Appendix 1 501053 Rothesay Options Feasibility_Stage12_FINAL KC 2025-02-18
Argyll and Bute Council · 4 March 2025
Back to Bute and Cowal Area Committee — 4 March 2025 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
Rothesay Pavilion to Albert Pier Active Travel Project Stage 1 & 2, Options Feasibility Report DATE: February 2025 REF: 501053 VERSION: FINAL v2
Page 2
MARK RINKUS Managing Director Mark.rinkus@connectedtp.com Contents 1 OUTLINE BUSINESS CASE ..................................................................................................................................................................... 1 2 OPTIONS DEVELOPMENT AND APPRAISAL ......................................................................................................................................... 25 3 DEVELOPING THE CONCEPT ............................................................................................................................................................... 41 4 DESIGN PROCESS QUALITY AND INNOVATION ................................................................................................................................. 57 5 PROJECT DELIVERABILITY AND DESIGN COLLABORATION .............................................................................................................. 64 APPENDIX A – EXTENT OF APPROXIMATE COUNCIL OWNERSHIP ............................................................................................................. 66 APPENDIX B – SOCIAL AND EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT (SEQIA) ..................................................................................................... 67
Page 3
1 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 1 OUTLINE BUSINESS CASE 1.1 Introduction and Study Overview The Rothesay community consists of around 4,2071 people with the town providing the service centre for the Isle of Bute. The island is located on the coast of the Firth of Clyde. The A844, Victoria Street passes through the centre of Rothesay and serves as the Main Street providing access to essential amenities and education facilities and will connect to neighbouring settlements via the B878 and B881 roads that connect Rothesay to the wider Isle of Bute. The proposed study route spans between the Rothesay Pavilion and the Albert Pier along the A844 Victoria Street. A distance of c.965m. The route can be considered in two sections split at the ferry terminal and high street junction. Each section reflects different challenges relating to land use and corridor space. This Outline Business Case (OBC) seeks to provide a ‘snapshot’ of the options to improve walking and cycling within the study extent, setting out a baseline from which future monitoring and evaluation can be referenced. This report should be considered in conjunction with the Stage 1 Community Feedback and Monitoring and Evaluation Report; reported separately. 1 https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/files//geography/2022- census/Census2022_SpatialDatasetsFileSpecification.pdf 1.2 Recent Study History Options to improve the town facilities have been considered for a number of years. These include: • In 2010, The Highlands and Islands Regional Transportation Partnership (HITRANS) commissioned an audit of existing active travel infrastructure in Rothesay, with the aim of recommending priority areas for future investment. The actions focused on four key priorities for encouraging active travel: Priority 1: Clear and simple sign for Rothesay (both signposting and mapping) Priority 2: Introduction of contra-flow cycling on Rothesay's one-way streets Priority 3: Montague Street - Bridge Street town centre shared space system Priority 4: School campus to town centre (High Street). • In 2015-16 Remaking Rothesay Charette was produced in response to the growing concern about population decline on the island. A series of community and stakeholder engagement events were held in 2015, gathering ideas and opinions from businesses, community groups, school pupils, and members of the public. The key outs of the charette are: - Redesign of circulation and way finding between harbour and town; https://surf.scot/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Remaking-Rothesay-Charrette- Report-1.pdf
Page 4
2 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com - Detailed reconfiguration of movement and parking across the wider town; - Accessibility awareness and improvements; - Connected transport and active travel. - The Charette also identified plans for improving the town including a ‘Low Speed Environment’ and also imposing an idea of different ‘Series of civic spaces and connecting routes’. • In 2013 Fyne Futures, the Sustainability subsidiary of Fyne Homes, and partners in the Toward Zero Carbon Bute group, sought to undertake a review, identification and implementation of actions to enable active travel on Bute. In Rothesay, the work focused on progressing key actions identified in the Rothesay Active Travel Audit, and included: -1. The development of a cycle signposting strategy for the island, including routes to Rothesay, although no strategy was proposed. -2. The design of a walking and cycling map of the island, including Rothesay, showing key active travel routes, destinations and transport modes. -3. The review and phasing of developing the esplanade/promenade as an active travel route between Port Bannatyne and Ascog Bay. The implementation of the route was split into three phases, with Rothesay town centre (from the Pavilion to East Prince Street) included in phase 2. • In 2016 Argyll and Bute Council commissioned a review of pedestrian and cycling movements in the harbour and promenade with the aim of identifying improvements to the poor connectivity in the area. The present feasibility study builds on that review and addresses the issues, suggestions and comments raised during the public consultations as part of Remaking Rothesay Charette. • During 2018 the town was examined as part of The Rothesay Town Initiative investigating how the town is being used and accessed. The resulting spatial strategy identified several improvement options. • Argyll and Bute Council (ABC) have been progressing an active travel route within the community since 2017. This study focuses on the route between the Joint Campus to the north of the town towards the ferry terminal junction via High Street. Through a process supporting community engagement, the project has concluded detailed design (Sustrans PfE stage 3) with funding now being sought to supported by the routes technical design prior to future construction. • Caledonian MacBrayne (CalMac) as the ferry operator commissioned a safety assessment during 2019. The study examined the layout, access and operation of the port and made recommendations for safety related improvements. 1.3 Project Alignment with National and Local Strategy / Policy
Page 5
3 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com As an active travel enabler2, this project seeks to support the connection of 20- minute neighbourhoods3, linking people and places whilst enabling the movement of people of all ages and abilities. The project will seek to reduce car dependency, reducing the need for car based short-journey trips whilst enabling the benefits of the healthier options of walking and cycling in undertaking everyday journeys by sustainable travel modes. The project seeks to directly contribute to safety and resilience objectives through the creation of a safe walking and cycling space. The project is therefore directly and indirectly aligned with national, regional and local policy and aligned with the strategic objectives of Argyll and Bute Council (ABC). The following strategies and policies are considered relevant to this study: • The Scottish Government’s National Performance Framework • Scottish Government Infrastructure Investment Plan • Active Scotland Outcomes • Physical Activity Implementation Plan – A More Active Scotland • Scottish Government Creating Places • Preventing Obesity in Scotland • The National Walking Strategy • The Cycling Action Plan for Scotland (CAPS) 2 A project which enables travel behaviour change. • The Climate Change Plan • The Road Safety Framework; and • The National Transport Strategy (NTS) A figure summarising the Scottish government's journey towards reducing car dependency for single occupancy trips is presented below. 3 https://www.sustrans.org.uk/our-blog/get-active/2020/in-your-community/what-is-a-20-minute- neighbourhood The National Picture
Page 6
4 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 1.4 Population and Demographic Assessment Rothesay currently has a population of 4,3204 residents based on the 2022 census. The population shows an overall small decline since 2001, summarised in the following table. Year Population 2001 5,140 2011 4,637 2022 4,320 The population is evenly split between males and females and weighted towards ages 60 – 69 years old and upwards. 4 2022 Census Supporting Information | National Records of Scotland (15 August 2021). "Appendix 2: Population and households on Scotland's Inhabited Islands" (PDF). Statistical Bulletin: 2022 Census: First Results on Population and 1.5 SIMD Assessment To understand Rothesay's social challenges, the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) area statistics for 2022 were examined. The results indicate that Rothesay is ranked low overall at 558 out of 6,976 places, all social indexes receiving a low score of between 1-3 out of 10. Thirteen out of the ABC area’s 125 data zones were identified as being amongst the 20% most overall deprived data zones in Scotland. These thirteen data zones are located in the towns of Rothesay, Dunoon, Campbeltown, Helensburgh and Oban. All of these data zones are located in the area’s towns, however, deprivation can, and does, occur elsewhere. Because the SIMD identifies concentrations of deprivation, smaller pockets and instances of individual deprivation are not picked up by the index. The town has a low level of car ownership with 41% not having access to a car or van when compared with wider Scotland (31%). The low ownership presents opportunities through the study scope to positively influence travel mode choice through improvements to infrastructure to support everyday travel by walk and cycle modes. Limited access to a private car will limit accessibility to services and opportunity by restricting the ability to move around with evidence showing that Household Estimates for Scotland Release 1C (Part Two) (PDF) (Report). SG/2013/126. Retrieved 14 August 2021.
Page 7
5 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com residents in smaller communities are typically disadvantaged by being more reliant on car ownership and exposed to greater costs of accessing goods and services. Most people living within Rothesay commute to work within the town with the largest movement outside the town being north east to adjacent settlement of Craigmore. Residents also commute off-island with reliance on the ferry service. Travel within the ward is likely but cannot be disaggregated from the reported census data. The islands primary employment industries are agricultural and tourism with the ferry services providing a critical lifeline to the movement of goods and services. The town suffers from comparably high levels of unemployment. 1.6 Rural Deprivation In recent years there has been a greater understanding of the impacts of transport poverty; where people lack access to services or work and the contributions that a lack of affordable transport options creates. Rothesay SIMD low ranking Census 2011 Rothesay travel to work Destination
Page 8
6 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com It is important to consider the aspect of island and rural inequalities, which creates challenges to living that are different from communities within larger urban areas5. In reviewing employment in rural areas, the SRUC report highlights a significantly larger percentage of those in part-time or smaller contract jobs, often with lower hourly rates or salaries than counterparts in urban population centres. Many rural areas have become increasingly reliant on the tourism industry, as a result, many jobs are seasonal and in demand, reducing the overall hours or contracts available over the year. Fuel Poverty Living outside larger urban areas is likely to increase the costs of goods overall – primarily due to the cost of the supply chain network required. This can be seen in the fuel cost with a predominant market of independent providers, unable to offer the prices of larger national outlets. This issue raises a secondary cost to residents, with island / rural communities relying more on private transport, and often having to travel further for services. Ultimately, for residents of communities such as those in Bute and Islay, more fuel is required to travel for day-to-day work and leisure. A report on the Minimum Income Standard for Remote Rural Scotland and research on the subject highlights that the cost of food and consumable goods are between 10-50% higher in rural areas, whilst clothing and household goods are between 30-50% higher. These estimates do not consider the impact of living 5 The Scottish Rural Policy Centre (SRUC) published a report entitled ‘Rural Scotland in Focus’ in the most remote locations where the costs associated with the movement of goods and services can be even more disproportionate. The cycling organisation Sustrans through their research has identified three key areas which can assist in addressing transport poverty. These are: • People-centred transport planning; • Provision of quality accessible, frequent and affordable public transport service; and • Development of a transport network that supports the movement of people to places irrespective of user’s social status. Whilst these options may not address the inequalities of island / local transport challenges; improving accessibility and access to goods and services, through sustainable travel modes, will provide the community with improved travel choices better aligned with the National Transport Policy. In time, these measures have the potential to reduce car dependency for short journey trips whilst contributing to people’s health and well-being through increasing daily physical activity. The reprioritisation of our streets to a more equitable distribution of limited space, combined with the reallocation of road space to support sustainable travel, landscaping, ecological and placemaking will improve the social and environmental experience of the area. Transport and access within
