Iona Primary School was reported separately, as the children tended to focus more on the location of the school, and the prospect of going to Oban High School. Reasons for wanting to attend Oban High School generally echoed the views of the adults during the public engagement: Independence and learning to cope away from home; Avoiding long or disruptive travel every day; and Ability to attend after school clubs. Tobermory High School Page 284
Page 221
Classification: OFFICIAL 3.1.18 Pupils mentioned that they would like to see the following new features within a new campus: a bigger gym hall, provision of social seating, assembly hall, sheltered spaces to eat lunch outside, more or bigger classrooms, music practice rooms and better sports equipment. 3.1.19 This group was also asked about their general perceptions or thoughts about location of the campus. Several pupils shared their perceptions of Oban High School, the importance of family life, and a desire to see a central site location. The general consensus of these participants was that they do not think boarding at Oban is a positive experience 3.1.20 Three members of staff raised that their main concern regarded the impact of travel, both on the wellbeing of young children and on the roads infrastructure, if the campus was located outside of Tobermory. Oban High School Hostel 3.1.21 Seventeen pupils who board at Oban High School hostel shared their thoughts on a new campus. Several talked about their own experiences and perceptions of staying at Oban, with mixed opinions on whether the campus could be an alternative option to boarding at Oban. Nine commented that there is no point in a central site location for the high school as it will be equally difficult to get to (or would still need a hostel); Six said that they would stay at Oban High School regardless Three said they would consider attending high school on Mull if it was easier to travel to. Others agreed with both points, say that families should have a choice and there should therefore be an option that is fairer for all families. Bunessan Parent Council Questionnaire 3.1.22 Following the engagement events and information released by the Mull Campus Team at the end of 2024, the Bunessan Parent Council independently decided to reassess the views and opinions of the parents of nursery and primary aged children locally. Bunessan Parent Council gave permission for their findings to be included in the impact assessment process, these are summarised below. 3.1.23 In November 2024, the Bunessan Parent Council distributed an up-to-date questionnaire and received 23 individual responses (representing 19 family groups), which suggests that almost every family in the area with children at primary school age or below gave their opinion. Key statistics from the questionnaire include: 100% of parents support and realise the importance of a new high school; 95% of parents would send their children to a central school daily; Only 5% of parents would send their children to school in Tobermory daily; 57% of parents expressed that there needs to be funded placement retention for Oban High School, including the hostel; and 50% of parents would seriously consider leaving the Ross of Mull if a central school is not built. 3.1.24 Overall, the questionnaire highlighted the importance of a central site location for the participants. The questionnaire noted that the participants felt that a Tobermory location would result in separation between the rest of the island and may contribute to depopulation levels of young people and families. Page 285
Page 222
Classification: OFFICIAL 3.1.25 Bunessan Parent Council gave permission for the findings of the survey to inform the ICIA detailed below in Section 6. 3.2 Impact Assessment Engagement Activities 3.2.1 The Mull Campus Team (Argyll & Bute Council) wrote to chairs of community organisations represented on the Community Sounding Board on 20th December 2024 to invite representatives from each organisation to co-ordinate a response to the ICIA and CRWIA process. 3.2.2 An engagement proforma was developed to collect high-level feedback from representatives in relation to the assessment criteria. The engagement proforma’s introduction and information sheets were supplied in English and Scottish Gaelic with the option provided to request the full document in Gaelic, if preferred. 3.2.3 The engagement proforma’s were issued by the Mull Campus Team on 6th January 2025 and a virtual briefing session was held on 9th January 2025 via Microsoft Teams. During the briefing sessions community organisations were invited to provide feedback to inform the site selection process for the Project. 3.2.4 During the briefing session and following this, community organisations collectively issued a formal response detailing that they would not participate in the impact assessment engagement process at this stage. Concerns were raised around the timing of the impact assessments, the length of the engagement window and the level of detail available of the proposed sites for selection. A joint response was issued by a collective of community organisations stating that they would not participate in the impact assessment process. As a result, only a small number of feedback has been received as part of the impact assessment engagement exercise. The impact assessment is predominantly informed by the engagement sessions held by the Mull Campus Team in September 2024, school engagement sessions and the Pupil Forum Impact Assessment Engagement exercise (summarised below). 3.2.5 Responses providing input to the Impact Assessment process were issued by: Salen Primary Parent Council; Mull Primary Schools Head Teachers (including Bunessan, Dervaig, Lochdonhead, Salen and Ulva); South West Mull and Iona Development (SWID); and Bunessan Parent Council – Pupil and community testimonies provided in respect of the Mull Campus Project, and findings from a parent council survey (conducted November 2024) discussed above in paragraphs 3.1.22-24. Pupil Forum Engagement 3.2.6 Pupil representatives who are part of the Mull Campus Pupil Working Group were invited to participate in the CRWIA process on 15th January 2025. An online session was led by a member of the Mull Campus team with schools including Bunessan Primary School, Lochdonhead Primary School, Ulva Primary School, Tobermory Primary School and Tobermory High School. 3.2.7 An engagement proforma was developed for the Pupil Working Group, focussing on three questions to inform the CRWIA. Pupil representatives were asked to provide feedback and gather the views of their peers and classmates. A number of responses were received from pupils in Tobermory Primary School, Tobermory High School, Bunessan Primary School and Ulva Primary School. Anonymised findings have been incorporated into the CRWIA section below. Page 286
Page 223
Classification: OFFICIAL 4 Baseline Assessment 4.1 Introduction 4.1.1 This socio-economic baseline provides a comprehensive overview of key demographic, educational, and social trends across the Isle of Mull, Gometra, Ulva and Iona, and comparisons with Argyll & Bute as well as Scotland. By exploring characteristics such as age, disability, and ethnicity, the baseline underscores Mull’s distinctive demographic makeup while providing comparative insights with regional and national averages. 4.1.2 Four ‘study areas’ have been adopted within the baseline assessment: Tobermory; North Mull, Gometra and Ulva; South Mull; and Southwest Mull and Iona: Tobermory: The data zone that Tobermory sits in is ‘S01007286’. North Mull, Gometra and Ulva: The data zone ‘S01007285’. South Mull: The data zone ‘S01007288’. Southwest Mull and Iona: The data zone ‘S01007287’. 4.1.3 Mull and the Islands (all data zones listed above), Argyll & Bute (local authority level) and Scotland (national level) have been used for comparison (where available). 4.1.4 The four study areas are shown in Figure 4.1. Figure 4.1: Four Study Areas Source: Stantec Page 287
Page 224
Classification: OFFICIAL 4.1.5 Where available, data from the Scottish Census in 2022 has been used. Where data availability is limited due to a delay in the release of data, census data from 2011 has been used. 4.1.6 The following data sources have been used to determine baseline information and are fully referenced in Chapter 10: Scotland’s Census; Education Scotland; and Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD); and Scottish Public Health Observatory. 4.2 Population Change 4.2.1 Table 4.1 below highlights the changes in the population in the four data zones, Mull and the Islands, Argyll & Bute, and Scotland between 2011 and 2022. 4.2.2 The 0-15 year old age group has grown in some of Mull and the Islands data zones, particularly in the South with a significant increase of 36%, and in Tobermory with a 15% rise. In contrast, North Mull, Gometra and Ulva; and Southwest Mull and Iona have seen declines of 3% and 9% respectively. Overall, Mull and the Islands has experienced an 8% increase in this age group, compared to declines in Argyll & Bute (-13%) and Scotland (-3%). 4.2.3 The 16-64 year old age group, representing the working-age population, has seen limited growth or decline across Mull and the Islands. The largest increase is in Tobermory with a 4% rise, while the North has also seen an increase at 3%. The South shows no change, and the Southwest has declined by 4%. Mull and the Islands overall has seen a 1% increase, outperforming Argyll & Bute (-8%) and Scotland (-1%). 4.2.4 The 65+ year age group has grown substantially across Mull and the Islands, with particularly sharp increases in the South (42%), Southwest (38%), and Tobermory (31%). The North, with a smaller rise of 24%, is higher than Argyll & Bute (21%) and Scotland (22%). Mull and the Islands overall has experienced a 32% increase in this group, reflecting the island’s ageing population. Table 4.1: Population Change, 2011-2022 Study Area 0-15 16-64 65+ All Ages North Mull, Gometra and Ulva -3% 3% 24% 8% Tobermory 15% 4% 31% 10% Southwest Mull and Iona -9% -4% 38% 4% South Mull 36% 0% 42% 15% Mull and the Islands 8% 1% 32% 9% Argyll & Bute -13% -8% 21% -2% Scotland -3% -1% 22% 3% Source: (Scotland’s Census, 2022a). 4.2.5 Overall, across the various parts of the island and Mull as a whole population growth has mostly exceeded Argyll & Bute and national averages for most age brackets. Although there may be an issue with an ageing population, growing faster than Argyll & Bute and Scotland, the growth in the younger age brackets is more positive than the national picture. Argyll & Page 288
Page 225
Classification: OFFICIAL Bute as a whole may have an issue with population decline, however, this has not been observed on the Isle of Mull. 4.3 Education and Qualifications Primary and Secondary Attainment 4.3.1 Table 4.2 below shows the level of primary and secondary pupil attainment for the 2023-2024 academic year, where the proportion for Reading, Listening & Talking, Numeracy, and Writing highlights the proportion of all pupils meeting the test score threshold required to be regarded as excellent3. The ‘Attendance’ score shows the average attendance across all school pupils in that geographical area. 4.3.2 Attendance in Argyll & Bute is slightly higher than the national average at both primary and secondary, suggesting consistent school engagement. In primary schools, performance is generally on par with the national average, with marginal differences in Reading and Numeracy, though Writing and Listening & Talking lag slightly more than other areas. Secondary school pupils in Argyll & Bute show similar trends, performing slightly below the national average in Reading, Listening & Talking, and Writing. However, a strength emerges in secondary Numeracy, where Argyll & Bute outperforms the national average by 1.8%, indicating strong mathematical attainment. Table 4.2: School Level Attainment Primary Secondary School Level Attainment Argyll & Bute Scotland Difference Argyll & Bute Scotland Difference Attendance 92.8% 92.2% 0.6% 87.9% 87.7% 0.2% Reading 80.0% 80.5% -0.5% 89.2% 90.2% -1.0% Listening & Talking 86.0% 87.3% -1.3% 89.8% 90.8% -1.0% Numeracy 80.1% 80.3% -0.2% 92.1% 90.3% 1.8% Writing 75.2% 76.2% -1.0% 87.5% 89.6% -2.1% Source: (Education Scotland, 2024). Qualifications 4.3.3 Figure 4.2 below indicates the highest level of qualification of residents across the study areas, Argyll & Bute and Scotland. Overall, Scotland and Argyll & Bute show broadly similar trends, with most residents achieving degree-level qualifications or above, followed by upper school qualifications and further education or sub-degree qualifications. 4.3.4 Within the specific study areas, there is noticeable variation. Some areas, such as North Mull, Gometra and Ulva, have a relatively high percentage of residents with degree-level qualifications, while others, such as South Mull, show higher proportions of residents with no qualifications or lower school qualifications, suggesting localised disparities in educational attainment. 4.3.5 There is noticeable variation within Mull and the Islands’ specific study areas (e.g., North Mull, Gometra and Ulva; South Mull; Southwest Mull and Iona; and Tobermory). Some areas, such as the North Mull, Gometra and Ulva, have a relatively high percentage of residents with degree-level qualifications, while others, such as South Mull, show higher proportions of 3 This is regarded as students who have exceeded their expected or targeted grade in key assessments. Page 289
Page 226
Classification: OFFICIAL residents with no qualifications or lower school qualifications, suggesting localised disparities in educational attainment. 4.3.6 However, Mull and the Islands overall has a higher proportion of adults aged 16 years and over who have a degree level qualification or above at 42% compared with the Argyll & Bute average of 32% and the Scottish average of 34%. Across Mull and the Islands, 46% of adults aged 16 years and above have a degree level qualification or above compared with 43% in Southwest Mull and Iona, 40% in South Mull and 39% in Tobermory. This suggest that Tobermory could have greater sensitivity in terms of educational attainment compared to other parts of the island. Figure 4.2: Highest Level of Qualification. Source: (Scotland’s Census, 2022b). 4.4 Deprivation 4.4.1 North Mull, Gometra and Ulva, Southwest Mull and Iona, South Mull study areas all fall into the least deprived 40% of areas in Scotland, whilst Tobermory performs better, in the bottom 30%. This means that Mull and the Islands is relatively less deprived compared to other areas within Scotland. 4.4.2 Table 4.3 below summarises domains of deprivation for data zones on Mull and the Islands, where lower percentages indicate higher levels of deprivation. The results highlight key challenges across different parts of the island, shaped by its geography, economy, and infrastructure. Figures that are closer to 1% represent higher levels of deprivation, where any area is below the 10% it is in the top 10% most deprived communities in Scotland for that type of deprivation. Similarly, those above the 90th percentile fall in the 10% least deprived areas in Scotland. 4.4.3 The North of Mull faces severe deprivation in access to services, it is in the 2% most deprived of areas, due to its remote and dispersed population, which makes it difficult to provide regular and convenient access to facilities. Housing deprivation (43%) may reflect limited housing stock, and the high costs associated with building or maintaining homes in remote areas. However, the area's lower crime levels (top 14% least deprived) and moderate education deprivation (23% least deprived) suggest a safe community with reasonably good access to education compared to other parts of the island. 4.4.4 Tobermory, the island's largest settlement, experiences challenges in income and employment deprivation. Despite being better connected than other areas, housing Page 290
Page 227
Classification: OFFICIAL deprivation also remains an issue. The relatively better access to services, top 40% least deprived of areas in Scotland, reflects Tobermory’s role as a service hub for the island. 4.4.5 The South West area of the island experiences extreme deprivation in access to services, ranked in the lowest percentile, this reflects its isolation and sparse infrastructure. The area is geographically remote, with fewer roads and limited public transport. However, the Southwest performs well in health and crime, for both domains the area ranked in the top 20% least deprived in Scotland. This is likely due to its rural character, low population density, and healthier lifestyle factors often associated with remote living. 4.4.6 The South of Mull similarly struggles with access to services ranked in the bottom percentile, reflecting its geographical challenges. However, the South performs relatively well as income, employment, education, crime and health are ranked in the top 30% least deprived. Table 4.3: Domains of Deprivation Study Area Income Employment Education Health Access Crime Housing North Mull, Gometra and Ulva 65% 75% 77% 67% 2% 86% 43% Tobermory 58% 63% 72% 59% 60% 54% 54% Southwest Mull and Iona 67% 68% 58% 83% 1% 88% 19% South Mull 76% 74% 72% 72% 1% 75% 16% Source: (SIMD, 2020). 4.5 Protected Characteristics Age 4.5.1 2022 Census data on age was published in May 2024 and provides a summary of age profiles across the four study areas. Table 4.4 illustrates the age profile of the study areas from the 2022 Census (Scotland’s Census, 2022c). Table 4.4: Age Profiles Study Area Ages (%) 0-15 Years 16-64 Years 65+ Years All Ages Tobermory 18.1% 58.5% 23.8% 100% North Mull, Gometra and Ulva 15.1% 57.1% 27.5% 100% South Mull 14.3% 55.3% 30.5% 100% Southwest Mull and Iona 16.5% 59.4% 27.8% 100% Page 291
Page 228
Classification: OFFICIAL Mull and the Islands 15.3% 57.6% 27.0% 100% Argyll & Bute 14.6% 58.2% 27.2% 100% Scotland 16.4% 63.6% 20.0% 100% Source: (Scotland’s Census 2022c). All figures have been individually rounded and may not sum. 4.5.2 In terms of the four study areas, Tobermory has the largest proportion of children aged 0-15 (18.1%) and South Mull had the lowest proportion (14.3%). Southwest Mull and Iona had the largest proportion of residents aged 16-64 at 59.4% and South Mull had the lowest at 55.3%. All study areas had a higher proportion of residents aged 65+ when compared to the national average (20.0%). However, South Mull had the highest proportion at 30.5% of residents aged 65+ and Tobermory had the lowest at 23.8%. 4.5.3 In terms of comparison with the regional and national averages, Mull and the Islands has a slightly higher proportion of children aged 0-15 (15.3%), compared to Argyll & Bute (14.6%) but had a lower proportion compared to Scotland (16.4%). Mull and the Islands had a lower proportion of working age population aged 16-64 (57.6%), compared to Argyll & Bute (58.2%) and Scotland (63.6%). However, Mull and Argyll & Bute overall had a higher proportion of older people aged 65+ (27.0% and 27.2%, respectively) compared to the national average of 20.0% (Scotland’s Census, 2022c). 4.5.4 Older people tend to have stronger feelings of belonging with their community. In 2019, almost nine in ten adults (86%) aged 60 and above said they felt a very or fairly strong sense of belonging to their community, compared to seven in ten (70%) of those aged between 16 and 39. However, young people are more likely to attend a cultural event of place than older people (Scottish Government, 2019). Disability 4.5.5 Table 4.5 illustrates the disability profiles of the study areas and comparators from the 2022 Census (Scotland’s Census, 2022d). The table demonstrates the percentage of residents of all ages who have a long-term health problem or disability. Table 4.5: Disability Profiles Study Area Disability (% - total population) Day-to-day activities limited a lot Day-today activities limited a little Day-to-day activities not limited Tobermory 7.7% 12.5% 79.8% North Mull, Gometra and Ulva 7.5% 14.7% 78.2% South Mull 9.1% 13.2% 77.5% Southwest Mull and Iona 6.7% 11.5% 81.7% Mull and the Islands 7.7% 13.1% 79.3% Argyll & Bute 10.6% 14.6% 74.7% Scotland 10.8% 13.3% 75.9% Source: (Scotland’s Census, 2022d). Page 292
Page 229
Classification: OFFICIAL 4.5.6 In terms of the four study areas, South Mull has the highest proportion of residents (9.1%) whose day-to-day activities are limited a lot, while Southwest Mull and Iona has the lowest proportion (6.7%). North Mull, Gometra and Ulva has the highest proportion of residents (14.7%) whose day-to-day activities are limited a little and Southwest Mull and Iona has the lowest proportion (11.5%). Overall, Southwest Mull and Iona study area has the population with the lowest percentage of residents who have a long-term health condition or disability. 4.5.7 In terms of comparison with the regional and national averages, Mull and the Islands has a significantly lower proportion of its population that have day-to-day activities limited a lot (7.7%), compared to Argyll & Bute (10.6%) and Scotland (10.8%). Despite this, all three areas have similar results in relation to day-to-day activities are limited a little, however Argyll & Bute has a marginally higher percentage: Mull and the Islands (13.1%), Argyll & Bute (14.6%) and Scotland (13.3%). Mull and the Islands has a higher proportion of residents whose day-to-day activities are not limited (79.3%), compared to regional (74.7%) and national (75.9%) averages. Overall, the population of Mull and the Islands has a lower percentage of residents who have a long-term health condition or disability when compared to regional and national averages. 4.5.8 In 2019, adults living with a long-term limiting physical or mental health condition were more likely to experience discrimination (12% vs 6%) and harassment (9% vs 5%) in the last 12 months compared to adults without any health condition (Scottish Government, 2023a). 4.5.9 According to the Scottish Household Survey, cultural attendance at events or places was lowest among adults with a physical or mental health conditions that caused long-term major reduced daily capacity (Scottish Government, 2018). 4.5.10 The gap between employment rates for disabled and non-disabled people across Scotland in 2018 was 35.5 percentage points (46.5% for adults aged 16-64 who were Equality Act disabled vs 81.1% for those who were not Equality Act disabled). However, the gap between employment rates for disabled and non-disabled people was lower for women (31.1 percentage points) than men (40.0 percentage points) (Scottish Government, 2020a). 4.5.11 The average rate of employment for people who are classed as disabled under the Equality Act in Argyll & Bute is 51.0% which is higher than the average rate for Scotland at 45.6%, as shown in Figure 4.3. Page 293
Page 230
Classification: OFFICIAL Figure 4.3: Disabled Employment Rates by Local Authority in Scotland Source: (Scottish Government, 2018). 4.5.12 Across Scotland, 13% of looked after children had a disability which is higher than the overall proportion of children with a disability (approximately 10%) (Scottish Government, 2017). Ethnicity 4.5.13 According to the 2022 Census, the majority of people across Scotland are White; however, across the four study areas within Mull and the Islands, a higher proportion of residents are White, as shown in Table 4.6 below. The study areas with the highest proportion are North Mull, Gometra and Ulva; and South Mull, both with 98.4%. These percentages are higher than the averages in Argyll & Bute (97.7%) and Scotland (92.9%). Table 4.6: Ethnicity Profiles Study Area Ethnicity (% - total population) ‘White’ ‘Mixed or Multiple Ethnic Group’ ‘Asian, Asian Scottish or Asian British’ African Caribbean or Black Tobermory 98.0% 0.7% 0.9% 0.1% 0.0% North Mull, Gometra and Ulva 98.4% 1.0% 0.5% 0.1% 0.3% South Mull 98.4% 0.8% 0.5% 0.0% 0.2% Southwest Mull and Iona 98.3% 0.5% 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% Mull and the Islands 98.3% 0.7% 0.6% 0.1% 0.1% Page 294
Page 231
Classification: OFFICIAL Argyll & Bute 97.7% 0.8% 0.9% 0.2% 0.1% Scotland 92.9% 1.1% 3.9% 0.1% 7.9% Source: (Scotland’s Census 2022e). All figures have been individually rounded and may not sum. 4.5.14 The second highest ethnic group in Tobermory is ‘Asian, Asian Scottish or Asian British’ (0.9%). The second highest ethnic group in the other three study areas is ‘Mixed or Multiple Ethnic Group’: North Mull, Gometra and Ulva (1.0%), South Mull (0.8%) and Southwest Mull and Iona (0.5%). Sex 4.5.15 Data on sex from the 2022 Census demonstrates that it is very similar across all four study areas and comparators, as seen in Table 4.7. Overall, there are marginally more females than males in Scotland. Table 4.7: Sex Profiles Study Area Sex (% - total population) Male Female Tobermory 46.8% 53.1% North Mull, Gometra and Ulva 49.1% 50.9% South Mull 48.1% 51.7% Southwest Mull and Iona 46.3% 53.7% Mull and the Islands 47.6% 52.3% Argyll & Bute 48.9% 51.1% Scotland 48.6% 51.4% Source: (Scotland’s Census, 2022f). All figures have been individually rounded and may not sum. 4.5.16 In Mull, Iona, Coll & Tiree4, life expectancy is higher for females (83.4 years) which is higher than the Scottish average (80.7 years). Life expectancy for males is 78.4 years which is higher than the Scottish average (76.5 years) (Scotland Public Health Observatory, 2024). Gender reassignment 4.5.17 The 2022 Census found that 19,990 people in Scotland were trans or had trans history. This is 0.44% of people aged 16 and over (Scotland’s Census, 2022g). Almost half (46.1%) of trans people were aged 16-24 and around a quarter (26.0%) were aged 25-34. In Argyll & Bute, 0.32% of people were trans, or had trans history, this is lower than the national average. Marriage and civil partnership 4.5.18 Table 4.8 shows the marital and civil partnership status profiles of the various study areas (Scotland’s Census, 2022h). Table 4.8: Marital and Civil Partnership Status Profiles Study Area Marriage and civil partnership (% - population aged 16+) Never married and never registered in a Married or in a registered Separated, but still legally Divorced or civil Widowed or surviving civil 4 Data is not available solely for Mull in regards to life expectancy, therefore intermediate zone level data is used which also includes Iona, Coll and Tiree. Page 295
Page 232
Classification: OFFICIAL civil partnership civil partnership married or still legally in a civil partnership partnership dissolved partnership partner Tobermory 33.0% 49.1% 2.5% 10.1% 5.5% North Mull, Gometra and Ulva 27.8% 57.1% 1.3% 7.3% 7.1% South Mull 27.4% 52.0% 2.8% 8.5% 9.2% Southwest Mull and Iona 30.6% 52.0% 1.8% 8.9% 6.7% Mull and the Islands 29.9% 52.6% 2.0% 8.7% 7.0% Argyll & Bute 30.2% 49.1% 2.5% 9.5% 8.7% Scotland 38.1% 44.0% 2.4% 8.4% 7.0% Source: (Scotland’s Census, 2022h). All figures have been individually rounded and may not sum. 4.5.1 In terms of the four study areas, Tobermory has the highest proportion of residents who have never been married or registered in a civil partnership (33.0%) and who are divorced or civil partnership dissolved (10.1%). North Mull, Gometra and Ulva has the highest proportion of residents who are married or in a civil partnership (57.1%). South Mull has the highest proportion of residents who are separated, but still legally married or in a civil partnership (2.8%) and widows or surviving civil partnership partner (9.2%). 4.5.2 In terms of comparison with the regional and national averages, Mull and the Islands has a higher proportion of residents who are married or in a registered civil partnership (52.6%), compared to Argyll & Bute (49.1%) and Scotland (44.0%). As a result of this, Mull and the Islands has a lower proportion of residents who have never been married and never registered in a civil partnership (29.9%) compared to Argyll & Bute (30.2%) and Scotland (38.1%). Additionally, a lower proportion of residents are divorced or civil partnership dissolved (8.7%), compared to 9.5% and 8.4%, respectively. Pregnancy and maternity 4.5.3 In Mull, Iona, Coll & Tiree, 81% of babies are a healthy birth weight which is very similar to the national average of 80.9%. In 2021, the rate of live births in Mull, Iona, Coll & Tiree was 9.5 births per 1,000 population which is higher than the national average at 8.8 births per 1,000 population. The rate of live births in Mull, Iona, Coll & Tiree from 2002-2021 has experienced periods of increase and decrease. The rate of live births did increase from 7.2 per 1,000 population in 2020 to 9.5 per 1,000 population in 2021 (Scottish Public Health Observatory, 2024). Religion or belief 4.5.1 Table 4.9 shows the religion and belief profiles of the various study areas (Scotland’s Census, 2022i). 4.5.2 In terms of the four study areas, the Church of Scotland is the religion or belief which the majority of residents identify with, Southwest Mull and Iona has the highest proportion of residents who identify with it (30.6%). Despite this, the majority of residents across all four study areas identify most with no religion, with North Mull, Gometra and Ulva reporting the highest percentage (56.8%). 4.5.3 In terms of comparison with the regional and national averages, Mull and the Islands has a higher percentage of residents who report no religion (53.8%), compared to Argyll & Bute Page 296
Page 233
Classification: OFFICIAL (48.5%) and Scotland (51.1%). Additionally, Mull and the Islands has a higher proportion of residents who identify with the Pagan religion (0.8%), compared to Argyll & Bute (0.6%) and Scotland (0.4%). Mull and the Islands has a higher percentage of residents who identify as Other Christian (8.7%) compared to Argyll & Bute (6.6%) and Scotland (5.1%). Conversely, Mull and the Islands has a significantly lower proportion of residents who are Roman Catholic (4.0%), compared to Argyll & Bute (9.2%) and Scotland (13.3%). Additionally, Mull and the Islands has a lower percentage of residents who identify as Muslim (0.2%), compared to Argyll & Bute (0.4%) and Scotland (2.2%). Table 4.9: Percentage Religion or Belief Reported in Scotland's Census 2022 Religion or Belief Religion or belief (% - total population) Tobermory North Mull, Gometra and Ulva South Mull Southwest Mull and Iona Mull and the Islands Argyll & Bute Scotland Church of Scotland 24.9% 19.1% 21.5% 30.6% 23.7% 27.0% 20.4% Roman Catholic 5.4% 3.6% 2.7% 3.9% 4.0% 9.2% 13.3% Other Christian 7.9% 8.0% 9.7% 10.1% 8.7% 6.6% 5.1% Buddhist 0.3% 0.1% 0.3% 0.0% 0.2% 0.3% 0.3% Hindu 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.6% Jewish 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% Muslim 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.5% 0.2% 0.4% 2.2% Sikh 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.2% Pagan 1.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.9% 0.8% 0.6% 0.4% Other religion 0.3% 0.1% 0.0% 0.9% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% No religion 54.0% 56.8% 55.2% 47.4% 53.8% 48.5% 51.1% Religion not stated 6.0% 11.2% 10.2% 5.3% 8.2% 7.0% 6.2% Source: (Scotland’s Census, 2022i). Sexual orientation 4.5.4 The 2022 Census found that there the majority of people aged 16+ in Argyll & Bute identify as heterosexual/straight (88.0%), which is very similar to the national average (87.8%). As of 2022, there were 1,894 LGB+ people aged 16+ in Argyll & Bute (2.5%), this is a smaller proportion of the population when compared to the rest of Scotland (4.1%). These percentages are demonstrated below in Table 4.10. Table 4.10: Percentage of people who identified as LGB+, 2022 Sexual Orientation Sexual orientation (% - population aged 16+) Argyll & Bute Scotland Heterosexual/Straight 88.0% 87.8% Gay or Lesbian 1.1% 1.8% Bisexual 1.1% 1.8% Page 297
Page 234
Classification: OFFICIAL Other sexual orientation 0.3% 0.5% Not answered 9.4% 8.2% Source: (Scotland’s Census, 2022j) All figures have been individually rounded and may not sum. 4.5.5 Of this 4.1% of people aged 16+ who identify as LGB+, 43.6% identify as ‘Gay or Lesbian’, 43.6% identified as ‘Bisexual’ and 12.8% identified as ‘Other sexual orientation’. Almost half (46.6%) of bisexual people were aged 16 to 24. Around a third (32.0%) were aged 25 to 34. Around a quarter (23.1%) of gay or lesbian people were aged 16 to 24. A further 28.6% were aged 25 to 34, therefore just under half were aged 35 and older (Scotland’s Census, 2022j). Page 298
Page 235
Classification: OFFICIAL 5 Economic Impact Assessment 5.1 Introduction 5.1.1 This economic impact assessment identifies areas of activity where the economic benefits of the proposed campus will differ depending upon whether a site is selected in Tobermory or in a more central island location. These include effects on local investment; effects on existing housing stock; impacts on educational attainment; parent/guardian loss of earnings; staff commuting costs and monetised value of transport carbon emissions. The assessment was undertaken based on HM Treasury (HMT) Green Book economic appraisal guidance (UK Government, 2022), using the Isle of Mull economy as an impact geography. 5.1.2 Its purpose is to support the Council in making an evidence-based decision on the most appropriate location for the school, and therefore does not include any consideration of economic benefits that will remain the same irrespective of school location. For example, it does not include an assessment of impacts related to staffing numbers, school expenditure, carbon emissions from construction and operations; or educational impacts related to size of the school’s student roll. 5.1.3 The assessed impacts provide insights into the effects of the Project on key groups and aspects of the local economy, including: 1. Local Housing 2. Students 3. Parents/Guardians 4. Staff 5. The Environment 5.2 Assessment Approach 5.2.1 The assessment has used HMT Green Book (UK Government, 2022) and Transport Scotland’s Scottish Transport Appraisal Guidance (STAG) compliant methodologies to quantify the impacts of keeping the school in Tobermory or relocating it to a central Site. Using publicly available data alongside information from the Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations Report (Systra, 2025), reliable data and robust assumptions have been applied to show the changes in economic impacts. The following impacts have been examined: Effects on Local Investments – The changes to wider Land Value Uplift (LVU) as a result of potential housing developments being closer to or further from a school. Effect on Existing Housing Stock – The changes in the house prices of existing residential units. Impacts on Educational Attainment – The loss in potential lifetime earnings of students as a result of a decreased likelihood to attend Higher/Further Education due to having to travel further to school. Parent/Guardian Loss of Earnings – Estimated earnings lost due to parents travelling further to take children to school. Cost of Commuting – Perceived costs to staff commuting to work at the school. Cost of Transport Carbon Emissions – Total environmental costs to society as a result of students, parents/guardians and staff travelling to the school. Page 299
Page 236
Classification: OFFICIAL 5.2.2 These impacts have been examined to best show the differences between the options. Due to the negligible or no difference in the construction and operations of the school between sites any impacts related to those would be the same. 5.2.3 In line with HMT Green Book Guidance all values are presented in Present Value (PV) terms. Using STAG and Green Book principles, values are discounted at 3.5% annually to give the economic impacts in PV terms. The school is scheduled for completion in 2028 and all annual impacts, excluding educational attainment, are appraised over a 10-year period post completion of the school. Educational Attainment is given as the effect on total earnings over a lifetime, still in PV terms. Impacts on housing and land are given in a single year once the school is open and operational. 5.3 Economic Impacts Investment Stimulus 5.3.1 Schools influence the attractiveness of an area for potential residents and therefore the value of future housing developments. The economic benefits of this are captured through the effect of a school on the LVU of surrounding proposed housing development sites. LVU is the net private benefit resulting from a change in land use to more productive uses. The impact represents the monetised difference between the current land value and future land value resulting from the proposed investment. 5.3.2 Research shows that in Scotland, houses within 0.5 miles of a school have a 1.73% higher Gross Development Value (GDV) (market price) than those further away (OnlineMoneyAdviser, 2025). The GDV of future housing developments drives the underlying land value and therefore the LVU of the site. The location of the school on the Isle of Mull will result in a change in the future land values of proposed housing developments nearby, increasing the value of those developments within 0.5 miles of the school’s location. 5.3.3 The key assumptions used are outlined below. Page 300
Page 237
Classification: OFFICIAL Table 5.1: Wider LVU Assumptions Assumption Value Source Current Developments Brought Forward within 0.5 miles of the Tobermory Site (number of units) 144 Calculated using data for Local Development Plan (LDP) and Large & Small Windfall Sites from Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations Report. Current Developments Brought Forward within 0.5 miles of the Central Site (number of units) 82 Calculated using data for LDP and Large & Small Windfall Sites from Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations Report. Average House Price in Tobermory £218,208 Zoopla average house price in Tobermory (Zoopla, December 2024). Average House Price near the Central Site £160,000 Zoopla average house price near the Central Site (Zoopla, December 2024). Change in House Price 1.73% Where in Britain do homes sell for more money when they are closer to a school? - Value for Scotland of the increase in property prices within 0.5 miles of a school. Current Land Value Tobermory £3,360,468 Calculated using data for LDP and Large & Small Windfall Sites from Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations Report and values from Scotland’s Land Information Service. Current Land Value Central Site £447,302 Calculated using data for LDP and Large & Small Windfall Sites from Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations Report and values from Scotland’s Land Information Service. Land Value as a Proportion of GDV 1/3 Savills – Land buyers rule of thumb, land value is a third of GDV. Source: Stantec. 5.3.4 The difference in all house prices for the areas near both sites are outlined below. Table 5.2: Wider LVU Results Tobermory Site Central Island Site Difference Between Tobermory and Central Island Site Effect on Local Investments £152,000 £63,000 £89,000 Source: Stantec. 5.3.5 The greater impact at the Tobermory Site is driven by the substantially greater number of houses in Tobermory than near the central island site. The impact of this will be realised when the school is opened and operational as this is from when prospective buyers will be able to use the school, the benefit occurs once in a single year. Existing Local Housing 5.3.6 A similar approach has been used to quantify the effect on existing local housing, showing the effect on house prices due to the choice of location of the school. As there is no change in the Page 301
Page 238
Classification: OFFICIAL use of land, LVU has not been captured. This effect shows only the change to total housing value in Tobermory and near the central site. The table below shows the assumptions used. Table 5.3: Change in Local Housing Value Assumptions Assumption Value Source Current Households within 0.5 miles of the Tobermory Site 496 Scottish Census 2022 Current Households within 0.5 miles of the Central Site 40 Scottish Census 2022 Average House Price in Tobermory £218,208 Zoopla average house price in Tobermory. (December 2024) Average House Price near the Central Site £160,000 Zoopla average house price near the Central Site. (December 2024) Change in House Price 1.73% Where in Britain do homes sell for more money when they are closer to a school? - Value for Scotland of the increase in property prices within 0.5 miles of a school. Source: Stantec. 5.3.7 The impact on all current house prices is outlined below. The impact of this will be realised when the school is opened and operational as this is from when prospective buyers will be able to use the school, the benefit occurs once in a single year. As there currently is a school in Tobermory the benefit is the value that would be retained if the school does not relocate. Table 5.4: House Value Results Tobermory Site Central Island Site Difference Between Tobermory and Central Island Site Effect on Local Investments £1,567,000 £93,000 £1,474,000 Source: Stantec. 5.3.8 The greater impact at the Tobermory Site is driven by the substantially greater number of houses located there and the higher average house price. Educational Attainment 5.3.9 The distance a student must travel to school influences their decision to participate in post- compulsory education, meaning it influences the decision of high school students on whether to continue on to further or higher education. Research shows that in the extreme condition in which a student must travel more than 8km to school they are 27% less likely to attend post- compulsory education than those that live within 2km of their educational institute. The decision of where to locate the high school on Mull will move some students from within 2km to further than 8km away from the school. 5.3.10 Those that do not attend university are likely to experience a loss of earnings compared to those that obtain a degree. Therefore, students that must travel further to school are less likely to attend university and may experience a loss of earnings as a result of this. The table below details the assumptions used to calculate the change in lifetime earnings because of the location of the school. Page 302
Page 239
Classification: OFFICIAL Table 5.5: Educational Attainment Assumptions Assumption Value Source Total High School Students within 2km of Tobermory Site 80 Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations Report (Systra, 2025). Total High School Students within 2km of Central Site 3 Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations Report (Systra, 2025). University Attendance Rate 35.8% Higher education student numbers. House of Commons Library. 2023 Higher Education Entry Rate. University Retention Rate 91.5% Report on Widening Access 2021-22. Scottish Funding Council. University Retention Rate. Percentage Change in Likelihood to Attend University 27.0% The Impact of Distance to Nearest Education Institution on the Post–Compulsory Education Participation Decision. Dickerson and McIntosh. Students who live less than 2km from their academic institutes are 27% more likely to attend post-compulsory education than those who live more than 8km away. Lifetime Difference in Earnings for a Male £130,000 The impact of undergraduate degrees on lifetime earnings. Britton et al. Over their working lives men who attend university earn £130,000 more than those who do not. Figures are over a lifetime and in PV terms. Lifetime Difference in Earnings for a Female £100,000 The impact of undergraduate degrees on lifetime earnings. Britton et al. Over their working lives women who attend university earn £100,000 more than those who do not. Figures are over a lifetime and in PV terms. Source: Stantec. 5.3.11 Using the number of high school students within 2km of each site and calculating a figure for the number of students likely to attend and complete university, which can then be adjusted for the decrease if the school moves 8km away. Applying the loss of earnings values to the number of pupils affected results in the total earnings lost over their entire lifetime. This is then discounted for 7 years, as an average amount of time for high school students to join the labour market. The results of the analysis on total lifetime earnings for all affected students for both sites are outlined below: Table 5.6: Educational Attainment Results Tobermory Site Central Island Site Difference Between Tobermory and Central Island Site Effect on Lifetime Earnings £652,000 £25,000 £627,000 Source: Stantec. 5.3.12 The impact of the Tobermory Site is the earnings that could be lost if the school was moved, the impact of the central site is the earnings gained from the relocation. The greater impact of the Tobermory Site is driven by the high number of students located in the area. Page 303
Page 240
Classification: OFFICIAL Loss of Earnings 5.3.13 Parents who drive their children to school are affected by the location of the school. Due to the transport infrastructure limitations a large number of parents must take their children to school, alongside this parents with children in early learning years must take their children to school themselves as transport is not provided. If the school is moved parents may lose the additional travel time in working time. This loss of working time may result in a loss of earnings to parents. Although not quantitively captured here, there will also be an effect on employer’s balance sheets due to the reduced working time of parents. Businesses are likely to suffer some changes to revenue or costs due to the effect on working time. As the effect of this on firms will differ dependant on their business model and approach to the change, this has not been captured here. 5.3.14 The assumptions used are outlined below. Table 5.7: Loss of Earnings Assumptions Assumption Value Source Daily Travel Time for all Parents - Tobermory Site (aggregate minutes across all staff) 630 Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations Report (Systra, 2025). This is the total travel time in minutes for all parents taking their children to school. This is for the 2 trips per day which are likely to impact employment time. Daily Travel Time for all Parents - Central Site (aggregate minutes across all staff) 936 Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations Report (Systra, 2025). This is the total travel time in minutes for all parents taking their children to school. This is for the 2 trips per day which are likely to impact employment time. Employment Rate 67.8% Argyll & Bute Employment Rate aged 16-64 (December 2024) taken from the Annual Population Survey. Value of Travel Time for Parents (per hour) £20.34 Average hourly earnings in Argyll & Bute from ASHE 2024. Source: Stantec. 5.3.15 The total journey time for 2 daily journeys has been calculated for the entire school year and multiplied by the average earnings in the area. This has then been adjusted to account for the percentage of parents in employment. The difference in journey time for trips in both the morning and afternoon for all employed parents results in the earnings retained or lost set out below: Table 5.8: Loss of Earnings Results Tobermory Site Central Island Site Difference Between Tobermory and Central Island Site Effects on Parents Earnings (per year) £0 -£96,000 £96,000 Source: Stantec. 5.3.16 The value for the central site is the earnings lost due to the relocation of the school, the value for the Tobermory Site is 0 as there will be no earnings lost if the school remains where it currently is. Page 304
Page 241
Classification: OFFICIAL School Staff Costs of Community 5.3.17 The STAG Guidance applies a value to the individual for commuting to work, this can be applied to the staff travel time for both site options. The STAG Guidance provides a willingness to pay value for the journey time savings for individuals commuting to work. Applying this to the total staff travel time for both sides will show the economic impact to the individuals for commuting to work. The assumptions applied are set out in the following table: Table 5.9: School Staff Cost of Commuting Assumptions Assumption Value Source Total Daily Staff Travel Time Tobermory Site (aggregate minutes across all staff) 1,390 Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations Report. Total Daily Staff Travel Time Central Site (aggregate minutes across all staff) 3,932 Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations Report. Value of Travel Time for Staff (per hour) £11.10 TAG Databook value of commuting 2024. Source: Stantec. 5.3.18 The results of the analysis for both sites are outlined below: Table 5.10: Cost of Commuting Results Tobermory Site Central Site Difference Between Tobermory and Central Island Site Cost of Commuting (per annum) - £350,000 - £990,000 £640,000 Source: Stantec. 5.3.19 Staff commuting time will approximately triple if the school is located at the central site, this is driving the large increase in the total cost to staff. Although staff would be reimbursed for their mileage for the first 4 years of the school relocating, this impact captures the willingness to pay value for the journey time savings which the staff will not receive back and takes a longer- term approach. Vehicle Carbon Costs 5.3.20 The various methods of transport used by students and staff to travel to school will result in carbon emissions. The Transport Scotland STAG Guidance provides values for monetising vehicle carbon emissions for use in appraisal, these values are estimated by the target- consistent marginal abatement costs consistent with the Government’s commitments on carbon emissions. These monetise vehicle emissions to align them with national commitments to carbon reduction. The assumptions used are highlighted below. Page 305
Page 242
Classification: OFFICIAL Table 5.11: Carbon Costs Assumptions Assumption Value Source Total Daily Carbon Emissions Tobermory Site (kgCO2e) 352 Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations Report. Total Daily Carbon Emissions Central Site (kgCO2e) 1,032 Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations Report. Carbon Costs (tCO2e) Varies by year Based on TAG Databook Carbon Values. Source: Stantec. 5.3.21 The results of the analysis for both sites are outlined below: Table 5.12: Carbon Costs Results Tobermory Site Central Island Site Difference Between Tobermory and Central Island Site Carbon Costs - £115,000 - £336,000 £221,000 Source: Stantec. 5.4 Summary 5.4.1 The differences in economic impact across the two options are summarised below. Table 5.13: Summary Summary Difference Between Tobermory and Central Island Site Investment Lost/Gained Due to Relocation £89,000 Existing Property Values £1,474,000 Students Lifetime Earnings £627,000 Changes to Parents Current Earnings £96,000 Cost of Commuting £640,000 Carbon Cost of Travel £221,000 Total Benefits £3,147,000 Source: Stantec. 5.4.2 Overall, the analysis has concluded that the economic impact of the Project will be £3,147,000 higher if the school were built in Tobermory than would be the case if it were built in a central island location. Sensitivity Analysis – Change in School Catchment Area 5.4.3 As part of the Transport Considerations Report (Systra, 2025) a change in school catchments has been included to present the scenario in which the secondary school catchments areas are altered. Although this scenario will not directly influence the site scoring and selection Page 306