Page 9
7 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com the community are a core consideration in helping to mitigate some of the challenges of rural social deprivation. 1.7 Understanding Place Rothesay as a Town Rothesay is the principal town located on the east side of the Isle of Bute. The town can be reached by ferry from Wemyss Bay, which offers an onward rail link to Glasgow. Rothesay is a Victorian seaside resort and the main town, with a traditional appearance and Victorian heritage including a Victorian frontage around Rothesay Bay. Dominating the shoreline amongst the esplanade front green is the refurbished Isle of Bute Discovery Centre, a unique 1920s circular structure of cast iron and glass, The centre incorporates a cinema, theatre and many interactive displays providing tourist information. The community includes Rothesay Castle and its dungeons. Just behind it is located Bute Museum. To the north of Rothesay, through the small community of Port Bannatyne, lies Ettrick Bay, Bute’s most accessible beach, which is attractive destination for able swimmers. Rothesay supports access to several everyday community services: • Coop supermarket • Rothesay Academy (Joint Campus) • Rothesay High Street, supplying most everyday service essentials; • St Andrews and Rothesay Primary Schools (Joint Campus); • Rothesay Leisure centre; • Esplanade Gardens including putting greens and palm trees; • Rothesay Castle, Victorian Toilets and cabbie’s shelter; • Bute Museum; • Discovery Centre (tourist information) and Cinema; and • Churches, supporting all aspects of community activity. Due to the town’s few surviving examples of Victorian design and styling the town is a conservation area. Rothesay Esplanade Rothesay is famous for its pier and promenade which have been built on reclaimed land. The original shoreline being located about 200m further inland, just in front of Rothesay Castle. The esplanade spans from the ferry terminal east along the coast. The esplanade is formed as a solid surfaced shared use footway which is as wide as c.14m. The route is formed in two parts consisting of a wider boulevard located between the front green and the sea and spanning from the ferry terminal (Victorian toilets) to around St Johns Place. From here the esplanade is formed adjacent to the A844
Page 10
8 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Victoria Street and continues north along the coast essentially becoming a footway. The esplanade at this location is considerably narrower at just over 2m in width. The esplanade provides a number of functions incorporating an inner and outer coastal defence wall providing protection to the front green from the Scottish weather and tidal surges. From the esplanade, access can be gained to Rothesay’s beaches via stairs. The esplanade is designed in keeping with the Victorian style incorporating ornate ironwork fences and is a car free route. Albert Pier Albert Pier forms the western boundary of the study area located to the west of the ferry terminal. This section of the study area is shorter than the esplanade at only 230m in length. The route is however complex incorporating a narrow route corridor between the harbour and buildings located on the inland side of Victoria Street. With the extent of Albert Pier there are a number of land uses including: • A 20-vehicle taxi rank formed as a taxi layby on the coastal side of Victoria Street; • A bus stance supporting access to island bus services. The stance is located on both sides of Victoria Street at the harbour; • Access to Bishop Street via a mini roundabout; • Access to Albert Pier car park providing c.20 vehicle spaces; • Access to a range of frontage business and residential flats. Limited land space at Albert Pier combined with seasonal high on-street parking demand will likely be key route design considerations. Rothesay Ferry Terminal The ferry terminal is owned by Argyll and Bute Council and operated by Caledonian MacBrayne. A commercial ferry port, the port is a lifeline to the island supporting access for goods and services. The terminal is a 30-minute journey from the mainland at Wemyss Bay. The terminal consists of a terminal building with waiting room, toilets and ticket terminal. Access to the terminal from the town is via a pedestrian walkway adjacent to a covered harbour stance that historically provided shelter to horse drawn cabs and buses. A relatively new swing bridge provides access across the inner harbour mouth to the terminal building. Vehicular access to the terminal is via the Victoria Street / High Street junction (the principal junction in Rothesay), the terminal is formed as a fourth arm to the junction configured to provide a 3m wide vehicular drop-off lane supporting access direct to the terminal building. Adjacent to this is 6 stacking lanes (1 HGV and 5 car) for traffic waiting to board the ferry and a single 2.5m traffic lane used by all traffic existing the ferry. Traffic movements are supervised by marshals who provide drivers with the necessary instructions. The Victoria Street / High Street / Ferry junction is an unusual layout incorporating non-standard road geometry with some very wide sections of
Page 11
9 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com carriageway. The junction is partially signalised, providing priority to egressing traffic from the ferry utilising loop detectors in the carriageway. The signals do not include any support for pedestrian or cyclist movements. Pedestrians wishing to cross the ferry arm are required to traverse 30m of carriageway unsupported. Similarly, crossing of Victoria Street at this location could also be a challenge as there are no pedestrian signals, provided and the road often has cars parked along both sides of the carriageway. Overall, measures to support access and mobility by those less able have not been included within the junction design. Notwithstanding, the separate Ferry Terminal to Joint Campus active travel route did identify a number of smaller scale junction improvements designed to improve pedestrian and cyclist mobility. The proposed changes are shown in the figure opposite. The design has been developed on the understanding that the majority of vehicular traffic arriving from the ferry will travel east or west along Victoria Street / Albert Pier with few drivers choosing to travel directly ahead onto High Street. High Street / Ferry Terminal Proposed Changes
Page 12
10 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Victoria Street Victoria Street is located to the east of the ferry terminal. This section of the study area is longer than Albert Pier at around 640m in length. The route leads on from Albert Pier at the High Street junction supporting access through the town to the west. The route is wide with a carriageway of around 18m flanked by two footways, the coastal side being c.3m and the inland side being 2m. The widths of the footways vary along the route. Within the study extent, Victoria Street is fronted by a number of businesses including accommodation services. The street supports access to the main shopping area on Montague Street located behind Victoria Road. Access to the Chapelhill Car Park can also be gained from Victoria Street noting that the street is often well used for parking with vehicles parked along both sides of the carriageway. A number of bus-stops are located along the route. A few pedestrian crossing points have been formed using cobbled ramps to manage vehicular speeds and carriageway buildouts to reduce pedestrian crossing widths and improve visibility between parked vehicles. Rothesay Pavilion Rothesay Pavilion is an internationally recognised building of architectural and cultural significance. The building is A listed and is currently being redeveloped with the intention of becoming a social hub and economic multiplier for the community, as well as a catalyst for the creative and digital industries in keeping with its heritage and a magnet for tourists, particularly architectural industrial design enthusiasts and fans of popular music, dance and entertainment. Upon completion and once open to the public, the Pavilion is anticipated to become a key trip attractor / generator and will increase trips from the town centre. The Pavilion is also anticipated to include a frontage placemaking design which will ideally ‘tie-in’ to this project. 2016 Pavilion Concept showing Placemaking
Page 13
11 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 1.8 Infrastructure Condition The esplanade is predominately surfaced using a bound surface asphalt between the sea defence walls. The surface is in generally good condition. Lighting is provided via Victorian style lighting columns installed on the inland side. Victoria Street is also in generally good surface condition with both the carriageway and footways showing only a few signs of failure. Victoria Street is lit from the lighting columns on the seaward side and from lighting installed on the building fronts. Some dropped kerbs have been installed along the length of Victoria Street although there are few locations where tactile paving has been provided. The road includes a number of footways buildouts helps pedestrians cross the wide road. Sections of cobbled inserts have been used to manage vehicle speeds. Whilst the surface condition is generally in good condition, the streetscape is a mish-mash of changes. Double rows of parked cars and limited formal crossing opportunities will create challenges for pedestrians seeking to cross the road. The adjacent front green provides a key recreational space for the town and a welcoming green space to visitors. The greens include putting greens, benches and bins with the benches and bins supporting pedestrians walking the length of the esplanade. Overall, the infrastructure within the study area is in generally good condition. Rothesay’s Road Surface is in Comparably Good Condition
Page 14
12 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 1.9 Tourism, Visitors and Local Economy Rothesay High Street provides a core function as the heart of the Rothesay community and provides a service centre to the wider region. The High Street consist of a wide range of retail and commercial uses supporting everyday services. Like all towns, Rothesay businesses face a challenging economic headwind having suffered through the COVID-19 pandemic with the cost-of-living crisis, fuel cost rises adversely impacting the viability of businesses to be able to afford occupying high street spaces. As an island community, the decline in footfall due to alternative online / home delivery options is less pronounced. In Rothesay tourism is a core component of the island’s economy, architecture and heritage such as Mount Stuart, Bute Museum, Rothesay castle, Victorian Toilets and seafront which all attract tourists and bring business to the town. Cycling is also popular with the island which is part of the five ferries challenge route with many cyclists travelling west to Rhubodach ferry terminal. 1.10 Utilities and Known Constraints To understand the utilities within the area, a search of utility apparatus within the study area was undertaken. These are summarised as follows: Water supply The Scottish water plan has indicated a 90mmm HPPE pipe below Victoria Street along the extent of the route. Consideration should be taken for any works undertaken within the vicinity of the pipe work in line with Scottish water guidance. Electricity Line search before you dig has indicated multiple HV main cables in the vicinity of the project route. Consideration should be taken for any works undertaken within the vicinity of the cables in line with SSE guidance. Foul/Surface Water Scottish water GIS plan has indicated a water main is present along Victoria Street. Communications Telecommunication apparatus was noted to be located along Victoria Street. Gas Gas apparatus was noted to be located along Victoria Street. Flood Risk An extract of the SEPA flood risk for the project area is supplied separately. The extract confirms that the project route is not at risk of flooding from a 1:200-year event.
Page 15
13 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 1.11 Landownership and Rights of Access The project route extent consists of road space publicly adopted by Argyll and Bute Council. The Front Green and Discovery Centre are owned by Visit Bute whilst much of the land on the wider Isle of Bute is owned by the Mount Stuarts. The project area is flanked by commercial and residential properties. The approximate extent of public road adoption excluding public road adoption is presented in Appendix A. 1.12 Understanding Travel Behaviour The study route forms one of the two major traffic routes in Rothesay. The route will complement the ongoing Joint Campus to Ferry Terminal route currently undergoing development. Once complete, both routes would provide network within the town centre supporting access from key trip generators to key trip attractors. This will include trips to and from local services and towards the residential areas. 1.13 School Travel A sample Hands-up Survey (HuS) was undertaken during February 2024 to understand how the community’s younger members currently travel to the primary school. The results of the sample survey show that pupil’s dependency on travel by car (60%) and bus (40%). Only 1% of the surveyed children walk to school and even fewer cycle. The school engagement has confirmed that a number of the town's younger members do own bikes and regularly walk or cycle along the route. The school’s location relative to the study area is however unlikely to be a key indicator of suppressed active travel demand for the project route. Travel Mode Morning Trip Afternoon Trip Walk 0 2 Cycle 0 0 Bus 7 11 Car 14 7 Ferry 1 0 Whilst pupil walking is popular, the school is located remote from the study area
Page 16
14 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 1.14 Public Transport Bus services around the town are contracted by Argyll and Bute Council and currently operated by West Coast Motors who provide public transportation services in various regions of Scotland. They offer a schedule of bus services connecting the various towns to Rothesay including Ardbeg and Ettrick. A review of the bus services offered suggest that the town benefits from an effective public transport service with a wide range of services operating on a 30- minute service frequency. 1.15 Baseline Data To support this project, a number of data sources were commissioned to provide a snapshot of people and traffic volumes speeds and movements during February 2024. The town is a known tourist destination with many visitors arriving between May and September. Any traffic survey undertaken during the peak seasonal period of May to September will therefore likely reflect seasonal peak (worst case) results. The surveys consisted of Automatic Traffic Counters (ATC) installed for 7 days along A844 Victoria Street, Albert Pier. Junction Turning Counts (JTC) were undertaken at Victoria Street / High Street and the Albert Pier / Bishop Street junctions. The counters recorded all vehicle movements including speeds by direction continuously. To support an understanding of parking behaviours in the area, parking surveys were also commissioned to capture parking on-street along Victoria Street and Albert Pier including two car parks. In addition to the ATCs, Non-Motorised Users (NMU) surveys were also undertaken during the same period. The NMU surveys were located at key locations along the route corridor. Location and range of survey data collection
Page 17
15 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 1.16 ATC Results The results of the surveys indicate that the typical traffic volumes along Victoria Street in the vicinity of the Pavilion are around 1,8006 vehicles per day in both the southbound and northbound directions. These volumes are low when compared with the roads theoretical design capacity. Vehicle speeds were noted to be in excess of the speed limit with an 85th percentile speed of 34mph being recorded (30mph limit). Nearer to the ferry terminal junction, eastbound vehicle numbers increase to around 2,800 vehicles per day. This indicates that traffic travelling along Montague Street turns right onto Victoria Street as part of a ‘gyratory’ loop. Westbound traffic flow is 1,600 vehicles per day. 85th percentile speeds of vehicles were noted to be under the speed limit with the eastbound recorded at 25.5mph and the westbound at 26.5mph. To east at Albert Pier, the number of vehicles travelling in both the eastbound and westbound directions was notably lower at around 1,000 vehicles per day. 85th percentile speeds were noted to be around 24mph with vehicles travelling westbound noted to be marginally slower at 22mph. This may be as a result of vehicles having to slow down on approach to the Bishop Street roundabout. Traffic composition along this route is 86% cars or light vans with 14% classed as Heavier Goods Vehicles (HGVs). 6 February 2024 12-hr AAWDT 1.17 Non-Motorised Users (NMU’s) During the same survey period, NMU surveys were located on the terminal junction and the Bishop Street / Albert Pier junction and recorded a single-day snapshot of pedestrian and cyclist movements. The surveys captured all ATC results by location
Page 18
16 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com pedestrian and cyclist numbers by travel direction within a 12hr day 07:00 to 19:00 over a typical off-peak weekday. The results of the surveys indicated that at the ferry terminal junction the daily pedestrian flow was 144 people travelling east/ west on the northern side of the footway (coastal) and 132 travelling east /west on the inland footway. Pedestrian movements along the Victoria Street section to the High Street junction is noted to be high with around 614 movements recorded on the inland footway. The majority of these movements then turn right and travel south along High Street. Unsurprisingly, the cycling numbers are low at this location, noting the time of year (February). Around 7 were recorded over the course of the day, favouring the coastal side footway. 1.18 ABC Cycle Counters ABC have installed a permanent pedestrian and cycle loop counters on the Esplanade. With the exception of when the counter has malfunctioned, the counter captures data continually 24hours per day and by each day of the year. The data can be used to understand how the number of pedestrians and cyclists change over the year. The results of the counter indicate that since 2020, the number of pedestrians / cyclists have declined up to 2022 which may be the result of COVID19 on tourist visitors to the island. From 2022 the counter would appear to be malfunctioning. Ferry Terminal Junction Off-Peak 24hr Pedestrians and Cyclist Movements Victoria Street Zebra -Off-Peak 24hr Pedestrians and Cyclist Movements
Page 19
17 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Notwithstanding the above, the data captured by the counter for 2019 would appear to be complete. Using this data a comparison of pedestrian’s and cyclist demand between an off-peak month and day (February) and a peak season weekday in September can be estimated. The results of the comparison are shown in the following figure and indicate that during the peak season, the number of pedestrian / cyclist trips increases from 174 to 282. This is an increase of 62%. 1.19 Parking Parking surveys were undertaken during early February 2024. The surveys included Chapelhill and Alber Pier off-street car parks and on-street parking. The survey results indicate that Chapelhill has a capacity of a round 25 spaces with around 40% of these unused during successive town visits. Albert Pier has an official parking capacity of 20 vehicles but during both the weekday and weekend surveys around 18 to 22 vehicles were parked within the car park and a peak parking occupancy of 31 vehicles was observed. Summary of Esplanade Counter Walk / Cycle Data ABC Off Peak-to-Peak 2019 Pedestrian Cyclist Comparison
Page 20
18 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com The parking duration for vehicles parking regular within the car parks is noted to be long at over 5 hours suggesting that the spaces are used by the staff of nearby businesses or local residents. Albert Pier Weekday / Weekend Parking Summary
Page 21
19 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com February 2024 Off Peak Parking Survey along A844 Victoria Street / Albert Pier
Page 22
20 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 1.20 Road Safety A review of the Crash Map Road Safety7 website indicated that there have been no incidents documented in the vicinity of the study route between 2018 and 2023. The nearest recorded accidents occurred in the public car park opposite the kiosk, just off Vicotria Street. The accident was serious, involving only one vehicle and one casualty. A second serious incident was recorded on the Guildford square. No details were available. It's important to note that this does not necessarily imply that no accidents have taken place within the study route, but rather that emergency services were either not required or not notified. 7 https://www.crashmap.co.uk/ Accident History 2018 - 2023
Page 23
21 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 1.21 Parking, Access and Management Parking within the study area is split between off-street car parks and on-street parking. Within the study area is located a number of off-street parking areas, all free of charge, consisting of: • Chapel hill Road. Providing 25 vehicles spaces. During the February site visit, it was noted that a number of the parking spaces are occupied by the bins from surrounding properties or caravans. • Albert Place Car Park. Proving parking for around 20 vehicles. • East Princess Street. Providing parking for a round 5 vehicles. There is adequate designated parking along the promenade to cater for all observed parking numbers. It’s noted there is a lot of pavement parking in the southeastern section of Rothesay due to the narrow width of the road and parking on the opposite side residents and visitors are parking with all 4 wheels on the footway. For electric vehicles, two 22kW, 32A charging points are available at Guildford Square Car Park, Rothesay, less than 100m from the Terminal Building. The Isle of Bute historically operated a Community Car Club which was open to both residents and visitors. Pavement parking is a common occurrence
Page 24
22 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 1.22 Current Travel Patterns The 2011 census data for Rothesay was examined to understand current travel behaviours and travel patterns within the project area. It is noted that more rural locations are more likely to be more dependent on private car use when compared with the Scottish average. However, as stated previously, car ownership for Rothesay remains comparably lower at 41%. Rothesay is currently participating in the 2024 ‘Beat the Street’ Active Travel programme. The results of the initiative may be available for the stage 2 of this project. 1.23 Understanding The Communities Demographics The National Records of Scotland data as at 2022 shows the population of Rothesay was 4,320. 14.3% were children, 55.1% were aged 15-64, 30.6% were over 65 years of age and over. There is a greater percentage decrease in the population aged 0-15 years compared to Highland or Scotland.8 The National Records of Scotland shows the population has decreased by 16% in the period 2002 to 2022 with a difference 8 https://www.citypopulation.de/en/uk/scotland/argyll_and_bute/S19002472__ro thesay/ between age groups concerning population change. There was a 63% increase in the 65+ age group, which occurred year on year since 2002 Over the next 10 years, the population of Argyll and Bute is projected to decrease by 6.2% due to natural change (more deaths than births). Notwithstanding, Total net migration (net migration within Scotland, from overseas and from the rest of the UK) is projected to result in a UK population increase of 0.5% over the same period.9 9 https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/files/statistics/council-area-data-sheets/argyll- and-bute-council-profile.html
Page 25
23 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 1.24 Where do People Currently Cycle? Rothesay is part of the Bute Cycle Network, a 23-mile loop around the Isle of Bute which runs through Rothesay and right along the A844 Victoria Street which is the site of the proposed development. This demonstrates demand for cycling in the Rothesay area, and a key tourist attraction. 1.25 Health and Wellbeing Being more physically active can benefit everyone and can reduce the chances of developing preventable conditions such as diabetes and heart disease. Active travel as promoted by this project will encourage individuals to be more physically active as part of their daily routine by incorporating physical activity into everyday tasks. This reduces the need to find extra time, money or motivation for exercise. The route could also offer savings to some users by saving on fuel, and vehicle running costs. Making short journeys using active travel helps to reduce the number of vehicles on the road and improves local air quality and environmental amenities. Investment in active travel can also deliver economic benefits with shoppers who are actively spending less per visit but making more frequent visits and spending more. Active travel is affordable and delivers value for money in achieving health, transport and wider policy objectives. Studies on the economic benefits of walking and cycling interventions in the UK revealed an average return of £13 for every £1 invested and returns as high as £19 for every £1 invested. Cycling and Walking Activity from Strava
Page 26
24 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com OPTIONS DEVELOPMENT AND APPRAISAL
Page 27
25 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 2 OPTIONS DEVELOPMENT AND APPRAISAL 2.1 Investigating the Network In advance of the Stage 1 Community engagement process undertaken during February 2024, the design team worked with the steering group to identify multiple route corridors which could be used to help identify the community’s appetite for change and set the ambition for the design. The concepts were developed in stages set out as follows: • A constraints plan was developed to capture all known geographic, ecological and physical considerations within the identified route corridors. Following engagement with Bute Community Council and ABC a land ownership register was produced to accompany a land ownership plan. A suite of data collection surveys was commissioned, including traffic surveys, NMUs. The results were consolidated and considered. • The previous 2020 spatial masterplan report for Rothesay Town and the route concept options developed between the Pavilion and Ferry Terminal junction were examined. • The results of the traffic surveys were considered in conjunction with the route design guidance provided within Transport Scotland’s Cycle by Design Guidance 2021 update. • Through a workshop discussion between the design team and ABC representatives it was noted that the study corridor is formed in two halves, each with a different set of challenges. A section between the Pavilion and the ferry terminal junction benefits from additional road space and therefore a number of potential group options are possible. Between the ferry terminal and the Albert Pier Carpark the route corridor is more constrained and the development of a route option would be more challenging. There are fewer options available for the route in this location. • It was noted that the Esplanade already provides a good quality walking and cycling route which should ideally support the majority of the route design. The use of the Esplanade was also noted to be a key objective of previous studies. The Esplanade was debated within the design team and the number of technical challenges were identified. These included avoiding alteration to the sea defence and the challenges of tying the route at the terminal back to the ferry terminal junction. On reflection it was agreed that the Esplanade must be promoted as an option for consideration • Between the Pavilion and the ferry terminal junction a total of five concept route alignments were identified. • Between the ferry terminal junction and Albert Pier, a total of three route alignments were identified. • Utilising the design team experience in conjunction with the guidance provided within Cycle by Design 2021, the concept options were created.