Page 243
Classification: OFFICIAL process it has been included as an additional test to consider the sensitivity. The bullets below show the impacts which are affected by the change in catchments: Changes to Parents Current Earnings – The earnings lost under the central site option, and the differential between the two options would increase by £20,000 to £116,000. Carbon Cost of Travel – The cost of carbon emissions for the central site option would increase by £24,000 to £360,000; raising the differential between the two options to £250,000. Aggregate Difference in Impact - These two changes would increase the aggregate difference in impact by £44,000, taking it to £3,191,000. Page 307
Page 244
Classification: OFFICIAL 6 Island Communities Impact Assessment 6.1 Introduction 6.1.1 The Islands (Scotland) Act 2018 provides a legal basis for greater decision making at a local level within Scottish Islands and seeks to increase economic prosperity for island communities. 6.1.2 This is to be achieved through ‘island proofing’ legislation, policy, and strategic decisions by taking account of the special circumstances of island communities and ensuring no disadvantage to people living and working on islands (as defined by Section 1 of the Act). 6.1.3 Section 7 of the Act sets out a specific duty for relevant public bodies to “have regard to island communities” in carrying out their functions. A related duty in Section 8 of the Act requires relevant public bodies to undertake an island communities impact assessment “in relation to a policy, strategy, or service which, in the authority’s opinion, is likely to have an effect on an island community which is significantly different from its effect on other communities (including other island communities) in the area in which the authority exercises its functions”. 6.2 Assessment Approach 6.2.1 An ICIA is intended to evaluate the potential effects of a project on island communities, taking account of the unique challenges and opportunities faced by people living on islands, such as geographical isolation, smaller population sizes, limited infrastructure and reliance on specific industries. 6.2.2 The assessment following the Scottish Government’s guidance and toolkit prepared on ICIAs (Scottish Government, 2020b). This provides a framework to assess the extent to which the proposed Mull Campus has an impact on island communities. The assessment has been informed by engagement activities, as discussed in Section 3.2. 6.2.3 Consideration has been given to the thematic questions in the ICIA guidance around: Demography – including current demographic structure, challenges faced in areas with greater proportion of older people and impacts on these challenges including encouraging young people to leave; Economy – potential for impacts on key industries, on island infrastructure and natural environment, on communications networks, on small businesses and their supply chains and taking account of the costs of travel particularly for people on low incomes; and Social – the often dispersed nature of island deprivation, impacts on the cost of living, changes affecting people in fuel poverty, consideration of part time and self-employed nature of much of the islands’ workforce and issues with availability of childcare provision. 6.2.4 The following framing questions have been applied to understand the potential impact of the Project based on high level site selection assumptions in accordance with the early phase of the Project. Guide Questions: Island Community Impact Assessment Q1. Does the proposal take into consideration the current demographic structure of the islands and the challenges faced by populations in these communities? Q2. Will the proposals have an impact of the economic prosperity of island communities? Page 308
Page 245
Classification: OFFICIAL Q3. Does the proposal consider the unique transport challenges faced by island communities? Has the cost and time taken in travelling between island communities been taken into consideration – particularly for those on low incomes or reliant on infrequent public transport? Q4. Will the proposals have an impact on the island’s infrastructure or natural environment and biodiversity? Q5. Effectively address the unique social challenges faced by island communities? Q6. Effectively address the unique health challenges faced by the islands’ communities? Q7. Does the Project have the potential to impact on the use of Gaelic in the community? 6.2.5 The framing questions have also been applied taking account of key aspects in Section 8 of the Act around the potential for differential impacts on the islands’ communities and on consideration of the extent to which delivery of the Project might improve or mitigate outcomes. 6.3 Island Communities Impact Assessment Findings Q1. Does the proposal take into consideration the current demographic structure of the islands and the challenges faced by populations in these communities? 6.3.1 At the time of writing, the Project is undergoing a site selection process to determine the most suitable location for a 2-18 education campus on the Isle of Mull. This process has been initiated as a result of LEIP (discussed previously in Section 2.2.2) funding which has been awarded to Argyll & Bute Council on the basis of a like-for-like replacement of an existing education campus in Tobermory. 6.3.2 The site selection process is considering the suitability of site options within the settlement boundary of Tobermory, including the existing school site, and site options located centrally on Mull in Craignure or Garmony. Due to commercial sensitivities, the exact locations of the site options was not released to the public prior to completion of the impact assessments at this stage. As such, the impact assessment report predominantly considers the high-level implications of a site in either a central (i.e., Craignure or Garmony) or Tobermory (i.e., existing or new site) location. 6.3.3 The proposals to consider a Central campus option responds to community views to provide a more equitable high schooling option for all children and young-people living on Mull. At present, children and young people living in the Ross of Mull (South West Mull) have limited access to the high school in Tobermory due to travel times of approximately 1 hour and 30 minutes each way, which precludes this as a viable option for most families. The area is currently within a catchment area for Oban High School where children can board weekly from Monday to Friday and return home to Mull at the weekends. 6.3.4 A Tobermory location would likely maintain the current status quo for school provision on the island. This predominantly includes families in Tobermory which is the largest settlement area on the Island and some families located in north, central and some south settlements. By retaining a Tobermory option, concerns about depopulation in the Ross of Mull have been cited during a number of community engagement events and this is reflected in the baseline data which indicates that South West Mull has experienced a depopulation rate of 9% amongst it’s 0-15 year old age group between 2011 and 2022, while North Mull, Gometra and Ulva has experienced a depopulation rate of 3% in this age group. Comparatively, South of Mull has seen a significant increase in population growth for this age group at 36%, while Tobermory has experienced a 15% increase in this age group. Page 309
Page 246
Classification: OFFICIAL 6.3.5 A centrally located campus would be sensitive to the demographic challenges faced by families living in the South and South West of Mull and would benefit families with teenage children attending secondary school on the mainland in Oban. A number of local families have expressed that attending boarding school on the mainland has negatively impacted their children and discourages young people from settling back in the local community in adulthood, increasing worries over depopulation. Results from the Bunessan Parent Council Survey (conducted November 2024) show that 50% of parents would “seriously consider leaving the Ross of Mull if a central school is not built”. 6.3.6 While 95% of those surveyed in the Bunessan Parent Council said they would send their children to a central school daily, 57% of parents said that a funded placement option for Oban High School, including the hostel needs to be retained suggesting a preference to maintain this option. During public engagement sessions in September 2024 a number of parents stated that they would continue to opt for their children to board and attend school in Oban, citing that they felt their children had wider access to more opportunities. 6.3.7 A centrally sited option is expected to allow all children on Mull to attend the same high school with reduced travel times for many pupils in the South and South West of Mull areas and allow for greater socialising amongst young people on Mull, this was particularly raised during the engagement with schools. This could have the potential to strengthen community cohesion amongst young people and their families leading to positive social benefits for all island communities. It would also encourage unity between communities in the North and South of Mull. 6.3.8 Proposals for a central site option currently involve the transfer of existing early-years and primary school education from Tobermory to the central Campus site due to the like-for-like requirements of the LEIP funding secured by the Council. As such, with a central site option, there is also the potential for negative demographic implications for those living in Tobermory which is Mull’s largest settlement area. Views expressed from community members suggest that families could choose to move away from Tobermory if early years and primary school provision was removed which could result in depopulation if families choose to leave the island. 6.3.9 A split-site option which would retain early years and primary school provision in Tobermory with a central high school was explored by the Council, however this option has been deemed unaffordable and thus unviable on the basis that the Council would be required to fund the additional cost requirement for a split-site option in its entirety. A motion was passed unanimously on this matter by Argyll & Bute councillors at a Special Meeting on 20 December 2024 (Argyll & Bute Council, 2024b). Q2. Will the proposals have an impact of the economic prosperity of island communities? 6.3.10 The Economic Impact Assessment presented in Chapter 5, outlines that if the campus was located in Tobermory, the economic benefit would be £3,147,000 higher than would be the case if the campus was built in a central island location. This assessment takes into account investment stimulus acknowledging that schools influence the attractiveness of an area for potential residents and therefore the value of future housing developments. The Economic Impact Assessment outlines that houses with 0.5 miles of a school have a 1.73% higher GDV (market price) which drives the underlying land value of the site. The location of the Mull Campus has the potential to increase the value of developments within 0.5 miles of the schools location which would generate positive impacts for both a central and Tobermory site option. 6.3.11 Similarly, the Economic Impact Assessment considers economic impacts to existing local housing. A substantially greater impact has been identified for the Tobermory sites options are as result of more houses being located there and higher average house prices. 6.3.12 While a Tobermory site location is judged to have a stronger economic impact, some community members feel that a central option could particularly bring positive benefits for the Ross of Mull. This is captured in the following response from members of the community in the Page 310
Page 247
Classification: OFFICIAL South West of Mull: “an accessible high school, built in a central location, would make South West Mull a significantly more attractive place for families to move to, assisting in building the economy, stimulating repopulation, and enhancing community resilience. With the increasing ability of remote working, there are exciting opportunities to build up our population through families employed in a combination of remote working and local employment which will make us less dependent on tourism and seasonal work. However, such families are more likely to be attracted to areas with accessible schools”. 6.3.13 Community testimonies provided to inform the ICIA from young people and families who have moved away from the Ross of Mull or from prospective working age families who want to move there but feel unable to do so due to the current secondary school catchment area also support the above comment. Impact on Local Businesses and Employment 6.3.14 Small businesses could experience changes in revenue or a loss in earning if working patterns were affected by the school site location. A central site option could result in a loss of revenue for Tobermory-based businesses who benefit from local footfall and custom from young people and families attending school in the town if they were instead required to travel daily to a central location. Increased travel times for working parents based in Tobermory and North Mull could also affect earnings if this impacted their available working hours and brings implications for increased travel costs for these families. 6.3.15 Bringing the Project forward in a central location could stimulate local business growth to provide services in proximity to the school such as new proposed housing allocations, local shops, amenities and other services. However, due to the early stage of the Project development process any potential impacts attributable to this are regarded as uncertain as they are dependent on a number of factors beyond the scope of this proposal. 6.3.16 Across Mull the supply of 0-3 year old childcare is very low compared to demand and provision is largely centred around Tobermory. It is recommended that that new Campus could integrate community spaces and services that meet the needs of the wider community as a whole. This could include more facilities and resources to offer more after school clubs, breakfast clubs and wraparound care that could positively benefits single parents and working parents. Journey Times and Cost of Travel 6.3.17 In the Mull Education Campus Transport Review (Systra, 2025) attending a central campus option would result in a doubling of travel time for all pupils on average compared to the existing baseline for attendance in Tobermory. This could have a negative impact on parent’s and carer’s working patterns, particularly those who are self-employed or who work part-time to ensure they can accommodate their children’s daily travel to and from school, including attendance at any after school activities locally or elsewhere on the island. 6.3.18 While it is assumed that bus services would be provided along major routes, there will still be a need for some families and staff to ‘feed in’ to bus route intersections where small villages and settlements may not be served. Additionally, the Transport Review (Systra, 2025) forecasts that a number of families are likely to drop-off and collection children by car. 6.3.19 Increased journey times and mileage could also have a significant impact on a higher number of families and staff members who will be subject to longer daily journeys to a central campus location. This would incur additional fuel and maintenance costs for private vehicles if travelling by car which could have financial implications, particularly for low-income families and families with limited or no access to a car. Staff Recruitment and Retention 6.3.20 Education staff have raised concerns about staff recruitment and retention on Mull which is already an issue for a range of positions across the island. A lack of housing options has also Page 311
Page 248
Classification: OFFICIAL been cited as a factor linked to this. It may be more attractive to recruit and retain teachers in a larger settlement area such as Tobermory but the full impacts of the proposals on staff recruitment and retention is not clearly known at this stage. 6.3.21 However, the nearby mainland town of Oban also experiences issues with staff recruitment and retention. Therefore, a location closer to the ferry that allows for staff travel may not alleviate these issues. Q3. Does the proposal consider the unique transport challenges faced by island communities? Has the cost and time taken in travelling between island communities been taken into consideration – particularly for those on low incomes or reliant on infrequent public transport? 6.3.22 To inform the site selection decision making process, Argyll & Bute Council commissioned a Mull Education Campus Transport Review (Systra, 2025). The Transport Review takes into account the transport context of Mull and the cost and time required to travel between island communities to four different proposed site options, including Site 1 Tobermory (existing school site), Site 2 – Craignure, Site 3 – Garmony and Site 4 – Tobermory South. 6.3.23 A summary of the report findings are presented in Table 6.1 below: Table 6.1: Key Travel Considerations from Systra (2025) Mull Education Campus Transport Review Report Site Location Key Travel Considerations Site 1 – Tobermory (existing school site) Travel characteristics are mostly known as they are likely to align with present conditions; The site is within walking distance of the most existing housing; and The site is constrained making access for large vehicles (e.g. buses and HGVs during construction) difficult. Site 2 – Craignure Travel times, distances and carbon emissions will increase over the baseline (more so if the catchments are amended to include the Ross of Mull); Average journey times will increase by approximately 20 minutes; Pupils who currently walk will likely have to be taken to the Craignure site by bus requiring approximately 4 additional buses over the baseline; There is an adjacent allocation for c. 80 housing units, enabling trips by active modes; and Footways and crossing opportunities on the adjacent highway network are limited, however, could be improved. Site 3 – Garmony Travel times, distances and carbon emissions will increase over the baseline (more so if the catchments are amended to include the Ross of Mull); Average journey times will increase by approximately 15 minutes over the baseline; Pupils who currently walk will likely have to be taken to the Garmony site by bus requiring approximately 4 additional buses over the baseline; The site is located adjacent to a limited number of existing housing and no LDP or Large Windfall housing sites identified in the Housing Land Audit; and There are no footways or crossing opportunities on the adjacent highway network – providing them would deliver limited benefit. Page 312
Page 249
Classification: OFFICIAL Site 4 – Tobermory South The site is walkable from some existing housing, and it is noted nearby, and adjacent sites are allocated with up to 112 new residential units; There are some existing footways from adjacent residential catchments; and Travel time, distance and associated carbon emissions are likely to remain broadly similar to the baseline. 6.3.24 Site 1 Tobermory will retain familiar travel patterns as current conditions would largely be unchanged. It is conveniently located within walking distance for most existing housing in Tobermory with 90% of pre-5 and primary school pupils currently living within a 5-minute walking distance (Systra, 2025). Constraints have been noted for the site whereby access for larger vehicles such as HGVs and buses may be challenging. 6.3.25 Site 4 Tobermory South is also walkable from local housing and a proposed residential allocation for us to 112 new homes which offers further potential for active travel to and from school. Other impacts are expected to remain consistent with baseline conditions for Site Location 1. 6.3.26 Both Site 3 Garmony and Site 2 Craignure would lead to increased travel times, distances and carbon emissions, particularly if the catchments are expanded to include the Ross of Mull. Average journey times would increase by approximately 20 minutes for Craignure and 15 minutes for Garmony, necessitating additional bus services in each case. While Craignure offers some potential for active travel with its proximity to an 80-unit residential housing allocation, it is noted that improvements would need to be made footways and cross infrastructure. Garmony lacks nearby housing and has no planned developments at present. There are also limited benefits from improving footways or crossings on the adjacent highway network at this location. There is also a high potential for increased traffic on the A849 and A848 with more buses and car traffic commuting to a central site for a large proportion of pupils and staff who are based in Tobermory. This could be particularly challenging along sections of the route that involve single track road which will be subject to a high volume of commuters also heading northwards to Tobermory for work at a similar peak time. 6.3.27 Island communities are subject to more extreme weather conditions that can more frequently affect travel infrastructure including public transport and ferry travel. For all site locations, it is recommended that the new facilities include digital infrastructure to facilitate and access to online learning for pupils and staff who may not be able to travel to school due to weather- based disruptions. Q4. Will the proposals have an impact on the island’s infrastructure or natural environment and biodiversity? 6.3.28 A central site option would involve increased vehicle trip generation compared with a Tobermory location. The Economic Impact Assessment estimated that vehicle carbon emissions generated from these trips would be 352 kgCO2e for a Tobermory Site and 1,032 kgCO2e for a central Site. 6.3.29 It is acknowledged that the existing road infrastructure on Mull is constrained with large sections of single track road, particularly between Tobermory and central island localities. Increased trip generation on these roads could have adverse effects on local road infrastructure which may require upgrading and could involve increased maintenance costs. 6.3.30 A Tobermory site location is not likely to result in substantially higher levels of vehicular traffic compared to the existing baseline scenario. 6.3.31 Environmental impacts are likely to arise during construction of either site option. It is considered that these will be robustly assessed during the pre-planning process with appropriate mitigation and monitoring measures proposed to meet local and national planning requirements. Page 313
Page 250
Classification: OFFICIAL 6.3.32 It is considered that sustainable design and energy measures will be incorporated into the new Campus, regardless of location, which could have a positive effect in terms of operational emissions and sustainability of the new Mull Campus. Further detail is expected in this regard as the Project develops. Q5. Effectively address the unique social challenges faced by island communities? 6.3.33 Mull has an ageing population and while some communities have experienced growth in the population group aged 0-15 years, some communities such as the South West of Mull has experienced depopulation in this age group of 9%. 6.3.34 Some community members have attributed this to the lack of a central high schooling option for children living in the Ross of Mull who at present have the option to travel and board weekly at Oban High School. Many believe that this discourages young people from returning to the island in adulthood to live and work. 6.3.35 Parents in the South West of Mull have voiced concerns about their children’s experiences at Oban High School. Some of these parents had personally experienced weekly boarding at Oban High School and due to their experiences had decided that they did not want that for their children. This was especially apparent as the survey showed that 50% of those surveyed stated that they would consider leaving the Ross of Mull is a school is not built centrally. Additionally, some parents knew of families who would return to Ross of Mull if there was a daily accessible secondary school for their children. 6.3.36 Through testimonies provided by Bunessan Parent Council, current and former pupils with experience of boarding at Oban High School detailed the adverse impact that boarding had on them and their mental health, citing particular difficulties with home-sickness and feeling isolated from their families and local community during secondary school. 6.3.37 Some community members in the South West of Mull have shared that the impacts of the previous school siting decision in Tobermory has resulted in generational impacts to the communities in this area which has shaped a number of social outcomes for the island as a whole. Community members also feel that if their children and young people are travelling to the mainland for high school education that they are less likely to return to the islands as young adults, bringing concerns around future depopulation. One parent reinforced this point by using an example of their friends who attended Oban High School and “still don’t have a close knit of friends” as they don’t know anyone in the north of the island. 6.3.38 Children who have to undertake long journeys to attend school, whether on Mull or in Oban are more likely to experience tiredness as a result. Parents with children who board at Oban High School have shared that their children are often so tired on the weekends that they worry about their ability to partake in local social activities. One parent stated: “The children come back tired on a Friday and Sundays are ruined because they have to get up so early on Monday. They are 'not here' at the weekends as they are too tired to participate in normal life.” 6.3.39 If a central school location was chosen, this could have the potential to positively impact social outcomes for children and young people currently living in the Ross of Mull, or those currently experiencing long commutes to Tobermory for high school. Many of these pupils, especially those from the Ross of Mull, would still likely experience longer than average travel times by bus each day, however it would provide a feasible option for them to remain on the island, living at home, while attending high school. They would also have the opportunity to socialise with a larger cohort of islanders across Mull who would also be attending the central high school opening up social opportunities such as friendships and participation in island based clubs and activities. 6.3.40 A central school location could have negative implications for younger and primary school aged children in Tobermory who would be required undertake daily journeys to a central location to attend early years and primary school education. As a result of this, average journey times for a central school location will increased by approximately 17.5 minutes over Page 314
Page 251
Classification: OFFICIAL the baseline (SYSTRA, 2025). This could negatively families who are less able to travel by car such as families on low income, experiencing unemployment or deprivation. Q6. Effectively address the unique health challenges faced by the islands’ communities? 6.3.41 Island communities face a number of unique health challenges linked which are augmented by limited access to healthcare services as a result of distance and travel from facilities and a lack of specialist care and emergency service provision within island communities. 6.3.42 Mental health challenges are prevalent in rural and island contexts, and this is often attributable to geographic isolation which can exacerbate feelings of loneliness. Limited access to mental health services also means island communities may lack the same level of support compared to mainland counterparts. Some island communities also have higher rates of chronic conditions such as hypertension, diabetes, and respiratory diseases due to lifestyle factors and limited preventative care options. Island residents may experience health inequalities compared to mainland populations due to socioeconomic disparities, limited job opportunities, and high costs of living. 6.3.43 While there is limited evidence around the impacts of daily travel time on children, some studies suggest that extended daily commutes of 30 minute to an hour each way for children can have several impacts on the following: Physical health: longer commutes could result in increased sedentary behaviour due to children spending more time sitting during travel. A reduction in physical activity can contribute to health issues such as obesity and other chronic conditions (Chairassamee et al., 2024). Sleep and exercise: children with longer travel times to school may get less sleep and engage in lower levels of physical activity compared to those with shorter commutes which has the potential to affect their overall wellbeing (Chairassamee et al., 2024). Mental health: extended period spent commuting can increase stress and negative emotions in children, making it more difficult for them to concentrate during school hours. Linked to the above point, have less time for sleep and exercise could further impact negative health outcomes in children (Voulgaris et al., 2017). Academic Performance: there is some evidence to suggest that a negative relationship between longer commuting times and academic performance (Alanzi and Alfraih, 2023). 6.3.44 The above factors are relevant to a number of pupils in both site option scenarios who need to contend with longer journey times than other peers across part of Argyll & Bute and Scotland more widely. 6.3.45 The Mull Campus proposals have generated a strong community response to an important matter that many care deeply about. A number of concerns have been raised by the community in respect of the proposals and it should be acknowledged that uncertainties around the proposals at present in terms of site location and catchment areas may be causing stress and anxiety to many families in the community. Community members, who have already contributed much to the engagement phases of the Project, have also expressed concerns during the impact assessment process. They have stated that they feel stretched and unable to engage with the process in their capacities as volunteers due to limited timeframes. 6.3.46 Some of the sentiments and concerns expressed by the community have indicated a loss of trust in the Project development process and could likely result in a negative impact on mental health for parents and families. It is recommended that Argyll & Bute Council regularly review and monitor their Engagement Strategy and consider measures to rebuild community trust around the Project to promote positive collaboration between the Council and community with Page 315
Page 252
Classification: OFFICIAL the aim of achieving beneficial outcomes for the Project and Mull’s island communities as the Project develops. Q7. Does the project have the potential to impact on the use of Gaelic in the community? 6.3.47 Community views suggest that the Project has the potential to increase the use of Gaelic in the community if a Gaelic unit is included as part of secondary education in order to continue the full Gaelic Medium Education (GME) currently available. Community views expressed that this could be further strengthened if a cohort from Bunessan Primary School are able to join to continue their Gaelic education at a central site option alongside GME pupils from Salen Primary School. 6.3.48 Delivering GME within the secondary sector of the campus is recognised as being very challenging due to ongoing issues around the recruitment and retention of teachers to Mull and the wider region, including Oban. As such, any GME provision at the Mull Campus cannot be guaranteed regardless of site location. 6.3.49 Feedback from Mull Primary Head Teachers also expressed that the new Campus could promote children’s bilingual learning and exposure to Gaelic through dual language signage throughout the building and potentially bring together the two Gaelic Medium Units on the island (Salen and Bunessan Primary Schools) to increase the prominence of Gaelic within the island’s communities. 6.3.50 Overall, it is viewed that the Project could result in minor positive impacts for the use of Gaelic and promotion of Gaelic learning for pupils of all ages and the wider community. The opportunities for this could be enhanced by bringing together two cohorts of Gaelic speaking children from Bunessan and Salen in a central secondary school. 6.4 Summary 6.4.1 Conclusions for the above assessment are provided below in accordance with high level assumptions for either a Central Site Location or a Tobermory Site Location. Conclusion Q1 – Island Demography and Population Challenges Central Site Location 6.4.2 It is considered that a central site location would positively impact children, young people and their families living in the South and South West of Mull and possibly bring unity to the North and South communities of the island. Community members feel strongly that a central high school option is crucial to reversing currents trends of depopulation in the island’s South West community. 6.4.3 Children, young people and their families would be affected in Tobermory and the North of Mull with increased travel times to school and importantly the removal of early years and primary school education in Tobermory which currently serves a combined total of 95 children, requiring them to travel daily to a central location. The implications of this could negatively impact the demographic structure of Tobermory and North Mull if families decided to move elsewhere with a risk of depopulation if they chose to leave the island. Tobermory Site Location 6.4.4 Retaining education provision in Tobermory would positively impact pupils, families and community members currently utilising the existing Site through the re-provision of enhanced and contemporary facilities. This could also encourage population retention and growth in the area. 6.4.5 However, there would be no additional benefit to families living in the South West of Mull who would likely continue with status quo education arrangements for local primary schooling and Page 316
Page 253
Classification: OFFICIAL off-island secondary-school attendance. This option poses the continued risk of depopulation with the South West of Mull, where some families may make decisions to relocate on the basis of their child’s education and to avoid the possibility weekly boarding on the mainland. Conclusion Q2 – Economic Prosperity Central Site Location 6.4.6 The location of the Mull Campus has the potential to increase the value of developments within 0.5 miles of the school location, which would generate positive impacts. However, a central site could stimulate local business growth in this area, for example, a greater number of local businesses surrounding the school. Conversely, a central site option may result in a loss of revenue for Tobermory-based businesses and negatively impact working parents based in Tobermory and North Mull due to increased travel costs. 6.4.7 An increase in travel time for those living in Tobermory and North Mull may have a negative impact on parent’s and carer’s working patterns whilst also incurring additional fuel and maintenance costs for private vehicles, which may be unaffordable for some. Tobermory Site Location 6.4.8 The Economic Impact Assessment estimated that there would be a higher economic benefit (£3,147,000) associated with a Tobermory location than a central site location. The location of the Mull Campus has the potential to increase the value of developments within 0.5 miles of the school location, which would generate positive impacts. As a larger settlement, the Tobermory site option may be more attractive to recruit and retain teachers, which is currently an issue on Mull. Conclusion Q3 – Transport Challenges Central Site Location 6.4.9 Based on the travel considerations outlined, both Site 2 – Craignure and Site 3 – Garmony would result in increased travel times (approximately 20 minutes for Craignure and 15 minutes for Garmony), distances and carbon emissions. Both sites would require additional bus services. While Craignure offers some potential for active travel, improvements would still be required. Despite this, it was deemed of little benefit to provide additional footways or crossing opportunities on the adjacent highway network. Tobermory Site Location 6.4.10 Based on the travel considerations outlined, Site 4 – Tobermory South emerges as the most favourable option. It maintains proximity to some existing housing and is adjacent to planned developments for up to 112 new residential units, which could support future active travel. The presence of existing footways and travel times, distances, and carbon emissions are expected to remain consistent with the baseline make it a practical choice. 6.4.11 While Site 1 – Tobermory (existing site) also offers proximity to housing and unchanged travel conditions, its constraints for large vehicle access during construction could pose logistical challenges. Sites 2 – Craignure and 3 – Garmony, by contrast, would significantly increase travel times, carbon emissions, and the need for additional buses, making them less efficient and less environmentally sustainable. Overall, South Tobermory balances accessibility, sustainability, and future growth potential, making it the best performing option. Conclusion Q4 – Island’s Infrastructure Central Site Location 6.4.12 A central site option would involve increased vehicle trip generation compared to a Tobermory location. It was estimated that vehicle carbon emissions generated from these trips would be Page 317
Page 254
Classification: OFFICIAL 1,032 kgCO2e. As existing roads from Tobermory to central island locations are mainly single track, increased trip generation could have adverse effects on local road infrastructure which may require upgrading. 6.4.13 Environmental impacts are likely to arise at both locations during construction but will be appropriately mitigated against. The new Campus, regardless of location, is likely to have a positive effect in terms of operational emissions and sustainability due to appropriate design and energy measures. Tobermory Site Location 6.4.14 A Tobermory Site location would result in lower vehicle trip generation compared to a central site location. It was estimated that vehicle carbon emissions generated from these trips would be 352 kgCO2e. Conclusion Q5 – Unique Social Challenges of Island Communities Central Site Location 6.4.15 Parents in the South West of Mull have voiced concerns if the school is not built centrally, as 50% of those surveys stated that they would consider leaving the area. 6.4.16 A central site option could have the potential to positively impact social outcomes for children and young people who have to undertake long journeys to attend school. Additionally, they have a greater opportunity to interact with a larger cohort children and young people on the island. However, for children and young people in Tobermory, average journey times for a central school location will increase by approximately 17.5 minutes over the baseline. 6.4.17 Additionally, a central site option could have negative implications for younger and primary school aged children in Tobermory who would be required to undertake daily journeys to a central location to attend early years and primary school education. Tobermory Site Location 6.4.18 Some community members in the South West of Mull have shared that the impacts of previous school siting decision in Tobermory has resulted in generational impacts and has shaped a number of social outcomes. Parents in South West Mull also raised that the issue of depopulation will continue in their area if the school was located in Tobermory. Children, especially in South West of Mull, who have to travel long journeys shared how tired they feel from their journeys, and this would continue with a Tobermory site location. Conclusion Q6 – Unique Health Challenges in Island Communities All Site Locations 6.4.19 Island communities face a number of unique health challenges. Some studies suggest than extended daily commutes of 30 minute to an hour each way for children can have several impacts on physical health, sleep and exercise, mental health and academic performance. These factors are relevant to a number of pupils in both Site option scenarios who need to contend with longer journey times than other peers across part of Argyll & Bute and Scotland more widely. Conclusion Q7 – Gaelic in the Community All Site Locations 6.4.20 Overall, it is viewed that the Project could result in minor positive impacts for the use of Gaelic and promotion of Gaelic learning for pupils of all ages and the wider community. Members of the community and school representatives have suggested the inclusion of Gaelic signage in the design of the new Campus building. While some members of the community are Page 318
Page 255
Classification: OFFICIAL advocating for further opportunities for Gaelic provision in the secondary sector of the Campus it is recognised that the delivery of this would be challenging due to recruitment constraints. It is recommended that opportunities to incorporate Gaelic in the new Campus are explored where possible during further development of the Project. Page 319
Page 256
Classification: OFFICIAL 7 Children’s Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment 7.1 Introduction 7.1.1 The Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014 requires public bodies to consider whether existing and emerging legislation, policy and guidance have an impact on children and young people and to assess what further action is required to ensure compliance with the UNCRC. CRWIAs are one of the general measures of implementation under the Convention. It recommends that all levels of government complete a CRWIA as part of their policy development. 7.1.2 There are four general principles of the UNCRC which must always be considered in policy appraisal: Article 2: apply rights without discrimination; Article 3: best interests of the child to be a principal consideration; Article 6: right to life, survival and development; and Article 12: right to express a view and have that view taken into account. 7.1.3 These articles underpin all other rights in the Convention and have formed the basis for consideration within this assessment. Additional articles considered relevant to this appraisal include, further detail is provided in Appendix B: Summary of the UNCRC (UNICEF UK, 2019): Article 15: freedom of association; Article 23: rights of the disabled children; Article 24: right to best possible health; Article 29: goals of education; Article 30: rights of children from minority or indigenous groups; and Article 31: right to leisure, play and participation in cultural and artistic activities. 7.2 Assessment Approach 7.2.1 The following guide framing questions have been applied to testing the performance of the proposed Mull Campus Development in relation to implementing the CRW Duties. This provides a transparent framework to assess the extent to which emerging components of the development have an impact on children and young people and assess what further action is required to ensure compliance with the UNCRC. 7.2.2 The framing questions, as set out below, have been applied to test and confirm the implementation of relevant Scottish Ministers’ duties under the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014 and the UNCRC in relation to the proposed Mull Campus. They have been formulated with reference to the approach recommended within the Scottish Government’s Child Rights and Wellbeing (CRW) Impact Assessment Guidance (Scottish Government, 2021a). 7.2.3 The objective is to help progress the realisation of children’s rights, and safeguard support and promote the wellbeing of children and young people. Page 320
Page 257
Classification: OFFICIAL 7.2.4 The assessment has been informed through engagement activities with relevant groups of interest and impact (as discussed in Section 3.2). 7.2.5 The framing questions have been applied in relation to the UNCRC articles and taking account of the Scottish Government’s SHANARRI5 wellbeing indicators developed for the Getting it Right for Every Child (GIRFEC) approach (Scottish Government, 2023b) to children’s services provision in Scotland. These indicators were developed from the UNCRC and are incorporated in the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014. They are safe, healthy, achieving, nurtured, active, respected, responsible and included. Guide Questions: Children’s Rights and Wellbeing impact Assessment Q1. What likely impact will the Mull Campus Proposals have on Children’s Rights? Q2. How will the Mull Campus proposals affect the wellbeing of children and young people? Q3. Are some children and young people more likely to be affected by the proposals than others? 7.3 Pupil Forum Engagement 7.3.1 To inform the CRWIA, representatives from the Mull Campus Pupil Working Group were invited to provide feedback during an online video call and afterwards by completing feedback forms centred around the three assessment questions highlighted below in Section 7.4. Pupil representatives from Lochdonhead Primary School, Bunessan Primary School, Ulva Primary School, Tobermory Primary School and Tobermory High School joined the call on 15 January 2025. The call was led by an Education Officer from Argyll & Bute Council with a consultant from Stantec present. 7.3.2 Written feedback was received digitally from pupils attending Ulva Primary School, Tobermory Primary School, Bunessan Primary School and Tobermory High School. No written responses were received from Lochdonhead Primary School, however verbal feedback captured during the online session has been taken into account. All responses gathered are presented anonymously to protect confidentiality. 7.4 Children’s Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment Findings Q1. What likely impact will the Mull Campus Proposals have on Children’s Rights? 7.4.1 The Project adheres to the four underpinning Rights of the UNCRC, including: Article 2 (non-discrimination): The Project proposals considered the needs of all children and young people on Mull without discrimination. For example, this includes consideration of children and young people with protected characteristics, their socio- demographic status and other status factors such as language, ability, or geographic location. This is evidenced in this IIA Report. Article 3 (best interests of the child): The Project proposals consider the best interests of children in the decision making process. This IIA report indicates that there is not one single solution that equally meets the needs of all children and young people living on Mull due to the challenges of its island context and geography. While the Education Authority has a duty to educate pupils in accordance with the wishes of their parents, there is a requirement for this to be compatible with the provision of suitable instruction and training 5 Eight wellbeing indicators: Safe, Healthy, Achieving, Nurtured, Active, Respected, Responsible, and Included. Page 321
Page 258
Classification: OFFICIAL and the avoidance of unreasonable public expenditure (Section 28, Education (Scotland) Act 1980). Article 6 (life, survival and development): The Project proposals support the delivery of a contemporary and accessible education campus facilities, designed to meet the needs of children, young people and their local communities on the Isle of Mull. In doing so, the proposals intend to support children to survive and develop to their full potential. Article 12 (respect for the views of the child): Every child has the right to express their views, feelings and wishes in all matters affecting them, and to have their views considered and taken seriously. The Mull Campus Team have engagement with all schools on Mull and Iona, as well as pupils from these areas attending Oban High School, during school engagement sessions in September 2024 to gather views on the Project to inform the site selection process. A pupil forum has also been established by the Mull Campus Team which invites pupil representative from all affected schools to meet regularly to discuss the Project and to be informed of the process and development of proposals. Argyll & Bute Council have also published an Engagement Strategy which details plans for key engagement activities, including those with children and young people as the Project develops. To inform the CRWIA, the Pupil Forum were invited to provide feedback for the assessment as detailed in Section 7.3. 7.4.2 The following articles have also been identified as relevant to the Project and are considered below in relation to different site options: Article 15 (freedom of association): Every child has the right to meet with other children and join groups and organisations, as long as this does not stop other people from enjoying their rights. A key driver of a central campus option is to provide children and young people across Mull with equal opportunities as part of the secondary school experience. This could include attendance and participation in school sports, clubs and music lessons available to all children on Mull. However, some community feedback has raised concerns that increased or long travel times for a large proportion of children travelling from Tobermory or the Ross of Mull to a central site location could affect their ability to participate fully in group and organisations due to timings, travel arrangements and the potential implications of a longer school day on children’s wellbeing. Article 23 (children with a disability): Children with a disability have the right to live a full and decent life with dignity and as far as possible, independence and to play an active part in the community. Regardless of the site option, the Mull Campus has the potential to deliver benefits for children with disabilities living on Mull. At present, there are concerns around inadequate accessibility at the existing Tobermory 2-18 School site which does not include suitable level access provision and is constrained by narrow corridors and split- level site design. The new Mull Campus will be designed to include modern accessibility standards and intends to provide a range of learning environments to support children with physical and mental disabilities or additional support requirement. The Council currently make provision for the transport needs of disabled pupils (i.e., by taxi or specialist bus) and future provisions will likely continue to be made available to meet the needs of pupils regardless of site option or where they reside on the island. Article 24 (right to best possible health): Every child has the right to the best possible health. All site locations have the potential to positive impact the health of all children through the provision of well-designed high-quality learning environments and sports facilities. In terms of active travel, a Tobermory location would facilities walking or cycling to school for a large proportion of Tobermory Primary and High School pupils. Currently 90% of primary pupils live within a five minute walk of the existing school site and 50% of Tobermory High School pupils live in Tobermory. It is likely that good levels of active travel to school will be maintained in either the existing or South Tobermory site option which is linked to a range of health benefits for children and young people. Active travel to school would be highly unlikely for the majority of pupils attending either central locations at Garmony or Craignure (Systra, 2025) and all pupils would likely be travelling via bus or car Page 322