Page 28
26 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com It was agreed appropriate that the stage 1 of the project should be to sample the community’s preference on route corridor. The options considered are summarised as follows and graphically overleaf. Option Pavilion to Ferry Terminal Route Concept Description 1 Route formed on Esplanade. Use existing route and connect back to Victoria Street at the Ferry Terminal either through the inner harbour or along the side of the Front Green 2 Widen existing footpath into winter gardens. Route on inland side of A844 3 Widen footpath on inland side to suit width constraints. Maintain current road widths by widening onto coastal side of A844 4 Reallocation of road space to suit new widened footpath on coastal side of A844 5 Reallocation of road space to suite new widened footpath on inland side of A844
Page 29
27 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Option Ferry Terminal to Albert Pier Route Concept Description A Widen route and provide path on inland side B Widen route and provide path on coastal side C Shared use of West Princess Street then widen route and provide a path on the inland side of the road A844 Albert Place Typical Cross Section Options
Page 30
28 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com All Route Corridor Options Initially Considered
Page 31
29 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 2.2 Pavilion to Ferry Terminal Junction: Route Summary Descriptions Each of the route options are described in greater detail as follows. Option 1: Route formed on Esplanade. Use existing route and connect back to Victoria Street at the Ferry Terminal Length 646m Description Widen the pinch points on the esplanade and provide improved connection to Ferry Terminal junction Key Challenges • Avoid impact on sea defences • Ramps and stairs will require realignment • Limited corridor space at terminal end • May not present as attractive alternative to Victoria Road (not direct enough) • Busy during summer peaks • Coastal exposure Key Opport’ies • Most direct route for tourists from ferry • Car free route • Lower capital costs • No impact on bus, servicing or loading • More pleasing environment • Limited impact on existing drainage systems • Limited impact on the front green area Option 2: Widen existing footpath into winter gardens. Route formed on inland side of A844 Length 604m Description Following Victoria Street, the route would be formed on the inland side of the street. The road cross section would be maintained with the whole road being shifted into the front gardens area by around 2m Key Challenges • Major impact on kerbs, drainage and services • Increased risk of cycle / pedestrian conflict • Higher capital cost • Potential impact on Front Green Key Opport’ies • Cycle route on busiest inland side nearest all key trip attractors • Most direct route • Avoid changes to front green • Simpler interface with Ferry Terminal Junction Option 3: Widen footpath on inland side to suit width constraints. Maintain current road widths by widening onto coastal side of A844 Route Length 604m Description Following Victoria Street, the route would be formed on the coastal side of the street. The road cross section would be maintained with the improved active travel facilities extended into the front gardens area Key Challenges • Major impact on kerbs, drainage and services • Some impact on front green area
Page 32
30 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com • Higher capital cost Key Opport’ies • Cycle route near all key trip attractors • Most direct route • Simpler interface with Ferry Terminal Junction Option 4: Reallocation of road space to suit new widened footpath on coastal side of A844 Length 604m Description Following Victoria Street, the route would be formed on the inland side of the street. The road cross section would be adjusted to narrow the carriageway width to avoid impact Key Challenges • Major impact on kerbs, drainage and services • Some impact on front green area • Higher capital cost Key Opport’ies • Cycle route near all key trip attractors • Most direct route • Simpler interface with Ferry Terminal Junction Option 5: Reallocation of road space to suite new widened footpath on inland side of A844 Length 604m Description Following Victoria Street, the route would be formed on the coastal side of the street. The road cross section would be adjusted to narrow the carriageway width to avoid impact with the gardens area by around 2m Key Challenges • Some impact on kerbs, drainage and services • Higher capital cost Key Opport’ies • Cycle route near all key trip attractors • Most direct route • Simpler interface with Ferry Terminal Junction
Page 33
31 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 2.3 Ferry Terminal Junction to Albert Pier: Route Summary Descriptions Each of the route options are described in greater detail as follows. Option A: Widen route and provide path on inland Length 245m Description Route would be formed on inland side of A844 Victoria Road Key Challenges • Limited route corridor space will limit the extent of design possible. • Impact on taxi and bus rank • Albert Pier Car park will be impacted • Area is heavy parked • Will impact on coach parking at Albert Pier Key Opport’ies • Route coherence • Most direct route option Option B: Widen route and provide path on coastal side Length 245m Description Route would be formed on coastal side of A844 Victoria Road Key Challenges • Limited route corridor space will limit the extent of design possible. • Impact on taxi and bus rank • Albert Pier Car park will be impacted • Area is heavy parked • Will impact on coach parking at Albert Pier Key Opport’ies • Route coherence • Most direct route option Option C: Shared use of West Princess Street then widen route and provide a path on the inland side of the road. Length 260m Description Using West Princess Street at a mixed traffic street to avoid the taxi and bus rank, the route would rejoin Victoria Street at Albert Pier. The route would then be formed on the coastal side Key Challenges • Limited route corridor space will limit the extent of design possible. • Albert Pier Car park will be impacted • Area is heavy parked • Least direct option, may not be used Key Opport’ies • Route coherence • Avoid Impact on taxi and bus rank
Page 34
32 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 2.4 Considering The Technical Challenges Albert Pier Coach and Vehicle Parking The Albert Pier car park has a marked capacity for 20 vehicles consisting of 17 cars and 3 coaches. Parking capacity is nearer 30 vehicles with cars and campervans often parking along the waterfront footway. The car park is irregularly shaped limiting the options to reconfigure the space to increase parking capacity. A key feature of the facility is the provision of 3 coach sized parking bays. These are understood to be well used during the peak summer months and should ideally be retained. A derelict pier building currently occupies the site and is noted to be an eyesore. Demolition of the building would contribute towards providing additional parking capacity whilst the building itself could be reinvested as a public toilet or an active travel community hub. Taxi Rank The taxi rank is located between the ferry terminal junction and the Bishop Street roundabout. The taxi rank is large supporting around 20 taxies (parked end in). The taxi rank is well used but could be reduced in scale. This would provide some additional road space within this constrained location. It is unclear at the time of writing what the optimum capacity of the taxi rank should be. It is also noted that currently taxies are parking end in. This requires a reversing manoeuvre on the main road which is considered less safe and best avoided. Bus Stance The bus stance is located adjacent to the taxi rank in front of the harbour and Guildford square. The stance can support a total of 4 coaches (2 per direction) within the lay-bys provided. Access between the stops is supported by a zebra crossing which ais also aligned with the pedestrian access to the inner harbour and ferry terminal building Ferry Junction The ferry junction is a key node point in the network. The junction is an irregular shape and partially signalised to support the egressing movements of ferry vehicles. The junction does not support the movement of pedestrians, cyclists of other non-motorised users.
Page 35
33 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Traffic Volumes It is noted to be very challenging to accurately predict any changes to traffic volumes as a result of the concept being implemented. This is primarily due to the challenges in forecasting drivers route decision making within a complex urban area which reflects the level of congestion and vehicle speeds at that time. Vehicle numbers are noted to be in excess of the 300 vehicles per day Cycle by Design threshold with Victoria Street and Albert Pier catering for over 10% in Heavy Goods Vehicles. As a result, a facility segregated from the carriageway will be required. As the route is within a 30mph area, the segregation strip may be a narrow as 0.5m subject to agreement of technical standards. Loading and Servicing Currently, a loading and servicing along Victoria Road is catered for by frontage access. Service vehicles park where they can (sometime across bus stops) and utilise pallet trucks to make deliveries through the businesses front doors. It is understood that many of the business have the ability to take delivery via the rear but find frontage servicing agreeable. Road Safety Feedback received through the stage 1 engagement combined with on-site design team observation indicates that there are a number of road safety challenges that could be addressed through the project design process. These include: • Crossing of pedestrians on Victoria Street which often required pedestrians to cross between parked cars. A lack of formal crossing points limits the mobility of those less able. The most obvious points for crossing support are the ferry terminal junction, at the Pavilion and Victoria Street Frontage Loading
Page 36
34 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com outside the Discovery Centre. Higher vehicle speeds and lower level of lighting during the darker winter months exacerbate this issue. • Cycling along Victoria Street / Albert Pier is not comfortable for less confident cyclists as they are required to cycle on the live carriageway between parked cars and moving vehicles. • High Street / Ferry Terminal junction is unwelcoming to pedestrians and cyclists with no pedestrian crossing provision and wider crossing distances increasing crossing risk. • Cyclist / pedestrian conflicts along the esplanade could be addressed through segregation of the user groups. • Pedestrian routes to the ferry terminal junction are not well sign posted for visitors. • There is no cohesive cycle network to support access south along High Street towards the joint campus. Street Trial The idea of a street trial to test concept 1 was raised during the public engagement event. Street trials are normally reserved for Category 4 (or bigger) PfE funded projects where the scale of the project would justify the additional costs of appraising the concept. Notwithstanding, Rothesay is a small scheme with a likely small cost associated with producing a Temporary Traffic Regulatory Order (TTRO) and temporary surfacing works required to test the concept. The preparation of the temporary order will however take time requiring public notification and collaboration with Argyll & Bute Council. Following discussions with the study steering group, it has been agreed that a street trial is not a practical option to test as the extent of temporary works required to safely implement the concept would be excessive and ultimately unmanageable. Maintaining The Design A key challenge to all placemaking design options relates to the development of a robust maintainable design. Often the choice of materials that meet the maintainability criteria will be restrictive as the Argyll & Bute Council will need to maintain a store of the materials to support future repair works. A number of services are noted to be present along Victoria Street. Evidence recorded on site indicates that ongoing repair and replacement works by utility service providers will continually disturb any new design. It is unlikely to be possible to relocate the services as part of the design process due to the likely disproportionate costs. Alternatively, the design and material selection should take cognisance of the need to access services and be provided to improve the quality of any repair works. The choice of design materials will require careful consideration as part of the next stages of the project and will be discussed in greater detail in the next chapter of this report.
Page 37
35 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment The site has been reviewed for potential sources of flooding following ABC Supplementary Guidance on Flood Risk. These are outlined below along with a qualitative assessment of the risk they pose to the route. • Fluvial Flooding: The SEPA Indicative Flood Map shows that the location of the site is not within the area of fluvial flood risk. • Pluvial flooding: The SEPA Indicative Flood Map shows that the location of the site is not within the area of high pluvial flood risk. • Coastal Flooding: The SEPA Indicative Flood Map shows that the location of the site is not within the area of high coastal flood risk. To summarise, the site is not considered at risk of flooding and no further investigation is deemed necessary. Community Feedback Reference is drawn to the results of the community and stakeholder feedback reported within the Community Feedback Report. A summary of the community’s feedback is summarised as follows: Concerns relating to the use of the existing road route • Parking is a premium within the town. Many of the town’s frontage buildings do not have alternative parking locations. Parking stresses increase with the influx of summer tourists • Parking at the Albert Pier end of town is particularly challenged. Camper vans, tour buses / coaches are understood to park on and along the footways. • The town roads are well trafficked by a number of HGVs (14%). These are often larger tractors or lorries. • The ferry terminal area is considered unsightly. There is opportunity to improve connection. • The front green should be protected. • The ferry terminal / High Street junction is noted to limit access by some user groups. The junction does not include a provision for the mobility impaired and is difficult to navigate. • There is a lack of crossing opportunities along Victoria Street to support the movement of pedestrians and cyclists. • Improve cycle walking connectivity between the ferry terminal and the Esplanade and between the Esplanade and Albert Pier. Aspirations for the future design • Victoria Street could be improved to include a central boulevard including palm trees. This would improve crossing potential and reduce carriageway width.
Page 38
36 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 2.5 Initial Options Sift Workshop The design team met to discuss the feedback of stage 1 consultation and investigate the route options being considered. Victoria Street The options were debated during a design team workshop. It was noted that option 1, the esplanade was strongly preferred by the small community sample with the primary justification being to avoid any negative impact on Victoria Street parking. The route would however require alterations to the sea defences in a number of locations including the installation of a sea defence gate. These changes were not acceptable to ABC due to risk of reducing effectiveness of flood defences and would require further investigation. Notwithstanding, option 1, when compared with the option Victoria Street options, would also be a less direct route for those wishing to pass along Victoria Street with the route being further disconnected from local everyday High Street services. It was also noted that the widening of the route (options 2 and 3) into the front green offered similar benefits to options 4 and 5 but would add significant additional cost to the project. It was therefore concluded that these options should only be considered if options 4 and 5 that used the existing road space could not be realised. Using the street width measured from OS mapping in combination with the options cross sections and feedback received, it was concluded during the workshop that options 4 and 5 can be accommodated within the existing road space, maintaining on-street parking. Further investigation of these two options highlights that the option four with the route formed on the coastal side would be the most deliverable option. Option 5 was felt to also reflect the most direct and coherent of the route options retaining cycle and walking activity on the businesses and residential side of the street and avoiding the need for promoting additional crossing movements.
Page 39
37 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Albert Pier Options A, B and C were considered further with option C – using Princess Street discounted on the basis that the route is too convoluted to be utilised. The taxi rank design was investigated further and it was noted that should this facility be rescaled and reorganised, the route could be accommodated along Albert Pier to the Albert Pier car park with no adverse impact on parking. It was noted that Albert Pier car park has a capacity of c.20 vehicles with a typical parking demand for 30 vehicles, even during the off-peak February survey. It has been concluded that all the design options would have an impact on the car park and / or on-street parking capacity. Consideration should therefore be given to either truncating the route option at the Ferry Terminal junction or seeking to identify alternative parking mitigation options to offset the parking impacts from both this project and the Joint Campus to Ferry Terminal. The route design standard was subjected to review using Transport Scotland’s Cycling by Design 2021 guidance. Noting the results of the vehicle traffic/speeds, the number of potential NMUs. Stakeholder Feedback Reference is drawn to the results of the community and stakeholder feedback reported within the Community Feedback Report. 2.6 Route Appraisal Against Cycling by Design (CbD) 2021 The route corridor was subjected to a review using the Sustrans route assessment criteria in combination with Cycling by Design 2021. The concepts were scored ranging between 1 – 3 with 1 reflecting a ‘high level’ of service and 3 a ‘low level’ of service. The assessment was undertaken by the design team as a workshop discussion to allow each route option and assessment criterion to be discussed and scored. The criteria considered in the assessment included: • Indicative Cost; • Deliverability; • Accessibility; • Local Need; • Coherence; • Directness; • Comfort; • Attractiveness; and • Adaptability. The resulting assessment identified that a number of the concepts, unsurprisingly would need further investigation to determine an appropriate standard of design provision. No consideration of the relative weighting of the evaluation criteria has been undertaken.
Page 40
38 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Route / Option Length (m) Proposed Intervention Structures Required / Altered 1 High level of Service 10-14 2 Medium level of Service 15-23 3 Low level of Service 24-30 Costs Deliverability Accessibility Local Need Safety Cohesiveness Directness Com fort Attractiveness Adaptability Total Option 1 646 Route formed on Esplanade. Use existing route and connect back to Victoria Street yes 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 17 Option 2 604 Widen existing footpath into winter gardens. Route formed on inland side no 3 3 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 16 Option 3 604 Widen footpath on inland side to suit width constraints. Maintain current road widths by widening onto coastal side no 3 3 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 16 Option 4 604 Reallocation of road space to suit new widened footpath on coastal side no 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 14 Option 5 604 Reallocation of road space to suite new widened footpath on inland side no 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 12 Option A 245 Widen route and provide path on inland side keeping road as it is. no 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 14 Option B 245 Widen route and provide path on coastal side keeping road as it is. no 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 14 Option C 260 Shared use of West Princess Street then widen route and provide a path on the inland side. no 1 1 3 1 2 3 3 2 2 1 19
Page 41
39 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 2.7 Recommended Stage 1 Outcomes • Option 1 should be progressed subject to detailed conversations with ABC stakeholders regarding sea defence changes and scope of connection through to CalMac terminal. • Options 5 should be developed to concept stage 2 with route provided on coastal preferred as smaller works and cheaper, space available, coherent and consistent with Albert Pier • Option B Coastal for Albert Pier should be progressed to stage 2 concept design • Recommend redesign of Albert Pier as parking demand at this location is will negatively ‘over shadow’ the other merits delivered by the project. Alternatives are to explore community car park near albert pier. This may provide joint benefit to offset parking impacts associated with the Ferry to Joint Campus route. 2.8 Considering Those with Protected Characteristics An appraisal of the project has been undertaken using a Social and Equality Impact Appraisal template (SEQiA). The results of the assessment are included in Appendix B. Taking cognisance of the appraisals summarised previously it is noted that all concepts would be provided to achieve a Cycle by Design ‘High standard’ of 10 Subject to reducing total traffic flow provision10. Once a preferred route alignment has been determined the design should consider best practices to maximise the route accessibility for all user groups and abilities.
Page 42
40 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com NEW CHAPTER DEVELOPING THE CONCEPT
Page 43
41 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 3 DEVELOPING THE CONCEPT 3.1 Developing the Options Following approval of progress by Argyll and Bute Council Officers, Option four, ‘Reallocation of road space to suite new widened footpath on coastal side’ has been selected for further development. 3.2 Designing with Nature A key consideration of the design process is to avoid an impact on flora and fauna. A Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA) was commissioned in support of the options development process. The assessment identifies and reports on a limited number of ecological points of note within the study route. The ecological constraints plan was overlaid on the concept option plan to check that the concept does not impact on any ecological matters. The check confirmed that the concept is not likely to have any impact. Further validation should be undertaken at stage 3, detailed design. 3.3 Developing the Design The concept was subject to continual development to address the challenges noted. These included: • Redesigning Albert Pier Car Park layout to maximise parking capacity by reducing circulation space and removing the derelict kiosk building. • Improve parking capacity of the off-street parking area opposite Albert Pier by standardising the parking layout and adopting a herringbone layout. • Improve coach parking by avoiding reversing and manoeuvring space promoting a drive in and drive out layout. • Address existing pavement parking by separating the pavement from the parking area by including the coach parking in between. This layout is anticipated to reduce pavement parking along Albert Pier. • Formalise on-street parking by introducing marked bays. These will assist in maximising parking capacity by supporting drivers to park within the spaces provided. • Reduce the overall operational carriageway width to 6.5m. This will allow improved crossing opportunities for pedestrians. • Increased the number of pedestrian crossing points along the route. The crossing points are located where the community expressed a need for improved crossing. • Redesigned the CalMac entrance to reduce carriageway space whilst retaining the same vehicle stacking capacity for the ferry. 3.4 Maintaining the Concept A key challenge of any design is ensuring the robustness and minimising future maintenance requirements of any network changes. To support this, a series of
Page 44
42 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com workshops were held with Argyll and Bute Network Management Representatives in advance of developing the final concept design. In advance of each workshop a concept option plan was shared to support discussion. The key points of each workshop are summarised in the remainder of this chapter. Argyll and Bute Network Management (Workshop 2) • Due to carriageway construction and drainage arrangements, developing the route on the A844 route on coastal footway side was agreed to be the preferred route option. • The operational carriageway width must be maintained at a 6.5m minimum to give extra space allowance for HGV and Buses. It was agreed that the road narrowing would improve pedestrian crossing opportunities and help encourage appropriate vehicle speeds. • Noting the potential impacts of the concept on the ferry vehicle access, the Harbour Master and CalMac operator should be consulted to understand better any operational impacts. • Improvements to parking capacity along the route are supported. Any changes should consider seasonal parking impacts and the demand for coach and camper van parking where possible. • Improved access options should explore the use of ramps and avoid the suggested gate in the sea defence wall. This will improve connectivity for cyclists and wheelchair users to access the winter gardens from the CalMac terminal while not risking reducing the effectiveness of the sea defences. • The trees located along Victoria Road should ideally be retained as the public may have concerns regarding removal. • There is limited scope to revert the roundabouts on the A844 to Priority T-junctions. The town operates as a one-way gyratory and noting the industrial activity to the north, the roundabouts must be retained to support industrial traffic access onto the A844 from Bishop Street. • It was agreed that there is scope to repurpose road space to better accommodate different user groups. This should ideally avoid the need for the design to be widened into the front green / gardens. • Any redesign of Albert Pier car park to maximise car parking capacity is desirable. • Exploring the use of herringbone parking layout solution at parking area opposite Albert Pier should be considered. End-in parking is undesirable and should be removed through the design process due to safety concerns relating to vehicle manoeuvring. This will most obviously impact on the existing taxi rank. Based on the feedback received, the concept design was developed considering the above noted points. The emerging design was again subject to review by ABC network management and maintenance representatives.
Page 45
43 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Argyll and Bute Network Management (Workshop 3) A third stakeholder workshop was initiated to discuss the approach to review the emerging concept. The following points were noted: • Due to limited road space, a cycle buffer strip width of 0.5m is promoted. • The accommodation of the design within the existing carriageway kerbing is noted to significantly reduce drainage concerns and overall project construction costs. • The proposed ramp solution at the sea defence wall just behind the Winter Gardens in lieu of steps will provide improved connectivity between the Esplanade and the CalMac terminal. • The introduction of a drainage system is an option that ABC would support but would increase the overall capital cost of the project. • Improved and formalised parking capacity was welcomed. The formalising of on-street parking is noted to be a benefit. The improved parking capacity at Albert Pier was noted to be beneficial. • Parking impacts at Albert Pier should be subject to further conversations with ABC Economic Development team to confirm ABC aspirations to provide additional coach parking. • The Scottish Water building within the Albert Pier car park must be retained. The design should be revised to include this. • There is limited scope to resize the existing roundabouts but changes can be considered subject to vehicle tracking analysis to ensure access by larger vehicles can be maintained. 3.5 Vehicle Tracking Analysis The concept design was subject to a vehicle tracking analysis using vehicle tracking simulation software. The tracking was undertaken at the locations where the design was estimated to impact on the operational layout and included: • The entrance, exit and circulation of the parking at Albert Pier; • Access, egress and access to parking bays in the parking area opposite the Albert Pier car park; • Access, queuing and exit of the CalMac ferry terminal junction; and • The resized roundabouts along the route length. Vehicle tracking results can be found below:
Page 46
44 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Albert Pier Coach and Car Tracking
Page 47
45 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Albert Pier Coach and Car Tracking
Page 48
46 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com CalMac Junction HGV / Car Tracking
Page 49
47 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Bishop Street HGV Tracking
Page 50
48 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 3.6 Considering the Ferry Junction Operation It was a decision by the stakeholders that the ferry junction should be consulted regarding the proposed changes. A meeting was set up with CalMac ferry’s manager and the Harbour Master for Rothesay to review the emerging concept. Key outcomes of the meeting included: • General agreement regarding the operational layout changes to the CalMac junction layout. Particularly that the layout might help queuing on access back along Victoria Street. This would reduce the requirement for occasional marshal intervention and also improve the operation of the vehicle waiting are for CalMac staff. • Consideration of options to improve visitor legibility of the queuing lanes and intended operational management plan. • Avoidance of the use of lines and signs due to longer term maintenance challenges within a coastal location and the skewing movement of vehicle tyres wearing road line markings. 3.7 Value Engineering Route Extent As the design has been developed it was noted that the concept would offer additional benefits from being extended from the current end point at Albert Pier west towards Craigmore. Following design team and client discussion, it was agreed that the route should be extended to Glenburn Road where the corridor width increases. This revised end point was agreed as this location would afford more route options for future extension and therefore provided a logical termination point for this project. 3.8 Peak Season Parking Surveys To better understand the parking demand within the study area and noting the towns role as a key summer tourist destination, a second parking survey / assessment was undertaken during June 2024. The surveys followed a similar scope to those undertaken during February 2024 to assist in comparison of the results. The June 2024 survey results are summarised as follows.
Page 51
49 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com June 2024 Peak Parking Survey along A844 Victoria Street / Glenburn Road
Page 52
50 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Understanding Parking Impacts Using the June 2024 parking data, an assessment of forecast parking capacity impacts has been estimated. A minimum parking bay space of 6m in length has been assumed to allow space for vehicle manoeuvring. For each section of the route as defined by the February parking survey sections, an estimate of theoretical capacity of the current road layout has been undertaken by calculating the length of available road space by section available for legal parking and dividing this by the 6m bay length. The calculation includes allowance to avoid parking across accesses and on existing parking restrictions. The results of the comparisons for the on-street and off-street parking provision is shown in the following tables. The results indicate that as a result of the concept design, the total number of parking bays has been increased by around 15 parking spaces. The majority of these additional spaces are located towards the Albert Pier end of the route where the February parking surveys and stage 1 community feedback have indicated parking stress is at its greatest. In general parking between the Pavilion and Albert Pier remains broadly unchanged from the existing arrangement. On Street Parking Route Section Description Road side Existing Parking Bays Proposed Parking Bays Difference A Pavilion St Johns Place South 19 20 1 North 0 7 7 B St Johns Place Chapel hill Car Park South 7 7 0 North 7 5 -2 C Chapel hill car park Chapel hill Road South 10 10 0 North 10 10 1 D Chapel hill Road Gallowgate South 5 3 -2 North 0 6 6 E Gallowgate Tower Street South 10 12 2 North 10 11 1 F Tower Street High Street South 8 7 -1 North 8 4 -4 G High Street Bishop Street South 5 10 6 North 0 0 0 H Bishop Street Albert pier South 13 13 0 North 0 0 0 I Albert Pier South 8 8 0 North 0 0 0 J Bishop Terrace Brae Commodore Guest House South 38 0 0 North 0 0 0 K Commodore Guest House Glenburn Road South 40 0 0 North 0 0 0 Total 221 120 15
Page 53
51 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 3.9 Coach, Taxi and Visitor Parking The proposed concept includes three 17m long coach parking bays located within Albert Pier which will replace the existing three coach bays currently provided. The coach parking will be accessed via a one-way in and one-way out gyratory style operation. This method of operation will ensure that no coaches are required to reverse within the public road spaces whilst ensuring all patrons are able to alight and disembark on the footway side away from the road. The proposed taxi layout will be redesigned to align vehicles parallel to road to improve access for passengers and remove need to reverse off the main road. This will reduce parking capacity to four allocated spaces. Additional taxi spaces may be possible through reallocation of adjacent public parking spaces. The bus-stops located along Victoria Road will remain in approximately the same location. 3.10 Route Safety Audit The emerging concept design were submitted to Drummond Black Ltd who undertook a Stage 1 Road Safety Audit in support of the design. Full details of the audit and designers’ response are supplied separately 3.11 Developing Route Cross Sections The proposed concept design route cross-sections taken at various locations across the scheme are shown in the following figure. Car Parks Car Park Existing Bays Proposed Bays Difference Chapel hill 21 21 0 Albert Pier 28 31 -2 Bishop Street 16 17 1 Total 70 70 0
Page 54
52 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 3.12 Forecast Construction Costs Estimates An initial assessment of the capital cost of constructing each of the concept option is set out in the following table. The estimates have been prepared by CTP using SPONS cost information and relevant previous experience. The cost estimates should be treated as indicative until complete estimates of construction costs are prepared during the stage 3 detailed design. The option includes a 44% Optimism Bias reflecting the early concept design stage.