Page 259
Classification: OFFICIAL to school. Increased sedentary time for a large proportion of pupils could have a negative impact on their health, particularly for those with longer commuting times. Article 29 (goals of education): Education must develop every child’s personality, talents and abilities to the full. It must encourage the child’s respect for human rights, as well as respect for their parents, their own and other cultures, and the environment. The Project has the potential to contribute positively to this right by designing a contemporary education facility that can deliver educational and social benefits to a range of children and young people living on Mull. Article 30 (rights of children from minority or indigenous groups): Every child has the right to learn and use the language, customs and religion of their family, whether or not these are shared by the majority of people where they live. In the context of Mull, like many other Scottish islands, there is a larger proportion of Scottish Gaelic speakers and relevant to the scope of this Project, provision is currently made for Gaelic Medium Education at Bunessan Primary, Salen Primary, Tobermory High School and Oban High School. The National Islands Plan Survey (2022) suggests that 13% of people in the Argyll Islands speak Gaelic. Regardless of site location, the Mull Campus has the potential to deliver Gaelic education for secondary pupils which promotes and protects the heritage and culture of the island for future generations. If this was delivered in a central location, then there would be a greater potential of bringing Gaelic speaking children from the South and North of the island together at secondary school. Article 31 (right to leisure, play and participation in cultural and artistic activities): Every child has the right to relax, play and take part in a wide range of cultural and artistic activities. Some children and parents living in the Ross of Mull and attending boarding school in Oban have cited concerns about their ability to participate in local activities as they can only return home for a short period at the weekends and often feel tired from travelling when they return. A central site option could enable the majority of children on Mull to participate in local sporting, cultural or other leisure activities locally with their island peers. However, at present many activities for children and young people are currently organised in and around Tobermory. There is also a concern that if the school site was relocated this would affect the provision of local activities in Tobermory or that children would be less able to attend due to increased travel time, increased travel costs and the need for additional travel arrangements which could be challenging for some families. 7.4.3 Some members of the community have referenced UNCRC Article 9 stating that children should not be separated from their parents in relation to the current scenario where children from the Ross of Mull leave their family homes weekly to board on the mainland in order to attend Oban High School, as per their defined catchment area. Many argue that secondary- school aged children are entitled to remain with their families during the week and the current catchment provision does not allow for this. A central site option could allow greater choice for pupils and families living in the Ross of Mull to attend secondary school on the island which would allow children to more fully enjoy all aspects of family life during their time at secondary school. 7.4.4 While the premise of citing Article 9 is important, the Article covers instances where there is enforced separation by the State of a child and parent. Examples of that being where a child is removed from the parent(s) by virtue of procedures under social work legislation, where a parent is detained or imprisoned or where a court makes an order restricting contact between a child and parent. As such, Article 9 would not apply to the current scenario as parent’s have a legal right to make a placing request for their child to attend a school that is not in their catchment area, as such Education Authorities cannot legally force children to only attend their catchment school. 7.4.5 Similarly, many parents and children have identified Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights in respect of children’s rights to a private and family life as being a relevant consideration in the Project. Article 8 is a qualified right and under the current proposals it is unlikely to be engaged on the basis that while the Education Authority is required to make Page 323
Page 260
Classification: OFFICIAL arrangements to set its catchment areas, it does not require the children attending with those areas to attend the catchment schools. 7.4.6 Taking the above into account, however, should not invalidate the concerns of children, young people and their families who wish to avoid boarding on the mainland as part of the decision- making process. Q2. How will the Mull Campus proposals affect the wellbeing of children and young people? 7.4.7 During the Pupil Working Group engagement, some young people expressed that the proposals involving increased travel time would have a negative impact on their mental health and physical wellbeing. For children and young people in the Ross of Mull this was a concern linked with weekly boarding at Oban High School. For children and young people in Tobermory concerns were raised around no longer being able to walk to school and spending more time travel to and from school which could also limit participation in sports clubs or other after-school activities. 7.4.8 Testimonies provided by Bunessan Parent Council form current and former pupils with experience of boarding at Oban High School highlight some of the difficulties experienced by pupils who board, including adverse impacts on their mental health often linked with home- sickness and feeling isolated from their families. Some former pupils said that these challenges affected their mental health in adulthood after finishing secondary school. If a Tobermory site is selected then, there would continue to be a proportion of pupils from the Ross of Mull who are likely to experience a range of difficulties boarding weekly in Oban for the duration of their secondary school education. 7.4.9 If the existing Tobermory site is selected for the Campus, additional consideration should be given to the disruption this could cause for pupils during the proposed two year construction period. This includes any decanting requirements while the site is prepared for construction and any amenity impacts (e.g., noise pollution, air pollution and dust) that could be experienced by children during school hours in addition to the safety of children in respect of increased construction and HGV traffic accessing the site. 7.4.10 Representatives from a Parent Council have requested that information is provided about the impacts of any potential building works on Tobermory High School pupils with assurance provided that their education will not be disrupted. It was expressed that a group of children have already been impacted by renovation works at Salen Primary School, involving a decant, in addition to disruptions caused by COVID-19. Efforts to minimise further disruption to their learning should be prioritised. 7.4.11 The Project responds directly to the need for improvements at the current Tobermory High School site which has a number of accessibility issues. The development of a new education Campus aims to provide a contemporary, pleasant and accessible learning environment for all children and young people, including those with additional needs. Regardless of site location, this is considered to have a significant positive impact on the wellbeing of pupils attending the Campus. 7.4.12 During consultation, concerns were raised about the potential increase in travel if younger children (e.g., early years and primary school aged children) were to be transported to a location outside of Tobermory. Key issues raised related to the wellbeing of children, especially, spending longer portions of their day travelling by bus or car. Additionally, concerns were raised around the impact on children who are neurodiverse or have other reasons to avoid long travel times such as experiencing travel sickness or bullying. 7.4.13 The safety of children was also raised during consultation as parents raised the importance of safe pick-up and drop-off areas at the new Campus. Active travel was also an important factor for many parents and children and young people, with a desire for pupils to be able to safely walk and cycle to school. Currently, 90% of children attending Tobermory Primary School and pupils live within a five minute walk of the school. Of the 157 pupils at Tobermory High School, 50% live within Tobermory. The Transport Review conducted by Systra (2025), suggests that Page 324
Page 261
Classification: OFFICIAL there would be very limited potential for active travel in either of the proposed central site locations due to their geographic locations and limited connectivity to residential settlements and co-located services. Q3. Are some children and young people more likely to be affected by the proposals than others? 7.4.14 It is clear from the ICIA that there is no clear definitive site option that would meet the needs of Mull communities in its entirety under the current proposals. With both site options there are groups of children and young people who will benefit and others who are more likely to be disproportionately affected by the proposals. For a Tobermory Site location, secondary school aged pupils living in the Ross of Mull would continue to be disadvantaged in terms of high school access and would face the choice of continuing to board off-island and attend Oban High School. 7.4.15 For a central site location, there would be more equity in terms of secondary school provision that is more suited to serving a wider proportion of the island’s population. However, this option would bring disadvantages for pre-school and primary school aged children living in Tobermory who would be required to undertake longer journeys by bus each day to access education. 7.4.16 Generally, many parents felt that longer travel times from Tobermory to a central location for high school aged pupils would have less of an adverse impact as they were more likely to adapt and cope with an increase in travel time similar to that undertaken by many of their peers currently to attend Tobermory High School. 7.4.17 As the Project develops, community members have requested that they are kept informed about any implications that could have a knock-on effect on other schools on Mull. For example, if pre-school and primary school provision was to be relocated from Tobermory as part of a central campus option, implications would need to be considered for nearby schools such as Salen Primary School and its ability to accommodate any additional primary intake that may arise. 7.5 Summary 7.5.1 In general, the Project aligns with the general principles underpinning the UNCRC. The development of Project proposals through engagement have aims to take the diverse needs of all children, including those with protected characteristics or specific geographic challenges into account. While no site solution fully meets the needs of all children due to Mull’s geography and the financial constraints of the Project, decisions have aimed to balance educational needs, parental wishes, and reasonable public expenditure. Findings in relation to other relevant UNCRC articles are summarised below: The provision of modern, accessible campus facilities aim to support children’s growth and development; Engagement with children and young people via the Pupil Working Group and school sessions has sought to ensure that children’s voices and views are considered. The Mull Campus Engagement strategy also outlines how this will be managed in the future. Overall, the Project aims to deliver increased accessibility and contemporary learning environments for all pupils, including those with a disability or additional support needs. The Project has the potential to promote island and Gaelic heritage and provide cultural opportunities. Some concerns are noted in regard to children’s ability to participate in extracurricular activities and travel to school via walking or cycling if they would be required to undertake significant different travel routines with increased journey times. Page 325
Page 262
Classification: OFFICIAL 7.5.2 The following impacts on children’s wellbeing have been considered: The new campus has the potential to address long-standing accessibility challenges currently identified at the existing Tobermory 2-18 High School site and provide improved learning environments benefitting all pupils including those with additional needs and enhancing overall pupil wellbeing. Increased travel times for children from Tobermory to a central site location could negatively affect children’s wellbeing and their ability to participate in extracurricular activities. Safety, travel arrangements, and minimising disruptions during construction are key priorities raised by parents and pupils. It is also acknowledged that some community members have expressed concern around the impact of boarding weekly on secondary aged pupils on their health and wellbeing from the Ross of Mull. In particular, there are concerns around the implications of this on their children’s mental health and physical wellbeing, including their ability to participate fully in island life. 7.5.3 The following differential impacts were identified for different groups of children and young people: A Tobermory site option maintains proximity for local children but continues challenges for children from the Ross of Mull, who may need to board off-island for secondary school. A central site option provides more equitable secondary school access across Mull but disadvantages Tobermory’s younger children, who would face longer daily commutes to early years and primary school attendance. Parents generally believe that that older children can better adapt to longer travel times compared with younger children. Community members emphasise the need to manage any knock-on effect on nearby primary schools if Tobermory provision is relocated. 7.5.4 In conclusion, while the Mull Campus Proposals have the potential to significantly enhance education and children’s rights on Mull, they also present challenges around travel, wellbeing, and equitable access, particularly for specific groups of children. Ongoing consultation and mitigation strategies will be critical. Page 326
Page 263
Classification: OFFICIAL 8 Equality Impact Assessment 8.1 Introduction 8.1.1 Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 sets out a ‘Public Sector Equality Duty’ (PSED). This requires public authorities to have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation, advance equality of opportunity, and foster good relations between those with a protected characteristic and those without.6 8.1.2 The Duty covers the following protected characteristics: age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation. The public sector equality duty also covers marriage and civil partnerships, with regard to eliminating unlawful discrimination in employment. 8.1.3 The Equality Act 2010 (Specific Duties) (Scotland) Regulations 2012 require listed authorities to undertake an impact assessment in relation to the needs outlined in section 149(1) of the Act and take account of the results of the assessment in development of the policy. The approach to the assessment has been informed by reference to the Scottish Government’s general guidance on the PSED (Scottish Government, 2016) and relevant guidance on application of the duty in Scotland (Equality and Human Rights Commission, 2016). 8.2 Assessment Approach 8.2.1 The assessment has been framed using the key aims of the PSED have been applied to test the performance of the proposed Project in relation to this duty and to assess the extent to which it promotes equality of opportunity. 8.2.2 The assessment takes the following three key aims of the Duty into account: Eliminating discrimination, harassment and victimisation; Advancing equality of opportunity; and Fostering good relations. 8.2.3 The second of these aims involves: Removing or minimising disadvantages affecting people due to their protected characteristics; Taking steps to meet the needs of people with certain protected characteristics where these are different from the needs of other people; and Encouraging people with certain protected characteristics to participate in public life or in other activities where their participation is disproportionately low. Assessment Scope 8.2.4 Age and disability have been scoped in as the proposals have the potential to disproportionately or differentially affect school children or staff with these protected characteristics. 8.2.5 However, the proposals are unlikely to disproportionately or differentially affect school children or staff with the following protected characteristics: ethnicity; sex; gender reassignment; 6 The protected characteristics referenced within this duty are specified within Section 4 of the Act, namely: age; disability; gender reassignment; marriage and civil partnership; pregnancy and maternity; race; religion or belief; sex; and sexual orientation. Page 327
Page 264
Classification: OFFICIAL marriage and civil partnership; pregnancy and maternity; religion or belief; and sexual orientation. Therefore, these protected characteristics have been scoped out of the assessment. 8.3 Equality Impact Assessment Findings Age 8.3.1 This section discusses the potential impacts of both campus locations on different age groups: young children (early years and primary school aged children) and older children (high school age). 8.3.2 For children in Tobermory, travelling to a central site would result in much longer journey times which could have a negative impact, especially for the younger children. Longer travel times for a greater number of children may also result in an adverse effect on educational attainment, thereby reducing equality of opportunity for all children. As shown in Table 4.2, performance relating to reading; listening and talking; numeracy; and writing within Argyll & Bute are all currently below the national averages. If a larger number of children are required to travel greater distances for school as would be the case with a central site option, there is concern that this could affect wellbeing, energy levels and ability to concentrate during school hours which may take away from their learning. This was echoed by feedback received from the Pupil Forum where children were concerned about the impacts of undertaking long daily commutes by bus and losing the ability to walk to school. 8.3.3 Conversely, a central site would benefit children living in the south and southwest of the island and would enable all children on the island to stay on the island by reducing the need for children to board at Oban High School throughout the week. However, through the consultation process it was highlighted by some parents that it is important that this commute remains an option regardless of what site option is taken forward. A benefit of the central site option would mean that there would be no discrimination for children depending on what part of the island they are from, thereby advancing equality of opportunity for children in the south and southwest of the island. Additionally, children from other parts of the island would spend less time travelling with a central site and may have more energy during school which may positively impact education attainment averages. A central site option would enable greater socialising amongst young people on the island and may lead to a greater level of unity across Mull. 8.3.4 A centrally located campus may negatively impact children and young people in relation to being able to attend after school clubs, particularly those living in Tobermory who already have access to such clubs. This was highlighted by school children attending both Tobermory Primary School and High School during the Pupil Forum engagement and concern was specifically raised regarding a lack of transport home. Additionally, the Transport Review Report (Systra, 2025), found that 50% of Tobermory High School students lived within Tobermory and many felt that because the majority of children attending the school lives within the surrounding area, the school would benefit from a Tobermory location. 8.3.5 Independence of both younger and older children are at risk through a central site as far fewer children would be able to exercise the freedoms that they are able to currently. An example of this was raised through the older children during consultation with Tobermory High School. They stated that a central location has the potential to negatively impact their mental health due to a likely remote location which would not allow them to have as much freedom as they do now, for example, at the moment they are able to go into town to the shops at lunch time. In addition to this, younger children raised how a central location would negatively impact their mental and physical health as they would no longer be able to walk to and from school. As stated in the Transport Report (Systra, 2025), 90% of the 81 pupils in Tobermory Primary School live within a 5 minute walk from the school. A central location would mean that children must travel to and from the school, reducing their level of physical activity throughout the day. Page 328
Page 265
Classification: OFFICIAL Disability 8.3.6 Improved campus facilities as a result of the proposed development will positively impact disabled children and staff compared to existing provision. This is likely to include enhanced accessibility measures and design features that could benefit pupils and staff with a disability. Further detail on these design measure will come forward as the project develops. 8.3.7 An increase in travel times, for example for children and staff living in Tobermory travelling to a central location, will have a negative impact on disabled children and staff. Conversely, a decrease in travel times, for example for children and staff living in Lochdon travelling to a central location, will have a positive impact on disabled children and staff. 8.3.8 Poverty rates remain higher for households in which somebody is disabled compared to those where no-one is disabled (Scottish Government, 2023c). Additionally, people who have a long-term illness or disability that limits their daily activities are more likely to live in households that do not have access to a private car. This may adversely impact disabled children who require transportation to school and may not be able to use a public bus. There is potential for additional adverse impacts if a parent is disabled and or does not have use of a private car. This would be particularly evident if the school was centrally located. This is a particular concern as the highest proportion of residents whose day-to-day activities are limited a lot is the South. 8.4 Summary 8.4.1 It is considered that a central Site option would positively impact children and young people and their families living in the South and South West of Mull and bring unity to the North and South communities of the island. During consultation, children and young people from these areas raised that a central Site option would be fairer for them as they would not have to travel as far every day and could potentially participate in after school clubs. 8.4.2 However, children and young people from Tobermory and the North of Mull presented concern with a central Site option as it would significantly increase their journey time to and from school, reduce their current freedoms and potentially remove their ability to attend after school clubs. They showed preference towards a Tobermory site option as they could continue to walk to and from school and because the majority of students currently live in and around Tobermory. 8.4.3 It is considered that all site options would positively impact disabled children as the school would have improved campus facilities, such as enhanced accessibility measures. However, there are potential negative impacts as a result of a central site as some disabled children may not be able to travel by public transport and this would put pressure on family members or caregivers who may not have access to a private car. Page 329
Page 266
Classification: OFFICIAL 9 Fairer Scotland Duty Assessment 9.1 Introduction 9.1.1 The FSD places a legal responsibility on certain public bodies in Scotland to actively consider how they can reduce inequalities of outcome caused by socio-economic disadvantage when making strategic decisions or developing policy. This differs from the PSED which considers only reducing inequalities of opportunity. The Duty seeks to tackle socio-economic disadvantage and reduce the inequalities associated with being disadvantaged. It is closely related to issues of poverty which may affect outcomes across health, housing, education and training and employment prospects. 9.1.2 The FSD identifies a need to consider both ‘communities of place’ and ‘communities of interest’ in terms of people who share an experience and are particularly impacted by socio- economic disadvantage (Scottish Government, 2021b). Demographic groups who share one or more of the protected characteristics listed in Section 4 of the Equality Act 2010 can be considered ‘communities of interest’, meaning there is a direct link between the FSD and the PSED. 9.2 Assessment Approach 9.2.1 The FSD assessment considers impacts of the Project on two key parts of the Duty, with relevant criteria identified from the statutory guidance. This includes consideration of the following: Socio-economic disadvantage, which is influenced by low income, low/no wealth, material and area deprivation and socio-economic background; and Inequality of outcome, including education, skills, employment, crime, health and wellbeing, life expectancy, living standards, poverty and connectivity. 9.2.2 The assessment has been informed through engagement activities with relevant groups of interest and impact (as discussed in Section 3). Socio-Economic Disadvantage 9.2.3 Socio-economic disadvantage considers living on a low income compared to others in Scotland, with little or no accumulated wealth, leading to greater material deprivation, restricting the ability to access basic goods and services. As well as considering areas of deprivation, the guidance also identified communities of place and communities of interest (Scottish Government, 2019). 9.2.4 Communities of place describe people who are bound together because of where they live or work. Communities of interest refers to groups who share an experience such as homelessness, or those who share one or more protected characteristics as listed in the Equality Act 2010. Inequality of Outcome 9.2.5 The Fairer Scotland Duty is intended to reduce inequalities of outcome cause by socio- economic disadvantage. Inequality of outcome refers to the measurable difference between those who have experienced socio-economic disadvantage and the rest of the population, for example this could be in relation to health and life expectancy or educational attainment. Socio-economically disadvantaged households have a higher risk of experiencing negative outcomes (Scottish Government, 2019). 9.2.6 Background to topic and provide response based on education outcomes, and other relevant topics from above bullet point. Page 330
Page 267
Classification: OFFICIAL 9.3 Fairer Scotland Duty Findings Socio-Economic Disadvantage An assessment has been provided below for the main consideration that would affect socio- economic disadvantage in respect of the Project. This includes Area Deprivation whereby living in a deprived area can exacerbate negative outcomes for individuals and households already affected by issues of low-income. Socio-economic background is considered which take account of structural disadvantage that can arise from parents’ education, employment and income. Communities of interest and communities of place have also been identified. Area Deprivation 9.3.1 The North, South West and South of Mull all fall into the least deprived 40% of areas in Scotland, whilst Tobermory performs even better in the bottom 30%. This means that the Isle of Mull is relatively better off in terms of deprivation compared to other areas within Scotland. While this provides some measure of deprivation, it should be noted that island contexts are known to have higher a cost of living and rates of fuel poverty compared to mainland counterparts which could affect adversely affect income deprivation. 9.3.2 The baseline evidence presented in Section 4.4 highlights key challenges across different parts of the island, shaped by its geography, economy and infrastructure in terms of deprivation. 9.3.3 The North of Mull faces severe deprivation in access to services, it is in the 2% most deprived of geographic areas, due to its remote and dispersed population, which makes it difficult to provide regular and convenient access to facilities. Housing deprivation (43%) may reflect limited housing stock, and the high costs associated with building or maintaining homes in remote areas. However, the area's lower crime levels (top 14% least deprived) and moderate education deprivation (23% least deprived) suggest a safe community with reasonably good access to education compared to other parts of the island. 9.3.4 Tobermory, the island's largest settlement, experiences challenges in income and employment deprivation. Despite being better connected than other areas, housing deprivation also remains an issue. The relatively better access to services, top 40% least deprived of areas in Scotland, reflects Tobermory’s role as a service hub for the island. 9.3.5 The South West area of the island experiences extreme deprivation in access to services, ranked in the lowest percentile, this reflects its isolation and sparse infrastructure. The area is geographically remote, with fewer roads and limited public transport. However, the South West performs well in health and crime, for both domains the area ranked in the top 20% least deprived in Scotland. This is likely due to its rural character, low population density, and healthier lifestyle factors often associated with remote living. 9.3.6 The South of Mull similarly struggles with access to services ranked in the bottom percentile, reflecting its geographical challenges. However, the South performs relatively well in crime and health ranked in the top 30% least deprived. 9.3.7 While overall levels of multiple deprivation across Mull perform better compared to other areas of Scotland, it is clear that the island’s geographies are impacted by more unique factors of deprivation typical for island and rural communities in terms of access to services and housing deprivation. 9.3.8 In terms of overall impact depending on the Campus site selection, it is not clear how area deprivation could be affected by either site option. It is likely that a central Site option could result in reduced access to services in Tobermory if the 2-18 Campus was to relocate, resulting in an adverse impact for the locality. However, a central option would enhance access to services for a central site options, particularly if this could be co-located with other services and infrastructure such as the Community Hospital and ferry terminal in Craignure. Page 331
Page 268
Classification: OFFICIAL Socio-Economic Background 9.3.9 Socio-economic background is a structural disadvantage that can arise as a result of parents’ education, employment and income. These factors in the Mull context are discussed below. 9.3.10 Educational attainment is closely linked to socio-economic background. Baseline evidence suggests that there is noticeable variation within Mull’s specific study areas (e.g., North, South, South West and Tobermory). Some areas, such as the North, have a relatively high percentage of residents with degree-level qualifications, while others, such as the South, show higher proportions of residents with no qualifications or lower school qualifications, suggesting localised disparities in educational attainment. 9.3.11 However, Mull overall has a higher proportion of adults aged 16 years and over who have a degree level qualification or above at 42% compared with the Argyll & Bute average of 32% and the Scottish average of 34%. Across the island 46% of adults aged 16 years and above have a degree level qualification or above compared with 43% in the South West, 40% in the South and 39% in Tobermory. This suggest that Tobermory could have greater sensitivity in terms of educational attainment compared to other parts of the island. 9.3.12 Approximately 63.0% of people aged 16+ in Mull are economically active, which is lower than both the Argyll & Bute and Scotland averages (75.0% and 77.1%, respectively). Average gross weekly pay for full-time workers in Mull is not available, therefore, the Argyll & Bute average has been used instead which is £653. This compares to a Scottish average of £702 and a British average of £682. In 2024 48% of employee jobs in Argyll & Bute are ‘Managers, Professional and Associated Professional Occupations'. This compares to 50% for Scotland and 52% for Great Britain (Argyll & Bute Council, 2024c). 9.3.13 The above data suggests that people living on the Isle of Mull are likely to be earning less compared to the Scottish average. While lower levels of economic activity may be reflective of an ageing population in Mull, there are likely disparities on the island in terms of socio- economic background compared to other parts of Scotland. The Economic Impact Assessment has quantified the potential impact of the Mull Campus proposals on future earning and loss of earnings depending on the site location (see Sections 5.3.9 – 5.3.16). There is a greater loss to earning and future earning for a central site location compared to Tobermory, which considers the larger population in the Tobermory settlement. This impact could be augmented by increased sensitivity among the population in terms of average full- time weekly earnings being lower and lower levels of economic activity on the island. Communities of Interest and Communities of Place 9.3.14 A community of interest refers to groups of people who share an experience. In this context, that is also closely aligned with communities of place so both factors are considered together. A notable community of interest in the context of the Mull Campus proposal is secondary school aged children from the Ross of Mull and other localities who access secondary education by boarding on the mainland to attend Oban High School. Community feedback has expressed concern around the impact of children attending six years of their schooling off- island, with limiting their opportunities to participate fully in family life and community life on the island. 9.3.15 The site selection proposals have the potential to significantly affect this community of interest with the potential to bring positive impacts and equity to this group through the delivery of a central site option. 9.3.16 Another community of place that could emerge as a result of the proposals is group of children from Tobermory attending pre-5 and primary school who might be required to undertake longer journeys on a daily basis to access education at a central or other location. Due to the age of children, it is judged that impact would be felt more significantly in this age group compared with secondary school aged children. There is also a precedent for extended travel times on Mull for secondary school children accessing Tobermory High School from other localities on the island. Page 332
Page 269
Classification: OFFICIAL Inequality of Outcome Equality of outcome is influenced by socio-economic disadvantage. To assess this in relation to the Mull Campus proposal, factors relating to education, health and income have been selected as most relevant. Education 9.3.17 Island communities often face challenges in providing consistent, high quality education due to their geographic context and smaller population sizes. Specific considerations include smaller school roll sizes which may mean schools have fewer resources, limited subject offerings and the ability to recruit fewer specialist teachers. Teacher recruitment and retention is often challenging and has been cited as a key concern from many community members and organisations during public engagement sessions. Attracting and retaining qualified staff can be challenging due to rural isolation, cost of living, and limited professional development opportunities. Digital connectivity and facilities can also have an impact on the access to online learning tools which could widen educational disparities. 9.3.18 In the National Islands Plan Survey 2020 (Scottish Government, 2021), 57% of Argyll Islands7 respondents agreed that children living on the islands can access secondary school education that offers a range of subjects (online or in person). While this response rate is similar to response rates in Uist and Barra (57%), and Bute and the Cumbraes (59%) is lower than the average response for all island groups (approx. 75% agreement). 9.3.19 Regardless of site location, the Project presents a positive opportunity to address challenges in the quality and provision of education on the island through the provision of contemporary and sustainably designed educational facilities that would benefit pupils aged 2-18 in addition to the wider community. 9.3.20 The extent of this benefit is varied depending on whether this is delivered in a central or Tobermory Site location. The reality of the proposals means that there is the potential to affect different groups of children and young people and their communities by virtue of where they live on the island. Existing baseline data should that educational attainment and qualification levels across Mull are relatively consistent across the Isle of Mull and with Scottish averages (please refer to Section 4.3). However, findings from the Economic Impact Assessment indicate that there could be negative impact on potential future earnings for children required to undertake longer daily journeys to school. The assessment is based on evidence that pupils who must travel further to school are less likely to attend university and may experience a loss of earnings as a result. Health and Wellbeing 9.3.21 In the National Islands Plan Survey 2020 (Scottish Government, 2021) it was reported that Argyll Islanders report notably lower satisfaction with local sports facilities than other island groups. Only 60% of Argyll Islands respondents agree that there were places they could go to take part in sports and physical exercise, compared with 86% of respondents who agreed across all island groups. Only 36% of Argyll Islands responses agreed that local sports facilities were good quality and maintained, compared with 73% across all island groups. 9.3.22 There could be higher sensitivity in local communities living near site options in Tobermory and a central site in relation to the provision of or re-provision of sports facilities that might be associated with the Mull Campus proposals. Early engagement and planning should ensure that new facilities are able to meet community needs to minimise the population loss or disruption of existing facilities during construction periods, which would be a key consideration if the Mull Campus is located on the existing school site in Tobermory. 7 Argyll Islands – National Islands Plan group that includes Coll, Colonsay, Easdale, Gometra, Iona, Isle of Gigha, Isle of Mull, Jura, Kerrera, Lismore, Luing, Oronsay, Seil, Tiree and Ulva. Page 333
Page 270
Classification: OFFICIAL Income 9.3.23 The Project has the potential to affect income both in terms of future earnings for pupils and the earning of parents and carers. This is discussed above in Sections 4.3 – 4.4 of the Economic Impact Assessment and as part of the FSD assessment in Section 9.3.12 – 9.3.13. 9.4 Summary Socio-Economic Disadvantage The North, South West and South of Mull all fall into the least deprived 40% of areas in Scotland, whilst Tobermory performs even better in the bottom 30%. In terms of overall impact depending on the Campus site selection, it is not clear how area deprivation could be affected by either site option. There is a greater loss to earning and future earning for a central site location compared to Tobermory, which considers the larger population in the Tobermory settlement. Community feedback has expressed concern around the impact of children attending six years of their schooling off-island, with limiting their opportunities to participate fully in family life and community life on the island. There is a precedent for extended travel times on Mull for secondary school children accessing Tobermory High School from other localities on the island. Inequality of Outcome Regardless of site location, the Project presents a positive opportunity to address challenges in the quality and provision of education on the island through the provision of contemporary and sustainably designed educational facilities that would benefit pupils aged 2-18 in addition to the wider community. The extent of this benefit is varied depending on whether this is delivered in a central or Tobermory Site location. The reality of the proposals means that there is the potential to affect different groups of children and young people and their communities by virtue of where they live on the island. There could be negative impact on potential future earnings for children required to undertake longer daily journeys to school. Pupils who must travel further to school are less likely to attend university and may experience a loss of earnings as a result. There could be higher sensitivity in local communities living near site options in Tobermory and a central site in relation to the provision of or re-provision of sports facilities that might be associated with the Mull Campus proposals. The Project has the potential to affect income both in terms of future earnings for pupils and the earning of parents and carers. Page 334
Page 271
Classification: OFFICIAL 10 Conclusion and Recommendations 10.1 IIA Summary 10.1.1 This report provides a high-level IIA of the Project proposals to inform the site selection process. 10.1.2 Findings from this impact assessment have been taken into consideration by Argyll & Bute Council as part of a technical scoring exercise to evaluate the performance of four separate sites on the Isle of Mull for delivery of the proposed Mull Campus. 10.1.3 Due to commercial sensitivities, members of the public were not made aware of the four individual sites for selection. As such, this assessment largely reflects public understanding to consider the implications of the Project broadly in either a central or Tobermory site location. 10.1.4 There is currently a strong need to upgrade the current Tobermory 2-18 School which is in need of upgrading and has been reported to have inadequate accessibility features for children and staff with disabilities or additional support needs. Many community members across the island feel strongly that a central high school is required to unite young people from the north and south of Mull and to provide an on-island secondary education option for children from the Ross of Mull. However, there is also a strong feeling across the island’s communities that early years and primary school education should not be relocated from Tobermory for the families residing there. As such, conclusions of the IIA show that there are benefits and disbenefits associated with all site options. However, due to LEIP funding restrictions and other cost factors, it is unlikely that either of the Campus locations would be able to provide a fully equal solution for all children and young people living on Mull and the islands. 10.1.5 Regardless of site location, the campus has the potential to deliver a range of benefits to the island through the provision of contemporary and high-quality learning, sport and community facilities. It is recommended that the pupils and members of the community are closely involved in shaping the design of the new Campus so that it can best meet the needs of people living on Mull and the islands. 10.2 Recommendations 10.2.1 The following recommendations are provided as part of this assessment: 10.2.2 This IIA has been conducted at an early phase of the Project and it is recommended that the assessments are taken forward and updated iteratively with community involvement as the Project progresses. It is recommended that the Mull Campus proposals consider the integration of community spaces and services that would meet the needs of the wider community as whole, this could include additional extracurricular activities, breakfast clubs and wraparound care to support working families and single parents. It is recommended that Argyll and Bute Council regularly review and monitor their engagement strategy for the Project to promote positive engagement and collaboration with the local community. It is recommended that, wherever possible, the Mull Campus Project should utilise local contractors and supply chains in the development and fit-out of the school. The Mull Campus has the opportunity to showcase and promote the island’s unique geography, culture and heritage. It is recommended that a strategy is developed between pupils, the community and the Project Team to promote these elements in the projects design and delivery. Page 335
Page 272
Classification: OFFICIAL It is recommended that the Project delivers digital infrastructure to enhance access to online learning which can be used to support pupils with additional support needs or pupils and staff affected by weather based disruptions. Page 336
Page 273
Classification: OFFICIAL 11 References Alanzi, K.A. and Alfraih, M.M. (2023), "Does students' commuting influence their academic performance?", Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 1706-1716. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-07-2022-0211 [last accessed: 20 January 2025]. Argyll & Bute Council (2024a) Mull Campus Pre Engagement feedback. Available from: Mull Campus Pre Engagement feedback | Argyll and Bute Council [last accessed: 27 January 2025]. Argyll & Bute Council (2024b) Special Meeting, Argyll and Bute Council – Friday, 20 December 2024 10:30am. Available from: Agenda for Argyll and Bute Council on Friday, 20 December 2024, 10:30 am - Argyll and Bute Council [last accessed: 28 January 2025]. Argyll & Bute Council (2024c) Quick Facts and Figures about Argyll and Bute. Available from: Quick Facts and Figures about Argyll and Bute | Argyll and Bute Council [last accessed: 27 January 2025]. Argyll & Bute Council (2025) Mull Campus Project. Available from: Mull Campus Project | Argyll and Bute Council [last accessed: 27 January 2025]. Chairassamee N, Chancharoenchai K, Saraithong W. (2024) Getting there: How commuting time and distance impact students' health. PLoS One. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11623559/ [last accessed: 20 January 2025]. Education Scotland (2024) Educational attainment. Available from: Educational attainment | National Performance Framework [last accessed: 27 January 2025]. Equality and Human Rights Commission (2016) Assessing impact and the Public Sector Equality Duty – A guide for public authorities in Scotland. Available from: https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/6._assessing_impact_-_formatted.pdf [last accessed: 20 December 2024]. OnlineMoneyAdviser (2025) Where in Britain do homes sell for more money when they are closer to a school. Available from: Does proximity to schools affect house prices in Britain? | Online Money Advisor [last accessed: 27 January 2025]. Ryder (2024) Mull Campus Community Engagement Report. Scotland’s Census (2022a) UV103 – Age by single year. Scotland’s Census (2022b) UV501 – Highest level of qualification. Scotland’s Census (2022c) UV102b – Age. Scotland’s Census (2022d) UV303 – Disability. Scotland’s Census (2022e) UV201 – Ethnic group. Scotland’s Census (2022f) UV102a – Age by sex. Scotland’s Census (2022g) Sexual orientation and trans status or history. Scotland’s Census (2022h) UV104 – Marital and civil partnership status. Scotland’s Census (2022i) UV205 - Religion. Scotland’s Census (2022j) UV904 – Sexual orientation. Page 337
Page 274
Classification: OFFICIAL Scottish Government (2016) Mainstreaming equality: Scottish Government’s equality duties. Available from: Mainstreaming equality: Scottish Government's equality duties - gov.scot [last accessed: 20 December 2024]. Scottish Government (2017) The Scottish Health Survey. Available from: Scottish Health Survey 2017: Volume 1: Main Report [last accessed: 20 December 2024]. Scottish Government (2018) Economy and Labour Market: Regional Employment Patterns in Scotland – Annual Population Survey 2018. Available from: Regional Employment Patterns in Scotland: Annual Population Survey 2018 [last accessed: 20 December 2024]. Scottish Government (2019) Scottish Household Survey. Available from: Scotland’s People Annual Report 2019 [last accessed: 20 December 2024]. Scottish Government (2020a) Disabled people and the labour market in Scotland. Available from: Disabled people and the labour market in Scotland - gov.scot [last accessed: 28 January 2025]. Scottish Government (2020b) Island Communities Impact Assessments: Guidance and Toolkit. Scottish Government (2021a) Child Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment (CRWIA) External Guidance. Available from: Child rights and wellbeing impact assessment external guidance and templates - gov.scot [last accessed: 20 December 2024]. Scottish Government (2021b) The Fairer Scotland Duty: Guidance for Public Bodies. Available from: Fairer Scotland Duty: guidance for public bodies - gov.scot [last accessed: 20 December 2024]. Scottish Government (2023a) Scottish Equality Evidence Finder. Available from: equalityevidence.scot [last accessed: 20 December 2024]. Scottish Government (2023b) GIRFEC. Available from: Getting it right for every child (GIRFEC) - gov.scot [last accessed: 27 January 2025]. Scottish Government (2023c) Poverty and Income Inequality in Scotland 2019-22. Retrieved from: Poverty and Income Inequality in Scotland 2020-23 Scottish Public Health Observatory (2024) All indicators. Available from: ScotPHO profiles (shinyapps.io) [last accessed: 20 December 2024]. SIMD (2020) Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation. Available from: SIMD (Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation) [last accessed: 20 December 2024]. Stantec (2024) Economic Impact Assessment. Completed December 2024. Systra (January 2025) Mull Education Campus Transport Considerations. Unicef UK (2019) A Summary of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Available from: UNCRC_summary-1.pdf [last accessed: 28 January 2025]. UK Government (2022) The Green Book. Available from: The Green Book (2022) - GOV.UK [last accessed: 27 January 2025]. Voulgaris, C. T., Smart, M. J., & Taylor, B. D. (2019). Tired of Commuting? Relationships among Journeys to School, Sleep, and Exercise among American Teenagers. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 39(2), 142-154. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X17725148 [last accessed: 20 January 2025]. Zoopla (2024) Zoopla average house price in Tobermory. Available from: Zoopla > Search Property to Buy, Rent, House Prices, Estate Agents [last accessed: 28 January 2025]. Page 338
Page 275
Classification: OFFICIAL Appendix A Glossary Abbreviation Meaning CRW Child Rights and Wellbeing CRWIA Children’s Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment ELC Early learning and childcare EqIA Equality Impact Assessment FSD Fairer Scotland Duty GDV Gross Development Value GIRFEC Getting it Right for Every Child GME Gaelic Medium Education HMT HM Treasury ICIA Island Communities Impact Assessment IIA Integrated Impact Assessment LDP Local Development Plan LEIP Learning Estate Investment Programme LGB+ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and other LVU Land Value Uplift PSED Public Sector Equality Duty PV Present Value SIMD Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation STAG Scottish Transport Appraisal Guidance UNCRC United Nations Convention of the Rights of the Child UK United Kingdom Page 339
Page 276
Classification: OFFICIAL Appendix B Summary of the UNCRC Articles Page 340
Page 277
a summary of the un convention on the rights of the child article 1 (definition of the child) Everyone under the age of 18 has all the rights in the Convention. article 2 (non-discrimination) The Convention applies to every child without discrimination, whatever their ethnicity, sex, religion, language, abilities or any other status, whatever they think or say, whatever their family background. article 3 (best interests of the child) The best interests of the child must be a top priority in all decisions and actions that affect children. article 4 (implementation of the Convention) Governments must do all they can to make sure every child can enjoy their rights by creating systems and passing laws that promote and protect children’s rights. article 5 (parental guidance and a child’s evolving capacities) Governments must respect the rights and responsibilities of parents and carers to provide guidance and direction to their child as they grow up, so that they fully enjoy their rights. This must be done in a way that recognises the child’s increasing capacity to make their own choices. article 6 (life, survival and development) Every child has the right to life. Governments must do all they can to ensure that children survive and develop to their full potential. article 7 (birth registration, name, nationality, care) Every child has the right to be registered at birth, to have a name and nationality, and, as far as possible, to know and be cared for by their parents. article 8 (protection and preservation of identity) Every child has the right to an identity. Governments must respect and protect that right, and prevent the child’s name, nationality or family relationships from being changed unlawfully. article 9 (separation from parents) Children must not be separated from their parents against their will unless it is in their best interests (for example, if a parent is hurting or neglecting a child). Children whose parents have separated have the right to stay in contact with both parents, unless this could cause them harm. article 10 (family reunification) Governments must respond quickly and sympathetically if a child or their parents apply to live together in the same country. If a child’s parents live apart in different countries, the child has the right to visit and keep in contact with both of them. article 11 (abduction and non-return of children) Governments must do everything they can to stop children being taken out of their own country illegally by their parents or other relatives, or being prevented from returning home. article 12 (respect for the views of the child) Every child has the right to express their views, feelings and wishes in all matters affecting them, and to have their views considered and taken seriously. This right applies at all times, for example during immigration proceedings, housing decisions or the child’s day-to-day home life. article 13 (freedom of expression) Every child must be free to express their thoughts and opinions and to access all kinds of information, as long as it is within the law. article 14 (freedom of thought, belief and religion) Every child has the right to think and believe what they choose and also to practise their religion, as long as they are not stopping other people from enjoying their rights. Governments must respect the rights and responsibilities of parents to guide their child as they grow up. article 15 (freedom of association) Every child has the right to meet with other children and to join groups and organisations, as long as this does not stop other people from enjoying their rights. article 16 (right to privacy) Every child has the right to privacy. The law should protect the child’s private, family and home life, including protecting children from unlawful attacks that harm their reputation. article 17 (access to information from the media) Every child has the right to reliable information from a variety of sources, and governments should encourage the media to provide information that children can understand. Governments must help protect children from materials that could harm them. article 18 (parental responsibilities and state assistance) Both parents share responsibility for bringing up their child and should always consider what is best for the child. Governments must support parents by creating support services for children and giving parents the help they need to raise their children. article 19 (protection from violence, abuse and neglect) Governments must do all they can to ensure that children are protected from all forms of violence, abuse, neglect and bad treatment by their parents or anyone else who looks after them. article 20 (children unable to live with their family) If a child cannot be looked after by their immediate family, the government must give them special protection and assistance. This includes making sure the child is provided with alternative care that is continuous and respects the child’s culture, language and religion. article 21 (adoption) Governments must oversee the process of adoption to make sure it is safe, lawful and that it prioritises children’s best interests. Children should only be adopted outside of their country if they cannot be placed with a family in their own country. article 22 (refugee children) If a child is seeking refuge or has refugee status, governments must provide them with appropriate protection and assistance to help them enjoy all the rights in the Convention. Governments must help refugee children who are separated from their parents to be reunited with them. article 23 (children with a disability) A child with a disability has the right to live a full and decent life with dignity and, as far as possible, independence and to play an active part in the community. Governments must do all they can to support disabled children and their families. article 24 (health and health services) Every child has the right to the best possible health. Governments must provide good quality health care, clean water, nutritious food, and a clean environment and education on health and well-being so that children can stay healthy. Richer countries must help poorer countries achieve this. article 25 (review of treatment in care) If a child has been placed away from home for the purpose of care or protection (for example, with a foster family or in hospital), they have the right to a regular review of their treatment, the way they are cared for and their wider circumstances. article 26 (social security) Every child has the right to benefit from social security. Governments must provide social security, including financial support and other benefits, to families in need of assistance. article 27 (adequate standard of living) Every child has the right to a standard of living that is good enough to meet their physical and social needs and support their development. Governments must help families who cannot afford to provide this. article 28 (right to education) Every child has the right to an education. Primary education must be free and different forms of secondary education must be available to every child. Discipline in schools must respect children’s dignity and their rights. Richer countries must help poorer countries achieve this. article 29 (goals of education) Education must develop every child’s personality, talents and abilities to the full. It must encourage the child’s respect for human rights, as well as respect for their parents, their own and other cultures, and the environment. article 30 (children from minority or indigenous groups) Every child has the right to learn and use the language, customs and religion of their family, whether or not these are shared by the majority of the people in the country where they live. article 31 (leisure, play and culture) Every child has the right to relax, play and take part in a wide range of cultural and artistic activities. article 32 (child labour) Governments must protect children from economic exploitation and work that is dangerous or might harm their health, development or education. Governments must set a minimum age for children to work and ensure that work conditions are safe and appropriate. article 33 (drug abuse) Governments must protect children from the illegal use of drugs and from being involved in the production or distribution of drugs. article 34 (sexual exploitation) Governments must protect children from all forms of sexual abuse and exploitation. article 35 (abduction, sale and trafficking) Governments must protect children from being abducted, sold or moved illegally to a different place in or outside their country for the purpose of exploitation. article 36 (other forms of exploitation) Governments must protect children from all other forms of exploitation, for example the exploitation of children for political activities, by the media or for medical research. article 37 (inhumane treatment and detention) Children must not be tortured, sentenced to the death penalty or suffer other cruel or degrading treatment or punishment. Children should be arrested, detained or imprisoned only as a last resort and for the shortest time possible. They must be treated with respect and care, and be able to keep in contact with their family. Children must not be put in prison with adults. article 38 (war and armed conflicts) Governments must not allow children under the age of 15 to take part in war or join the armed forces. Governments must do everything they can to protect and care for children affected by war and armed conflicts. article 39 (recovery from trauma and reintegration) Children who have experienced neglect, abuse, exploitation, torture or who are victims of war must receive special support to help them recover their health, dignity, self-respect and social life. article 40 (juvenile justice) A child accused or guilty of breaking the law must be treated with dignity and respect. They have the right to legal assistance and a fair trial that takes account of their age. Governments must set a minimum age for children to be tried in a criminal court and manage a justice system that enables children who have been in conflict with the law to reintegrate into society. article 41 (respect for higher national standards) If a country has laws and standards that go further than the present Convention, then the country must keep these laws. article 42 (knowledge of rights) Governments must actively work to make sure children and adults know about the Convention. The Convention has 54 articles in total. Articles 43–54 are about how adults and governments must work together to make sure all children can enjoy all their rights, including: article 45 Unicef can provide expert advice and assistance on children’s rights. optional protocols There are three agreements, called Optional Protocols, that strengthen the Convention and add further unique rights for children. They are optional because governments that ratify the Convention can decide whether or not to sign up to these Optional Protocols. They are: the Optional Protocol on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, the Optional Protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflict and the Optional Protocol on a complaints mechanism for children (called Communications Procedure). For more information go to unicef.org.uk/crc/op Page 341
Page 278
This page is intentionally left blank
Page 279
Document is Restricted Page 343 Agenda Item 6oNOT FOR PUBLICATION by virtue of paragraph(s) 8, 9 of Schedule 7A of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973
Page 280
This page is intentionally left blank
Page 281
Classification: OFFICIAL# Criteria Category Category Individual Factors to consider Score Weighted Score Score Weighted Score Score Weighted Score Score Weighted Score Notes/ rationale 3 Utility infrastructure - capacity and need for any diversions 7 21 5 15 2 6 5 15 Existing utilities considered, minimal diversions, opportunities for future heat network connections. Distance of running utilities. 3 Ground conditions 6 18 5 15 5 15 7 21 Potential for contamination at Site 1. Poorer ground conditions at Site 2/Site 3 marine deposits etc. 2 Topography 3 6 8 16 9 18 5 10 Existing school site constrained. Site 2/3 both more devleopable level wise 2 Flood risk & Drainage Assessment 4 8 6 12 5 10 9 18 Next steps would involve flood modelling/assessment. SEPA engagement key 3 Site abnormals 3 9 8 24 7 21 5 15 2 Habitat constraints 8 16 9 18 5 10 7 14 Impact 53 10 Is the site capable of accommodating the brief in full? 4 40 9 90 9 90 5 50 South tob can be used better than existing, due to constraints. More space in Craignure/Garmony sites. 5 Quality of external environment to support outside learning, sports activities etc 3 15 9 45 10 50 6 30 2 Does the site provide capacity for future expansion? 4 8 9 18 9 18 5 10 8 Travel times for ELC and primary school pupils 9 72 4 32 4 32 8 64 Systra report 2 Travel times for staff and secondary school pupils 9 18 4 8 5 10 8 16 Systra report 5 Access and connectivity to good community facilities and services 9 45 4 20 1 5 8 40 Ryder place report 2 Impact on family life 4 8 5 10 5 10 4 8 Refer to Stantec report. Impact on families if their child is away from home during the week was felt to be the greatest (sites 1 & 4). Increased travel time affects a greater number of families (sites 2 & 3).Travel time increase has a bigger impact for families with young children compared to older children 2 Equitable - unites north & south of island 4 8 7 14 6 12 4 8 Criteria re-defined to be around uniting north/south island, as it was felt that better reflects community feedback 2 Sustain and support local economy 7 14 4 8 3 6 7 14 Stantec report 2 Impact of construction activities on existing school/ residential areas 3 6 7 14 6 12 7 14 1 Good public transport links to site and location 5 5 7 7 4 4 6 6 Existing public transport links. Craignure slightly higher score due to ferry terminal and better links to north & south 2 Existing safe active travel links to site 4 8 3 6 2 4 6 12 Improvements in scoring could be seen as a result of future development at sites 1 Number of user journeys - bus, car, pedestrian (Pupil/ staff mode split) 8 8 5 5 3 3 7 7 1 Potential impact on public transport network 9 9 7 7 7 7 8 8 Scoring for sites 2 & 3 assumes school bus from Dervaig would travel via Tobermory 2 Ability of existing (wider) roads infrastructure to service site 3 6 4 8 3 6 7 14 New access roads required for both Craignure/Garmony. Tob South limitations. Existing site challenging/constrained, not much space for adjustment - one way in/out. Single track roads on Mull have an impact 1 Trips with complex dependencies/ multiple stages and modes of travel 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 No material difference between site options 2 Potential for re-use of existing infrastructure and buildings (embodied carbon) 4 8 3 6 1 2 3 6 3 Carbon impact of travel (travel distances and mode of transport) 8 24 3 9 4 12 8 24 Personal decisions to drive could impact actual carbon impact 15 Costs associated with construction abnormals 9 135 8 120 5 75 7 105 Thomson Gray report. Assume demolition included in scope regardless Based on assumptions and known information, site investigations not completed at this early stage 5 Potential acquisition/ disposal costs 4 20 7 35 10 50 3 15 Market value of each site. Updated 28/1/25 to reflect existing site value excluding common good land, and cumulative value of Tobermory South site (2 separate land transactions) Site 3 Garmony (005) MULL CAMPUS SITE SELECTION CRITERIA (v5) Site 4 Tobermory South (013) Accessibility & Transport 15 32 8 8 Deliverability Education Community and Place Weighting Site 1 Existing Tobermory site Site 2 Craignure (001) Affordability Sustainability 5 25 Page 411 Agenda Item 6p
Page 282
Classification: OFFICIAL# Criteria Category Category Individual Factors to consider Score Weighted Score Score Weighted Score Score Weighted Score Score Weighted Score Notes/ rationale Site 3 Garmony (005) MULL CAMPUS SITE SELECTION CRITERIA (v5) Site 4 Tobermory South (013)Weighting Site 1 Existing Tobermory site Site 2 Craignure (001) 5 Other (revenue) cost implications e.g. pupil transport 9 45 2 10 2 10 9 45 4 additional buses for site 2 & 3 (£1,385 per week for 40 weeks = £222k per annum) plus additional cost for staff travel for change of base (over 4 years). Any hostel savings, assuming catchment area change, negigible as staff shortages already. Main difference would be cost of food 3 Wayleaves, legal restrictions and site acquisition risk 6 18 7 21 7 21 7 21 Common good land risk on site 1 Sites 2-4 have site acquisition risk 2 Construction Programme risk 3 6 8 16 5 10 7 14 Likely to be a prolonged programme on site 1 due to need for staged construction and decant. Greater enabling works required for site 3 2 Planning designation and sensitive receptors 8 16 7 14 6 12 8 16 Site 2 - consider risk with housing development next door. Countryside zone, but already some development. Site 3 - also countryside zone, flooding considerations, cat 1 peat land. Site 4 - Housing allocation, amendment needed to LDP. TOTAL 100 625 628 546 645 Impact 53 Deliverability 15 Affordability 25 Risk 7 7Risk Affordability 25 Page 412
Page 283
ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL COUNCIL FINANCIAL SERVICES 27 FEBRUARY 2025 TREASURY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY AND ANNUAL INVESTMENT STRATEGY 2025-26 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 The Local Government in Scotland Act 2003 requires the council to have regard to the CIPFA Code of Practice on Treasury Management (revised 2021), the Code. The Treasury Management Strategy, including prudential and treasury Indicators, and the Annual Investment Strategy is a key reporting requirement, providing a comprehensive statement of treasury management policies and planned activity for the financial year ahead. 1.2 This report, prepared in compliance with the Code, covers the following: • Capital Expenditure and Financing; • An economic and interest rate update; • Borrowing Strategy; • Investment Strategy; and • Prudential and Treasury Indicators 2025-28. 1.3 The report concludes that: a) The Treasury Management Strategy provides a comprehensive statement of treasury management policies and planned activities, covering the relevant treasury and prudential indicators, the current and projected debt positions, and the Annual Investment Strategy for 2025- 26. b) A key driver of treasury management activity is the council’s capital investment plans. Prudential indicators reflect the output from these plans and are designed to ensure that the council’s capital investment plans are affordable, prudent and sustainable. Within the range of prudential indicators, there are several key indicators to ensure that the authority operates its activities within well defined limits. c) Whilst the Capital Financing Requirement represents an underlying need to borrow, the council is currently maintaining an under-borrowed position. This strategy is prudent while medium and longer dated borrowing rates are expected to fall from their current levels, albeit that considerable uncertainty remains around interest rate forecasts. d) The council’s revenue budget includes appropriate provision for financing costs of capital expenditure. The key principles of the Page 413 Agenda Item 8
Page 284
1.4 borrowing strategy will be to minimise debt interest costs over the medium term and to achieve a more even spread in the debt maturity profile. e) The council’s investment priorities will be security, liquidity and yield (return). A prudent approach to managing investment risk has been adopted. Exposure to credit risk will be limited by ensuring that all investments are placed with the higher rated bodies. A balanced view of risk against return will be taken in respect of all investments. It is anticipated that return on investments will be limited in 2025-26, as a result of Bank Rate forecasts and the over-riding principle of risk aversion. This report has been considered by the Policy and Resources Committee and referred to full Council for approval. Council is requested to: a) Approve the Treasury Management Strategy and Annual Investment Strategy for 2025-26, and the Prudential and Treasury Indicators for 2025-26 to 2027-28; and b) Note that the strategy will be further scrutinised by the Audit and Scrutiny Committee at its meeting of 13 March 2025, with any recommendations requiring Council approval brought back to full Council at the earliest opportunity. Page 414
Page 285
ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL COUNCIL FINANCIAL SERVICES 27 FEBRUARY 2025 TREASURY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY AND ANNUAL INVESTMENT STRATEGY 2025-26 2. INTRODUCTION 2.1 Background 2.1.1 The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) defines treasury management as ‘The management of the local authority’s borrowing, investments and cash flows, including its banking, money market and capital market transactions; the effective control of the risks associated with those activities; and the pursuit of optimum performance consistent with those risks.’ 2.1.2 The authority is required to operate a balanced revenue budget, which broadly means that cash raised during the year will meet cash expenditure. In addition, the authority’s capital plans indicate the borrowing and longer term cash flow planning, required to meet its capital spending obligations. The treasury management operation ensures that cash flow is adequately planned, with cash being available when it is needed. 2.1.3 Surplus monies are invested in low risk counterparties or instruments commensurate with the council’s low risk appetite, providing adequate liquidity initially before considering investment return. The management of longer term cash flow may involve arranging long or short term loans or using longer term cash flow surpluses. On occasion, when it is prudent and economic, any debt previously drawn may be restructured to meet risk or cost objectives. 2.1.4 The contribution the treasury management function makes to the authority is critical, as the balance of debt and investment operations ensure liquidity or the ability to meet spending commitments as they fall due, either on day to day revenue or for larger capital projects. The treasury operations will see a balance of the interest costs of debt and the investment income arising from cash deposits, impacting available resources. Since cash balances generally result from reserves and balances, it is paramount to ensure adequate security of the sums invested, as a loss of principal will in effect result in a loss to the General Fund balance. 2.2 Reporting Requirements 2.2.1 The authority is required to receive and approve, as a minimum, three main treasury reports each year: Page 415
Page 286
1) The Treasury Management Strategy, including prudential and treasury Indicators, and the Annual Investment Strategy (this report) – A forward looking report for the financial year ahead. 2) A Mid-year Treasury Management report – To update members on the capital and treasury position, amending prudential and treasury indicators, as necessary; and any required policy revisions. 3) An Annual Treasury Management report – A backward looking review, providing details of actual treasury activity, and prudential and treasury indicators, compared to the approved estimates. 2.2.2 The above reports require to be adequately scrutinised before being recommended to full Council for approval. This role will be undertaken by the Policy and Resources and Audit and Scrutiny Committees. In addition to the three major reports detailed above, quarterly reporting (end of June/end of December) is also required. These additional reports do not have to be reported to full Council but do require to be adequately scrutinised. This role will be undertaken by the Audit and Scrutiny Committee. 3. RECOMMENDATIONS 3.1 This report has been considered by the Policy and Resources Committee and referred to full Council for approval. Council is requested to: a) Approve the Treasury Management Strategy and Annual Investment Strategy for 2025-26, and the Prudential and Treasury Indicators for 2025-26 to 2027-28; and b) Note that the strategy will be further scrutinised by the Audit and Scrutiny Committee at its meeting of 13 March 2025, with any recommendations requiring Council approval brought back to full Council at the earliest opportunity. 4. TREASURY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY 2025-26 4.1 Capital Expenditure and Financing 4.1.1 The authority’s capital expenditure plans are the key driver of treasury management activity. The output of the capital expenditure plans is reflected in the prudential indicators, which are designed to assist members’ overview and confirm capital expenditure plans are prudent, affordable and sustainable. 4.1.2 The Capital Expenditure prudential indicator is a summary of the authority’s capital expenditure plans, both those agreed previously, and those forming part of this budget cycle. The following table summarises the capital expenditure plans, as outlined within the proposed capital plan 2025-28. Page 416
Page 287
2025-26 Estimate £m 2026-27 Estimate £m 2027-28 Estimate £m Executive Directorate (Douglas Hendry) Education 2.946 1.988 1.988 Facility Services - Shared Offices 3.681 0.667 0.382 Major Projects/CHORD 10.865 10.018 0.000 Executive Directorate (Kirsty Flanagan) ICT 1.352 0.820 0.688 Roads and Infrastructure 48.500 39.110 33.979 Development and Economic Growth 1.104 0.000 0.000 Health and Social Care Partnership 2.084 0.000 0.382 Live Argyll 0.474 0.468 0.382 Total 71.006 53.071 37.801 Note: The above financing need excludes other long-term liabilities, such as PFI and leasing arrangements that already include borrowing instruments. 4.1.3 The table below summarises the above capital expenditure plans and how these plans are being financed by capital or revenue resources. Any shortfall of resources results in a funding borrowing need. 2025-26 £m 2026-27 £m 2027-28 £m Gross Capital Expenditure 71.006 53.071 37.801 Financing: Specific Project Income 8.302 5.000 0.000 General Capital Grant 11.178 8.633 8.633 Asset Sales 0.750 0.500 0.500 Earmarked Reserves/Revenue 5.577 5.030 0.000 Total 25.807 19.163 9.133 Net Financing Need 45.199 33.908 28.668 Page 417
Page 288
4.2 The Authority’s Borrowing Need (the Capital Financing Requirement) 4.2.1 The second prudential indicator is the authority’s Capital Financing Requirement (CFR). The CFR is simply the total historic outstanding capital expenditure which has not yet been paid for from either revenue or capital resources. It is essentially a measure of the authority’s indebtedness and so its underlying borrowing need. Any capital expenditure, which has not immediately been paid for through a revenue or capital resource, will increase the CFR. 4.2.2 The CFR does not increase indefinitely, as prudent annual repayments from revenue need to be made, which reflect the useful life of capital assets financed by borrowing. This authority has chosen to make debt repayments through scheduled debt amortisation (loans fund charges). 4.2.3 The CFR includes any other long term liabilities (e.g., PPP schemes, finance leases). Whilst these increase the CFR, and therefore the authority’s borrowing requirement, these types of schemes include a borrowing facility by the PPP or lease provider and so the authority is not required to separately borrow for these schemes. The council hold long term liabilities within its CFR in this respect totalling an estimated £106.346m as at 31 March 2025. 4.2.4 Council is asked to approve the CFR projections outlined in the table below. 2025/26 Estimat e £m 2026/27 Estimat e £m 2027/28 Estimat e £m Opening CFR 360 394 415 Movement in CFR 34 21 16 Closing CFR 394 415 431 Net financing need for the year (above) 45 34 29 Less Loans Fund principal repayments and other financing movements including new PPP/ finance lease arrangements and principal repayments 11 13 13 Movement in CFR 34 21 16 4.2.5 In addition to the CFR, there will be a refinancing requirement in respect of the repayment of PWLB loan principal of £1.680m each year. These repayments of principal relate to a 10 year PWLB loan (original principal £21m), which was taken on a fixed Equal Instalments of Principal (EIP) basis. All other PWLB loans will be repayable on maturity, with no maturity loans due to mature in the period to 31 March 2028. 4.2.6 There is also a potential for market loans to be recalled. The council has one outstanding market or LOBO loan for £5.255m, maturing 2048, with call dates every 6 months. This loan could potentially be recalled at the 22 June or 22 December call dates in any year. Page 418
Page 289
4.2.7 Any PWLB or LOBO loans maturing during the year will ultimately require replacement borrowing to maintain the council’s cashflow position. In addition, the council will continue to actively monitor potential restructuring opportunities, in order to generate cash savings, at a minimum risk, and improve the balance of the loan debt maturity profile. 4.3 Liability Benchmark 4.3.1 The authority is required to estimate and measure the Liability Benchmark for the forthcoming financial year and the following two financial years, as a minimum. There are four components to the Liability Benchmark, also reflected in the graph below: 1. Existing loan debt outstanding: the authority’s existing loans that are still outstanding in future years. 2. Loans CFR: this is calculated in accordance with the loans CFR definition in the Prudential Code and projected into the future based on approved prudential borrowing and planned Loans Fund advances/Loans Fund principal repayments. 3. Net loans requirement: this will show the authority’s gross loan debt less treasury management investments at the last financial year-end, projected into the future and based on its approved prudential borrowing, planned Loans Fund principal repayments and any other major cash flows forecast. 4. Liability benchmark (or gross loans requirement): this equals net loans requirement plus short-term liquidity allowance. Any years where actual loans are less than the benchmark indicate a future borrowing requirement. Any years where actual loans outstanding exceed the benchmark represent an overborrowed position, which will result in excess cash requiring investment. Page 419
Page 290
4.4 Core Funds and Expected Investment Balances 4.4.1 The application of resources to either finance capital expenditure or to support the revenue budget will have an ongoing impact on cash balances available for investment. It is anticipated that treasury investments will be held to manage day to day cashflow requirements, with balances expected to fluctuate throughout the year. Whilst the council holds significant usable reserve balances, due to the strategy of internal borrowing, as outlined within the Borrowing Strategy section, investment balances are expected to be low throughout the year. 4.5 Statutory Repayment of Loans Fund Advances 4.5.1 The authority is required to set out its policy for the statutory repayment of loans fund advances prior to the start of the financial year. The repayment of loans fund advances ensures that the council makes a prudent provision each year to pay off an element of the accumulated loans fund advances made in previous financial years 4.5.2 A variety of options are provided to councils, so long as a prudent provision is made each year. A review of the council’s loan fund advances was undertaken during 2019-20 to ensure the council continues to make a prudent provision each year for the repayment of loans fund advances. 4.5.3 For all new loans fund advances the policy for repayment will be in accordance with the following methodology, as appropriate: 1. Asset life method – loans fund advances will be repaid with reference to the life of an asset using a 5.1% annuity rate; 2. Funding / Income profile method – loans fund advances will be repaid by reference to an associated income stream. 4.5.4 Using the asset life method, the council is required to ensure that the debt is repaid over a period that is reasonably commensurate with that over which the capital expenditure provides benefits. The following table details the repayment period applicable to each asset type. Page 420
Page 291
4.6 Current Treasury Portfolio Position 4.6.1 The overall treasury management portfolio as at 31.3.24 and for the position as at 31 December 2024 are shown below for both borrowing and investments. TREASURY PORTFOLIO Actual 31 March 2024 Actual 31 December 2024 Treasury investments £m % £m % Banks 18.133 55% 10.016 30% Local Authorities 10.000 30% 0.000 0% Money Market Funds 1.400 4% 20.000 60% Third Party Loans (RSLs) 3.543 11% 3.408 10% Total treasury investments 33.076 100% 33.424 100% Treasury external borrowing PWLB 108.877 92% 107.197 95% Market Loans (LOBO) 5.255 4% 5.255 5% Temporary Borrowing* 5.256 4% 0.297 0% Local Bonds 0.018 0% 0.018 0% Total external borrowing 119.406 100% 112.767 100% *Note: This represents short term borrowing from various institutions. 4.6.2 The council’s forward projections for borrowing are summarised in the following table. This table shows the actual external debt, against the underlying capital borrowing need, (the Capital Financing Requirement), highlighting any over or under borrowing. Asset Type Repayment Period (Years) Land (including cemeteries) 100 Road Structures - Bridges, Retaining Walls, Sea Walls, Flood Defences 60 Piers and Harbours - Major Structural Work 60 Piers and Harbours - Medium Term Works e.g painting/cathodic protection 20 Piers and Harbours - Limited Lifespan Improvements 10 Roads and Footways 20 Street Lighting 30 Vehicles & Plant 7 IT Equipment 5 Major Regeneration Works (Public Realm etc) 60 New Builds including Schools 60 Buildings - Electrical 40 Buildings - Plant 20 Buildings - Roofing 35 Buildings - Windows & External Doors 20 Buildings - Structural 25 Page 421
Page 292
2025/26 Estimate £m 2026/27 Estimate £m 2027/28 Estimate £m Debt at 1 April 153 220 275 Expected change in Debt 67 55 37 Other long-term liabilities (OLTL) 106 101 95 Expected change in OLTL (5) (6) (6) Actual Gross Debt at 31 March 321 370 401 The Capital Financing Requirement 394 415 431 Under / (over) borrowing 73 45 30 4.6.3 Within the range of prudential indicators there are several key indicators to ensure that the authority operates its activities within well defined limits. One of these is that the authority needs to ensure that its gross debt does not, except in the short- term, exceed the total of the CFR in the preceding year plus the estimates of any additional CFR for 2025/26 and the following two financial years. This allows some flexibility for limited early borrowing for future years but ensures that borrowing is not undertaken for revenue or speculative purposes. 4.6.4 The council’s Section 95 Officer reports that the council has complied with this prudential indicator in the current year and does not envisage difficulties for the future. This view takes account of current commitments, existing plans and the proposals in the 2025-26 Budget Pack in respect of the Capital Plan 2025-28. 4.7 Treasury Indicators: Limits to Borrowing Activity 4.7.1 The Operational Boundary. This is the limit beyond which external debt is not normally expected to exceed. In most cases, this would be a similar figure to the CFR but may be lower or higher depending on the levels of actual debt and the ability to fund under-borrowing by other cash resources. Operational Boundary 2025/26 Estimate £m 2026/27 Estimate £m 2027/28 Estimate £m Debt 293 320 341 Other long-term liabilities 101 95 90 Total 394 415 431 4.7.2 The Authorised Limit for external debt. This is a key prudential indicator and represents a control on the maximum level of borrowing. This represents a legal limit beyond which external debt is prohibited, and this limit needs to be set or revised by full Council. It reflects the level of external debt which, while not desired, could be afforded in the short term to manage day to day cashflow requirements but is not sustainable in the longer term. • This is the statutory limit determined under section 3 (1) of the Local Government Act 2003. The Government retains an option to control either the total of all local authority plans, or those of a specific authority, although this power has not yet been exercised. Page 422
Page 293
• Council is asked to approve the following Authorised Limit: Authorised Limit 2025/26 Estimate £m 2026/27 Estimate £m 2027/28 Estimate £m Debt 298 325 346 Other long-term liabilities 104 98 93 Total 402 423 439 4.8 Prospects for Interest Rates 4.8.1 The council’s treasury advisor has provided an update on the current economic position, given within Appendix 1. Part of this advisory service is also to assist the authority to formulate a view on interest rates. The following forecasts have been provided for short term (Bank Rate) and long term (PWLB certainty rates) borrowing. (a) Long term PWLB rates: PWLB rates Dec 2024 % March 2025 % March 2026 % March 2027 % Dec 2027 % 5 year 5.0 4.9 4.5 4.1 3.9 10 year 5.3 5.1 4.7 4.3 4.1 25 year 5.6 5.5 5.1 4.7 4.5 50 year 5.4 5.3 4.9 4.5 4.3 The current and expected interest rates for long term borrowing from the PWLB highlight a gradual decrease from the current position. The PWLB rates quoted (gilt yields plus 80 bps) take account of the application of a 0.2% certainty rate reduction, introduced by the government in return for council’s providing their borrowing forecast information. Argyll and Bute Council is able to access the certainty rate reduction. (b) Short term borrowing rates: Bank Rate Dec 2024 % March 2025 % March 2026 % March 2027 % Dec 2027 % 4.75 4.50 3.75 3.50 3.50 The ‘Bank Rate’ is the official Bank of England rate paid on commercial bank reserves. The current and Bank Rate forecasts also highlight an expected gradual decrease from the current position. Short term borrowing rates will generally fall in line with Bank Rate cuts. 4.8.2 Considerable uncertainty remains around interest rate forecasts. As all PWLB certainty rates are currently significantly above the longer term Bank Rate forecast (10 years 3.25%), borrowing strategies will need to be reviewed in Page 423
Page 294
that context. Overall, better value can be obtained at the shorter end. MUFG will continue to monitor economic and market developments as they unfold and advise the authority accordingly. Typically, forecasts are reviewed following the quarterly release of the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Report but will be considered on an ad hoc basis, as required. 4.9 Borrowing Strategy 4.9.1 The council is currently maintaining an under borrowed position. This means that the capital borrowing need, (the Capital Financing Requirement), has not been fully funded with loan debt as cash supporting the authority’s reserve balances and cash flow has been used as a temporary measure (internal borrowing). This strategy is prudent while medium and longer dated borrowing rates are expected to fall from their current levels, albeit only once prevailing inflation concerns are addressed by restrictive near term monetary policy. 4.9.2 Short term borrowing from money markets or other local authorities is currently expected to be cheaper than long term borrowing and will therefore be attractive throughout the financial year. However, as with internal borrowing, short term savings by delaying new long term external borrowing requires to be balanced with potential additional long term costs. 4.9.3 Current PWLB rates are forecast to gradually decrease over the next couple of years. As a result, consideration will be given to the timing of any new fixed rate long term borrowing. Although more expensive in the short term, this may be more cost effective over the longer term and also provides an element of budget certainty in respect of future years. 4.9.4 The council’s annual revenue estimates include appropriate provision for financing costs of capital expenditure. The key principles of the strategy will be to minimise debt interest costs over the medium term and to achieve a more even spread in the debt maturity profile. It is anticipated that a range of solutions will be employed in order to mitigate against interest rate risk, and to provide longer term cost certainty, as outlined above. 4.9.5 Against the economic background and the risks within interest rate forecasts, caution will be adopted with the 2025-26 treasury operations. The Section 95 Officer, in conjunction with the treasury advisors, will monitor interest rate forecasts and adopt a pragmatic approach to changing circumstances, with any new borrowing reported to committee at the next available opportunity. 4.10 Policy on Borrowing in Advance of Need 4.10.1 The authority will not borrow more than or in advance of its needs purely in order to profit from the investment of the extra sums borrowed. Any decision to borrow in advance will be within forward approved Capital Financing Requirement estimates and will be considered carefully to ensure that value for money can be demonstrated and that the authority can ensure the security of such funds. Risks associated with any borrowing in advance activity will be subject to prior appraisal and subsequent reporting through the mid-year or annual reporting mechanism. Page 424
Page 295
4.11 Rescheduling 4.11.1 The principle reasons for debt rescheduling include: • The generation of cash savings; and • To enhance the balance of the debt maturity profile, mitigating the risk of refinancing at a higher rate of interest in any year in the future. 4.11.2 Opportunities for debt rescheduling within the current debt portfolio will be monitored on an ongoing basis throughout the year. There may be potential opportunities to generate savings and enhance the balance of the debt maturity profile by switching from long term debt to short term debt. However, these options would need careful consideration in light of the short term nature of potential savings and the likely cost of re-financing those short term loans on maturity, if required, together with any debt repayment premiums that may be incurred. Whilst premature redemption rates remain elevated, rescheduling opportunities to generate savings are not expected to be available. This would only expect to be undertaken, where a rebalancing of the portfolio, to provide more certainty, is considered appropriate. Any rescheduling undertaken will be reported to Council, at the earliest opportunity. 4.12 New Financial Institutions as a Source of Borrowing 4.12.1 Currently the PWLB Certainty Rate is set at gilts + 80 basis points. However, consideration may still need to be given to sourcing funding from the following sources: • Local authorities (primarily shorter dated maturities out to 3 years or so – generally still cheaper than the Certainty Rate). • Financial institutions (primarily insurance companies and pension funds but also some banks, out of forward dates where the objective is to avoid a “cost of carry” or to achieve refinancing certainty over the next few years). Our advisors will keep us informed as to the relative merits of each of these alternative funding sources. 4.13 Approved Sources of Long and Short Term Borrowing 4.13.1 A summary of the council’s approved sources and types of borrowing are set out within Appendix 2. 4.14 Treasury and Prudential Indicators 2025-28 4.14.1 A key driver of treasury management activity is the council’s capital investment plans. The treasury management function ensures that sufficient cash is available to meet capital spending commitments. Prudential indicators reflect the output from these plans and are designed to ensure that the council’s capital investment plans are affordable, prudent and sustainable. Required updates to the prudential and treasury indicators for 2024-25 were Page 425
Page 296
outlined within the Treasury Management Strategy Mid-year Review Report, approved by Council on 20 December 2024. The prudential and treasury indicators for 2025-26 to 2027-28 are outlined in Appendix 3 and reflect the proposed Capital Plan 2025-28. These indicators are relevant for the purpose of setting an integrated treasury management strategy. 5. ANNUAL INVESTMENT STRATEGY 5.1 Investment Policy 5.1.1 The council’s investment policy implements the requirements of the following: • Local Government Investments (Scotland) Regulations 2010, (and accompanying Finance Circular 5/2010), • CIPFA Treasury Management in Public Services Code of Practice and Cross Sectoral Guidance Notes 2021 (“the Code”) 5.1.2 The council’s investment priorities, in order of importance, will be security, minimising the risk of any loss on the principal sum invested; portfolio liquidity, ensuring that cash is available when required; and yield (return), the rate of interest earned from the investment. The authority will aim to achieve the optimum return on its investments, commensurate with proper levels of security and liquidity, and with regard to the authority’s risk appetite. The risk appetite of the council will be low, with security of investments the key priority. 5.1.3 In the current economic climate, it is considered appropriate to maintain a degree of liquidity to cover cash flow needs but to also consider opportunities for ‘laddering’ investments for periods up to 12 months with high credit rated financial institutions, whilst investment rates remain elevated. 5.1.4 The borrowing of monies purely to invest or on-lend and make a return is not permitted and the council will not engage in such activity. The limit of investments will reflect the level of available council reserve fund balances and borrowing in advance to meet capital financing requirements, in line with the borrowing strategy, together with provision for managing the council’s day to day cash flow requirements. 5.1.5 The guidance from the Scottish Government and CIPFA places a high priority on the management of risk. This authority has adopted a prudent approach to managing risk and defines its risk appetite by the following means: 1. Minimum acceptable credit criteria are applied in order to generate a list of highly creditworthy counterparties. This also enables diversification and thus avoidance of concentration risk. The key ratings used to monitor counterparties are the short term and long term ratings. 2. Other information: ratings will not be the sole determinant of the quality of an institution; it is important to continually assess and monitor the financial sector on both a micro and macro basis and in relation to the economic and political environments in which institutions operate. The assessment will also take account of information that reflects the opinion of the markets. To achieve this consideration the council will engage with its Page 426
Page 297