Page 55
53 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 3.13 Route Re-Appraisal Against Cycling by Design (CbD) 2021 The route option was again subjected to a review using the Sustrans route assessment criteria in combination with Cycling by Design 2021. The concepts were scored ranging between 1 – 3 with 1 reflecting a ‘high level’ of service and 3 a ‘low level’ of service. The assessment was undertaken by the design team as a workshop discussion to allow assessment criterion to be discussed and scored. The criteria considered in the assessment included: • Indicative Cost; • Deliverability; • Accessibility; • Local Need; • Coherence; • Directness; • Comfort; • Attractiveness; and • Adaptability. The resulting assessment identified that a number of the concepts, unsurprisingly would need further investigation to determine an appropriate standard of design provision. No consideration of the relative weighting of the evaluation criteria has been undertaken.
Page 56
54 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Route / Option Length (m) Proposed Intervention Structures Required / Altered 1 High level of Service 10-14 2 Medium level of Service 15-23 3 Low level of Service 24-30 Costs Deliverability Accessibility Local Need Safety Cohesiveness Directness Com fort Attractiveness Adaptability Total Option 5 604 Reallocation of road space to suite new widened footpath on inland side no 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 12 Option B 245 Widen route and provide path on coastal side keeping road as it is. no 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 14
Page 57
55 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 3.14 Considering Those with Protected Characteristics An appraisal of the project has again been undertaken using ABC Social and Equality Impact Appraisal template (SEQiA). The results of the assessment are included in Appendix B. Taking cognisance of the appraisals summarised previously it is noted that both options would be provided to achieve a Cycle by Design ‘Medium standard’ of provision. 3.15 Considering Construction Phasing Due to the overall route length and complexity of island delivery, it is highly unlikely that the identified route corridor will be constructed as a single delivery project. It is more likely that the route will be delivered in a staged order as funding becomes available. Taking cognisance of the known challenges at this stage of the network development, the following construction order is suggested. 3.16 Recommendations and Next Steps Following consideration of the material provided within this assessment, it is recommended that the concept route is promoted and developed further during the stage 3 design process. The developed version will both reduce the unknown risks in the construction costs and improve deliverability but will also align with key stakeholders’ requirements. The design builds on the feedback provide by the community to focus less on cycle provision, improve more opportunities to cross the road, improve parking and address provision for overnight parking, coach and campervan parking. The concept improves connectivity between the Esplanade and the CalMac terminal and promotes a direct route that benefits pedestrian and cyclists through the town. Ref Route Section Route Length(km) Phase 1 Option 5 - Esplanade to Ferry Junction 0.58 Phase 2 Option B - Ferry Junction including Albert Pier 0.25 Phase 3 Option B - Albert Pier to Route end 0.62
Page 58
56 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com DESIGN PROCESS QUALITY AND INNOVATION
Page 59
57 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 4 DESIGN PROCESS QUALITY AND INNOVATION 4.1 Outline Design Process The project will be developed to align with the Places for Everyone (PfE) design development programme. 4.2 Design Guidance and Quality A wide range of design guidance and standards have been used to develop the project proposals. The core documents include: • Designing Streets; • Cycling by Design (2021); • The National Roads Development Guide (NRDG); and • Inclusive Mobility (2021). The detailed design process will use these standards and include: • Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB); • Traffic Signs and Regulations and General Directions (TSRDG); • Local Transport Notes (LTN); and • Traffic Advisory Leaflets (TAL). These references represent the core design guidance however other documents such as Sustrans Design Guidance Documents and other examples of best practice have also been considered.
Page 60
58 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 4.3 Considering Wider Area Improvements The concept design process will include several key considerations in support of the emerging network. These include: • Improvement to accessibility, walking and cycling links between people and place; • Developing a signage and wayfinding strategy; • Promoting a cycle-welcoming intervention; • Introducing a Travel behaviour change programme; and • Providing cycle parking and storage measures. 4.4 Considering Streetscape and Landscape Improvements The route on its own will not create the maximum opportunity to support the movement of people, create a place and encourage community ownership. Rothesay is a key service centre for the regional community which relies heavily on the use of motorised travel to support the movement of the community. To support lasting change to travel behaviours the design process must include placemaking potential giving priority to maximising the communities’ assets and access to public transport as well as the opportunity to walk and cycle while retaining car-based access. 4.5 Planting, Drainage and Local Environment Within the proximity of any areas where there would be works such as seating, way finders, and shared surfaces, planting of native species will enhance the environmental improvements. Not only will planting create an attractive setting but it will also be encouraging and increasing biodiversity. Salt-tolerant species can be used for foraging and can be educational. The changing seasons are marked with the advent of spring with blossom flowers followed by autumn leaf colour changes.
Page 61
59 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 4.6 Developing Streetscape Sensitively designed rural street furniture and public art can be incorporated as part of the concept design process and is aimed at enriching the experience of everyday journeys and visits to the area. Whilst keeping in mind the coastal environment; seating, opportunities for incidental play, and way-finders would be appropriate. As a rural area with period style street lighting, the lighting design must be provided very sensitively. Lighting can become a design feature in its own right, by marking at ground level or by enhancing seating areas by incorporating lighting into the structures. Paving materials will avoid any garish colours and patterns which would be more associated with an urban area; again, as they are not in keeping with the style of the road. The linear nature of the site naturally establishes a physical connection through the site which can be punctuated with environmental improvements such as seating areas and viewpoints. Examples of bike stands combined with seating Examples of Bike Stands
Page 62
60 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Example of Seating and Planting Example of Route Signage Example of Paving
Page 63
61 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Examples of Rural Route Lighting Solutions
Page 64
62 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Designing for Equality and Accessibility The proposed Active Travel network must support access by all user’ groups that includes accessibility by all ages and abilities. As the route corridor design progresses, consideration must be given to ensuring that the network remains safe and inviting to everyone. This includes how those more vulnerable in our society will be supported by the design. The design is supported by a Social and Equalities Impact Assessment (SEQiA) which is included in Appendix B. 4.7 Flood Prevention With a changing climate, the importance of designing with flood risk in mind is paramount. The SEPA flood risk maps indicate that the route is not at risk of 1:200-year coastal flooding event. A summary of the flood risk map is supplied separately. 4.8 Traffic Modelling No traffic modelling is considered necessary at this stage of the concept development. 4.9 Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA) A Preliminary Ecological Appraisal has been undertaken for the existing route corridor. The PEA is supplied Separately.
Page 65
63 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com PROJECT DELIVERABILITY AND DESIGN COLLABORATION
Page 66
64 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 5 PROJECT DELIVERABILITY AND DESIGN COLLABORATION 5.1 Landownership The project route is predominately located within Argyll & Bute Council owned or adopted lands. There are no sections of the route where third-party land ownership is expected to be required. Additional frontage landowners may need to be consulted at the next stage of the design development depending on the route standard developed. 5.2 Designer Risk Register Similar to the Project Risk Register, the Designer Risk Register provides a summary of the risks and risk management associated with the technical delivery of the design. The Designer Risk Register is supplied separately. 5.3 Project Budget Forecast A whole-life project forecast has been provided (Supplied separately).
Page 67
65 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com APPENDICES
Page 68
66 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com APPENDIX A – EXTENT OF APPROXIMATE COUNCIL OWNERSHIP
Page 69
67 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com APPENDIX B – SOCIAL AND EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT (SEQIA) Argyll and Bute Council: Equality and Socio-Economic Impact Assessment Section 1: About the proposal Title of Proposal Rothesay, Pavilion to Glenburn Road Walking and Cycling Improvement Description of Proposal Stage 2 Concept design of a 1.45km Active Travel Route through Rothesay Purpose and Aims of Proposal To provide safe walking and cycling route between Pavilion and Glenburn Road, local community services. To encourage everyday cycling and walking as an alternative to private car use. To improve the islands travel and mobility options. To improve access for those less able. Intended outcome of proposal Concept design for the route aligned with the funding requirements of the Scottish Government active travel programme. Intervention to be proportionate and affordable to the communities requirements and maintain the islands character whilst providing infrastructure improvement. Business Outcome(s) / Corporate Outcome(s) / National Policies to which the proposal contributes/relates Aligned with National and local policy interventions regarding promotion of sustainable travel modes, reduction in single journey car dependency. Design reflects use of Cycle By Design 2021 update. Lead officer details:
Page 70
68 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Name of lead officer Colin Young Job title Strategic Transportation Delivery Officer Service / Company ABC Contact Details colin.young@argyll-bute.gov.uk Appropriate officer details: Name of appropriate officer Colin Young Job title Strategic Transportation Delivery Officer Service / Company ABC Contact Details colin.young@argyll-bute.gov.uk Sign off of EqSEIA Approver Signature Approver Name Approver Job title Date of sign off Revision Number 1 Who will deliver the proposal? ABC Strategic Transportation Team Individuals involved in developing the EqSEIA Name Colin Young Job title Strategic Projects Officer Service / Company ABC Contact Details colin.young@argyll-bute.gov.uk Name Mark Rinkus Job title Managing Director
Page 71
69 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Service / Company Connected Transport Planning Ltd Contact Details mark.rinkus@connectedtp.com Name Jack Munro Job title Engineer Service / Company Narro Ltd Contact Details jmunro@narroassociates.com Section 2: Evidence used in the course of carrying out EqSEIA Who does the proposal impact? Will impact on everyone as it is a community asset and part of core infrastructure. Key receptors include local frontage property owners, local residents and visitors to the community Are there any aspects which explicitly address discrimination, victimisation or harassment? No. The project is a supporting element of infrastructure that will connect people with place. Are there any aspects which explicitly promote equal opportunities? No. Through good design aligned with current guidance and design standards, the project will be designed to support access by all user groups and abilities. Through appropriate design, the project will promote a safe environment for all user groups seeking to support the movement of people Are there any aspects which explicitly foster good relations? Potential concerns regarding project location and route and the negative impact of unwanted construction and parking impacts Are there any aspects which explicitly promote socio-economic equality?
Page 72
70 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com No. The project will contribute towards socio economic growth through better provision of a safer route between people and place Consultation / engagement undertaken Consultation Details Date(s) Summary of Findings Online via Facebook study page and community pages Various. See Consultation Report Support for the project Community visit x4 Various. See Consultation Report Support for the project Public Consultation x2 in including digital dial in workshop Various. See Consultation Report Support for the project. Some landownership concerns Local Community Primary School x1 Various. See Consultation Report Support for the project. Include colourful infrastructure Local Community High School x1 Various. See Consultation Report Support. No interest in play equipment LGBTQIA+ Pride community Various. See Consultation Report Support for the project Community Social Services x1 Various. See Consultation Report Support. Concerned relating to speeding cyclists and cycle priority scheme General interactions with the community x10 Various. See Consultation Report Supportive. Concerns raised relating to off-road routes around rear of Rothesay Regular steering group sessions Various. See Consultation Report Helped guide engagement with the community Have people who identify with any protected characteristic(s) been involved in the development of the proposal? Yes. Individuals would self-identified as having protected characteristics of age, sexual orientation, race and disability have engaged in the project Data Sources
Page 73
71 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Census 2011 and 2022, 2019 previous engagement outputs, project traffic data (2023 off and on peak), community feedback Other information Various design standards but primarily Cycle by Design 2021 update. What is known currently about the experience of people under each characteristic? Protected characteristic What is currently known Source(s) Gaps in Evidence Age Including the experiences of young people (age 18 and under) and older people. Young adults live in the community and use a bus or parent transport to get around. Older populations have expressed concerns regarding cycle priority vs.. pedestrian priority. Kerbs, poor visibility, changes in surface delineation are challenges to mobility. Ensuring older people do not need to step into the cycle route and have sufficient time to hear an oncoming cyclists. Particularly relevant for those trying to cross the concept at points beyond the allocated pedestrian crossings. Meetings and feedback with primary, secondary schools. The general public and through previous project experience such as conversations with the RNIB. none Disability Physical and mental. Including the experiences of people with long term limiting health conditions. Older mobility challenged residents live in the community. They use mobility aids to get around. Changes in surface levels such as kerbing can limit some people’s ability to physically move their bike. Those with hearing impairment have expressed concerns regarding ability to hear and see oncoming traffic or cyclists and have sufficient time to take action Face to face meeting with residents in the community and survey feedback from the public. Previous experience from other projects. none Ethnicity Including impact relating to skin colour, nationality, language spoken and country of origin. People identifying as Gypsy / Travellers are protected by this characteristic. Some users from some ethnic groups have a view that they may be more vulnerable to assault or verbal abuse as members of particular ethnic groups. Safety concerns relate to the creation of unsupervised spaces and places that might support Online data search. Points shared through design team conversation No empirical evidence to support what might be a generalised viewpoint. Feedback reflects subjective view of some individuals and
Page 74
72 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com intimidating behaviour by some individuals. Promotion of natural surveillance and appropriate lighting is important to inclusive / welcoming design. Challenges also relate to signage and language barriers. may not reflect the group overall. Not all ethnic groups surveyed or view points have been recorded so there is a high risk of generalisation. Sex Some user groups feel they are unsafe passing through or along spaces which is less well lit. Appropriate levels of lighting and natural surveillance can help address these perceptions. Online data search. Points shared through design team conversation. No evidence to support what is likely to be a personal view held by the individual. No safety concerns relating to sex have been received via the community survey. Gender reassignment Where someone is living part / full time as the opposite gender to their assigned sex at birth. Some user groups suffering from gender dysphoria may feel they are unsafe or more vulnerable to attack when passing through or along spaces which are less well lit. Appropriate levels of lighting and natural surveillance can help address these perceptions. Online data search. Points shared through design team conversation. No evidence to support what is likely to be a personal view held by the individual. No safety concerns relating to gender have been received via the community survey. Marriage and Civil Partnership Some male or females living together out with marriage or in a civil partnership may feel less secure or victimised by other people using the travel route. This perception of risk may be the result of religious belief. No data available. No evidence to support what is likely to be a personal view held by the individual. No safety concerns relating to marital status have been received via the community survey. Pregnancy and Maternity This covers women as soon as they become pregnant. In the workplace this includes pregnancy-related illness. When a woman gives birth or is breastfeeding, this characteristic protects them for 26 weeks. Parents in the community do walk the project route but numbers are low are proportionately lower. Use of private car is preferred for ease and convenience noting the space between places, weather and concerns have been raised regarding shared use of the road and safety challenges of maintaining access for those reliant upon car use. Face to face meeting with residents in the community and survey feedback. Few participating parents to provide comment by anecdotal evidence provided from wider island community
Page 75
73 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Religion / Belief Including the experiences of people with no religion or belief. Some user groups have a view that they may be more vulnerable to assault or verbal abuse as members of particular religious groups. Safety concerns relate to the creation of unsupervised spaces and places where would anti-social activity might take place. Promotion of natural surveillance and appropriate lighting is important to inclusive design. There are multiple churches on the island supports some religious groups and can be accessed via the road. Online data search. Points shared through design team conversation No empirical evidence to support what might be a generalised viewpoint. Feedback reflects subjective view of some individuals and may not reflect the group overall. Not all religious groups surveyed or view points have been recorded so there is a high risk of generalisation. Sexual Orientation Some people can feel they are unsafe passing through or along spaces which they believe they have less than appropriate lighting and natural surveillance. In these situations their perception of risk due to verbal or physical assault is elevated. The inclusion of spaces with limited natural surveillance can also present opportunities to individuals with protected characteristics. Online data search. Points shared through design team conversation. No evidence to support what is likely to be a personal view held by the individual. No safety concerns relating to sexual orientation have been received via the community survey. Other marginalised groups Including but not exclusive to the experiences of unpaid carers, homeless people, current and ex-offenders, people with addictions, care experienced people, people living in rural areas. Some people from some marginalised groups have a view that they may be more vulnerable to assault or verbal abuse as members of particular marginalised groups. Safety concerns relate to the creation of unsupervised spaces and places where anti-social behaviour might occur. Promotion of natural surveillance and appropriate lighting is important to inclusive design. As a rural community the distance and acceptance of the challenge of access to everyday services is considerably greater than that on the mainland. Online data search. Points shared through design team conversation No empirical evidence to support what might be a generalised viewpoint. Feedback reflects subjective view of some individuals and may not reflect the group overall. Not all marginalised groups surveyed or view points have been recorded so there is a high risk of generalisation. Cross Cutting Where two or more characteristics overlap and the proposal affects those people in a specific way The project will support access to improved walking and cycling travel. The promotion of walking is at odds with the needs of cyclists and vice versa. Some user groups are at 'odds' with the needs of local drivers who wish to access places quickly. Conversations and Community feedback. Conversations and Community feedback.
Page 76
74 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com These needs are in turn at 'odds' with the actions of tourists arriving on the island by private car. What is currently known Source(s) Gaps in Evidence Mainland rural population The island co-exists through a dependency with the mainland through the passenger ferry service. Access to Rothesay is via car, ferry and bus service provides support. The equality challenges are typical to those associated with rural island living. Community conversations. Census and Placemaking tool results. No gaps identified. Island populations The community consists of many people who live throughout the area, have many different aspects of travel with no difficulty. Community conversations. Census and Placemaking tool results No gaps identified Low income There is no single definition or measure of low income. Some indicators suggest that low income is where individuals living in households receive below 60% of UK median income. Scottish Government’s Children in Families With Limited Resources Across Scotland 2014-2016 defines low income as ‘household income below 70% of the Scottish median after housing cost’. Access to travel is not a challenge for Rothesay. The movement of goods and services are often at a higher comparable cost to the mainland. This cost disparity can exacerbate difference in wealth, health and welfare. Online research. Published research no gaps identified Low wealth Not having access to wealth (including for example, financial products, equity from housing, decent pension, accessible saving). People who have low wealth lack protection from socio-economic disadvantage. Access to travel is not a challenge for the community. The movement of goods and services is often at a higher comparable cost to the mainland. This cost disparity can exacerbate difference in wealth, health and welfare. Online research. Published research. No gaps identified.
Page 77
75 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Material deprivation Inability to access basic goods and services. Access to travel is a challenge for rural communities and remote communities. The movement of goods and services is often at a higher comparable cost to the mainland. This cost disparity can exacerbate difference in wealth, health and welfare. Census and place standard tool feedback None Area deprivation Areas where there are concentrations of deprived households. Access to travel is not a challenge for area deprivation as many residents own cars and drive quite often, some areas also have bus stops which can pass in and out of Rothesay. Online research. Published research no gaps identified Socio-economic background Relates to the context in which a person has been raised or in which they live. Disadvantage may arise from parents’ education, employment and income (social class). Access to travel is a challenge for rural communities and remote communities. The movement of goods and services is often at a great comparable cost to the mainland. This cost disparity can exacerbate difference in wealth, health and welfare. Online research. Published research. No gaps identified. Communities of place Refers to people who are bound together because of where they live, work, visit, or otherwise spend a continuous portion of their time. This may include rural, remote and island areas. Challenges associated with community living including higher car dependency and cost of living Census and place standard tool feedback. None. Section 3: Impact of proposal Impact on service users Protected characteristic Negative No Impact Positive Don’t Know Action required for impact be known Details (incl. action taken to minimise negative and/or maximise positive impact) Age Including the experiences of young people (age Any proposal will have some positive and Consider user group design separation Many of the communities younger generation are independently mobile. The travel distances in the
Page 78
76 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 18 and under) and older people. negative challenges to people of different ages and abilities. Overall, the proposal wont prioritise one age group over another if space allows community between places mean travel by car is the only practical option even though many of the children show a willingness to walk and cycle and do walk and cycle regular. Personal safety is not currently a community concern with some of the younger adults often cycling and walking during the hours of darkness. The more mature generation has expressed concerns relating to accessibility challenges, noting the limited road width and loss of access through changes to parking. Steep gradients should be best minimised or avoided. Cycle speeds can be intimidating (particularly e-bikes) to some older people and measures to clarify the priority of the route to pedestrians and provide cycle speed control measures cannot yet be effectively managed. The concept will seek to minimise road crossings by keeping the route on the same side of the carriageway as much as reasonably practicable. The design includes additional benches as requested by the community to
Page 79
77 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com provide more frequent rest opportunities for the less able- bodied noting the overall length of the route is around 1.45km. The design does include for user segregation meaning that multiple user groups which will address some of these challenges but will create other challenges for crossing the route beyond the allocated crossing points. No additional play areas are promoted as the community did not identify them as preference. Lighting is provided via existing street lighting. Disability Including the experiences of people with long term limiting health conditions. Any proposal will have some positive and negative challenges to people of different abilities. Overall, the proposal will be a net improvement overall as it provides infrastructure where there Consider user group design separation. Install measures to manage cyclist speeds. We have considered accessibility by those less able, noting the design is a shared use path which supports segregation of user groups. By using the existing road route we have avoided steep or lengthy inclines and declines which keeps the route accessible by the mobility impaired. We have ensured pedestrian priority in the project as far as possible with the route changes seeking to provide a more coherent and continual route. This is achieved by removing
Page 80
78 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com is currently none vegetation and improving sightlines. Ethnicity Including impact relating to skin colour, nationality, language spoken and country of origin. People identifying as Gypsy / Travellers are protected by this characteristic. The route concept includes good practice design to minimise people accessing dark or unwelcoming spaces that might discourage use by some user groups. However, the island is a remote community and much of the route does not benefit from natural surveillance The ethnicity of the population in the community is Scottish / white. The spoken language is English and Gaelic. Route signage will be provided bi- lingual. The route is being designed to support access by all races and we are unaware of any design features that would influence users within this category. There are no published details of path design considerations relevant to race that are not equally as relevant to other user group criterion. Sex The route concept includes good practice design to minimise people accessing dark or unwelcoming spaces that might discourage use by some user groups. However, the island is a remote community and much of the route does not benefit from natural surveillance The concept design supports mobility by all user groups. The route design is promoted to support mobility by a unaccompanied 12 year old. We are not aware of any design criterion relevant to path design that is unique to this category.