advisors to maintain a monitor on market pricing such as ‘credit default swaps’ (CDS) and overlay that information on top of the credit ratings. 3. Other information sources used will include the financial press, share price and other such information pertaining to the financial sector, in order to establish the most robust scrutiny process on the suitability of potential investment counterparties. 4. This council has defined the list of types of investment instruments that the treasury management team are authorised to use and lending limits (amounts and maturity). A limit for the amount of its investments which are invested for longer than 365 days has also been set. 5. Investments will only be placed with counterparties from countries with a specified minimum sovereign rating and all investments will be denominated in sterling. However, the council will also pursue value for money in treasury management and will monitor the yield from investment income against appropriate benchmarks for investment performance throughout the year. 5.1.6 5.1.7 Investment instruments identified for potential use during the year, together with associated treasury risk mitigations and monetary limits, are outlined in Appendix 4. Information on Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) considerations is also provided. Within the constraints of the policy, due consideration will be given to the diversification of investments, in order to limit a concentration of investments with too few counterparties or countries, and to ESG factors. There has been considerable change in the types of investment instrument brought to the market in recent years. Given the fluidity of this area, members will be kept informed and requested to approve the use of any new instruments, as appropriate, in order to allow maximum flexibility. 5.2 Creditworthiness Policy 5.2.1 The council applies the creditworthiness service provided by MUFG (formerly Link Group). This service employs a sophisticated modelling approach utilising credit ratings from the three main credit rating agencies - Fitch, Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s. The credit ratings of counterparties are supplemented with the following overlays: - 1. “watches” and “outlooks” from credit rating agencies; 2. CDS spreads that may give early warning of changes in credit ratings; 3. sovereign ratings to select counterparties from only the most creditworthy countries. 5.2.2 This modelling approach combines credit ratings, and any assigned Watches and Outlooks, in a weighted scoring system, which is then combined with an overlay of CDS spreads. The end product of this is a series of colour coded bands, which indicate the relative creditworthiness of counterparties. These colour codes are used by the authority to determine the suggested duration for investments. Page 427
Page 298
5.2.3 All credit ratings will be monitored on an ongoing basis throughout the year. Through its use of the MUFG creditworthiness service, the council is alerted to changes to ratings of all three agencies and will also be advised of information in movements in Credit Default Swap spreads and other market data on a daily basis. If a downgrade results in the counterparty / investment scheme no longer meeting the authority’s minimum criteria, its further use as a new investment will be withdrawn immediately. Sole reliance will not be placed on the use of this external service. All available information will be considered when making investment decisions. 5.2.4 5.2.5 The council will continue to limit exposure to credit risk by ensuring that all investments are placed with the higher rated bodies from a weekly credit list of worldwide potential counterparties. For illustration purposes, a snapshot of this counterparty list as at 7 February 2025 is provided in Appendix 5. The council essentially adopts a hybrid approach in formulating its creditworthiness policy. In addition to the MUFG creditworthiness service, which provides details of the most highly credit rated institutions (counterparties) and suggested investment durations, the council also places a monetary limit on each type of investment or counterparty, as outlined within Appendix 4. These investment criteria will be kept under review throughout the year and amended, if required, to ensure that they continue to be fit for purpose. 5.3 Investment Strategy 5.3.1 Investments will be made with reference to the core balance and cash flow requirements and the outlook for short term interest rates (i.e., rates for investments up to 12 months). Greater returns are usually obtainable by investing for longer periods. Accordingly, while most cash balances are required in order to manage the ups and downs of cash flow, where cash sums can be identified that could be invested for longer periods, the value to be obtained from longer term investments will be carefully assessed. 5.3.2 The current forecast shown in paragraph 4.8.1 includes a forecast for Bank Rate to fall to a low of 3.5%. However, as there are so many variables at this time, caution must be exercised in respect of all interest rate forecasts. The suggested budgeted investment earnings rates for returns on investments placed for periods up to about three months during each financial year are as follows: Average earnings in each year % 2025/26 4.10% 2026/27 3.70% 2027/28 3.50% Page 428
Page 299
5.3.3 For its cash flow generated balances, the authority will seek to utilise its business reserve instant access accounts, Money Market Funds and short- dated deposits, (overnight to 100 days), in order to benefit from the compounding of interest. 5.3.4 An investment treasury indicator and limit requires to be set in respect of total principal funds invested for greater than 365 days. These limits are set with regard to the authority’s liquidity requirements and to reduce the need for early sale of an investment and are based on the availability of funds after each year end. The council is asked to approve the following Treasury Indicator and limit: Upper limit for principal sums invested for longer than 365 days 2025/26 £m 2026/27 £m 2027/28 £m Principal sums invested for longer than 365 days 20 20 20 Current investments in excess of 1 year maturing in each year 0 0 0 5.4 Investment Performance / Risk Benchmarking 5.4.1 The Section 95 Officer will continue to monitor the economic environment and adopt a pragmatic approach to changing circumstances. A balanced view of risk against return will be taken in respect of all investments. The authority may use an investment benchmark to assess the investment performance of its investment portfolio of overnight, 7 day, 1, 3, 6 or 12 month compounded SONIA (Sterling Overnight Index Average), as appropriate. However, it is anticipated that return on investments will be limited in 2025-26, as a result of Bank Rate forecasts and the over-riding principal of risk aversion. Investment activity will be reported at the end of the financial year, as part of the Annual Treasury Report. 5.5 Non-treasury investments 5.5.1 Non-treasury investments are defined as the following categories: • All shareholding, unit holding and bond holding, including those in a local authority owned company; • Loans to a local authority company or other entity formed by a local authority to deliver services; • Loans made to third parties; and • Investment property. 5.5.2 Any such finance arrangements or loans would be subject to specific committee approval. The authority may make loans to third parties, where this is consistent with meeting the service objectives of the council and for which, specific statutory provision exists. For service reasons, loans to third parties may be offered at an interest rate below the market rate. Where the loan is advanced at less than a market interest rate, there is an associated loss of investment return, which would Page 429
Page 300
otherwise have been earned on these resources. Any cost to the council in this respect will be reflected in the authority’s annual accounts. All loans to third parties will be recognised as investments and detailed within the Annual Investment Report. 6. Capital Strategy 6.1 The CIPFA 2021 Prudential and Treasury Management Codes places a requirement on local authorities to prepare a Capital Strategy. The Capital Strategy demonstrates how capital expenditure, capital financing and treasury management activity contribute to the provision of services and longer term policy objectives of the council. It also provides an overview of how associated risk is managed and the implications for future financial sustainability. An updated Capital Investment Strategy was approved by Policy and Resources Committee in August 2023. This will be reviewed and updated, as appropriate, as part of a planned review of capital arrangements, to be undertaken during the 2025-26. 7. Training 7.1 The CIPFA Code requires the proper officer to ensure that members with responsibility for treasury management receive adequate training. This especially applies to Members responsible for scrutiny. Members of the Audit and Scutiny Committee received training from the council’s treasury advisors, Link Group in October 2024, to assist with this scrutiny role. Members are advised to notify Financial Services as/when they feel further training sessions would be beneficial. Furthermore, the training needs of treasury management officers are periodically reviewed to ensure appropriate treasury management knowledge and skills for those responsible for management, delivery, governance and decision making. 8. Policy on Use of External Service Providers 8.1 The authority uses MUFG (formerly Link Group), as its external treasury management advisors, to acquire access to specialist skills and resources. However, it is recognised that responsibility for treasury management decisions remains with the council. All decisions will be undertaken with due regard to all available information, including from our treasury advisers. For short term market borrowing and investments, the council utilises a number of brokers to access sterling cash markets. This ensures that the council ensures best value in daily cash flow management. 9. Scheme of Delegation and Role of the Section 95 Officer 9.1 The treasury management scheme of delegation, together with the treasury management role of the Section 95 officer and nominated Member, are outlined in Appendix 6. 10. CONCLUSION 10.1 The Treasury Management Strategy provides a comprehensive statement of treasury management policies and planned activities, covering the relevant treasury and prudential indicators, the current and projected debt positions, and the Annual Investment Strategy for 2025-26. Page 430
Page 301
10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 A key driver of treasury management activity is the council’s capital investment plans. Prudential indicators reflect the output from these plans and are designed to ensure that the council’s capital investment plans are affordable, prudent and sustainable. Within the range of prudential indicators, there are several key indicators to ensure that the authority operates its activities within well defined limits. Whilst the Capital Financing Requirement represents an underlying need to borrow, the council is currently maintaining an under-borrowed position. This strategy is prudent while medium and longer dated borrowing rates are expected to fall from their current levels, albeit that considerable uncertainty remains around interest rate forecasts. The council’s revenue budget includes appropriate provision for financing costs of capital expenditure. The key principles of the borrowing strategy will be to minimise debt interest costs over the medium term and to achieve a more even spread in the debt maturity profile. The council’s investment priorities will be security, liquidity and yield (return). A prudent approach to managing investment risk has been adopted. Exposure to credit risk will be limited by ensuring that all investments are placed with the higher rated bodies. A balanced view of risk against return will be taken in respect of all investments. It is anticipated that return on investments will be limited in 2025-26, as a result of Bank Rate forecasts and the over-riding principal of risk aversion. 11. IMPLICATIONS 11.1 Policy Sets the policy for borrowing and investment decisions. 11.2 Financial Provides the Treasury Management Strategy for 2025-26, including the Annual Investment Strategy. 11.3 Legal None 11.4 HR None 11.5 Fairer Duty Scotland: 10.5.1 Equalities – protected characteristics None 10.5.2 Socio-economic Duty None 10.5.3 Islands None 11.6 Climate Change None 11.7 Risk Provides an overview of treasury management and investment risk, and how these risks are managed. 11.8 Customer Service - None None 11.9 The Rights of the Child (UNCRC) None Page 431
Page 302
Kirsty Flanagan Executive Director/S95 Officer 10 February 2025 Councillor Ross Moreland, Policy Lead for Finance and Commercial Services APPENDICES: Appendix 1 – Economic Background Appendix 2 - Approved Sources and Types of Borrowing Appendix 3 – Treasury and Prudential Indicators 2025-28 Appendix 4 – Permitted Investments Appendix 5 – Example Weekly Counterparty List Appendix 6 – Scheme of Delegation; Section 95 Officer and Nominated Member Roles For further information contact: Carolyn Earl, Acting Head of Financial Services Carolyn.Earl@argyll-bute.gov.uk Page 432
Page 303
APPENDIX 1 ECONOMIC BACKGROUND (to 12th December 2024) The third quarter of 2024 (July to September) saw: • GDP growth stagnating in July following downwardly revised Q2 figures (0.5% q/q) • A further easing in wage growth as the headline 3myy rate (including bonuses) fell from 4.6% in June to 4.0% in July; • CPI inflation hitting its target in June before edging above it to 2.2% in July and August; • Core CPI inflation increasing from 3.3% in July to 3.6% in August; • The Bank of England initiating its easing cycle by lowering interest rates from 5.25% to 5.0% in August and holding them steady in its September meeting; • 10-year gilt yields falling to 4.0% in September. Over the aforementioned period, the economy’s stagnation in June and July pointed more to a mild slowdown in UK GDP growth than a sudden drop back into a recession. However, in the interim period, to 12 December, arguably the biggest impact on the economy’s performance has been the negative market sentiment in respect of the fallout from the Chancellor’s Budget on 30 October. If we reflect on the 30 October Budget, our central case is that those policy announcements will prove to be inflationary, at least in the near-term. The Office for Budgetary Responsibility and the Bank of England concur with that view. The latter have the CPI measure of inflation hitting 2.5% y/y by the end of 2024 and staying sticky until at least 2026. The Bank forecasts CPI to be elevated at 2.7% y/y (Q4 2025) before dropping back to sub-2% in 2027. Nonetheless, since the Budget, the October inflation print has shown the CPI measure of inflation bouncing up to 2.3% y/y with the prospect that it will be close to 3% by the end of the year before falling back slowly through 2025. The RPI measure has also increased significantly to 3.4% y/y. How high inflation goes will primarily be determined by several key factors. First amongst those is that the major investment in the public sector, according to the Bank of England, will lift UK real GDP to 1.7% in 2025 before growth moderates in 2026 and 2027. The debate around whether the Government’s policies lead to a material uptick in growth primarily focus on the logistics of fast-tracking planning permissions, identifying sufficient skilled labour to undertake a resurgence in building, and an increase in the employee participation rate within the economy. There are inherent risks to all the above. The worst-case scenario would see systemic blockages of planning permissions and the inability to identify and resource the additional workforce required to deliver large-scale IT, housing and infrastructure projects. This would lead to upside risks to inflation, an increased prospect of further Government borrowing & tax rises in the June Page 433
Page 304
2025 Spending Review (pushed back from the end of March), and a tepid GDP performance. Regarding having a sufficiently large pool of flexible and healthy workers, the initial outlook does not look bright. Research from Capital Economics has alluded to an increase of some 500,000 construction workers being needed to provide any chance of the Government hitting its target of 300,000 new homes being built in each of the next five years (234,000 net additional dwellings in England in 2022/23). But the last time such an increase was needed, and construction employment is currently at a nine-year low, it took 12 years to get there (1996 to 2008). Also note, as of October 2024, job vacancies in the construction sector were still higher than at any time in the 20 years preceding the pandemic. Currently, it also seems likely that net inward migration is set to fall, so there is likely to be a smaller pool of migrant workers available who, in the past, have filled the requirement for construction worker demand. The Government plans to heavily promote training schemes, particularly to the one million 16- to 24- year-olds who are neither in education nor work. But it is arguable as to whether the employee shortfall can be made up from this source in the requisite time, even if more do enter the workforce. Against, this backdrop, there may be a near-term boost to inflation caused by a wave of public sector cash chasing the same construction providers over the course of the next year or so, whilst wages remain higher than the Bank currently forecasts because of general labour shortages, including in social care where Government accepts there is a 150,000 shortfall at present. Unemployment stands at a low 4.3% (September), whilst wages are rising at 4.3% y/y (including bonuses) and 4.8% (excluding bonuses). The Bank would ideally like to see further wage moderation to underpin any further gradual relaxing of monetary policy. Indeed, over the next six months, the market is currently only pricing in Bank Rate reductions in February and May – which would see Bank Rate fall to 4.25% - but further cuts, thereafter, are highly likely to be even more data-dependent. If we focus on borrowing, a term we are likely to hear throughout 2025 is “bond vigilante”. Essentially, this represents a generic term for when the market is ill at ease with the level of government borrowing and demands a higher return for holding debt issuance. In the UK, we do not need to go back too far to recall the negative market reaction to the Truss/Kwarteng budget of 2022. But long- term borrowing rates have already gradually moved back to those levels since their recent low point in the middle of September 2024. Of course, the UK is not alone in this respect. Concerns prevail as to what the size of the budget deficit will be in the US, following the election of Donald Trump as President, and in France there are on-going struggles to form a government to address a large budget deficit problem too. Throw into the mix the uncertain outcome to German elections, and there is plenty of bond investor concern to be seen. Staying with the US, Donald Trump’s victory paves the way for the introduction/extension of tariffs that could prove inflationary whilst the same Page 434
Page 305
could be said of further tax cuts. Invariably the direction of US Treasury yields in reaction to his core policies will, in all probability, impact UK gilt yields. So, there are domestic and international factors that could impact PWLB rates whilst, as a general comment, geo-political risks continue to abound in Europe, the Middle East and Asia. In the past month, the US Core CPI measure of inflation has indicated that inflation is still a concern (3.3% y/y, 0.3% m/m), as has the November Producer Prices Data (up 3.0 y/y v a market estimate of 2.6% y/y, 0.4% m/m v an estimate of 0.2% m/m) albeit probably insufficient to deter the FOMC from cutting US rates a further 0.25% at its December meeting. However, with Trump’s inauguration as President being held on 20 January, further rate reductions and their timing will very much be determined by his policy announcements and their implications for both inflation and Treasury issuance. Looking at gilt movements in the first half of 2024/25, and you will note the 10- year gilt yield declined from 4.32% in May to 4.02% in August as the Bank’s August rate cut signalled the start of its loosening cycle. More recently, however, 10 year gilt yields have spiked back up to 4.35%. The FTSE 100 reached a peak of 8,380 in the third quarter of 2024 (currently 8.304), but its performance is firmly in the shade of the US S&P500, which has breached the 6,000 threshold on several occasions recently, delivering returns upwards of 25% y/y. The catalyst for any further rally (or not) is likely to be the breadth of AI’s impact on business growth and performance. MPC meetings: 9 May, 20 June, 1 August, 19 September, 7 November 2024 • On 9 May, the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) voted 7-2 to keep Bank Rate at 5.25%. This outcome was repeated on 20th June. • However, by the time of the August meeting, there was a 5-4 vote in place for rates to be cut by 25bps to 5%. However, subsequent speeches from MPC members have supported Governor Bailey’s tone with its emphasis on “gradual” reductions over time. • Markets thought there may be an outside chance of a further Bank Rate reduction in September, following the 50bps cut by the FOMC, but this came to nothing. • On 7 November, Bank Rate was cut by 0.25% to 4.75%. The vote was 8-1 in favour of the cut but the language used by the MPC emphasised “gradual” reductions would be the way ahead with an emphasis on the inflation and employment data releases, as well as geo-political events. In the following chart, despite a considerable gilt market rally in mid-September, rates started and finished the six-month period under review in broadly the same position. Page 435
Page 306
PWLB RATES 02.04.24 - 30.09.24 HIGH/LOW/AVERAGE PWLB RATES FOR 02.04.24 – 30.09.24 3.00 3.40 3.80 4.20 4.60 5.00 5.40 5.80 6.20 6.60 7.00 PWLB Certainty Rate Variations 2.4.24 to 30.9.24 2-Apr-24 30-Sep-24 Average 1 Year 5 Year 10 Year 25 Year 50 Year 02/04/2024 5.39% 4.72% 4.80% 5.28% 5.07% 30/09/2024 4.95% 4.55% 4.79% 5.33% 5.13% Low 4.78% 4.31% 4.52% 5.08% 4.88% Low date 17/09/2024 17/09/2024 17/09/2024 17/09/2024 17/09/2024 High 5.61% 5.14% 5.18% 5.61% 5.40% High date 29/05/2024 01/05/2024 01/05/2024 01/05/2024 01/05/2024 Average 5.21% 4.76% 4.88% 5.35% 5.14% Spread 0.83% 0.83% 0.66% 0.53% 0.52% Page 436
Page 307
APPENDIX 2 Approved Sources of Long and Short-term Borrowing On Balance Sheet Fixed Variable PWLB • • UK Municipal Bond Agency • • Local Authorities • • Banks • • Pension Funds • • Insurance Companies • • UK National Wealth Fund • • Market (long-term) • • Market (temporary) • • Market (LOBOs) • • Stock Issues • • Local Temporary • • Local Bonds • Local Authority Bills • • Overdraft • Negotiable Bonds • • Internal (capital receipts & revenue balances) • • Commercial Paper • Medium Term Notes • Finance Leases • • Page 437
Page 308
This page is intentionally left blank
Page 309
Prudential and Treasury Indicators - 2025-28 Estimates Prudential indicators for prudence 1) Capital expenditure Gross capital expenditure Less Financing Net financing need (in year borrowing requirement) 2) Capital financing requirement (CFR) Total CFR at 1 April Total CFR 31 March Movement in CFR Represented by: Net in year borrowing requirement (above) Less Principal repayments and other financing movements Total 3) Authorised limit for borrowing Authorised limit for long-term liabilities Authorised limit for external debt 4) Operational boundary for borrowing Operational boundary for long-term liabilities Operational boundary for external debt 5) Gross debt and the CFR Gross debt at 31 March Total CFR at 31 March Gross debt less the CFR at 31 March Prudential indicators for affordability 6) Ratio of financing costs to net revenue stream Treasury indicators - borrowing limits 7) Maturity structure of fixed rate borrowing Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower a) Under 12 months 30% 0% 30% 0% 30% 0% b) 12 months and within 24 months 30% 0% 30% 0% 30% 0% c) 24 months and within 5 years 30% 0% 30% 0% 30% 0% d) 5 years and within 10 years 40% 0% 40% 0% 40% 0% e) 10 years and above 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 8) Limits on fixed and variable rate borrowing Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower a) Fixed rate 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% b) Variable rate 60% 0% 60% 0% 60% 0% Treasury indicator - investment 9) Upper limit on principal sums invested for over 365 days £m £m £m 71 53 38 26 19 9 45 34 29 APPENDIX 3 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 Estimate Estimate Estimate 21 £m £m £m 360 394 415 34 16 394 415 431 101 95 90 394 415 431 £m £m £m 293 320 341 104 98 93 402 423 439 £m £m £m 298 325 346 20 £m £m £m 321 370 401 394 415 431 -73 -45 -30 1634 21 % % % 4.9% 5.2% 5.6% £m £m £m 20 20 45 34 29 11 13 13 Page 439
Page 310
APPENDIX 3 Notes to Prudential and Treasury Indicators Prudential Indicators - Prudence Affordability Prudential Indicators Ratio of Financing Costs to Net Revenue Stream Maturity Structure of Borrowing This indicator identifies the trend in the cost of capital (borrowing and other long term obligation costs), against the net revenue stream. The estimates of financing costs include current commitments and the proposals in the 2025-26 Budget Pack. These gross limits are set to reduce the authority’s exposure to large, fixed rate sums falling due for refinancing, and are required for upper and lower limits. Indicators 1 - 5 above cover the overall capital and control of borrowing prudential indicators. The authority’s capital expenditure plans are the key driver of treasury management activity. The output of the capital expenditure plans is reflected in the prudential indicators, which are designed to assist members’ overview and confirm capital expenditure plans. Within the overall framework, prudential indicators are required to assess the affordability of the capital investment plans. These provide an indication of the impact of the capital investment plans on the authority’s overall finances. Page 440
Page 311
APPENDIX 4 Permitted Treasury Investments Note: Limits are given as a monetary value in £ or as a percentage of the overall investment portfolio. Type of Investment Treasury Risks Mitigating Controls Council Limits Common Good Limits Cash type instruments a. Deposits with the Debt Management Account Facility (UK Government) (Very low risk) This is a deposit with the UK Government and as such counterparty and liquidity risk is very low, and there is no risk to value. Deposits can be between overnight and 6 months. Little mitigating controls required. As this is a UK Government investment the monetary limit is unlimited to allow for a safe haven for investments. £unlimited, maximum 6 months. £unlimited, maximum 6 months. b. Deposits with other local authorities or public bodies (Very low risk) These are considered quasi UK Government debt and as such counterparty risk is very low, and there is no risk to value. Liquidity may present a problem as deposits can only be broken with the agreement of the counterparty, and penalties can apply. Little mitigating controls required for local authority deposits, as this is a quasi UK Government investment. Non-local authority deposits will follow the approved credit rating criteria. £unlimited, maximum 2 year. Limit of £10m per local Authority or public body £unlimited, maximum 2 years. Page 441
Page 312
Type of Investment Treasury Risks Mitigating Controls Council Limits Common Good Limits Deposits with other non-local authority bodies will be restricted to the overall credit rating criteria. c. Money Market Funds (MMFs) – CNAV/LVNAV/VNAV(Low to very low risk) Pooled cash investment vehicle which provides very low counterparty, liquidity and market risk. These will primarily be used as liquidity instruments. Funds will only be used where the MMFs has a “AAA” rated status from either Fitch, Moody’s or Standard and Poor’s. £15m per fund 100% d. Ultra short dated bond funds (low risk) Pooled cash investment vehicle which provides very low counterparty, liquidity and market risk. These will primarily be used as liquidity instruments. Funds will only be used where the have a “AAA” rated status from either Fitch, Moody’s or Standard and Poor’s. £15m per fund 100% e. Call account deposit accounts with financial institutions (banks and building societies) (Low risk depending on credit rating) These tend to be low risk investments, but will exhibit higher risks than categories (a), (b) and (c) above. Whilst there is no risk to value with these types of investments, liquidity is high and investments can be returned at short notice. The counterparty selection criteria restricts lending only to high quality counterparties, utilising MUFG creditworthiness service. £20m per UK banking group; £15m per non-UK banking group 100% f. Term deposits with financial institutions (banks and building societies) (Low to These tend to be low risk investments, but will exhibit higher risks than categories (a), (b) and (c) above. Whilst there is The counterparty selection criteria restricts lending only to high quality counterparties, utilising MUFG creditworthiness service. £20m per UK banking group; 100% Page 442
Page 313
Type of Investment Treasury Risks Mitigating Controls Council Limits Common Good Limits medium risk depending on period & credit rating) no risk to value with these types of investments, liquidity is low and term deposits can only be broken with the agreement of the counterparty, and penalties may apply. £15m per non-UK banking group g. Government Gilts and Treasury Bills (Very low risk) These are marketable securities issued by the UK Government and as such counterparty and liquidity risk is very low, although there is potential risk to value arising from an adverse movement in interest rates (no loss if these are held to maturity. Little counterparty mitigating controls are required, as this is a UK Government investment. The potential for capital loss will be reduced by limiting the maximum monetary and time exposures. £10m maximum 1 year. 100% maximum 1 year. h. Certificates of deposits with financial institutions (Low risk) These are short dated marketable securities issued by financial institutions and as such counterparty risk is low, but will exhibit higher risks than categories (a), (b) and (c) above. There is risk to value of capital loss arising from selling ahead of maturity if combined with an adverse movement in interest rates (no loss if these are held to The counterparty selection criteria restricts lending only to high quality counterparties, utilising MUFG creditworthiness service. £10m per counterparty maximum 1 year. 20% maximum 1 year. Page 443
Page 314
Type of Investment Treasury Risks Mitigating Controls Council Limits Common Good Limits maturity). Liquidity risk will normally be low. i. Structured deposit facilities with banks and building societies (escalating rates, de- escalating rates etc.) (Low to medium risk depending on period & credit rating) These tend to be medium to low risk investments, but will exhibit higher risks than categories (a), (b) and (c) above. Whilst there is no risk to value with these types of investments, liquidity is very low and investments can only be broken with the agreement of the counterparty (penalties may apply). The counterparty selection criteria restricts lending only to high quality counterparties, utilising MUFG creditworthiness service. £20m per UK banking group; £15m per non-UK banking group 50% j. Corporate bonds (Medium to high risk depending on period & credit rating) These are marketable securities issued by financial and corporate institutions. Counterparty risk will vary and there is risk to value of capital loss arising from selling ahead of maturity if combined with an adverse movement in interest rates. Liquidity risk will be low. The counterparty selection criteria restricts lending only to high quality counterparties, utilising MUFG creditworthiness service. £5m and maximum 1 year. 20% and maximum 1 year. Other types of investments a. Investment properties These are non-service properties which are being held pending disposal or for a longer term In larger investment portfolios some small allocation of property based investment may £10m 20%. Page 444
Page 315
Type of Investment Treasury Risks Mitigating Controls Council Limits Common Good Limits rental income stream. These are highly illiquid assets with high risk to value (the potential for property prices to fall or for rental voids). counterbalance/compliment the wider cash portfolio. Property holding will be re-valued regularly and reported annually with gross and net rental streams. b. Loans to third parties, including soft loans These are service investments either at market rates of interest or below market rates (soft loans). These types of investments may exhibit credit risk and are likely to be highly illiquid. Each third party loan requires Member approval and each application is supported by the service rational behind the loan and the likelihood of partial or full default. £10m and maximum 5 years. 10% and maximum 5 years. c. Shareholdings in a local authority company These are service investments which may exhibit market risk and are likely to be highly illiquid. Each equity investment in a local authority company requires Member approval and each application will be supported by the service rational behind the investment and the likelihood of loss. 50% 20% d. Non-local authority shareholdings These are non-service investments which may exhibit market risk, be only considered for longer term investments and will be likely to be liquid. Any non-service equity investment will require separate Member approval and each application will be supported by the service rational behind the investment and the likelihood of loss. 5% 100% Page 445
Page 316
Type of Investment Treasury Risks Mitigating Controls Council Limits Common Good Limits e. Loans to third parties as part of the Council’s Empty Homes Strategy These are service investments either at market rates of interest or below market rates (soft loans). These types of investments may exhibit credit risk and are likely to be highly illiquid. Each third party loan requires Section 95 Officer approval and each application is supported by the service rational behind the loan and the likelihood of partial or full default. Each funding request will be accompanied by financial projections and be subject to an assessment of the project and borrower. £1.5m and a maximum of 10 years. N/A f. Loans to third parties as part of the Council’s SHF Front Funding Facility These are service investments either at market rates of interest or below market rates (soft loans). These types of investments may exhibit credit risk and are likely to be highly illiquid. Each third party loan requires Section 95 Officer approval and each application is supported by the service rational behind the loan and the likelihood of partial or full default. Each funding request will be accompanied by financial projections and be subject to an assessment of the project and borrower. £5m and a maximum of 3 years. N/A g. Loans to third parties as part of the Council’s Long Term Loan Funding to RSL’s These are service investments either at market rates of interest or below market rates (soft loans). These types of investments may exhibit credit risk and are likely to be highly illiquid. Each third party loan requires Section 95 Officer approval and each application is supported by the service rational behind the loan and the likelihood of partial or full default. Each funding request will be accompanied by financial projections £5m and a maximum of 30 years. N/A Page 446
Page 317
Type of Investment Treasury Risks Mitigating Controls Council Limits Common Good Limits and be subject to an assessment of the project and borrower. h. Hub Co sub debt These are non-service investments which may exhibit market risk, be only considered for longer term investments and will be likely to be highly illiquid. Any non-service equity investment will require separate Member approval and each application will be supported by the service rational behind the investment and the likelihood of loss. £10m N/A i. Investment in a project run by a Local Authority or Local Authority Joint Committee These are investments which may exhibit market risks and will only be considered for medium to longer term investments Each investment requires approval by the Section 95 Officer up to £250,000, and, above this level, member approval. Each application will be supported by the service rationale behind the investment and the likelihood of loss. £10m N/A Page 447
Page 318
Treasury Risks All of the specific investment instruments outlined above are subject to the following risks: 1. Credit and counterparty risk This is the risk of failure by a counterparty (bank or building society) to meet its contractual obligations to the organisation particularly as a result of the counterparty’s diminished creditworthiness, and the resulting detrimental effect on the organisation’s finances. There are no counterparties where this risk is zero although AAA rated organisations have a very high level of creditworthiness. 2. Liquidity risk This is the risk that instant access to cash will not be available when it is needed. Investments can range from being instant access to term, that is, money is locked in until an agreed maturity date. However, some forms of investment, for example, gilts can usually be sold immediately if the need arises. 3. Market risk This is the risk that, through adverse market fluctuations in the value of the principal sums an organisation borrows and invests, its stated treasury management policies and objectives are compromised, against which effects it has failed to protect itself adequately. However, in certain circumstances, exposure to market risk may be sought, with a view to obtaining a long term increase in value. 4. Interest rate risk This is the risk that fluctuations in the levels of interest rates create an unexpected or unbudgeted burden on the organisation’s finances, against which the organisation has failed to protect itself adequately. This authority has set limits for its fixed and variable rate exposure in the Prudential Indicators within this report. 5. Legal and regulatory risk This is the risk that the organisation itself, or an organisation with which it is dealing in its treasury management activities, fails to act in accordance with its legal powers or regulatory requirements, and that the organisation suffers losses accordingly. The level of both risk exposure and liquidity influences the rate of return on investments. Generally, the lower the risk or the higher the liquidity, the lower the rate of return. Controls on Treasury Risks 1. Credit and counterparty risk The council utilises the creditworthiness service provided by its treasury advisors to determine which counterparties and countries are of high creditworthiness to enable investments to be made safely. 2. Liquidity risk The council has a cash flow forecasting model to enable it to determine how long investments can be made for and how much can be invested. 3. Market risk The council generally does not purchase investment instruments which are subject to market risk in terms of fluctuation in their value. The authority may purchase treasury bills as their value does not vary much during their short life. 4. Interest rate risk The council manages this risk by having a view of the future course of interest rates and formulates a treasury management strategy accordingly. The strategy aims to minimise net interest costs, consistent with control of risk. Page 448
Page 319
5. Legal and regulatory risk The council will not undertake any form of investing until it has ensured that it has necessary powers and also complied with all regulations. Unlimited investments Regulation 24 states that an investment can be shown in tables 1 & 2 as being ‘unlimited’ in terms of the maximum amount or percentage of the total portfolio that can be put into that type of investment. However, it also requires that an explanation must be given for using that category. The authority has given the following types of investments an unlimited category: 1. Debt Management Agency Deposit Facility. This is considered to be the lowest risk form of investment available to local authorities as it is operated by the Debt Management Office which is part of H.M. Treasury i.e., the UK Government’s sovereign rating stands behind the DMADF. It is also a deposit account and avoids the complications of buying and holding Government issued treasury bills or gilts. 2. High creditworthiness banks and building societies. While an unlimited amount of the investment portfolio may be put into banks and building societies with high creditworthiness, the council will ensure diversification of its portfolio by ensuring that no more than £20m of the total portfolio can be placed with any one institution or group at any one time. Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Considerations The Treasury Management Code states that “The organisation's credit and counterparty policies should set out its policy and practices relating to environmental, social and governance (ESG) investment considerations. This is a developing area, and it is not implied that the organisation’s ESG policy will currently include ESG scoring or other real- time ESG criteria at individual investment level.” ESG investment considerations are about understanding the ESG risks that an entity is exposed to and evaluating how well it manages these risks. It is not the same as Socially Responsible Investing, (typically where you apply negative screens), and equally, it is not the same as Sustainable Investing, (investing in products / companies based on expected sustainable and beneficial societal impact, alongside a financial return). The council is supportive of the Principles for Responsible Investment (www.unpri.org) and will seek to bring ESG factors into the decision making process for investments. Within this, the council is also appreciative of the Statement on ESG in Credit Risk and Ratings, which commits signatories to incorporating ESG into credit ratings and analysis in a systemic and transparent way. Each of the mainstream credit rating agencies are signatories to this statement. All the main rating agencies now incorporate ESG risks, alongside more traditional financial risk metrics, when assessing counterparty ratings. As such, their incorporation is already being done, to an extent, by the council’s use of the creditworthiness service provided by the council’s treasury advisors. In addition, our treasury advisors continue to Page 449
Page 320
look at ways in which these factors can be incorporated into their creditworthiness assessment service. Whilst the council is supportive of responsible investment, it should be noted that ESG information will still be secondary to the requirement for the council to adhere to the Code priorities of Security, Liquidity and Yield. Ethical principles must play a subordinate role to these priorities. Furthermore, limiting the potential counterparty options could reduce diversification and increase risk, therefore, these considerations need to be carefully balanced. Page 450
Page 321
APPENDIX 5 MUFG Weekly Credit List 07/02/2026 Long Term Short Term Long Term Short Term Long Term Short Term Suggested Duration Suggested Duration (Watch/Outloo k Adjusted) Suggested Duration (CDS Adjusted with manual override) Australia AAA Aaa AAA Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd. AA- F1+ Aa2 P-1 AA- A-1+ O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Commonwealth Bank of Australia AA- F1+ Aa2 P-1 AA- A-1+ O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Macquarie Bank Ltd. A+ F1 Aa2 P-1 A+ A-1 O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths National Australia Bank Ltd. AA- F1+ Aa2 P-1 AA- A-1+ O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Westpac Banking Corp. AA- F1+ Aa2 P-1 AA- A-1+ O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Belgium AA- Aa3 AA Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable BNP Paribas Fortis A+ F1 A1 P-1 A+ A-1 R - 6 mths R - 6 mths R - 6 mths KBC Bank N.V. A+ F1 Aa3 P-1 A+ A-1 O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Canada AA+ Aaa AAA Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Bank of Montreal AA- F1+ Aa2 P-1 A+ A-1 O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Bank of Nova Scotia AA- F1+ Aa2 P-1 A+ A-1 O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce AA- F1+ Aa2 P-1 A+ A-1 O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths National Bank of Canada A+ F1 Aa2 P-1 A+ A-1 O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Royal Bank of Canada AA- F1+ Aa1 P-1 AA- A-1+ O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Toronto-Dominion Bank AA- F1+ Aa2 P-1 A+ A-1 O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Denmark AAA Aaa AAA Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Danske A/S A+ F1 A1 P-1 A+ A-1 R - 6 mths R - 6 mths R - 6 mths Finland AA+ Aa1 AA+ Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Nordea Bank Abp AA- F1+ Aa3 P-1 AA- A-1+ O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths OP Corporate Bank plc WD WD Aa3 P-1 AA- A-1+ O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths France AA- Aa3 AA- Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable BNP Paribas A+ F1 A1 P-1 A+ A-1 R - 6 mths R - 6 mths R - 6 mths Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank A+ F1 A1 P-1 A+ A-1 R - 6 mths R - 6 mths R - 6 mths Credit Agricole S.A. A+ F1 A1 P-1 A+ A-1 R - 6 mths R - 6 mths R - 6 mths Credit Industriel et Commercial A+ F1 A1 P-1 A+ A-1 R - 6 mths R - 6 mths R - 6 mths Societe Generale A- F1 A1 P-1 A A-1 R - 6 mths R - 6 mths R - 6 mths Germany AAA Aaa AAA Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Bayerische Landesbank A+ F1+ Aa2 P-1 NR NR O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Commerzbank AG WD WD A1 P-1 A A-1 R - 6 mths R - 6 mths R - 6 mths Deutsche Bank AG A- F2 A1 P-1 A A-1 R - 6 mths R - 6 mths R - 6 mths DZ BANK AG Deutsche Zentral- Genossenschaftsbank AA- F1+ Aa2 P-1 A+ A-1 O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Landesbank Baden-Wuerttemberg A+ F1+ Aa2 P-1 NR NR O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Landesbank Berlin AG Aa3 P-1 O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Landesbank Hessen-Thueringen Girozentrale A+ F1+ Aa2 P-1 NR NR O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Landwirtschaftliche Rentenbank AAA F1+ Aaa P-1 AAA A-1+ P - 24 mths P - 24 mths P - 24 mths Norddeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale A+ F1+ Aa2 P-1 NR NR O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths NRW.BANK AAA F1+ Aa1 P-1 AA A-1+ P - 24 mths P - 24 mths P - 24 mths Netherlands AAA Aaa AAA Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable ABN AMRO Bank N.V. A F1 Aa3 P-1 A A-1 R - 6 mths R - 6 mths R - 6 mths BNG Bank N.V. AAA F1+ Aaa P-1 AAA A-1+ P - 24 mths P - 24 mths P - 24 mths Cooperatieve Rabobank U.A. A+ F1 Aa2 P-1 A+ A-1 O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths ING Bank N.V. AA- F1+ Aa3 P-1 A+ A-1 O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Nederlandse Waterschapsbank N.V. Aaa P-1 AAA A-1+ P - 24 mths P - 24 mths P - 24 mths Norway AAA Aaa AAA Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable DNB Bank ASA Aa1 P-1 AA- A-1+ O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Qatar AA Aa2 AA Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Qatar National Bank A+ F1 Aa3 P-1 A+ A-1 O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Singapore AAA Aaa AAA Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Fitch Rating Moody's Ratings S&P Ratings Page 451
Page 322
DBS Bank Ltd. AA- F1+ Aa1 P-1 AA- A-1+ O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp. Ltd. AA- F1+ Aa1 P-1 AA- A-1+ O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths United Overseas Bank Ltd. AA- F1+ Aa1 P-1 AA- A-1+ O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Sweden AAA Aaa AAA Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB AA- F1+ Aa3 P-1 A+ A-1 O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Svenska Handelsbanken AB AA F1+ Aa2 P-1 AA- A-1+ O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Swedbank AB AA- F1+ Aa3 P-1 A+ A-1 O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Switzerland AAA Aaa AAA Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable UBS AG A+ F1 Aa2 P-1 A+ A-1 O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths United Arab Emirates AA Aa2 AA Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable First Abu Dhabi Bank PJSC AA- F1+ Aa3 P-1 AA- A-1+ O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths United Kingdom AA- Aa3 AA Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Collateralised LA Deposit* Y - 60 mths Y - 60 mths Y - 60 mths Debt Management Office Y - 60 mths Y - 60 mths Y - 60 mths Multilateral Development Banks Y - 60 mths Y - 60 mths Y - 60 mths Supranationals Y - 60 mths Y - 60 mths Y - 60 mths UK Gilts Y - 60 mths Y - 60 mths Y - 60 mths Al Rayan Bank Plc A2 P-1 R - 6 mths R - 6 mths R - 6 mths Bank of Scotland PLC (RFB) AA- F1+ A1 P-1 A+ A-1 O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Barclays Bank PLC (NRFB) A+ F1 A1 P-1 A+ A-1 R - 6 mths R - 6 mths R - 6 mths Barclays Bank UK PLC (RFB) A+ F1 A1 P-1 A+ A-1 R - 6 mths R - 6 mths R - 6 mths Clydesdale Bank PLC A- F1 A1 P-1 A A-1 R - 6 mths R - 6 mths R - 6 mths Co-operative Bank PLC (The) BBB+ F1 A3 P-2 G - 100 days G - 100 days G - 100 days Goldman Sachs International Bank A+ F1 A1 P-1 A+ A-1 R - 6 mths R - 6 mths R - 6 mths Handelsbanken Plc AA F1+ AA- A-1+ O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths HSBC Bank PLC (NRFB) AA- F1+ A1 P-1 A+ A-1 O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths HSBC UK Bank Plc (RFB) AA- F1+ A1 P-1 A+ A-1 O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Lloyds Bank Corporate Markets Plc (NRFB) AA- F1+ A1 P-1 A A-1 O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Lloyds Bank Plc (RFB) AA- F1+ A1 P-1 A+ A-1 O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths National Bank Of Kuwait (International) PLC A+ F1 A A-1 R - 6 mths R - 6 mths R - 6 mths National Westminster Bank PLC (RFB) A+ F1 A1 P-1 A+ A-1 R - 6 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths NatWest Markets Plc (NRFB) A+ F1 A1 P-1 A A-1 R - 6 mths R - 6 mths R - 6 mths Santander Financial Services plc (NRFB) A+ F1 A1 P-1 A- A-2 R - 6 mths R - 6 mths R - 6 mths Santander UK PLC A+ F1 A1 P-1 A A-1 R - 6 mths R - 6 mths R - 6 mths SMBC Bank International Plc A- F1 A1 P-1 A A-1 R - 6 mths R - 6 mths R - 6 mths Standard Chartered Bank A+ F1 A1 P-1 A+ A-1 R - 6 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc (RFB) A+ F1 A1 P-1 A+ A-1 R - 6 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Coventry Building Society A- F1 A3 P-2 G - 100 days G - 100 days G - 100 days Leeds Building Society A- F1 A3 P-2 G - 100 days G - 100 days G - 100 days Nationwide Building Society A F1 A1 P-1 A+ A-1 R - 6 mths R - 6 mths R - 6 mths Principality Building Society BBB+ F2 Baa1 P-2 N/C - 0 mths N/C - 0 mths N/C - 0 mths Skipton Building Society A- F1 A2 P-1 R - 6 mths R - 6 mths R - 6 mths Yorkshire Building Society A- F1 A2 P-1 R - 6 mths R - 6 mths R - 6 mths United States AA+ Aaa AA+ Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Bank of America N.A. AA F1+ Aa1 P-1 A+ A-1 O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Bank of New York Mellon, The AA F1+ Aa1 P-1 AA- A-1+ P - 24 mths P - 24 mths P - 24 mths Citibank N.A. A+ F1 Aa3 P-1 A+ A-1 O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A. AA F1+ Aa1 P-1 AA- A-1+ P - 24 mths P - 24 mths P - 24 mths Wells Fargo Bank, NA AA- F1+ Aa1 P-1 A+ A-1 O - 12 mths O - 12 mths O - 12 mths Page 452