Page 81
79 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Gender reassignment Where someone is living part / full time as the opposite gender to their assigned sex at birth. The route concept includes good practice design to minimise people accessing dark or unwelcoming spaces that might discourage use by some user groups. However, the island is a remote community and much of the route does not benefit from natural surveillance The concept design supports mobility by all user groups. The route design is promoted to support mobility by a unaccompanied 12 year old. We are not aware of any design criterion relevant to path design that is unique to this category. We also note participation of two individuals within the community feedback who suffer from gender dysphoria and inclusion of Bute Pride within the concept design consultation. Marriage and Civil Partnership Not measurable. Pregnancy and Maternity This covers women as soon as they become pregnant. In the workplace this includes pregnancy- related illness. When a woman gives birth or is breastfeeding, this characteristic protects them for 26 weeks. The separation of user groups to provide level- priority walking route that is not shared with vehicles will improve the projects attractiveness. The concept design supports mobility by all user groups. The route design is promoted to support mobility by a unaccompanied 12 year old.
Page 82
80 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Religion / Belief Including the experiences of people with no religion or belief. The intervention will include good practice design to minimise provision of dark or unwelcoming spaces that might discourage use by some user groups. However, the area is a remote community and much of the project does not benefit from natural surveillance The concept design supports mobility by all user groups. The route design is promoted to support mobility by a unaccompanied 12 year old. The route will continue to be available to persons of any religion or belief. The location of the route nearer the coast may appeal to some individuals with a religious belief rooted in nature. Sexual Orientation Other marginalised groups Including but not exclusive to the experiences of unpaid carers, homeless people, current and ex- offenders, people with addictions, care experienced people, people living in rural areas. The intervention will include good practice design to minimise provision of dark or unwelcoming spaces that might discourage use by some user groups. However, the area is a remote community and much of the project does not benefit from natural surveillance The concept design supports mobility by all user groups. The route design is promoted to support mobility by a unaccompanied 12 year old. Cross Cutting Where two or more characteristics overlap and the proposal affects those people in a specific way Conflicts between cyclists, pedestrians and vehicles. The standard of design includes a low level of provision narrow but segregated cycle route. User groups are expected to interact sensibly. This may present a risk to some user groups such as the older and less able who have difficulty in hearing oncoming
Page 83
81 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com vehicles or cyclists. The design will include some basic wayfinding signage that should seek to reinforce pedestrian priority. The route has a high level of coherence making it easier for groups to navigate between and across sections. At these locations, user conflict risk is increased. There is little can be done from a design perspective to manage user group behaviours. It is also noted that visiting drivers can often choose to arrive by car and place continued strain on available community parking. Fairer Scotland Duty Mainland rural population Island populations x
Page 84
82 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Low income There is no single definition or measure of low income. Some indicators suggest that low income is where individuals living in households receive below 60% of UK median income. Scottish Government’s Children in Families With Limited Resources Across Scotland 2014-2016 defines low income as ‘household income below 70% of the Scottish median after housing cost’. Improved access to services will address the challenges noted through the SIMD and Place scoring tool. Accessible routes will support the movement of people on all points of the social scale. The routes should provide some support to social interaction between the community. During the stage 1 engagement, it was noted that promotion on a route along the existing road corridor would be preferred as it is within this space that the majority of the communities social engagement occurs. Whilst no data is known about low income families within the community the principle of providing improved access to people to place by improved sustainable travel options is known to support individuals from all income abilities. Low wealth Not having access to wealth (including for example, financial products, equity from housing, decent pension, accessible saving). People who have low wealth lack protection from socio-economic disadvantage. Improved access to services will address the challenges noted through the SIMD and Place scoring tool. Accessible routes will support the movement of people on all points of the social scale. The route may support new business opportunities through tourist cycling groups which could contribute to wealth creation. Whilst the route is not directly linked to wealth it is again supportive of wealth creation.
Page 85
83 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Material deprivation Inability to access basic goods and services. Intervention is unlikely to create a significant enough impact to address the areas overall rural remoteness and the cost of living in a community. The intervention is unlikely to create a significant enough impact to address the areas overall rural remoteness and the cost of living in a community. The route links Rothesay's pavilion to Glenburn Road which might provide some betterment to the communitas located to the West or East of Rothesay noting these folks will still need to travel to Rothesay to access goods and services in any case. The route will not provide any improvement to the location of services but may accessing services more comfortable. Area deprivation Areas where there are concentrations of deprived households. Intervention is unlikely to create a significant enough impact to address the areas overall rural remoteness and the cost of living in a community. Intervention is unlikely to create a significant enough impact to address the areas overall rural remoteness and the cost of living in a community.
Page 86
84 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Socio-economic background Relates to the context in which a person has been raised or in which they live. Disadvantage may arise from parents’ education, employment and income (social class). Improved access to services will address the challenges noted through the SIMD and Place scoring tool. Accessible routes will support the movement of people on all points of the social scale. Communities of place Refers to people who are bound together because of where they live, work, visit, or otherwise spend a continuous portion of their time. This may include rural, remote and island areas. Improved access to services will address the challenges noted through the SIMD and Place scoring tool. Accessible routes will support the movement of people on all points of the social scale. The route should support social interaction between the community. The route will be located along the existing road as promoted by the community. This will continue to support community social interaction and maintain a community connection with the residents. Communities of interest Refers to groups of people who share an identity or an experience. They do not need to live in the same area, however. Improved access to services will address the challenges noted through the SIMD and Place scoring tool n/a
Page 87
85 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com If you have identified any impacts on service users, explain what these will be. Impact on service deliverers (including employees, volunteers etc) Protected characteristic Negative No Impact Positive Don’t Know Action required for impact be known Details (incl. action taken to minimise negative and/or maximise positive impact) Age Including the experiences of young people (age 18 and under) and older people. x As per Service Users. Disability Including the experiences of people with long term limiting health conditions. x As per Service Users. Ethnicity Including impact relating to skin colour, nationality, language spoken and country of origin. People identifying as Gypsy / Travellers are protected by this characteristic. x As per Service Users. Sex x As per Service Users Gender reassignment Where someone is living part / full time as the opposite gender to their assigned sex at birth. x As per Service Users. Marriage and Civil Partnership x As per Service Users.
Page 88
86 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Pregnancy and Maternity This covers women as soon as they become pregnant. In the workplace this includes pregnancy-related illness. When a woman gives birth or is breastfeeding, this characteristic protects them for 26 weeks. x As per Service Users. Religion / Belief Including the experiences of people with no religion or belief. x As per Service Users. Sexual Orientation x As per Service Users. Other marginalised groups Including but not exclusive to the experiences of unpaid carers, homeless people, current and ex- offenders, people with addictions, care experienced people, and people living in rural areas. x As per Service Users. Cross Cutting Where two or more characteristics overlap and the proposal affects those people in a specific way x As per Service Users. Fairer Scotland Duty Mainland rural population X As per Service Users. Island populations x As per Service Users. Low income There is no single definition or measure of low income. Some indicators suggest that low income is where individuals living in households receive below 60% of UK median income. Scottish Government’s Children in Families With Limited Resources Across Scotland 2014- 2016 defines low income as x As per Service Users.
Page 89
87 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com ‘household income below 70% of the Scottish median after housing cost’. Low wealth Not having access to wealth (including, for example, financial products, equity from housing, decent pension, accessible saving). People who have low wealth lack protection from socio- economic disadvantage. x As per Service Users Material deprivation Inability to access basic goods and services. x As per Service Users. Area deprivation Areas where there are concentrations of deprived households. x As per Service Users. Socio-economic background Relates to the context in which a person has been raised or in which they live. Disadvantage may arise from parents’ education, employment and income (social class). x As per Service Users. Communities of place Refers to people who are bound together because of where they live, work, visit, or otherwise spend a continuous portion of their time. This may include rural, remote and island areas. x As per Service Users. Communities of interest Refers to groups of people who share an identity or an experience. They do not need to live in the same area, however. x As per Service Users.
Page 90
88 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Section 4: Interdependencies Is this proposal likely to have any knock-on effects for any other activities carried out by or on behalf of the Council? No Details of knock-on effects identified. None Select the overall assessment result, 1-4, which applies Overall Assessment Result Justification No major change If this is selected you are confirming that the EqSEIA demonstrates the proposal is robust and there is no possible adverse impact. n/a Continue the proposal If this is selected you are confirming that the EqSEIA identifies possible adverse impact or missed opportunities but the proposal can be justified. At this early stage, the project options can be developed to provide a positive influence on all user groups within the community. Consideration of a project alignment which supports access by those less able will increase the interventions attractiveness for use by a wider audience. Adjust the proposal If this is selected you are confirming that the EqSEIA identifies possible adverse impact or missed opportunities which suggest the proposal needs to be adjusted. n/a Stop and remove the proposal The proposal shows actual or possible unlawful discrimination. It must be halted or significantly changed. n/a High Level Amendments made to Proposal due to EqSEIA
Page 91
89 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Protected characteristic Specific Adjustments made due to EqSEIA Lessons Learned Age Including the experiences of young people (age 18 and under) and older people. None n/a Disability Including the experiences of people with long term limiting health conditions. None n/a Ethnicity Including impact relating to skin colour, nationality, language spoken and country of origin. People identifying as Gypsy / Travellers are protected by this characteristic. None n/a Sex None n/a Gender reassignment Where someone is living part / full time as the opposite gender to their assigned sex at birth. None n/a Marriage and Civil Partnership None n/a Pregnancy and Maternity This covers women as soon as they become pregnant. In the workplace, this includes pregnancy-related illness. When a woman gives birth or is breastfeeding, this characteristic protects them for 26 weeks. None n/a Religion / Belief Including the experiences of people with no religion or belief. None n/a Sexual Orientation None n/a Other marginalised groups Including but not exclusive to the experiences of unpaid carers, homeless people, current and ex-offenders, people with addictions, care experienced people, people living in rural areas. None n/a Cross Cutting Where two or more characteristics overlap and the proposal affects those people in a specific way. None n/a Fairer Scotland Duty Mainland rural population None n/a
Page 92
90 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Island populations None n/a Low income There is no single definition or measure of low income. Some indicators suggest that low income is where individuals living in households receive below 60% of the UK median income. Scottish Government’s Children in Families With Limited Resources Across Scotland 2014-2016 defines low income as ‘household income below 70% of the Scottish median after housing cost’. None n/a Low wealth Not having access to wealth (including for example, financial products, equity from housing, decent pension, accessible saving). People who have low wealth lack protection from socio-economic disadvantage. None n/a Material deprivation Inability to access basic goods and services. None n/a Area deprivation Areas where there are concentrations of deprived households. None n/a Socio-economic background Relates to the context in which a person has been raised or in which they live. Disadvantages may arise from parents’ education, employment and income (social class). None n/a Communities of place Refers to people who are bound together because of where they live, work, visit, or otherwise spend a continuous portion of their time. This may include rural, remote and island areas. None n/a Communities of interest Refers to groups of people who share an identity or an experience. They do not need to live in the same area, however. None n/a Section 6: Monitoring and Review How will the equality and socio-economic impacts of the proposal be monitored and evaluated?
Page 93
91 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Update the SEQiA at the next stage of the project once the design is developed. Action to be taken to: Provide a best practice design • Mitigate possible negative impact(s) (listed under Section 3); • Promote possible positive impact(s) and; • Gather further information or evidence. Action Lead Timescale When is the proposal due to be reviewed? Jul-25