Page 323
APPENDIX 6 TREASURY MANAGEMENT SCHEME OF DELEGATION SECTION 95 OFFICER AND NOMINATED MEMBER ROLES Council • Overall responsibility for Treasury Management Strategy. • Adoption of Treasury Policy Statements. • Receive an Annual Report and other reports on the Treasury Management Operation and on the exercise of delegated treasury management powers. Policy and Resources Committee • Responsibility for the overall investment of money under the control of the Council. • Keeping under review the level of borrowing. • Approval of Annual Strategy Statement. • Receiving and reviewing reports on treasury management policies, practices and activities. • Approval of Treasury Policy Statements. • Implementation and monitoring of Treasury Management Policies and Practices. Audit and Scrutiny Committee • Review the overall internal and management control framework related to the treasury function. • Review internal and external audit reports related to treasury management. • Review provision in the internal and external audit plans to ensure there is adequate audit coverage of treasury management. • Monitor progress with implementing recommendations in internal and external audit reports. • Reviewing the treasury management policy and procedures and making recommendations to the responsible body. Role of the nominated Elected Member (Policy Lead for Finance and Commercial Services): • Acting as spokesperson for treasury management. • Taking a lead for elected Members in overseeing the operation of the treasury function. • Review the treasury management policy, strategy and reports. • Support and challenge the development of treasury management. Role of the Section 95 Officer: • Recommending clauses, treasury management policy/practices for approval, reviewing the same regularly, and monitoring compliance. Page 453
Page 324
• Submitting regular treasury management policy reports. • Suubmitting budgets and budget variations. • Receiving and reviewing management information reports. • Reviewing the performance of the treasury management function. • Ensuring the adequacy of treasury management resources and skills, and the effective division of responsibilities within the treasury management function. • Ensuring the adequacy of internal audit, and liaising with external audit. • Recommending the appointment of external service providers. • Reviewing and considering risk management in terms of treasury activities. • preparation of a capital strategy to include capital expenditure, capital financing, non- financial investments and treasury management, with a long term timeframe • ensuring that the capital strategy is prudent, sustainable, affordable and prudent in the long term and provides value for money • ensuring that due diligence has been carried out on all treasury and non-financial investments and is in accordance with the risk appetite of the authority • ensure that the authority has appropriate legal powers to undertake expenditure on non-financial assets and their financing • ensuring the proportionality of all investments so that the authority does not undertake a level of investing which exposes the authority to an excessive level of risk compared to its financial resources • ensuring that an adequate governance process is in place for the approval, monitoring and ongoing risk management of all non-financial investments and long term liabilities • provision to members of a schedule of all non-treasury investments including material investments in subsidiaries, joint ventures, loans and financial guarantees ensuring that members are adequately informed and understand the risk exposures taken on by an authority • ensuring that the authority has adequate expertise, either in house or externally provided, to carry out the above • creation of Treasury Management Practices which specifically deal with how non- treasury investments will be carried out and managed, to include the following: - o Risk management (TMP1 and schedules), including investment and risk management criteria for any material non-treasury investment portfolios; o Performance measurement and management (TMP2 and schedules), including methodology and criteria for assessing the performance and success of non-treasury investments; o Decision making, governance and organisation (TMP5 and schedules), including a statement of the governance requirements for decision making in relation to non-treasury investments; and arrangements to ensure that appropriate professional due diligence is carried out to support decision making; Page 454
Page 325
o Reporting and management information (TMP6 and schedules), including where and how often monitoring reports are taken; o Training and qualifications (TMP10 and schedules), including how the relevant knowledge and skills in relation to non-treasury investments will be arranged. The nominated Elected Member (Policy Lead for Finance and Commercial Services) • Acting as spokesperson for treasury management. • Taking a lead for elected Members in overseeing the operation of the treasury function. • Review the treasury management policy, strategy and reports. • Support and challenge the development of treasury management. Page 455
Page 326
This page is intentionally left blank
Page 327
ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL COUNCIL CHIEF EXECUTIVE 27 February 2025 2023/24 COUNCIL ANNUAL REPORT 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 This report presents to Council the 2023/24 Council Annual Report (CAR). 1.2 The CAR is one of the means by which we discharge our Public Performance Reporting obligations through reporting of our performance against our corporate outcome indicators and information presented by services on the key activities, successes and challenges faced in the reporting period. Page 457 Agenda Item 9
Page 328
ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL COUNCIL CHIEF EXECUTIVE 20 February 2025 2023/24 COUNCIL ANNUAL REPORT 2.0 INTRODUCTION 2.1 This report presents to Council the 2023/24 Council Annual Report (CAR). 3.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 3.1 Council are asked to consider the content of the Council Annual Report and approve it to be published on the council website. 4.0 DETAIL 4.1 The CAR is a key document for the Councils statutory Public Performance Reporting (PPR) duties and is published on the council website. 4.2 The CAR presents both our performance against our corporate outcome indicators (COI) and information gathered via the service annual performance reviews (SAPR) on the key activities, success and challenges that our services faced during 2023/24. 4.3 The SAPRs contained a vast amount of content and not all content could be contained within the CAR. However, the CAR pulls together many examples of the exceptional efforts, innovative solutions and joined up working within the Council and our partners and communities that occurred during this period. 4.4 The Performance Excellence Project is continuing to review and improve our approach to performance reporting, and this will include ongoing review of how we continue to publish this information. 4.5 The way that we capture current COI results and SAPR content has changed and a new template was launched in early October to capture content. It is anticipated that this new process will support timely reporting of annual performance in the future. Page 458
Page 329
5.0 CONCLUSION 5.1 The CAR is a key document for the Councils statutory Public Performance Reporting (PPR) duties and once approved will be published on the Council website. 6.0 IMPLICATIONS 6.1 Policy - The indicators in this document are based on agreed Council policy. 6.2 Financial - Indicators with financial implications are managed through agreed budget monitoring processes. 6.3 Legal - This report is required to meet statutory Public Performance Reporting (PPR) duties. 6.4 HR - HR implications are actively managed through agreed monitoring processes. 6.5 Fairer Scotland Duty: All activities comply with Equal Opportunities/Fairer Scotland Duty policies and obligations. 6.5.1 Equalities - protected characteristics - All activities comply with Equal Opportunities policies and obligations. 6.5.2 Socio-economic Duty - All activities comply with the Council’s socio-economic duty. 6.5.3 Islands - All activities comply with the Council’s islands duty. 6.6 Climate Change - The Council is committed to working towards net zero and this report highlights examples of this. 6.7 Risk - This report is required to meet the Council’s statutory Public Performance Reporting (PPR) duties. 6.8 Customer Service - All activities with customer feedback or insight are monitored for improvement. 6.9 The Rights of the Child (UNCRC) - This report highlights examples of how the Council is committed to reducing child poverty and improving outcomes for every child. Pippa Milne Chief Executive Policy Lead – Councillor Mark Irvine Page 459
Page 330
19 November 2024 For further information contact: Jane Fowler, Head of Customer Support Services Kay Owen, Team Lead – OD Project Officer APPENDICES Appendix 1 Council Annual Report 2023-24 Page 460
Page 331
1 Council Annual Report 2023 – 2024 Page 461
Page 332
1 Contents Forewords ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Leader of the Council ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 3 Chief Executive .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 4 Financial statement ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 6 Cross-cutting activities ................................................................................................................................................................................ 7 Changing how we work..................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Connect for Success ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 7 Performance Excellence Project ........................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Our Workspace – reducing costs and increasing efficiencies ................................................................................................................................ 8 ICT and Digital ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Climate Change ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 10 Capital Investment and central repairs delivered ...................................................................................................................................... 11 Housing and the Housing Emergency ....................................................................................................................................................... 11 Our performance ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 12 How We Compare – Local Government Benchmarking Framework (LGBF) ..................................................................................................... 13 Delivering our outcomes ........................................................................................................................................................................... 14 Corporate Outcome: People live active, healthier and independent lives ................................................................................................. 14 Corporate Outcome: People will live in safer and stronger communities .................................................................................................. 17 The Mentors in Violence Prevention Programme (MVP) ..................................................................................................................................... 20 Corporate Outcome: Children and young people have the best possible start ......................................................................................... 21 Support and interventions for our care experienced children and young people .................................................................................................. 23 Page 462
Page 333
2 Children and Young People Improvement Collaborative (CYPIC) improving writing programme ......................................................................... 24 Registration Early Learning Childcare (ELC) ....................................................................................................................................................... 24 Nurture teaching support ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 25 Corporate Outcome: Education, skills and training will maximise opportunities for all .............................................................................. 26 Developing the young workforce ......................................................................................................................................................................... 28 Helping people into work ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 28 Corporate Outcome: Our economy is diverse and thriving ....................................................................................................................... 29 Supporting the economic recovery and our communities .................................................................................................................................... 34 Building Standards achieves maximum 6-year licence ........................................................................................................................................ 37 Corporate Outcome: We have an infrastructure that supports sustainable growth ................................................................................... 39 Water scarcity and air quality .............................................................................................................................................................................. 41 Flood protection and marine works ..................................................................................................................................................................... 41 Land Based Developments ................................................................................................................................................................................. 48 Helensburgh Waterfront Development ................................................................................................................................................................ 49 Corporate Outcome: Getting it right .......................................................................................................................................................... 50 Increasing the use of our website and self-service tools ...................................................................................................................................... 52 Improving our customer service .......................................................................................................................................................................... 53 Supporting our Community Councils ................................................................................................................................................................... 54 Local Government elections and supporting new elected councillors .................................................................................................................. 55 Strategic Risk Register ............................................................................................................................................................................. 57 Operational Risk Register ......................................................................................................................................................................... 58 Service delivery challenges....................................................................................................................................................................... 59 Consultations – we asked, you said, we did.............................................................................................................................................. 65 Page 463
Page 334
3 Forewords Leader of the Council Resourceful, resilient, responsive – that’s what comes to mind when I consider the contents of Argyll and Bute Council’s Annual Report for 2023 to 2024. Argyll and Bute has particular challenges to contend with, given our unique geographic mix of rural and island communities. This means that we as a Council need to think swiftly and differently about even the most routine service delivery, in ways that few other public agencies may ever have to consider. On top of that, we deliver a number of services that other local authorities do not. We do all of that in that context of challenge – but we also do so in order to be excellent, to improve, to innovate. This Annual Report sets out several examples of that innovative approach and some of those particular challenges. It is also full of success stories and ambition. It is the Annual Report of a forward-thinking, aspirational organisation which is meeting the big issues head-on. Take for example the two key drivers of housing and population, where Argyll and Bute Council is leading nationally – being the first Scottish council to declare a housing emergency, and bringing together other local authorities who have population challenges to work together and ensure that our needs are firmly on the national agenda. It is the Annual Report of a learning local authority which is constantly striving for improvement and beyond to excellence. One which is making the most of new technology, and exploring emerging technology, so that we can work with rather than against our geography – and showcasing Argyll and Bute as an ideal choice to live, learn, work and do business, while enjoying all that the area has to offer by way of lifestyle. It is the Annual Report of a Scottish Council which is playing its part and contributing to national priorities, and which has much potential to offer at every level. All Scottish local authorities are facing unprecedented times, with local government finance and governance in the spotlight. In that Argyll and Bute is no different, but the way we handle our business and rise to those challenges is characterised by determination and the will to succeed rather than survive. Councillor Jim Lynch Leader, Argyll and Bute Council Page 464
Page 335
4 Chief Executive We are pleased to present the Argyll and Bute Council Annual Report for the financial year 2023-2024. This report reflects the progress we have made in the face of increasingly constrained resources. Through collective effort and collaboration, we have worked tirelessly to address the key priorities that were set out in the Council’s Corporate Plan while remaining committed to the well-being and prosperity of our diverse communities. I would like to thank all our staff and partners for their continued hard work and commitment to delivering the very best for Argyll and Bute. This year witnessed challenges out with our control including the effects of climate change resulting in the devastating impact on our transport infrastructure with landslides and flooding damaging roads and bridges. The ongoing demands have tested our capacity to deliver, but they have also inspired innovative solutions. We are proud of the many accomplishments we have achieved together, which represents the strength and adaptability of Argyll and Bute. Throughout this report, you will find information on our activity highlighting our commitment to creating a thriving, resilient, and sustainable future for our region. From critical infrastructure investments to environmental initiatives, our work has been guided by the principles of inclusivity, collaboration, and fiscal responsibility. We have also continued to foster strong relationships with community groups, local businesses, and external partners, all of whom play a vital role in the ongoing success of our efforts. As we look ahead, we remain aware of the significant challenges facing local authorities. However, our focus remains clear: we are determined to build on the progress made this year and continue to provide the best services possible with the funding available to us and opportunities for all who live and work in Argyll and Bute. With the same resolve that has carried us through the past year, we will strive to deliver on our commitments and respond to the evolving needs of our communities. We hope this report provides you with valuable insights into the wide range of services provided by the council and our achievements over the past year. Pippa Milne Chief Executive, Argyll and Bute Council Page 465
Page 336
5 Financial statement In 2023/24 the budget gap was £13.082m, prior to any measures to balance the budget, and projected to rise to over £51m over a five-year period, with decisions made to bridge the 2023/24 gap, reduce future year pressures and protect vital services. When agreeing the 2023/24 budget, the Council committed investment in key priorities largely due to a significant one-off Service Concession gain. These included: £7m to safeguard future investment in priorities for Argyll and Bute establishing a dedicated fund to lever in, secure and support key strategic investments. £6.132m investment in Rothesay Pavilion building on previous commitments to secure a future for this building. £8.865m additional capital funding to support the repair and maintenance of roads in 2023/24 and 2024/25. £8m investment to support futureproofing of Argyll and Bute’s school estate. £3.5m to ensure that Argyll and Bute is better able to address the challenges of the Biodegradable Municipal Waste Ban. £2m to boost resilience in the capital programme and provide support to key projects. £0.750m funding for footpath improvements. £0.700m for new refuse collection vehicles. £0.600m investment in Climate Change Projects. £0.531m for ICT equipment to support digital resilience. Over the course of 2023/24 almost £0.590m in Scottish Welfare Fund grants were paid to support vulnerable people and £0.895m of Discretionary Housing Payments were distributed to households in need. During the year the Council also continued to pay grants to cover food and fuel for people in poverty and successfully referred them for support to advice agencies; this resulted in maximised benefit income and reduced fuel costs of over £3.8m by the end of the 2023/24. Page 466
Page 337
6 Introduction Welcome to our annual report. This report is an opportunity to share with you how your council has performed over the past year and is part of our public performance reporting commitment. In 2023 we outlined Argyll and Bute Council’s vision and strategic direction through to 2027 via our Corporate Plan. Central to our corporate plan and highlighted throughout this report is successful partnership working with our partners, stakeholders and local communities. The corporate plan sets out the three key priorities we have identified to fulfil our vision of a prosperous, inclusive, and sustainable Argyll and Bute. People and Places: our core business as a council Potential and Growth: turning opportunities into reality Partnership and Action: everyone has a part to play in Argyll and Bute’s success Further information on our corporate plan can be found in the plans and policy section of our website. Plans and Policy | Argyll and Bute Council Our performance on these priorities over the past year was monitored via seven high-level Corporate Outcomes and a series of 47 Corporate Outcome Indicators (COIs). These indicators are strategic in nature and are reported annually to the Audit and Scrutiny Committee and Full Council. Detail on our performance against these Corporate Outcome Indicators as well as further information on our key activities and areas of focus and successes and challenges are provided within this report. Page 467
Page 338
7 Cross-cutting activities Changing how we work Under our commitment to realise continuous improvement, key change projects are underway to improve how we work and how we monitor and report on this. Connect for Success This initiative is dedicated to encouraging and recognising new ways of working across the Council, to make things better for everyone. We are looking to the future and are focused on advancing how we use technology, share resources and collaborate because better for us is better for our communities. There are 7 key areas, or principles, that we are focused on developing in how we work: 1. One Council One Place 2. Purpose and Mission Focus 3. Employee Empowerment 4. Data and Evidence Driven 5. Learning Council 6. Agile Mindset 7. Maximise Useful Technology Across the council these principles are in action and people are working on new projects and in new ways to help make things better. For example, we have reduced bureaucracy and saved time and effort by implementing a project to streamline our internal human resources systems and speed up the recruitment process. Connect for Success is about bringing the 7 principles to life by sharing ideas and looking for new ways to innovate to help us do our jobs and deliver services. Performance Excellence Project We are now delivering phase two of this project to review and update our performance management and reporting procedures. The aim of this project is to review and update the Council’s current approach to performance and improvement to ensure that it is in alignment with our Connect for Success Principles and allow us to take a compliant and proportionate approach to measuring and managing our performance and improvement Page 468
Page 339
8 activities whilst maximising the use of technology to support this wherever possible. The project will deliver a Performance Improvement Framework to support scrutiny of performance by Elected Members and Senior Officers. Our Workspace – reducing costs and increasing efficiencies Our Modern Workspace project is progressing well. The project is reviewing how we use our workspace, reduce costs and increase efficiency. Six Hub Buildings are now complete under-utilised buildings under review for repurpose or to be mothballed. The entire project (excluding Lochgilphead) is being delivered through existing capital programme budgets and Scottish Government Place Demonstrator Funding (£664K awarded to deliver Rothesay Project). The Project has delivered significant savings from rationalising shared offices through: • Non-Domestic Rates relief on the buildings that have been closed. • A reduction in utility consumption. • A reduction in cleaning costs. • A reduction in the number of printing devices required. • A reduction in paper and the need to print as we adopt a more digital approach to Service Delivery. • A Reduction in annual ICT network charges, such as ISDN lines and broadband charges. • Reduced ongoing cost pressures for replacement of network equipment (Wi-Fi access points / server switches etc.), where possible network equipment has been utilised in other locations. These savings and ease on cost pressures will continue to grow as the Our Modern Workplace project continues to deliver town by town. ICT and Digital The Council’s ICT and Digital Strategy aims to position Argyll and Bute Council as a “digital by default” authority. This sits alongside the Digital Strategy for Scotland, which sets out measures to ensure Scotland will fulfil its potential in a constantly evolving digital world, a world in which data and digital technologies are transforming every element of our lives, and will help realise Argyll and Bute’s full potential in this digital world, ensuring we all have the skills, connectivity and devices to fully participate in a digital nation. The strategy sets out how ICT and Digital services will be designed, sourced and delivered, and how digital technologies and processes can support our people and our customers to work better together, get things done, and contribute to a better organised and more efficient council. Page 469
Page 340
9 Microsoft365 (M365) We led on the national project for M365, working with the NHS and Digital Office to provide shared calendars, address books, distribution lists, instant messaging and presence management across NHS and Council platforms. Within the Council, phases 2 and 3 of the Microsoft 365 project are now being implemented. A council-wide support network of Digital Champions has been set up to encourage more efficient and effective use of M365 across the organisation, along with the introduction of an extensive training programme. We have created an online programme using our own brand AB 365 to support our adoption of Microsoft 365. The programme focuses on showcasing how changing behaviours and using the opportunities which are provided through technology can generate benefits not only for the employee, but for the whole organisation. It acts as an enabler to ensure that employees feel in control of their workload, are more efficient and assists them in their role by saving time and reducing internal emails. It introduces employees to a set of principles that they will work towards to ensure we are getting the most out of the Microsoft 365 platform. These principles have been adopted by the Council as our new way of working that strongly links to our Connect for Success programme. Partnership working As part of our Connect for Success principles and adopting the “Themes not Teams” approach, we continue to work with colleagues across all teams and services, and where appropriate external partners and stakeholders to achieve a common goal. This approach to partnership working assists in improving efficiencies and removing work barriers, helping fully utilising what we have, connecting staff through technology, connecting services in delivering change and services, while connecting with communities and working together to improve outcomes for Argyll and Bute. New ways of working with ICT and Data Data is at the heart of key decision-making and improving outcomes for Argyll and Bute’s residents and communities. A key benefit of the Data Strategy & Action Plan 2024-2028, which will work alongside the council’s existing ICT and Digital Strategy, will be to focus attention and resources on the most relevant data challenges and opportunities. That will require us to maintain our track record of investment in software, data platforms and digital infrastructure, evaluating, designing and implementing a new Data Platform to allow us to measure and report on performance and making better use of our data, to assist in evidence-based decision making. Page 470
Page 341
10 Climate Change The Council has a statutory duty to report on its emissions and climate action via the annual Public Bodies Climate Change Duties (PBCCD) Report. Regular update reports are presented to the Council’s Climate Change Board which provides governance, oversight and discusses progress and action. The PBCCD Return for the year 2023/24 is due to be submitted by 30/11/24. Action is informed by the Decarbonisation Plan 2022-25 which maps out actions required to achieve net zero by 2045. The Plan identifies groups actions into six themes, one of which relates to the preparation and adaptation for impacts of climate change. • Waste • Energy and Water Consumption • Transport emissions from our commercial fleet like buses, bin lorries, vans and cars. • Preparing and adapting for impacts of climate change • Offsetting our emissions through partnership and innovation • Telling you about it and encouraging the community to do their bit Argyll and Bute Climate Action – Community Planning Partnership Climate Change Strategy Argyll and Bute Council and other Community Planning Partnership partners have jointly provided funding for a Project Manager for two years to support and undertake a climate risk assessment for Argyll and Bute as a region, and to develop a Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan comprising an integrated set of adaptation, mitigation and engagement actions. Carbon Neutral Islands Programme The Scottish Government Carbon Neutral Islands project aims to support six islands (Islay, Barra, Great Cumbrae, Hoy, Raasay and Yell) to become carbon neutral by 2040. Argyll and Bute Council is a member of the newly formed Local Authority Advisory Group, which aims to support the implementation of the Carbon Neutral Island’s project, ensuring alignment and co-ordination with wider Local Authority activity, and reciprocal sharing of information. Carbon audits have been carried out for each island, and community climate change action plans and climate change investment strategies have been developed; these will identify learning and good practice that can be shared with other Scottish islands. Page 471
Page 342
11 Capital Investment and central repairs delivered We have successfully delivered a programme of investment in our property assets totalling £7.5M. Included within the wide variety of investment projects were 50 projects relating to energy efficiency, reducing fossil fuel consumption and renewable energy generation. This included solar panels, air source heat pumps and new automated control systems in our buildings, mainly in our schools. As well as delivering the additional investment projects, emergency, planned and statutory maintenance programmes were successfully delivered, resulting in improved customer satisfaction. Additionally, a separate large-scale project reviewed the water, wastewater and drainage charges for the Council. This project has delivered one-off refunds in the region of £500,000 and year-on-year savings of more than £100,000 per annum. Housing and the Housing Emergency The pressures on the housing market in Argyll and Bute are recognised both nationally and locally. Whilst we are not the only local authority to be experiencing these pressures, the diverse geography of our area means that we experience a range of impacts that other authorities do not need to consider, such as the cost, infrastructure, and transport challenges of delivering services in our Island communities. Against a backdrop of real-time financial cuts to public services, and the pressures from the rising cost of living on our residents, volunteer organisations, and businesses, there are significant pressures on the local authority and partners to deliver housing services in a cost effective and efficient way. The delivery of housing and related services remains a high priority for the Council. In June 2023, the Environment, Development & Infrastructure Committee declared a ‘housing emergency in Argyll and Bute’. This is based on the acute shortage of housing across the area, reflected in high homelessness and waiting list numbers, together with the pressures partners are experiencing trying to secure housing. The housing emergency impacts on our ability to recruit and retain people in the area, and our capacity to deliver services within the area. We held a housing summit in the autumn to bring partners together to highlight and discuss the shortage of housing, the cost impacts, and to identify how we can address the challenges by delivering more collaborative, innovative, and affordable housing across the area. One outcome from the summit was that the Community Planning Partnership (CPP) acknowledged the need for actions and agreed to set up a CPP Housing Sub-Group (led by Highlands and Islands Enterprise) to explore what and how the CPP might contribute. Through our Local Housing Strategy, the council is striving to minimise the impacts on services for our customers and residents. We have reassessed the Local Housing Strategy’s action plan to ensure that the aims and objectives of the strategy are still relevant to meet identified needs. We have considered the changing needs and demands for housing, related services, and support that our residents require, and also what is needed to attract people to the area and promote Argyll and Bute as a place to live and work. Page 472
Page 343
12 Our performance This table illustrates how we have delivered on our 7 Corporate Outcomes. This is followed by detailed performance and supporting commentary for our Corporate Outcome Indicators. Overall performance of our Corporate Outcome Indicators Corporate Outcome Number of Indicators Number On Track / Above Target / No Target with Improving Performance Number Off Track / Under Target / No Data People live active, healthier and independent lives 6 4 2 People will live in safer and stronger communities 4 2 2 Children and young people have the best possible start 8 6 2 Education, skills and training maximise opportunities for all 7 1 6 Our economy is diverse and thriving 12 8 4 We have an infrastructure that supports sustainable growth 5 3 2 Getting it right 5 2 3 TOTAL 47 26 21 We continue to report other indicators of importance on a quarterly basis at each of our Area Committees. Quarterly Area Performance Reports present a suite of indicators at a local, area level with complementary narrative, and, where possible, Council-wide performance is also presented alongside these indicators. These can be found in the Performance and Improvement section of the Council website. Performance and Improvement | Argyll and Bute Council (argyll-bute.gov.uk) Page 473
Page 344
13 How We Compare – Local Government Benchmarking Framework (LGBF) In addition to monitoring our corporate outcomes we use a variety of improvement tools. A key aspect of this relates to our engagement with the Local Government Benchmarking Framework (LGBF). All local authorities in Scotland participate in the Local Government Benchmarking Framework (LGBF). The data is collected and presented in ways to ensure consistency and enabling comparisons between councils to be made, as levels of performance are affected by differences in local circumstances and local priorities. Because of the variations between council areas, the LGBF divides councils into ‘family groups’; each group is made up of eight councils which share similar characteristics, enabling more relevant comparisons to be made. The selection of family groups is based on types of area and levels of deprivation. More detail on the LGBF and ‘family groups’ can be found by clicking on the above link. LGBF data is updated monthly, with some indicators being updated throughout the year. However, data for the most recent year will not be complete until after the full twelve months has passed. The majority of the 2023/24 data will be published by the end of 2024. In addition to participating in the LGBF, we actively engage with other sector specific organisations. This allows us to share best practice and benchmark our performance. Both activities are valuable tools to help us identify improvements. Page 474
Page 345
14 Delivering our outcomes Below we provide detail on our performance against each of our Corporate Outcome Indicators and further context on the activities that have taken place to support delivery in that area. Corporate Outcome: People live active, healthier and independent lives Number of indicators: 6 Number on track: 4 Number no target / no data: 2 Corporate Outcome Indicator Target 2020/21 Actual 2021/22 Actual 2022/23 Actual 2023/24 Actual Status Commentary Maximise distribution of Scottish Welfare Fund 95.30% 85.90% 120.70% 144.00% 128.56% G The 2023/24 overspend was covered by remaining ear marked reserves from 2022/23. This ensured the continued support for the Council's most vulnerable citizens during the year through the provision of Community Care Grants and Crisis support. Percentage of clients satisfied that they are better able to deal with their financial problems following our support and intervention 90.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% G A voluntary survey is distributed. All clients who expressed an opinion agreed that they are better able to deal with their financial problems following our support. Maximise distribution of 96.00% 99.90% 98.20% 79.00% 84.30% R Page 475
Page 346
15 Corporate Outcome Indicator Target 2020/21 Actual 2021/22 Actual 2022/23 Actual 2023/24 Actual Status Commentary Discretionary Housing Payment (DHP) fund Total expenditure at the year-end was £894,000 which is less than the £1.061 million provided by Scottish Government for the year. New DHP guidance has been issued to Scottish local authorities in 2024/25 and we will conduct a policy review with a view to ensuring our expenditure is maximised in line with the grant award in the future. Percentage of care services graded 'good' (4) or better in Care Inspectorate inspections 75.20% 87.10% 80.00% 79.50% 77.30% G This indicator is captured within the Local Government Performance Framework. Performance exceeds target and the latest Scotland national level, reported as 77%. Percentage of adults receiving any care or support who rated it as excellent or good 75.30% 78.30% 78.30% 68.60% 74.00% R This indicator is captured within the Health and Care Experience Survey 2023/24. Performance noted as below target however, it exceeds the latest Scotland figure, reported as 63%. Percentage carers who feel supported to continue in their caring role 29.70% 35.00% 38.00% 38.00% 38.00% G This indicator is captured within the Health and Care Experience Survey 2023/24. Performance exceeds target and the latest Scotland national figure, reported as 31%. Page 476
Page 347
16 Helping people live active, healthier and independent lives We have helped residents maximise their income through additional benefits or accessing grants. This work has supported vulnerable people with assistance with independent living, preventing homelessness and helping reduce the number of households and families living in all types of poverty, including extreme poverty. • A total of £589,168 in Scottish Welfare Fund grants was paid to support vulnerable people in our communities who are in desperate need of financial support. This made up of Scottish Government programme funding (£458,28) and funding by Argyll and Bute Council (£131,000). • Discretionary Housing Payments totalling £894,477 were distributed to households in need to prevent homelessness and assist vulnerable members of our communities to maintain their tenancies. As a result of new guidance issued from Scottish Government, the Council’s policy will be reviewed to maximise further use of the fund in future years. • We paid out £144,105 in grants to cover food and fuel for people in poverty and successfully referred them for support to advice agencies. • 2,500 families have been supported to maximise benefit income and reduced fuel costs to the value of £2.527m. • The average processing time for new housing benefit claims was 16.41 days and 3.17 days for changes in circumstances against targets of 21 days and 6 days respectively. • We assisted residents to claim £4.45 million in additional benefits that may have otherwise remained unclaimed, assisting independent living and preventing homelessness. This was supported through partnership with Macmillan Cancer Support and the Welfare Advice and Health Partnership. • 99% of respondents in our welfare rights customer satisfaction survey would recommend the service. 99% rated their overall experience of using the service as excellent or good and 97% said the time taken to respond to their initial enquiry was excellent or good. • In line with Scottish Government Policy the basic pay of carers and personal assistants who look after adults in our communities was implemented twice during the year. We calculated and implemented contract rates for the Council’s early learning and childcare partners that enabled them to sustain their services and pay their staff at least the Scottish Living Wage. • Full allocation of the council’s Supporting Communities Fund to 58 community groups across Argyll and Bute for a range of projects addressing, social, environmental and cultural and economic outcomes. Page 477
Page 348
17 Corporate Outcome: People will live in safer and stronger communities Number of indicators: 4 Number on track: 2 Number no target / no data: 2 Corporate Outcome Indicator Target 2020/21 Actual 2021/22 Actual 2022/23 Actual 2023/24 Actual Status Commentary Percentage of groups who say their effectiveness has increased as a result of capacity building by the community development team 75.00% 100.00% 100.00% 90.00% 100.00% G We surveyed groups we had been working with for them to self-assess whether they felt that their effectiveness had increased as a result of capacity building by the Community Development team. Comments from the survey (in responders’ own words): • Lots of one-to-one advice, attendance at meetings and leading strategic focus groups. • They have provided help and support regarding funding for our group. They were really helpful and responsive and provided good straightforward advice. Very approachable. • Funding advice and assistance with Council funding applications. • Advice on Participation Request process and help with engagement between LCC and Council officers responsible for the service. • Advice around recruitment and changing our charity from unincorporated to a SCIO. Page 478
Page 349
18 Corporate Outcome Indicator Target 2020/21 Actual 2021/22 Actual 2022/23 Actual 2023/24 Actual Status Commentary Information provided to our community groups, individuals and partners is easy to understand 75.00% 89.00% 96.00% 90.00% 93.00% G We provide information on queries about Community Empowerment and Community Development (Assets, Participation Requests). We also provide information on general funding and training opportunities, and on how to take things forward in community and partnership projects such as developing action plans and engaging to develop these. The Communities and Partnership Team send out regular information bulletins. The different bulletins each have a different audience cohort and a different editorial style. Every effort is made to use plain English, and checks are made to ensure accessibility compliance. Total value of compensation settlements for vehicle damage/driver injury as a result of road/bridge faults No Target £2,884 £2,807 £1,879 £1,956 No Target The sums paid out have remained at a similar level year on year which may be indicative of an ongoing improvement in road and bridge surfaces. Percentage of adult residents stating their neighbourhood as a 'very good' place to live. 70.00% - - 69.00% No Data - This figure is derived from the Scottish Government's Household Survey and results are released a year in arrears. The figure for 2022 is the last available. Page 479
Page 350
19 Argyll and Bute Community Safety Strategy We are further developing the Community Safety Strategy, which underpins the Argyll and Bute Outcome Improvement Plan and sets out strategic priorities in relation to: • We live in a safe and positive community. • We encourage safer road and water use. • Our natural and built environment is protected. • Our communities are supported and included. It also identifies how we will work with key partners including Police Scotland, Scottish Fire and Rescue Service, HM Coastguard, Health & Social Care Partnership (HSCP), Third Sector Interface (TSI) and local groups to bring together resources to ensure that Argyll and Bute is a safer place to live, work and visit. The Anti-Social Behaviour Co-ordinator continues to work in partnership with several outside agencies to manage an increase in anti-social related incidents across Argyll and Bute and works closely with Police Scotland in the management of the CCTV network across the area. Prevent The Council’s approach to Prevent was refreshed with the Prevent Multi-Agency Panel, which was reformed to assess the information received from Police Scotland and consider appropriate safeguarding measures in supporting individuals to reduce their vulnerability of being drawn into terrorism. Building Standards Balanced Scorecard The Building Standards Balanced Scorecard provides details of achievements and performance and service priorities until 2025. Good progress is being made on the following: • Exceeded all targets for the 5 key Building Standards National Performance Targets in 2023/24. • Attained one of the best customer satisfaction rates from the national Building Standards Customer Satisfaction Survey run by the Scottish Government. • Processed a total of 1690 warrants, compared to 1844 in 2022/23. Argyll and Bute generated warrants increased from 1262 to 1355 in 2023/24 • Responded to 104 dangerous / defective building cases at various properties across Argyll and Bute, acting where appropriate, to remove imminent risk to public safety. • Implemented the new requirements of the Scottish Governments Technical Standards for Building Standards. Page 480
Page 351
20 The Mentors in Violence Prevention Programme (MVP) This peer mentoring programme gives young people the chance to explore and challenge attitudes, beliefs, and cultural norms that underpin all forms of gender-based violence in our society. We have a robust 3-year development plan in place, which has helped to ensure a strategic direction and focussed approach to implement the programme. The programme has continued to be developed across our secondary school settings and a further 17 members of staff have been trained with a further training session planned for 2024. So far 7 of our secondary schools trained to deliver this programme and further training will allow those remaining schools who have not yet participated in training to engage. We have continued to increase partner engagement and are developing the School Support Services contract to ensure that this is embedded in our partnership approach. This development is in line with our Mentors in Violence Prevention Action plan. We are currently planning to pilot approaches to introducing the transition materials into Primary Schools. Supporting complex needs To ensure appropriate support is in place for learners with the most complex needs, we have been working closely with CALM organisation to access training that helps staff understand more complex dysregulated behaviours and how to reduce and prevent those behaviours over time. Staff who have completed this have provided positive feedback regarding the positive impact that learning from the training is already having on their practice. We have updated our documentation and guidance for staff on exclusions, distressed behaviour and violence and aggression towards staff and delivered staff awareness raising sessions on the changes to this important guidance. 252 members of staff have completed the CALM online theory course which focusses on prevention and a reduction of restrictive responses with training secured for a further 75 staff. 4 Physical Intervention instructors successfully completed their reaccreditation course and will undertake an instructors training course. There is a training plan to roll out targeted Physical Intervention training to relevant establishments starting on the August in-service days. 88% of our care experienced young people eligible to leave in 2022-23 sustained a positive destination. Destinations include remaining in education, employment and further training. Educational outcomes for ‘looked after’ children 2022-23 have yet to be published to facilitate national comparison. Page 481
Page 352
21 Corporate Outcome: Children and young people have the best possible start Number of indicators: 8 Number on track: 6 Number no target / no data: 2 Corporate Outcome Indicator Target 2020/21 Actual 2021/22 Actual 2022/23 Actual 2023/24 Actual Status Commentary Provide quality meals within cost margins to all pupils +/-5% -0.069 -0.04 -2.56% 0.48% G Catering continues to perform well, with the variance from food costs within the +/-5% target across the area. We continue to monitor areas/locations that fall outside of the target variance. Increase the percentage of our care experienced young people that have the recommended additional tracking and monitoring plans in place 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% G Each care experienced child and young person enrolled in an authority school has tracking and monitoring plans in place via our education management information system knowns as Seemis. Data collated includes attendance, exclusion, progress and attainment and wellbeing information. Percentage of children living in poverty (after housing costs) No Target 18.9% 21.7% 23.5% No Data - The 2022/23 figure (latest data) is 23.5%, a small increase in keeping with figures from across Scotland and still below the Scottish national average of 24.0%. Percentage rate for attendance across 92.00% 93.30% 93.30% 90.55% 92.85% G Page 482
Page 353
22 Corporate Outcome Indicator Target 2020/21 Actual 2021/22 Actual 2022/23 Actual 2023/24 Actual Status Commentary all Argyll and Bute schools is comparable or better than the Scottish national average (biennial data) Final data for 2023/24 is still unavailable and as much as it is a biennial uplift nationally, locally we track and submit this annually. Support the increase in the uptake of available grants, allowance and entitlements 2,573 2,998 2,853 2,999 3,125 G Education has issued individual communications to eligible pupils. Public notices and social media posts have been issued to publicise other available grants including free school meals and clothing grants. A counselling service is available in all secondary schools 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% G Referrals have been received from each secondary school. There has been an increase in referrals since the service was launched in 2023. The service is currently managing demand well. The number of referrals is aligned to what would be expected and what the capacity of the contract can manage. Percentage of children with no concerns across all domains at 27 to 30 month assessment 82.10% 85.50% 87.30% 85.3% No Data - This measure is captured within the Local Government Benchmarking Framework and exceeds the latest Scotland national level reported as 82.1%. Data is not yet available for 2023/24. 95% of schools have a suitability rating of A or B 95.00% 95.00% 95.00% 95.00% 95.00% G Page 483
Page 354
23 Corporate Outcome Indicator Target 2020/21 Actual 2021/22 Actual 2022/23 Actual 2023/24 Actual Status Commentary Work is planned for summer 2024 to upgrade the suitability of two schools which will leave only one school with a suitability rating of C. Support and interventions for our care experienced children and young people Regular tracking and monitoring of attendance and attainment and designated manager meets has led to targeted support and interventions for our care experienced children and young people (CECYP). Attendance figures for CECYP across primary, secondary and special settings is 85.33%, nationally the comparative figure is 87.5% These figures align with a national area of focus on attendance. Health and Wellbeing Family Liaison Officers continue to support young people and families across the authority. • Additional resources to support nurturing environments in each Early Years settings to enable flexibility in how these environments to support self-regulation for children. • Training sessions supported 143 practitioners in engaging in dialogue around infant behaviour and how to apply nurture principles. • Bespoke training to support practitioners to increase their skill and confidence in delivering play and learning outdoors. Specific outdoor environments can engage and extend children’s thinking and support their connection to the natural environment. Participants reported that they felt more confident to assess risk, engage new skills and deliver learning outdoors. Additional tracking and monitoring of attendance and attainment has led to targeted support and interventions for Care Experienced Children and young people. As a result, close analysis of the data has shown positive outcomes from this including an increase in positive destinations to 94%, which is above our target of 85%. Personalised support has been put in place to maximise attendance for this cohort; attendance data aligns to the national picture. There is a sustained low number of exclusions for care experienced children and young people. Interventions to support this sustained level of low number of exclusions this include individual work with children by Health and Wellbeing Liaison Officers, School based personalised support, Ed Psychology support, health discussions and wider partnership working. Page 484
Page 355
24 Children and Young People Improvement Collaborative (CYPIC) improving writing programme 27 schools have undertaken training in using a quality improvement approach to support writing attainment, with a further 16 signed up to undertake training next session. This includes all our Gaelic medium schools. The percentage of pupils on track across P3-P7 has increased from an average of 61% to 76%, based on Feb 24 predictions. Our Children, Their Future The current Education Vision and Strategy, ‘Our Children, Their Future’, was developed in 2016 and remains a robust and meaningful document, however in response to impacts of a global pandemic and a changing national landscape and changing national and local policy contexts in regards to Education, a planned and informed refresh is underway. Consultation on the strategy was carried out with pupils, parents and carers, staff and wider partners to gather views and define what was important to them for education in Argyll and Bute. The consultation included opportunities for in-person and online group sessions along with an online individual questionnaire and was supported by parent and pupil groups as well as school staff. And the questionnaire was also offered in Ukrainian, Russian and Gaelic. The refreshed strategy will shape the future delivery of an Education Service which will support our children, young people and communities to achieve the best possible outcomes. Award winning school meals service Following the successful pilot in 2022-23 for the delivery of school meals via drone, the project has moved onto the next phase, and we will soon be piloting the delivery of school meals from one school to another. The Council continues to offer fresh, healthy and sustainable school lunches and hold the Soil Association Scotland’s ‘Bronze Food for Life Served Here’ award. The award is widely respected and independently assessed. It is supported by the Scottish Government and recognises councils that serve food made from fresh ingredients, free from genetically modified ingredients and undesirable additives, and using free-range eggs and high- welfare meat. Registration Early Learning Childcare (ELC) The Customer Engagement Digital Service Team and Education Service worked together to review and update the annual registration processes for Early Learning Childcare (ELC), Primary School Enrolment and Secondary School Enrolment. Page 485
Page 356
25 This included a streamlined and efficient online application form for parents and an assisted caseload management and approval system for use by Education administrators, with features such as automated reminders and notifications to parents. This greatly reduced the administrative burden for officers and significantly sped up the process for parents. In total 502 ELC applications, 840 P1 applications and 950 secondary school applications were processed in under a fortnight for each cycle. The same digital enablement approach was also applied to the application process for Under 22-year-old Travel Cards and 1,531 were awarded, raising the take up rate to 70% of those eligible. This will be further enhanced in 2024/25 with robotic updates via an integration into the Education system, SEEMIS. School Counselling Service The School Counselling Service delivered by The Exchange (TCS) provides 100% coverage of services across all schools and localities. Referrals have been received from each secondary school, and support provided. Attendance and engagement at counselling by young people in Argyll and Bute is high, and above The Exchange's national average rate. There has been an increase in referrals over the past 2 quarters in comparison to when the service was launched in 2023. The service is currently managing demand well. The number of referrals is aligned to what would be expected and what the capacity of the contract can manage. There continues to be quarterly reporting meetings with The Exchange. There has been an increase in the contract capacity to allow support to younger children, and ongoing monitoring will ensure that capacity continues to be able to meet the demand. Nurture teaching support Where our most distressed young people have been identified, nurture teachers continue to provide intensive, time-limited support through coaching. Capacity building ensures staff are well equipped to adopt nurturing and trauma informed approaches and support the young people who need these most. Qualitative feedback from staff in schools indicates the positive impact this work has on both staff wellbeing and children and young people: “…Nurture teacher support has made a huge difference across the board. Targeted support for pupils ensured needs were met, particularly for emotional regulation. This facilitated inclusion and wellbeing of individuals, peers and adults involved. The Nurture Teacher being on site increased our sense of being supported and was an integral part of the approach. Having this support across schools is an essential resource...”. We have implemented a new a Counselling in Schools Service to improve outcomes for children and young people. Impact of the new service is being tracked and monitored and data gathered so far is showing very positive impacts for children and young people. 453 young people have been supported by a school counsellor over the past 12 months, with 82% reporting improved outcomes following support. Page 486
Page 357
26 Corporate Outcome: Education, skills and training will maximise opportunities for all Number of indicators: 7 Number on track: 1 Number no target / no data: 6 Corporate Outcome Indicator Target 2020/21 Actual 2021/22 Actual 2022/23 Actual 2023/24 Actual Status Commentary Maintain the percentage of all young people leaving school achieving a positive destination into further education, training or employment *ACADEMIC YEAR 95.00% 94.00% 93.50% 95.20% 94.30% R The slight decrease on 2022/23 is due to a change in the way HMRC data was included. Overall, we are positioned 9th out of 32 local authorities for this measure. Maintain the percentage of successful examination presentations in Levels 4 and 5 for literacy and numeracy by our senior phase pupils *ACADEMIC YEAR 60.00% 100.00% 97.00% SCQF4 87.23% SCQF5 66.84% SCQF4 84.08% SCQF5 66.59% R At SCQF level 4 there has been a decrease of around 3pp. This data has been shared with schools and there are processes in place to ensure rigorous tracking and monitoring. Broadly, we have maintained attainment level at SCQF 5. However, we are continuing to support and challenge our establishments in order to ensure that attainment is raised. Increase the uptake of wider No Target - - 88.00% 100.00% No Target Page 487
Page 358
27 Corporate Outcome Indicator Target 2020/21 Actual 2021/22 Actual 2022/23 Actual 2023/24 Actual Status Commentary achievement opportunities which complement traditional SQA awards and offer alternative ways to develop learning, life and work skills All secondary schools have developed an enhanced Wider Achievement Programme for young people in S1 to S6. These additional opportunities are being supporting and funded by the UKSPF. Percentage of modern apprentices that go on to a positive destination after completing the Argyll and Bute Council Modern Apprentice Programme 95.00% 100.00% 96.10% 96.20% 94.55% R The slight decrease is due to a small percentage of Early Years Modern Apprenticeship students withdrawing prior to completing the qualification. We will continue to explore the use of Modern Apprentices as part of the ongoing workforce planning process. Percentage of children that achieve their appropriate developmental milestones by Primary 1 70.00% 75.00% 64.00% 63.00% 61.00% R Although below target this result is reflective with the national picture in relation to child development across Scotland. Percentage pass rate for the National 5 qualification is comparable or better than the Scottish national average *ACADEMIC YEAR No Target 87.50% 79.70% 77.39% 75.60% No Target The national pre-appeal A-C pass rate for National 5 is 77.2%. The authority post-appeal pass rate will not be available until October 2024. The national post-appeal data will not be made available until December 2024. The percentage pass rate for the No Target 90.20% 80.90% 77.35% 72.00% No Target Page 488
Page 359
28 Corporate Outcome Indicator Target 2020/21 Actual 2021/22 Actual 2022/23 Actual 2023/24 Actual Status Commentary National Higher qualification is comparable or better than the Scottish national average *ACADEMIC YEAR The national pre-appeal A-C pass rate for Higher is 74.9%. The authority post-appeal data will not be made available until October. The national post-appeal data will not be made available until December. Developing the young workforce We have continued to focus on broadened and improved work-based vocational learning opportunities for young people, improving vocational educational provision in schools, and developing strong partnerships with employers and agencies who can contribute towards equipping young people with the skills and qualities they need to succeed in life and work. As a result of the implementation of a Developing the Young Workforce (DYW) strategic action plan for 2023-24, and continued proactivity and dedication of the DYW School Coordinators, DYW Argyll and Bute have increased engagement with employers by nearly 70%, young people by 411% and implemented an additional 250 DYW-related activities across the Authority in the year 2023-24. Helping people into work There are several programmes delivered by Argyll and Bute Council’s Employability Team and third sector delivery partners available to residents to help participants progress towards education, training or employment. Participants have access to: • a tailored support package • accredited training • work placements paying the Real Living Wage • benefits, debt and fuel poverty advice • assistance with job applications, CV creation and interviews skills and techniques. Items to remove specific barriers can also be purchased, such as a digital device to access online learning or a bicycle to help address poor transport links and allow travel to and from work. A childminding programme enables parents to develop skills, confidence and accreditation in childcare, which in turn supports their journey to starting up and providing much needed local services as a registered childminder. Page 489
Page 360
29 Support is offered to people who meet one or more of the following criteria: • People between the ages of 15 and 67 years who are experiencing barriers to employment. • Young people over the age of 15 years who are within 6 months of the school leaving date and who are identified as being at risk of not moving on to a positive destination. • Parents on a low-income whilst in-work, with a specific focus on the six priority family groups. Our service eligibility also recognises different family structures, such as a grandparent or guardian caring for a child. • Employers looking to host a fully funded work placement. • People ages 16 to 67 who are unemployed or underemployed looking to undertake accredited training. The following are some quotes from participants, giving their views on the support received. To find out information on all the support options available, please visit Helping people into work | Argyll and Bute Council (argyll-bute.gov.uk) Corporate Outcome: Our economy is diverse and thriving Number of indicators: 12 Number on track: 8 Number no target / no data: 4 “Just to let you know I passed my HGV driving test this afternoon!! It still feels like a dream. I'm still in shock. Just wanted to say thanks so much for what you did. I couldn't have done this without you. I've finished reading the book you recommended so it's onwards and upwards for me now!” “Thank you so much for the support I have received to date. There is no way I would have been able to afford to pay to put myself through this course, and the fact that you paid for all the resources I needed to help me through my course was amazing. It was also great to know my PESF support Worker was only a call away if I had any queries or needed help with anything. Thank you!” Page 490
Page 361
30 Corporate Outcome Indicator Target 2020/21 Actual 2021/22 Actual 2022/23 Actual 2023/24 Actual Status Commentary Maintain the percentage of local suppliers that benefit from the awards of contracts via the procurement portal 20.00% 27.90% 13.50% 19.90% 17.80% R From the 116 contracts awarded during 2023/24, 37 contracts received local bids. The nature of the types of contracts awarded can impact on submission from local bidders. Of the 37 contracts, 22 were awarded to local suppliers (59.5%) with an estimated total contract value of £4.1m. The Procurement, Commercial and Contract Management team will continue to support local suppliers by providing useful information on the Council’s website. Increase the number of community benefits that are delivered through the contracts we award locally No Target 22 55 73 74 No Target The Procurement, Commercial and Contract Management team is committed to maximising community benefits from its procurement activities and to delivering wider benefits for its communities when purchasing the required goods, services and supplies for Argyll and Bute. We have been working closely with our suppliers to deliver additional social, economic and environmental value to our society. Number of business and industry planning applications submitted annually No Target 21 19 23 21 No Target This measure details the number of applications submitted to the Council for business and industry applications. The data for 2023/24 indicates a slight decrease to activity in this area from the previous reporting period. Page 491
Page 362
31 Corporate Outcome Indicator Target 2020/21 Actual 2021/22 Actual 2022/23 Actual 2023/24 Actual Status Commentary Percentage of homeless applicants who required temporary accommodation this period No Target 45.00% 40.00% 34.00% 29.00% No Target The percentage reduction should be considered in the context of a reduction of 4% in the number of households presenting as homeless to the local authority in 2023/24 compared to 2022/23. The actual number of households requiring temporary accommodation increased from 136 households in 2022/23 to 141 households in 2023/24, but the pro-active housing advice and information provided by the Area Teams has meant the effective prevention work is carried out to ensure that as many households as possible get a positive housing outcome and do not require temporary accommodation. Number of affordable social sector new builds completed per annum Actual 48 145 188 70 G The Strategic Housing Investment Plan process is a partnership between the Council, Registered Social Landlords and the Scottish Government to ensure new build affordable housing is delivered across the local authority to meet need and demand. This included 54 units for social rent, 11 properties for New Supply Shared Equity (NSSE) and 5 properties for Mid-Market Rent. Total number of visitor trips to Argyll and Bute No Target 0.8M 1.5M 2.5M 2.8M No Target This data is taken from the Scottish Tourism Economic Activity Monitor. The number of visitors trips has increased as the region Page 492
Page 363
32 Corporate Outcome Indicator Target 2020/21 Actual 2021/22 Actual 2022/23 Actual 2023/24 Actual Status Commentary continues to recover from the impact on visitor numbers due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Total visitor spend in Argyll and Bute No Target £125M £262.5M £407.5M £461.5M No Target This data is taken from the Scottish Tourism Economic Activity Monitor. Visitor spend has increased as the region continues to recover from the impact on visitor numbers due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Gross Value Added (GVA) per capita No Target £20,543 £23,394 £47,270 £47,270 No Target The latest figure is still £47,270 taken from the Scottish Annual Business Statistics 2021 (excludes the finance sector and part of agriculture and the public sector). The latest data is for 2021 as the 2022 data has yet to be finalised. Please note these statistics are in arrears and do not match the financial years stated. GVA is an indicator of wealth creation. GVA per capita measures the contribution to the economy made by each individual employee/producer. The latest GVA per capita figure for Argyll and Bute is 86% of the Scottish average. This shows that on average Argyll and Bute's economy, with many low skill and low pay employment opportunities, is performing less strongly than Scotland as a whole. However, this is only one measure and does not take into consideration issues such as wellbeing. Page 493
Page 364
33 Corporate Outcome Indicator Target 2020/21 Actual 2021/22 Actual 2022/23 Actual 2023/24 Actual Status Commentary Unemployment rate - claimant count as a %age of working age population No Target 5.80% 4.00% 2.80% 2.50% No Target This indicator is based on working age group 16 to 64. The downward trend over the years is positive. Unemployment rate - claimant count as a %age of the population (16-24) No Target 6.50% 4.30% 2.80% 0.41% No Target This indicator is based on age group 16 to24. The downward trend over the years is positive. The number of Business Gateway start-ups per 10,000 of population No Target 110 154.3 135.7 135.0 No Target 135 start-ups were supported during 2023/24. Geographical percentage coverage of 4/5G mobile phone connectivity 95.00% 77.00% 79.00% 81.00% No Data - The latest data we can access (Jan 2024) is that currently geographic coverage from one operator sits at 85% an increase of 4% however the coverage from all operators has increased to 37%, with a decrease of no coverage to 15%. The Mobile Mapping Project procurement is currently underway with the closing date for returns due late September with project commencement early November. Page 494
Page 365
34 Supporting the economic recovery and our communities We continue to ensure that we maintained the percentage of Council spend that is under a contract or service level agreement, while also maintaining the percentage of all Small Medium Enterprises (SME) that win council contracts. We also worked to improve the delivery of contract management on all high-risk contracts. 2023/24 Contracted Spend: 91.9%. 2023/24 SME Wins: 82.9% We effectively planned and coordinated the release of tenders to avoid overwhelming the market, particularly the local market, by issuing invitations to tender where the regulations allowed. For 2023/24, we awarded 116 contracts and of these 84 were Quick Quotes (ITQ’s). Our procurement processes were simplified and streamlined, ensuring that documentation was as straightforward as possible, and we engaged with local Economic Development colleagues and other collaborative stakeholders to support emerging priorities that will support the economic recovery within Argyll and Bute. The level of local spend was monitored in 2023/24, and the overall percentage with our local suppliers was 35.8% - see detail below: Total Spend Local Spend % 2023/24 – Spend Distribution £183,347,604 £65,716,826 35.8 The team recognises the strategic importance of maximising the economic benefits from directing Council spend to local businesses in terms of benefiting the local economy. Whilst it would not be acceptable to give preference to local businesses during any particular procurement, efforts are made to ensure that local businesses are upskilled to have the greatest chance of being successful in winning Council and other public sector business. We are committed to maximising community benefits from procurement activities and to delivering wider benefits for our communities when purchasing goods, services and supplies. We have worked closely with our suppliers to deliver additional social, economic and environmental value to our society. A total of 74 community benefits were achieved in 2023/24 through robust management of contract awards and matching requirement to the Request List. Page 495
Page 366
35 Business Support – case studies In June 2023 Business Gateway launched a new range of support for businesses through the UK Government Shared Prosperity Fund. This range of support includes: • Small Business Development Grant of up to £10,000 • Business Start-up Grant of up to £1,000 • Trade Fair, Training, Accreditation and Digital Grants of up to £1,000 • Fully funded expert help 1-2 days of support from a subject specialist • Intensive Support Programme focused on building resilience and exploiting business opportunities to help businesses make a step- change. Support provided included: • 122 grants awarded totalling £346,243 • 60 small business development grants • 39 start-up grants • 10 trade fair, training, accreditation and digital grants • 6 expert help (1 to 2 days support) • 6 participants in intensive business support programme Page 496
Page 367
36 Ardardan Estate Through Business Gateway, Ardardan Estate (a family run business), received one-to-one guidance from a dedicated business adviser and signposting to various funding opportunities to support their new ‘Highland Cow’ experience. The family-run business employs 70 locals who share their passion and farm experience with visitors. Determined to continuously improve; while keeping food, farming and family at the heart of their business, the family has worked with Business Gateway over the last few years to help improve their product offering and also recently benefited from assistance to source further grants, which funded a new oven, coffee machine and equipment to introduce seasonal events. Sue Aikman, Director of Ardardan Estate, said: “Our strong heritage lies at the heart of our estate, but we’re always on the lookout to introduce new products and services, so we are really excited to be introducing a ‘Highland Cow’ experience. Business Gateway has been a great source of support over the last few years, and we’re very grateful to have been able to benefit from their expertise.”. Page 497
Page 368
37 Islay Sea Adventures Thanks to support from a dedicated business adviser and advice on funding opportunities, Islay Sea Adventures has introduced new seafood trips where customers can enjoy on deck, a selection of locally caught fresh and smoked seafood by the team. Born and bred on Islay, founder and Managing Director Gus Newman is passionate about showing off the best of the island and approached Business Gateway for support in developing this new venture. Business Gateway helped to source grant funding towards the costs of a Safety Management System and HACCP food safety management course. Gus Newman, Managing Director and Skipper, Islay Sea Adventures, said: “We’re really proud to be able to offer our customers the unique chance to enjoy the scenery and wildlife that Islay has to offer, all while sampling some of the best local produce available. “Business Gateway allowed us to invest in our ability to smoke quality Scottish seafood, which may not have been possible without their support.” Building Standards achieves maximum 6-year licence Building Standards have achieved the maximum six-year verification licence from the Scottish Government, which allows us to continue to vet and verify building warrants. This brings benefits to the built environment and supports our economy. During the period 2023/24 our work in supporting the economy resulted in a total 1,690 building warrants processed. Argyll and Bute generated warrants increased from 1262 to 1355 in 2023/24 Building Standards User Forum We delivered a digital “user forum” for customers to highlight issues with the service, changes to the Technical Standards, and how these impact the customer and used this as a platform to discuss their issues. Presentations were given to stakeholders and contractors regarding the new updates to the Domestic and Non-Domestic Technical Handbooks, which were well received by our customers. Page 498
Page 369
38 One council: property income We have generated over £680,000 from disposals and generated new annual revenue income of £25,500 driven by our strategy of divesting of surplus property assets and generating income from our estate. Notable sales include: • Glencreran School House • The former Ashfield Primary School & Bridge of Orchy Primary School. • The marketing of the Helensburgh Waterfront commercial site, which attracted 9 international, national and local bids for the site which have been assessed by the Property Development Working Group with a preferred developer to be selected in August 2024. • Oban Airport marketing has generated 3 significant aviation related business interests for the business park. An Outline Business Case was completed in 2023/24 with the full business case due for completion in 2024/25. We are developing a Strategic Outline Programme. This will cover potential opportunities for the Council to develop several of its assets on a more commercial basis and will be delivered over a number of years, with the immediate focus being a new Business Park at Kilmory, and commercial developments at Helensburgh’s waterfront. We secured ongoing commercial planning / building standards work from other local authorities. Not only is this important for us to provide a balanced budget, but it also supports communities in these other Council areas. Housing Services Partnership with Home Argyll Housing Services, in partnership with the Council’s Home Argyll partnership have delivered amendments to the Common Housing Register Allocation Policy. Crucial changes have been made to assist in finding permanent tenancies for homeless applicants, to allow single person households allocation of two-bedroom properties in certain circumstances, and to create the flexibility to accommodate other identified housing market pressures when identified. Cultural and leisure events 2023-24 saw the creation of a new centralised approach to the authorisation of major cultural and leisure events across Argyll and Bute, that has dramatically improved the previously fragmented and siloed processes. This makes it easier for those organising a major event to find out what is expected of them, easier for them to make an application and simpler for those approving such events to control the application and supporting evidence so that speedier decisions can be reached. Page 499
Page 370
39 The new design includes: • A single online Events page with all the resources needed by applicants in one place. • A definitive online Guide as to what is required of applicants. • An easy to use “smart” online application form that only asks the questions needed for a particular type of event and allows the upload of supporting documentation. • A highly automated application management back-office system, that also controls the inputs needed by various stakeholders such as Fire and Police Services and manages key deadlines. • A streamlined approval process that packages together the application and evidence for the approving officer and issues the certification of approval to proceed or rejection notice. Since going live, 2953 applications have been approved using the new digital cultural and sporting events management process and 8 rejected. Further enhancements are being made to the system. Corporate Outcome: We have an infrastructure that supports sustainable growth Number of indicators: 5 Number on track: 3 Number no target / no data: 2 Corporate Outcome Indicator Target 2020/21 Actual 2021/22 Actual 2022/23 Actual 2023/24 Actual Status Commentary Percentage of waste recycled, composted or recovered 45.00% 49.30% 48.30% 52.00% 58.20% G The overall improvement was mainly due to an increase in green garden waste, soils and rubble tonnages recycled by Renewi from the PPP area. In addition during Q4 (Jan-March 2024), all of Helensburgh and Lomond’s Page 500
Page 371
40 Corporate Outcome Indicator Target 2020/21 Actual 2021/22 Actual 2022/23 Actual 2023/24 Actual Status Commentary general waste was disposed of as refuse derived fuel (RDF)/energy from waste (EFW) instead of landfill. Number of tonnes of waste sent to landfill (biodegradable) 21,500 18,435 18,772 18,165 17,406 G The decrease is mainly due to FQ4 (Jan-March 2024), when all of Helensburgh and Lomond’s general waste was disposed of as refuse derived fuel (RDF)/energy from waste (EFW) instead of landfill. This significantly reduced the council tonnage to landfill during that quarter and in turn reduced the 2023/24 financial year tonnage. Percentage of street cleanliness 73.00% 81.00% 79.00% 83.00% 84.00% G The level of street cleanliness across Argyll and Bute remains high and exceeds the national service standard of 67%. The service continues to set a target of 73% to challenge the operation. Percentage of roads in need of maintenance as defined by the annual survey No Target 52.50% No Data 49.70% No Data No Target We have not received an accurate Roads Condition Index figure from the supplier as they were unable to access most of our islands. This has been raised at a national level as two other Scottish local authorities were in a similar position. We are unable therefore to report on this outcome. Page 501
Page 372
41 Corporate Outcome Indicator Target 2020/21 Actual 2021/22 Actual 2022/23 Actual 2023/24 Actual Status Commentary Carbon emissions relating to Council activities (Council carbon footprint) tCO2e = tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent Net Zero tCO2 by 2045 26,619 28,218 26,512 No Data - There are no figures available until after the submission of the Public Bodies Climate Change Duties Compliance Report which is due by the end of November 2024. Water scarcity and air quality Our Environmental Health team supported a Scottish Government scheme to assist private water supply users when their private water supplies run dry, by coordinating a response and provide bottled water to affected properties. We completed and assessed our air monitoring program to conclude that local air quality in Argyll and Bute is good. Flood protection and marine works We have progressed assessments, watercourse clearance works, flood incident investigation and provision of flooding advice. A watercourse inspector and additional engineers have been recruited to assist the flooding team and help to deliver our obligations in terms of Flood Risk Mitigation. Page 502
Page 373
42 Campbeltown Flood Protection Scheme Construction of the Campbeltown Flood Protection Scheme started on site in September 2022. It is the first scheme to be promoted by Argyll and Bute Council under the Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009. Budgeted to cost £15.2M, it is being funded 80% by Scottish Government and 20% by Argyll and Bute Council. Works progressed well throughout 2023/24 with full completion expected in 2024. Road resurfacing is ongoing along streets where pipework installation has been completed. Surface water has been removed from the combined foul drainage system, reducing the amount of water that needs to be treated in the sewage treatment works. This required the construction of a storage tank, small ponds and a reservoir. These ponds and the reservoir will remain dry for the majority of the time, and will provide holding capacity during a storm event, where water will be held and ultimately slowly discharged into the sea. Additionally, we have progressed to a cloud-based Flood Risk Management System which enables flooding information to be held in a safe and appropriate format. Page 503
Page 374
43 Flood event Following a period of wet weather which left ground conditions very wet and, in many cases saturated, more than a month’s worth of rain fell over a 36-hour period, starting Friday 6 October 2023 and running into Saturday 7 October 2023. Conditions were so severe that Police Scotland declared a major incident, and a multiagency tactical response was assembled. Public infrastructure and transport connections into and out of Argyll and Bute were severely compromised and for a period all trunk roads and many local roads were impassable. The compromised roads are illustrated by the dots on this map. The damage and disruption to the transport network included: Page 504
Page 375
44 • Roads unpassable due to excessive surface water • Bridges washed away or significantly damaged • Carriageway and footway damage • Numerous landslides Numerous people became stranded due to flood waters, landslips and damaged structures and the Council response was significant with reception centres and catering put in place to accommodate individuals who were stranded. Many communities were also isolated and cut off, with lifeline routes served and alternative home to school transport provided by boat. The response resulted in communities being reconnected, a significant amount of repair to storm damage and adaptation works designed to mitigate future disruption should another similar event occur. The images below show the impact of the event and repair and mitigation works. Page 505
Page 376
45 PRCA (Public Relations & Communications Association) Scotland’s In-house Communication Team of the Year This award recognises the work we did to support communities following significant weather disruption in October, in accessing the council support services they need. We did this by informing and involving communities in different aspects of the council’s work, by listening and responding to their concerns, and by promoting the area to raise the profile of Argyll and Bute’s challenges, needs and opportunities. Page 506
Page 377
46 Marine infrastructure and ferry services The restructure of our larger harbour infrastructure and reviewed legislation have led to a ‘new’ number of Piers and Harbours. Argyll and Bute Council is the Statutory Harbour Authority at 7 locations and a marine asset owner at a further 29 marine facilities located throughout the Council area. Since the last Annual Performance Review, the Council is now fully complaint with the Port Marine Safety Code. Oban Harbour revision order Informal discussion has been ongoing to finalise the Oban Harbour draft Harbour Revision Order (HRO). The draft HRO has undergone some changes to the content order, formatting and points of specific interest e.g. definitions and references. Formal statutory consultation has taken place and representations have been received by the Council, which has carried out due diligence and responded in accordance with the relevant legislation. The next stage of the process will take place 2024/25 which will largely be down to Scottish Government/Transport Scotland to consider any outstanding representations and take forward the HRO. The Terms of Reference for the proposed Consultative Forums have been drawn up. These are based on the guidelines and recommendations of the Port Marine Safety Code (PMSC). It is proposed to have two Consultative Forums. One will be a group consisting of the organisations with financial and legal responsibility in the bay. The other will consist of the stakeholders and communities who rely on Oban Harbour. Recruitment has been completed to ensure a smooth first step is made in preparation for the new shift patterns once the HRO is in place. Page 507
Page 378
47 Ferry services All our ferry routes operated according to timetable with additional sailings to cope with increased demand. We are reviewing the previous works and studies carried out around the ferry services we provide and the infrastructure they need now and for the future. Replacement of the Jura ferry remains a priority and work is underway towards the installation of appropriate passenger access at Feolin on Jura. We have undertaken a topography study with a view to tendering a design build for passenger only access when a vehicular vessel is not available. This will likely be in the form of a gangway and pontoon near the existing slipway and is expected to make a very significant improvement to the breakdown-related connectivity issues. Iona slipway and breakwater The Breakwater planning application is progressing to tender. The forecast of a 1-year construction period is subject to contractors work scope and supply chains, particularly the rock armour. We have received a quote to complete the Slipway work started by the previous contractor. There are some issues to finalise which are being addressed. Due to the nature of these issues, we initially had no returns from known contractors; this may signify problems with completing the works. We are currently considering the issue and comments. Views and thoughts from the pier users have been requested. Page 508
Page 379
48 Fionnphort The work to progress key pieces of marine infrastructure to allow for full and unfettered access to and from Iona is ongoing. The Environmental Impact Assessment is in process including the socioeconomic assessment. Work is ongoing to address the potential issues with CalMac Marine regarding swept paths etc. Once Marine Scotland has approved the Environmental Impact Assessment we will continue with the licences, etc. with a view to progressing to tender. Port Askaig In April 2018, Scottish Ministers announced that Islay would be next in line for new vessels to replace the MV Hebridean Isles. As part of the New Islay Vessels (NIV) Project, the Port is being assessed and upgraded to accommodate the larger capacity ferry. Land Based Developments Road Reconstruction During this financial year we carried out a programme of road improvements with an investment of £8m of council funding together with additional monies from the Timber Transport Fund in the region of £387k. This allowed us to complete over 65 individual roads reconstruction schemes, which will improve the overall road network, contributing to keeping Argyll and Bute open for business. Road Condition Improvements Continuing the trend of improvement / arresting the decline in our road network, Our Annual Status and Options Report sets out the benefits of continued investment in our road network and highlights the critical risk of underinvestment. Although our network has seen a welcome improvement in recent years, we would need to spend in the region of £10-11million annually to maintain a ‘standstill’ position, and significantly more to see continued improvements. Year on year budget consultations and public feedback has shown the importance of roads to our communities, but maintaining the required level of investment is likely to be challenging in future years given the predicted decline in available capital funding. This brings with it significant engineering, economic, financial and reputational risks for the Council. We continue to deliver a range of different technical solutions that are designed to be proportionate for the use of the road and take into consideration the island and rural geography of Argyll and Bute. Page 509
Page 380
49 Claoniag landslip The B8001 is a lifeline route to both the Claonaig ferry slip and the Skipness community. A significant landslide has compromised the road, albeit access has been maintained using traffic management. The detailed design to provide a long-term solution is complex, as the hill is sliding/moving down towards the stream and therefore complicating the solution. This has been progressed by a specialised geotechnical Consultant. Works tender package is in the process of being assembled, alongside continuous consultation with the landowner, SEPA and Openreach. There are several complexities affecting this scheme, including works consents, land acquisition and challenging ground conditions. In the meantime, the council continues to monitor the landslide. Helensburgh Waterfront Development The new facility features a 25-metre main swimming pool and training pool, luxury health suite with steam room and sauna, a café and shop, fitness studios and a gym with panoramic views of the Clyde. The centre, operated by LiveArgyll, is fully accessible and includes a changing places facility, a floating moveable floor in the training pool and poolside pods for anyone with mobility issues to access the pool independently. The completed leisure and public realm development was a ‘Placemaking’ finalist in the national Planning Awards 2023 and was shortlisted for ‘’Best Construction Projects GB&I’ for the Construction Employers Federation (CEF). Page 510
Page 381
50 Corporate Outcome: Getting it right Number of indicators: 5 Number on track: 2 Number no target / no data: 3 Corporate Outcome Indicator Target 2020/21 Actual 2021/22 Actual 2022/23 Actual 2023/24 Actual Status Commentary Increase the percentage of all self-service and automated contacts 72.00% 71.10% 73.10% 75.00% 76.70% G The figure represents 660,938 interactions made using the digital self-service. This is an increase of 61k on the previous year. Our approach of making digital easier to use and better quality is supported by an updated corporate website that conforms to accessibility standards, a new online payment system (that took 43.7k payments worth £6.5m) and numerous new online services, from pupil registration to major Events applications. Person to person interactions also grew by 2.5k. Sickness absence days per employee (non-teacher) No Target 10.0 days 13.4 days 14.9 days 14.6 days No Target The top three reasons for sickness absence were 1. Stress/depression/mental Health, 2. Other musculoskeletal and 3. Infections. It is noteworthy that stress/depression and mental health have exhibited a steady and consistent increase. Infections remain high as strains of Covid have joined influenza as major causes of absence. Page 511
Page 382
51 Corporate Outcome Indicator Target 2020/21 Actual 2021/22 Actual 2022/23 Actual 2023/24 Actual Status Commentary Sickness absence days per teacher No Target 4.4 days 5.6 days 7.2 days 9.0 days No Target The top three reasons for sickness absence were 1. Stress/depression/mental health, 2. Infections and 3. Stomach. liver, kidney and digestion. The absence is predominantly a number of long-term cases for stress related reasons, though infections and Covid has continued to be a significant absence reason. This will feed into our Wellbeing Action Plan. Level of employee satisfaction TBC - - - - - The Council's employee experience survey was run during the month of May 2024 capturing a snapshot of employee the employee experience at that point in time and will provide the indicator for the period 2024/25. The survey will be rerun in 2025. Level of customer satisfaction 92.5% (combined) 95.60% 92.00% 97.60% 96.95% G This outcome measures the customer satisfaction of citizens contacting the council's contact centre and websites. The outcomes for 2023/24 were again very positive. Community Planning Partnership Development and publication of the new Community Planning Partnership, 10 year, Argyll and Bute Outcome Improvement Plan (ABOIP) Building standards customer services excellence The service was reaccredited with the Customer Services Excellence (CSE) Award on the 23 April 2024, increasing the number of compliance- Page 512
Page 383
52 plus criteria to 26, the highest across all Council services. This reflects the excellent “customer-focus” across the team and the auditor concluded that “you clearly remain at the forefront of excellence and the recommendation for retention of the CSE Standard is well deserved”. Increasing the use of our website and self-service tools In June 2023, following a long period of thorough preparations, the Customer Engagement Team’s Web Team launched the wholly new Council website. This was based on the latest Drupal Local Gov best practice structure, derived from shared working across councils and on the free Drupal Content Management System. There were two separate user testing exercises participated in by over 400 customers to fine tune everything from colour palette to navigation layouts, and the final design was based on what customers told us they wanted to see rather than what the council wanted to tell them. The website is the fulcrum of online information and transactional services with 1.6million visits and 4.3 million page views in 2023-24. 8,871 online forms were submitted for a host of services and over £7million in online payments made by customers; over 70% of whom used mobile devices to view the website. The new website allows us to comply with the very latest international Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.2 standards, where we reached 98% compliance – top 40 out of all UK councils and 4th ranked in Scotland. Page 513
Page 384
53 The Council’s Registration Service pioneered the move to a remote, digitally enabled registration of deaths and Citizenship Ceremonies during Covid and saw a tremendously high (97%) take up of the ‘Tell Us Once’ digital death notification service. Building on that expertise the council was chosen by National Records of Scotland to be one of eight councils to pilot the paperless digital registration service titled “Calling in the Pages”. This project tested the systems and processes that allow customers to no longer appear in person to register births and deaths, but to provide electronic signatures and evidence. It no longer requires registrars to send signed paper copies of registers to Edinburgh each year. This is more convenient for customers, allows more flexible use of scarce registrar resources to meet peaks in demand across our challenging geography, and reduces paper and transport costs. The new way of working was rolled out nationally from February 2024 and Argyll and Bute was in the first cohort to go live. Our Registrars have registered 1,180 deaths, 593 births and 985 marriage and civil partnerships. They officiated at 507 civil weddings / partnerships raising £226k in income and held 55 Citizenship Ceremonies. Improving our customer service Being informed and involved about issues, services and opportunities affecting them plays an important part in customer satisfaction. Officers are supported with developing the survey content and promoting surveys on different topics. The Customer Engagement Team closely monitors all aspects of customer satisfaction, and the 2022/23 outcomes were very positive: • The Customer Service Centre had 967 survey respondents to its survey of telephone callers and averaged 96% customer satisfaction. • The Registration Service had 264 respondents to its service satisfaction survey with a 96.6% satisfaction rating. • There were 972 users of the Customer Service Points who completed a survey and 96.7% of them were satisfied. Page 514
Page 385
54 • The corporate website had an 98% overall satisfaction rating, the transactional forms element scored 92% and the new marriage website scored 96.4% satisfied visitors. All returns were analysed to determine if improvements could be made, but comments were overwhelmingly positive and where staff were named the feedback was passed on to them. We are dedicated to the highest levels of customer service and via the Customer Excellence Accreditation Award, Building Standards and Legal and Regulatory Services not only achieved reaccreditation but increased the number of Compliance Plus elements awarded. Other ways that we are improving our customer service experience is the digital “User forum” for Building Standards customers to highlight issues with the service, changes to the Technical Standards, how this impacts on the customer and an opportunity to discuss their issues. Our new corporate website scored 98% satisfactory achievement against WACG accessibility standards. We introduced new visitor experience surveys to help inform improvements to the website and 68% of the 15k+ respondents confirmed that their visit to the corporate website helped them; there were 1.6m visitors to the website in 2023/24. 13,267 of them submitted an online request using a council built webform and 83% of survey respondents (177), said they had a successful visit using these forms. The outcomes for 2023/24 were again very positive, with 100% of 264 respondents to our Registration Service survey rating the service good or excellent, 96.6% of 1637 telephone customers satisfied with their Contact Centre experience and Service Point customers marking 96.7% of 972 elements of their experience satisfactory or better. Supporting our Community Councils We listened to feedback from our Community Councils and arranged for a session with the Executive Leadership Team in June 2023 which allowed them the opportunity to speak to the Chief Executive and Executive Directors to raise concerns and issues directly. We have also taken forward a number of Community Council By-Elections, which ensures that our communities are appropriately represented. We continue to develop social media to help communities get the support they need, for council and communities to work together through engagement exercises, and to promote council and area challenges and opportunities. Our combined corporate social media channels grew by 10% Page 515
Page 386
55 last year and our use of social media successfully signposted 80,000 people to the information they could access quickly and easily on the council’s website. Local Government elections and supporting new elected councillors Following the resignation of a sitting Councillor, we delivered a By-Election ensuring that the new Elected Member was fully briefed and ready to undertake their duties. We have taken forward the Elected Member Development Framework which utilises the Political Skills Assessment tool from the Improvement Service. We also arranged a development session for Senior Councillors and one for Officers on “Working with Councillors,” which were delivered by the Local Government Information Unit. The Elected Member case management system has been reviewed. This has resulted in a new, self-service system being introduced called “Member Zone”. The new system is more user friendly and enables our Elected Members to operate the system to manage their constituent queries. We conducted a review of the equipment in the Council Chambers in Kilmory, which is used to facilitate our Council and Committee meetings. Following the review, we undertook a procurement exercise, and the equipment and microphones were largely replaced, which is much more robust and reliable. We also have a new maintenance contract in place which gives us stability for the next few years. Looking after our financial assets The Council’s Counter Fraud Team is in place to enhance the Council’s zero tolerance to fraud and protect the public purse. During 2023/24 the team rebilled £1.04m as a direct consequence of their work and have recovered £777 of that total to date. • We collected 96.43% of Council Tax exceeding the target of 96.00%. • A positive External Audit Annual Audit Report was received and reported to Council in March 2024. • Financial monitoring packs and Budget Outlook were submitted to each Policy & Resources Committee. • The average investment rate for 2023/24 was 4.832%, and the investments generated £2.178m of interest during the year. • We processed 97.7% of invoices due within 30 days, exceeding the target of 95.5%. • The external audit of the Council’s Non-Domestic Rates Income (NDRI) Notified Return of £34.886m was completed by the statutory deadline with an unqualified audit certificate being received. • The Payroll Team processed the 2023/24 SLGE Staff and the Teacher’s pay rises in the next available pay run following settlement, with the SLGE Staff pay rise being agreed and paid in two trenches in November 2023 and February 2024. Page 516
Page 387
56 Supporting attendance The Local Government Benchmarking Framework allows us to compare the number of days lost to absence with other Scottish local authorities. Our position in the overall rankings has improved from 17 to 10 for teaching employees and from 26 to 22 for local government employees and shows that we are not experiencing as sharp a rise in absence compared to other local authorities. We continue to work with other councils to share good practice in absence management. The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development’s annual Health and Wellbeing at Work report showed the highest sickness absence rates across the UK for over a decade, and average rate of employee absence now stands at 7.8 days per employee per year, a considerable increase since before the pandemic in October 2019 where it was 5.8 days. The report reminds us that it has been a challenging few years for many individuals and organisations and that has impacted on employee health and wellbeing. Experts advise that the pandemic would have a long tail in terms of mental wellbeing for some, and uncertainty and disruption has continued with further events, including economic turbulence, a cost-of-living crisis and war. The top three reasons for employee absence in 2023/24 at Argyll and Bute Council were: • Mental health • Infections • Other musculoskeletal (e.g. broken/fractured bones, ligament damage, strains, pain) Under the category of mental health, most days lost were due to stress. The highest absence reason under infections was Coronavirus and within other musculoskeletal it was fractures. Employee wellbeing One of the ways we are meeting the challenge of rising absence rates was the launch of our new Employee Assistance Programme. The programme provides independent, confidential support and information to all employees and eligible family members. The services available to our employees include: • A 24/7 confidential helpline for emotional and practical support, as well as financial and legal support • The service extends to eligible family members (partner and children up to 18, or 24 if in full-time education) Page 517
Page 388
57 • Consultation available for mental health support (for mild to moderate issues) from qualified mental healthcare professionals. • Support from a practitioner and an appointment within 4 days of referral • Access to 24/7, unlimited remote GP appointments for fast access to a doctor • Cancer Assist, a service provided by cancer support experts • Online physiotherapy, up to eight sessions a year per family group Other services include on-demand wellness content packed with podcasts, articles, webinars and more to help manage wellbeing. Reminders on the services available are communicated to employees, to ensure that they are aware of the assistance that is available to them and to their families. We continue to focus on wellbeing of employees through a number of activities and interventions. • developing focused and targeted corporate communications on wellbeing • continued support for managers with ongoing absence cases and team-based intervention tools • improving the mental wellbeing of our employees • first day assistance for those that report absence due to mental health reasons. • online physiotherapy including webinars for desk-based employees and body mapping workshops for manual staff. • a 12-week programme focusing on building sustainable healthy habits to support health. • wellbeing webinars on a range of topics. Argyll and Bute Council’s Wellbeing Toolkit gives employees and managers access to health-related information, sources of support and relevant policies and procedures to support continued good health. Going forward additional wellbeing focus will be on: • developing focused and targeted corporate communications on wellbeing • continued support for managers with ongoing absence cases and team-based intervention tools • improving mental wellbeing Strategic Risk Register The Strategic Risk Register (SRR) details significant risks faced by the Council and the agreed approaches to manage them in the context of risk mitigation. These can be cross-cutting across all areas of the Council, although some are very specific to a service function and tend to be long-term in nature. They each have specific interventions, subject to scrutiny at Strategic Committees, and are formally reviewed bi-annually, although the Page 518
Page 389
58 SRR can be reviewed at any time should matters need to be placed on the register by the Strategic Management Team. A formal report is prepared on an annual basis by the Chief Executive on risk management and is reported to the Audit and Scrutiny Committee. Currently the SRR has 13 risks in total, 4 are red, 8 are amber and the remaining 1 is green. The red risks relate to: Population, External Infrastructure and Economic Decline, Waste Management, Service Delivery - Cyber Security, Lack of Housing availability The amber risks relate to: Condition and suitability of Infrastructure & Asset Base, Financial Sustainability, Governance and Leadership, Engagement and Understanding the needs of the Community, Service Delivery, Health and Social Care Partnership, Cost of Living Crisis, Impact of Climate Change The green risks relate to: Civil Contingency & Business continuity Operational Risk Register Separate from the Strategic Risk Register we monitor Operational Risks. These largely relate to a direct impact on service deliver. Our Operational Risks are categorised into Red, Amber and Green. Key actions have been agreed to address all risks in the Operational Risk Register. All of our Red Operational Risks are summarised here with some mentioned in more detail in our Significant Challenges section of this report below. Executive Director Kirsty Flanagan has three red risks which relate to: 1) Environmental Health Resource availability and income shortfalls to the service from reduced license applications, requests for export certificates and other sources of income 2) Environmental Health, dealing with Public Health / infectious disease / food related incidents and emergencies, which have significant financial implications for the Council in terms of sampling / monitoring costs, employment of experts and storage and disposal costs, 3) availability of suitable temporary accommodation and housing support. Executive Director Douglas Hendry has two red risks which relate to: 1) short term let licensing 2) Non-compliance with state subsidy regulations with regards to the council and externally funded projects, dealt with by the Transformation Projects. Operational Risk Registers are monitored on a quarterly basis at Departmental Management Team meetings and are managed accordingly. This has resulted in a number of the risks improving their risk rating from red to amber’. Page 519
Page 390
59 Service delivery challenges As well as our Strategic and Operational Risk Registers, we face a number of challenges that can impact on service delivery. This is a summary of challenges we have encountered over the year and the actions we have identified and are putting in place to address them. 1. Recruitment and retention Difficulties in recruitment and retention of staff are an ongoing are of focus particularly within professional and technical disciplines, catering and cleaning and responding to spikes in demand in specialist areas. Actions • We are reviewing our Growing our Own activities associated with promotion of career paths into the council and developing our workforce and are developing a revised framework and action plan • Our People Strategy is in development and will deliver further initiatives under the themes of ‘attracting and keeping talented people’, ‘providing a positive employee experience’ and ‘supporting learning and growth’ • We are implementing targeted projects focused on resourcing and agility to better understand and address the issues in this area • We are utilising recruitment fayres and social media to highlight careers with the Council • The Argyll and Bute Aspiring to Headship programme has been updated for session 2024/25 to ensure access to a range of Professional Learning opportunities 2. Securing contractors The current competitive marketplace and our rural location means it can be difficult to secure contractors. In turn, this creates difficulties in delivering programmes of works. In some instances, significant projects have only received one tender. Actions • We are encouraging contractors to apply to be admitted into the Council’s Dynamic Purchasing Scheme to widen the pool of contractors that are willing and able to work in Argyll and Bute. • We are considering different delivery models with more emphasis on a mixed economy solution, using a blend of in-house resource, SMEs and national suppliers. 3. Partnership working We are committed to working with other public sector agencies and our communities to get the most from Argyll and Bute’s resources, though working to timescales and competing demands can be challenging. Page 520
Page 391
60 Action • We are mitigating this by considering communications and structured planning in our approach to our partnership activities. 4. Changes in legislation and compliance a) The introduction of the Elections Act (2022) has brought forward several changes to the way that UK Parliamentary Elections will be conducted and a change in boundary for the UK Parliament Constituency which will now cover areas of South Lochaber in the Highland Council area. Actions • Dedicated resource has been allocated to focus on taking forward the Elections Act requirements and we have already undertaken a lot of preparatory work. • We have been working closely with our colleagues in Highland Council to ensure a transition for boundary changes. b) Several changes are being introduced to the building standards system, through the work of the Building Standards Futures Board Programme. This follows recommendations made by the expert review panels on Compliance and Enforcement and Fire Safety, (due to the aftermath of failings in Edinburgh School buildings and the Grenfell Tower fire), to strengthen the Building Standards system in Scotland. The changes to strengthen the system will require additional verification compliance capacity and financial resources for local authority verifiers over the coming years. Action • A 3-year Action Plan is currently being developed to strengthen building standards regulation in Argyll and Bute. c) The Biodegradable Municipal Waste (BMW) ban is due to be introduced in January 2026. This will affect current waste collection and disposal methods. Other emerging challenges relate to Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), the Circular Economy bill, carbon reduction initiatives, and market availability, particularly for Energy from Waste (EfW) feedstock. Argyll and Bute is in a unique position in that we have a public-private partnership contract which runs until September 2026, nine months after the introduction of the BMW ban. The PPP contract covers the mainland area of Argyll and Bute excluding Helensburgh and Lomond, and this contract needing to be varied to enable compliance with the BMW ban. Actions Page 521
Page 392
61 • Ferry capacity to be planned and manged to service the requirements of the BMW ban and other emerging changes. • Solutions have been identified through the Waste Strategy, with ongoing discussions with Scottish Government et al around derogations and how the changes of various legislation and regulations will be affected by the rural geography of Argyll and Bute. There are ongoing discussions with Scottish Government regarding a £1.5M additional cost which will be incurred through a contract variation. 5. Asset management The network which provides access for our CCTV cameras is changing with the removal of analogue and being replaced by an IP (Internet Protocol) system. This will have a significant cost impact as it affects most of our cameras. Our current CCTV maintenance contract is also nearing the end of its’ term. Actions • We are working to identify options and funding sources for replacement of the cameras and infrastructure in our main towns and liaising with colleagues in Police Scotland • We have utilised procurement processes to identify market options for the provision of maintenance services for our CCTV systems. 6. Financial Implications Budget uncertainty and access to funding is an ongoing challenge in number of areas and impacts on how we are able to maintain a number of assets. Actions • We are maximising funding opportunities for asset sustainability works to support the long-term safe use of a complex and varied portfolio of assets and designing and assembling works packages with proportionate treatments based on affordability. • Funding opportunities are being explored with Transport Scotland and other partners for replacement vessels for the Council’s internal ferry services • To fully understand the scope and budget implications of the roll out of free school meals to primary 6 and 7 pupils we are engaging with national groups and Scottish Government. • To address the reduction in the number of requests for building warrants we are liaising with other local authorities and the Building Standards National Hub, to promote the availability of our service. • We are pursuing other opportunities around commercial work including looking at efficiencies and the use of additional fees to strengthen building standards regulation • We will undertake a review of the Supporting Communities Fund in 2024/25 to establish how it can best meet the demands for funding in communities. Page 522
Page 393
62 7. Community engagement We require a consistent and effective approach to support our engagement work with communities. Action • We will develop an engagement framework informed by best practice and national guidance and embed the framework across the organisation. 8. Managing pressures out with our control a) We must be satisfied that the health of those we issue a Taxi License to meets our expectations. Customers were experiencing significant delays in receiving a response from their doctor which delayed the issuing of licenses resulted in negative economic consequence. Action • We undertook a period of consultation with all 389 private hire/taxi drivers and operators in the area which resulted in securing the services of an external agency to undertake the required medical check. b) The appointment of new auditors is always challenging as new working relationships begin and an understanding of how each other operates is gained. Issues including delays in recruitment within newly appointed auditors Mazars caused significant delays in the process. Action • A lessons learned meeting was held with Mazars to highlight the issues identified during the process and how these will be addressed. c) Increase in the number of special diet requests, both medical and non-medically prescribed and an increase in International Dysphagia Diet Standardisation Initiative (IDDSI) and neurodivergent amended diet requests. Action • The special diet procedure was reviewed. A new system to assist in monitoring and providing special diets, with on-going monitoring of requests is underway • We are working with NHS Dietetic teams to implement procedures for special diet requests and requests for children with additional support needs Page 523
Page 394
63 9. Emergency resilience and planning a) We are experiencing difficulties in engaging external providers to assist with the delivery of a future-proofed Net Zero route map for the Council. Action • We will Issue a Request for Information (RFI) to assess what the wider market may be able to offer and receive input/feedback from relevant parties that will help to inform future Net Zero plans. b) Many areas within Argyll and Bute are off gas grid while the electrical grid has limitations in terms of capacity/constraints. These ongoing issues continue to impact the council and the wider community in terms of resilience and delivering renewables solutions. Action • We will continue to lobby electrical network operators and the regulator to highlight the impact of constraints on the capacity of the grid and emphasise the need for them to reinforce their infrastructure within Argyll and Bute. 10. Cost of living impacts • Inflation and cost of living increases continue to have a detrimental effect on procurement, service delivery and on project budgets due to them being fixed over a number of years. There is limited capacity to build contingency into projects to account for cost escalation. Action • We continuously review products used and where necessary test and roll out new products. We design projects around budgets available, look at external funding to address funding gaps and value engineering projects as necessary. 11. Digital investment to ensure we keep pace The scope of new robotic and AI technologies is fast developing and with it the demand to improve efficiency and quality of services, particularly those that are customer facing. Action • We have invested in a robotic process automation (RPA) platform. This provides us with the ability to build our own applications and to harness RPA to automate and integrate new applications across the Council. We have a pipeline of developments, and several solutions have already been implemented. These include a Food Health Certification system and an online yacht berth booking and payment system. Page 524
Page 395
64 12. Cyber security 2023/24 saw a continued and major increase in the levels of risk associated with cyber-attacks. Action • We have implemented a Security Operations Centre service for the corporate and education network to provide a 24-hour monitoring service • We have created a new IT Engineer post to work alongside the ICT Compliance and Security Officer • All network users are issued with Cyber Awareness training to increase understanding of the dangers we face from cyber security attacks. 13. Addressing the housing emergency Argyll and Bute Council was the first local authority in Scotland to declare a Housing Emergency in June 2023 due to a consistent reduction in supply of housing, a steady increase in demand for housing across all tenures and increasing levels of unaffordability. Actions • The scale of housing emergency in Argyll and Bute is greater than the capacity of any one agency to address, we committed to hold a Housing Summit to bring partners together to identify potential solutions with regards to housing shortages in our area. • A key outcome of the Housing Emergency Summit was the creation of a shortlist of priority actions and interventions to address housing shortages, to act as the catalyst for collective action. • Council officers (working with consultants engaged to facilitate the Housing Summit) developed a final list of action points under each housing emergency priority, which reflects the options appraisal and prioritisation carried out by the delegates attending the Housing Emergency Summit. • The Argyll and Bute Local Housing Strategy will be updated to outline the vision and investment priorities for tackling housing need between 2022 and 2027 • The Community Planning Partnership (CPP) acknowledged the relevance and need for the identified actions and agreed to set up a CPP Housing Sub-Group (led by Highlands and Islands Enterprise) to explore what and how the CPP might contribute. 14. Provision for our children with the most complex needs We have experienced Increased demand across Argyll and Bute for specialist provision for our children with the most complex needs. Action • We have adapted buildings, increased the staff compliment in relevant areas, put in place minor environmental adaptations and developed 4 new learning centres in Mull, Islay, Kintyre and Helensburgh. Page 525
Page 396
65 15. Pupil attendance Pupil attendance continues to be a challenge across the authority. Action • Reporting of progress against individual school level stretch aims will be put in place. There will be a focus on attendance from Principle Teacher Attendance and Engagement, the Educational Psychology Team and Education Managers through Quality Improvement Team visits. Consultations – we asked, you said, we did We want to ensure that proposed developments are what our citizens and communities want. To help us obtain your views we post our consultations on our website. The following link will take you to the ‘closed’ consultations which relate to this reporting period. Consultation Results | Argyll and Bute Council (argyll-bute.gov.uk) Page 526
Page 397
ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL COUNCIL LEGAL AND REGULATORY SUPPORT 27 FEBRUARY 2025 DRAFT PROGRAMME OF MEETINGS 2025-26 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 The Council’s Standing Orders for Meetings require the Council to approve a Programme of Meetings for the Council and its Committees every year. Attached for consideration is a draft Programme of Meetings for 2025-2026. 2.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 2.1 It is recommended that the Council agree the draft Programme of Meetings for the year 2025-26. 3.0 DETAIL 3.1 Standing Order 20.1 requires that the Council approve a Programme of Meetings each year. 3.2 The current approved Programme of Meetings for the Council and its Committees runs until June 2025. 3.3 The Council is required to approve a Programme of Meetings for the period July 2025 to June 2026. Due to external factors, it has been identified that meetings of Council would be better suited taking place on a Wednesday and the attached draft Programme reflects this. Strategic Committees will generally take place on a Thursday as has been usual practice. 3.4 3.5 Members should be aware that due to a clash with meetings of the IJB in the months of September and November, meetings of PPSL will take place on a Tuesday in those months. It should be noted that Standing Order 20.2 makes provision for the Chair of a Committee (or in whose absence the Vice- Chair) for good cause to cancel or alter the date, time or place for a meeting but not after the summons for the meeting has been issued. 4.0 CONCLUSION 4.1 The Council’s Standing Orders for Meetings require the Council to approve a Programme of Meetings for the Council and its Committees. The approved Programme runs until June 2025 and the Council is invited to consider approval of a Programme of Meetings for the period July 2025 to June 2026. Page 527 Agenda Item 10
Page 398
5.0 IMPLICATIONS 5.1 Policy - None 5.2 Financial – Members travel and subsistence costs 5.3 Legal – Requirement of Standing Order 20.1 5.4 HR - None 5.5 Fairer Scotland Duty: None 5.5.1 Equalities – None 5.5.2 Socio-economic Duty - None 5.5.3 Islands - None 5.6 Climate Change - None 5.7 Risk - None 5.8 Customer Service – None 5.9 The Rights of the Child (UNCRC) - None Douglas Hendry Executive Director with responsibility for Legal and Regulatory Support 13 February 2025 For further information contact: Shona Barton, Governance Manager (01436) 657605 APPENDICES Appendix 1 – Draft Programme of Meetings 2025-26 Page 528
Page 399
Programme of Committee Meetings – up to June 2026 Appendix 1 2025 2026 Committee Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Council Thu 27 Thu 24 Thu 26 Wed 24 Wed 26 Wed 25 Wed 29 Wed 24 Policy & Resources Thu 20 Thu 8 Thu 21 Thu 9 Thu 4 Thu 19 Thu 21 Community Services Thu 6 Thu 5 Thu 28 Thu 11 Thu 5 Thu 4 Env, Dev, Inf *Harbour Brd *Thu 20 Thu 19 *Thu 11 Thu 18 *Thu 19 Thu 18 PPSL Wed 22 Wed 19 Wed 19 Wed 23 Wed 21 Wed 18 Wed 20 Tue 16 Wed 22 Tue 18 Wed 17 Wed 21 Wed 18 Wed 18 Wed 22 Wed 20 Wed 17 Audit & Scrutiny Thu 13 Thu 12 Thu 4 Tue 16 Thu 12 Thu 11 B&C Area Tue 4 Tue 3 Tue 2 Tue 2 Tue 3 Tue 2 B&C CPG Tue 4 Tues 6 Tue 12 Tue 4 Tue 3 Tue 5 MAKI Area Wed 5 Wed 4 Wed 3 Wed 3 Wed 4 Wed 3 MAKI CPG Wed 5 Wed 7 Wed 27 Wed 5 Wed 4 Wed 6 H&L Area Tue 11 Tue 10 Tue 9 Tue 9 Tue 10 Tue 9 H&L CPG Tue 11 Tue 13 Tue 19 Tue 11 Tue 10 Tue 12 OLI Area Wed 12 Wed 11 Wed 10 Wed 10 Wed 11 Wed 10 OLI CPG Wed 12 Wed 14 Wed 13 Wed 12 Wed 11 Wed 13 IJB Wed 29 Wed 26 Wed 28 Wed 17 Wed 19 Wed 28 Wed 25 CPP/Mgt Comm Licensing Board Tue 25 Tue 22 Tue 24 Seminars Page 529
Page 400
This page is intentionally left blank
Page 401
ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL COUNCIL LEGAL AND REGULATORY SUPPORT 27 February 2025 COUNCIL CONSTITUTION UPDATE 2025 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 This report advises on changes to the Council Constitution in respect to Roads and Infrastructure Services. 2. RECOMMENDATIONS 2.1 The Council is invited to agree to the adjustments to the Constitution as set out in paragraphs 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 hereof. 3. DETAIL 3.1 The proposed changes to the Constitution are to clarify delegated authority for orders made in terms of regulations made under s.12 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, decisions made under the Disabled Persons’ Parking Places (Scotland) Act 2009 and to allow officers to carry out enforcement activities and propose exemption orders under the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019, Part 6. 3.2 The Environment, Development and Infrastructure Committee, at its meeting held on Thursday 20th June 2024, agreed to the introduction of enforcement of the prohibitions set out in the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019 (Part 6), in relation to pavement parking, parking at dropped kerbs and double parking and to commence this once the associated back-office system was upgraded. The timescale was amended to introduce the enforcement from 3rd March 2025 at the Committee meeting held on 19th December 2024. Page 531 Agenda Item 11
Page 402
To enable officers to enact the Council decision and enforce the legislation, it is proposed that the following is added to the Delegations for the Executive Director with Responsibility for Roads and Infrastructure: In Part C – Scheme of Administration and Delegation, at an appropriate point, add the words; “To carry out any function conferred on the Council by or under the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019 (Part 6, Parking Prohibitions) save for the making, amendment and revocation of exemption orders under s.51 and s.52 of the said Act which shall be a function reserved to the Environment, Development and Infrastructure Committee”. 3.3 It is proposed that the following is added to the Delegations for the Executive Director with Responsibility for Roads and Infrastructure: In Part C – Scheme of Administration and Delegation, at an appropriate point, add the words; “To make decisions in relation to Disabled Persons’ Parking Spaces under the Disabled Persons’ Parking Spaces (Scotland) Act 2009”. This will clarify the process for officers in relation to the designation of disabled parking spaces. 3.4 It is proposed that the following is added to the Delegations for the Executive Director with Responsibility for Roads and Infrastructure: • In Part C – Scheme of Administration and Delegation, at paragraph 37 on page 109, after “1984;” where it appears in the second line thereof, add the words; “Regulations made under s.12 of the Road Traffic Act 1988;” This will clarify and facilitate the granting of orders in terms of the Acts and Regulations for the temporary closure of a road by notice where there is no period for objection and the matter is intimated by notice with no notification period required. This is similar in nature to other delegated powers already extant. 4. CONCLUSION 4.1 The proposed changes to the Constitution will clarify the delegated authority in terms of the functions set out. 5. IMPLICATIONS Page 532
Page 403
5.1 Policy – none 5.2 Financial – none 5.3 Legal – the proposed changes ensure that the Council’s Constitution reflects recent decisions. 5.4 HR – None 5.5 Fairer Scotland Duty - None 5.5.1 Equalities - protected characteristics – None 5.5.2 Socio-Economic Duty - None 5.5.3 Islands - None 5.6 Climate Change - None 5.7 Risk – None 5.8 Customer Service – None 5.9 The Rights of the Child (UNCRC) - None Douglas Hendry Executive Director with responsibility for Legal and Regulatory Support 30th January 2025 For further information please contact Hugh O’Neill, Network and Standards Manager on 01546 604084 David Logan, Head of Legal and Regulatory Support on 01546 604322 Page 533
Page 404
This page is intentionally left blank
Page 405
ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT AND ECONOMIC GROWTH 27 FEBRUARY 2025 HOUSING EMERGENCY – HOUSING NEED AND DEMAND AND SUPPORTING COMMUNITY HOUSING FEASIBILITY WORK 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 The main purpose of this report is to propose three important requests from the Strategic Housing Fund, which will all contribute to tackling the Housing Emergency. 1.2 The Council as the Strategic Housing Authority is required to produce a Housing Need and Demand Assessment (HNDA) every 5 years. It is vitally important to support the development of the Local Housing Strategy, Strategic Housing Investment Plan and the Local Development Plan. It must be agreed by Scottish Government. Officers are currently beginning this process and funding is requested from the Strategic Housing Fund (SHF) to help deliver this. 1.3 In addition to Registered Social Landlord (RSL) Community Trusts play a key role in the delivery of affordable houses. The Council’s Housing Emergency Action Plan has an action to ‘create funding mechanisms for Community Housing Trusts to finance feasibility studies, professional fees and approval processes. Discretionary funding of up to £10,000 per unit, is requested from the SHF to enable Community Trusts to carry out feasibility work in order to bring affordable housing developments to delivery stage. 1.4 Funding up to £150,000 from the SHF is requested to support feasibility studies which will help to unlock delivery of housing allocation (H4009), known as the Old Hospital Site, Ganavan. This site is a key housing site given the shortage of immediately deliverable housing land in the Oban Area potentially delivering 40-60 units. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that Council :- i) Approve £60,000 from the Strategic Housing Fund to enable the delivery of the Housing Need and Demand Assessment – a statutory obligation of the local authority. ii) Delegate to the Executive Director with Responsibility for Development and Economic Growth in consultation with the relevant Policy Lead for Page 535 Agenda Item 12
Page 406
Housing the power to approve discretionary feasibility funding up to a maximum of £10,000 per unit from the Strategic Housing Fund to enable Community Trusts to bring potential affordable housing developments to delivery stage. iii) Approve feasibility and design funding from the Strategic Housing Fund to a maximum of £150,000 for West Highland Housing Association to enable delivery of road and footpath proposals unlocking LDP2 housing site H4009 at Ganavan. Page 536
Page 407
ARGYLL AND BUTE COUNCIL COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT AND ECONOMIC GROWTH 27 FEBRUARY 2025 HOUSING EMERGENCY – HOUSING NEED AND DEMAND AND SUPPORTING COMMUNITY HOUSING FEASIBILITY WORK 2.0 INTRODUCTION 2.1 The Strategic Housing Fund (SHF) is the budget which will be used to fund both proposals contained in this paper. The SHF is a housing budget ring fenced for activities relating to affordable housing delivery in Argyll and Bute. The SHF is made up of the income received when the Council reduced discounts on long term empty and second homes from 50% to 10% in 2004. 2.2 The paper sets out the details of three requests for funding from the Strategic Housing Fund, all of which are considered important contributions to tackling the Housing Emergency. 3.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 3.1 It is recommended that Council :- i) Approve £60,000 from the Strategic Housing Fund to enable the delivery of the Housing Need and Demand Assessment – a statutory obligation of the local authority. ii) Delegate to the Executive Director with Responsibility for Development and Economic Growth in consultation with the relevant Policy Lead for Housing the power to approve discretionary feasibility funding up to a maximum of £10,000 per unit from the Strategic Housing Fund to enable Community Trusts to bring potential affordable housing developments to delivery stage. iii) Approve feasibility and design funding from the Strategic Housing Fund to a maximum of £150,000 for West Highland Housing Association to enable delivery of road and footpath proposals unlocking LDP2 housing site H4009 at Ganavan. Page 537
Page 408
4.0 DETAIL COUNCIL HOUSING NEED AND DEMAND PROCESS 4.1 Section 89 of the Housing (Scotland) Act 2001 requires the local authority to produce a Local Housing Strategy which details the needs of households for accommodation and the demand for and availability of accommodation. 4.2 The Housing Need and Demand Assessment (HNDA) process provides the evidence base upon which housing supply targets are defined in local housing strategies and suitable available land is allocated through development plans to meet these targets. A regular, five-yearly review of the assessment linked to the review of the local housing strategy is required. 4.3 From a housing and planning policy perspective, local authorities should ensure that assessments are robust and credible. 4.4 The most recent Scottish Government guidance describes housing need and demand assessments as:- • enabling local authorities to develop long-term strategic views of housing need and demand to inform local housing strategies and development plans. • providing robust evidence to inform policies aimed at providing the right mix of housing across the whole housing market - both market and affordable housing. • providing evidence to inform policies about the level of affordable housing required, including the need for different types and sizes of affordable housing. • supporting local authorities to develop a strategic approach to housing through consideration of housing need and demand in all housing sectors – owner occupied, private rented and affordable. • drawing together the bulk of the evidence required for local authorities to appraise strategic housing options including housing supply targets, social housing allocation priorities and the role of intermediate housing products. 4.5 Statistically robust and validated national datasets will be used to build the housing need and demand assessment wherever practical, however, given the dispersed geographical nature of this local authority, it is necessary to enhance the evidence base with local data. A detailed Housing Need and Demand Household Survey for the nine Housing Market Areas (HMAs) within Argyll and Bute is required as the foundation of the HNDA process. The survey requires to be completed by around 3000 households across the local authority area for the process to be accepted as robust and credible by Scottish Government. 4.6 The Council’s Housing Service will produce the many technical papers which comprise the HNDA along with the final HNDA document. However, a Page 538
Page 409
specialist research company is required to co-ordinate, carry out and assess the findings of the household survey element of the HNDA. As a result this paper requests approval to utilise £60,000 of the Strategic Housing Fund to enable the household survey to be carried out within the HNDA process which is a statutory housing function of the local authority. COMMUNITY HOUSING FEASIBILITY FUNDING PROCESS 4.7 The Argyll and Bute Housing Emergency Action Plan contains an action to ‘create funding mechanisms for Community Housing Trusts to finance feasibility studies, professional fees and approval process’. 4.8 This action recognises that an innovative and flexible approach is required to assist Community Trusts to be able to undertake all the activities required to take a housing proposal to delivery stage. The required activities include:- • Land valuation • Architectural Services • Housing Need Assessment/Community Consultation • Topographical Survey • Ground Investigation • Flood Risk Assessment • Ecology Report • Quantity Surveyor • Pre Planning Application 4.9 It is of vital importance that Community Trusts seeking to deliver affordable housing must have evidence that their community is supportive of their activities and that the Community Trust is registered with the Office of Scottish Charity Regulator or Companies House. The Council recognises the importance of community housing delivery in the local authority area to meet assessed housing need. The Strategic Housing Fund already contributes £12,000 per affordable housing unit delivered by Community Trusts through projects supported by the Scottish Land Fund (SLF) and Rural and Island Housing Fund (RIHF) process. The feasibility funding proposed in this paper is over and above that amount. 4.10 Scottish Land Fund (SLF) feasibility funding is available if the Community Trust is looking to purchase land to deliver housing. Rural and Islands Housing Fund (RIHF) feasibility funding is also available. It is recognised that the total funding of £30,000 across the 2 feasibility funds may not be enough for Community Trusts to take a housing proposal to delivery stage 4.11 It is proposed that before a Community Trust applies to the Council SHF for feasibility funding they must:- • provide evidence that they made successful applications to all relevant feasibility funds available e.g the RIHF and the SLF. Page 539
Page 410
• demonstrate that they have applied to other potential funding sources such as Highland and Islands Enterprise (HIE) and any community funds available to the Trust. • demonstrate that they have committed a reasonable amount of their own funds as a contribution to the project. 4.12 It is proposed that the Executive Director with Responsibility for Development and Economic Growth, in consultation with the relevant Policy Lead for Housing, will have delegated power to approve discretionary feasibility funding up to a maximum of £10,000 per unit and capped at £100,000 per development site, from the Strategic Housing Fund to enable Community Trusts to bring potential affordable housing developments to delivery stage. GANAVAN ROAD FOOTPATH IMPROVEMENT FEASIBILITY STUDIES 4.13 West Highland Housing Association owns land which is a housing allocation (H4009), known as the Old Hospital Site, Ganavan. This site is a key housing site given the shortage of immediately deliverable housing land in the Oban Area. The site can deliver between 40-60 units which will be vital housing supply during the housing emergency – see Appendix 1. 4.14 Although the site has been owned by the Association for several years, development has been delayed due to the need for pedestrian footpath improvements along the Oban to Ganavan Road before any housing construction can begin. This is particularly challenging around "pinch points," where there is no footpath due to the proximity of the shoreline on one side and a rock face on the other and the land is in third party ownership. 4.15 Scottish Government More Homes Division have identified the necessary footpath improvements as ones which can be potentially funded by the Housing Infrastructure Fund and this is identified in the Council’s Strategic Housing Investment Fund. 4.16 WHHA has now negotiated servitude rights with the landowner to facilitate the delivery of the required pedestrian footpath improvements. 4.17 The next stage is for WHHA in consultation with the Council Roads Officers, to carry out engineering feasibility, further traffic assessment, survey and ground investigation, agreement of a pedestrian access solution in consultation with the Council’s Roads Officers, and then detailed design of an adoptable solution suitable for tender drawings, specification and contractor pricing. 4.18 Currently there is no funding in place to take this work forward, and given its importance in delivering housing supply, it is proposed that the Strategic Housing Fund be utilised to take forward the feasibility works up to a maximum of £150,000. Page 540
Page 411
5.0 CONCLUSION 5.1 This paper provides detail on 3 key work strands which are essential to tacking the Housing Emergency in Argyll and Bute. 5.2 The Housing Need and Demand process underpins the Council’s approach to tackling the Housing Emergency by producing a robust and credible evidence base which will ensure that Scottish Government capital investment is secured for the Argyll and Bute area through the Affordable Housing Supply Programme (AHSP). 5.3 The proposal to enable Community Trusts to apply for feasibility funding through the Strategic Housing Fund will address an action within the Housing Emergency Action Plan and provide the opportunity for more affordable homes to be delivered in Argyll and Bute. 5.4 Funding feasibility studies will help to unlock delivery of housing allocation (H4009), known as the Old Hospital Site, Ganavan. This site is a key housing site given the shortage of immediately deliverable housing land in the Oban Area potentially delivering 40-60 units. 6.0 IMPLICATIONS 6.1 Policy – if the proposals are approved it will result in Community Trusts being able to apply for discretionary housing feasibility funding to the Strategic Housing Fund. (This is over and above the standard £12k per delivered unit already provided by the Strategic Housing Fund). It will also enable the Council to fulfil a statutory housing obligation in terms of producing a housing need and demand assessment. 6.2 Financial – if the proposals are approved they will be funded through the Strategic Housing Fund. 6.3 Legal – the Council will be in breach of statutory obligations if a housing need and demand assessment is not produced. 6.4 HR – none. 6.5 Fairer Scotland Duty:- 6.5.1 Equalities - protected characteristics - The proposals are consistent with aims and objectives set out in the local housing strategy, which is subject to an EqSEIA. 6.5.2 Socio-economic Duty - the delivery of housing across Argyll and Bute facilitates socio-economic opportunities for all. 6.5.3 Islands - many of the housing projects delivered by Community Trusts are on islands which will provide many benefits such as employment and the continued delivery of essential services to island communities. Page 541
Page 412
6.6 Climate Change - new housing in the right location helps reduce carbon outputs when delivered using renewable energy and other measures. Making best use of existing stock by delivering energy efficiency measures helps towards achieving climate change targets. 6.7 Risk - there is a risk of depopulation, damage to the economy a risk to delivering essential services in the local authority area if partners cannot effectively tackle the Housing Emergency. 6.8 Customer Service – none. 6.9 The Rights of the Child (UNCRC) - the delivery of more housing will enable more children to have a safe secure environment. The housing need and demand assessment process will also have clear links to the Child Poverty Strategy. Kirsty Flanagan: Executive Director with responsibility for Development and Economic Growth Councillor Jim Lynch, Policy Lead for Housing 21st January 2025 For further information contact: Fergus Murray, Head of Development and Economic Growth fergus.murray@argyll-bute.gov.uk Matt Mulderrig, Development Policy and Housing Manager matt.mulderrig@argyll-bute.gov.uk Douglas Whyte, Team Lead – Housing Strategy Douglas.whyte@argyll-bute.gov.uk APPENDICES Appendix 1 – Map of WHHA Housing Allocation Site Page 542
Page 413
APPENDIX 1 – MAP OF WHHA HOUSING ALLOCATION SITE Anticipated pedestrian upgrade route (subject to change during detailed design and site investigations etc) Page 543
Page 414
This page is intentionally left blank