Appendix 2 - Rosneath Phase 2 Enagagement Report
Argyll and Bute Council · 10 December 2024
Back to Helensburgh & Lomond Area Committee — 10 December 2024 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
Rosneath, Phase 2 Marina to ‘Y’ Junction at Castle Caravan Park Stage 1&2 Combined, Community Engagement Report DATE: February 2024 REF: 501047 VERSION: Draft v1
Page 2
MARK RINKUS Managing Director Mark.rinkus@connectedtp.com Click the icons to view our website and LinkedIn +44 7515834101 Contents 1 APPROACH TO TRAVEL BEHAVIOUR CHANGE AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT1 2 STAGE 1 - SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS ................................................ 15 3 STAGE 1 - COMMUNITY FEEDBACK TOOL (CFT) RESULTS ............................... 26 4 2019 PLACE STANDARD TOOL RESULTS .......................................................... 30 5 STAGE 1 - STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK ............................................................... 32 6 STAGE 1 - BARRIERS AND OPPORTUNITIES TO ACTIVE TRAVEL .................... 38 7 STAGE 2 – DEVELOPING THE CONCEPTS ......................................................... 42 8 STAGE 2 - SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS ................................................ 45 9 STAGE 2 - COMMUNITY FEEDBACK TOOL (CFT) RESULTS ............................... 54 10 OUR LESSONS LEARNT ..................................................................................... 44 APPENDIX A – ROSNEATH PRIMARY SCHOOL - HANDS UP SURVEY 2023 .............. 45 APPENDIX B – CONSULTATION EVENT REGISTER OF ATTENDANCE ........................ 46 APPENDIX C – CONSULTATION STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP NOTES ...................... 48 APPENDIX D – STATUTORY STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP NOTES ............................ 49
Page 3
MARK RINKUS Managing Director Mark.rinkus@connectedtp.com Click the icons to view our website and LinkedIn +44 7515834101
Page 4
2 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com ` STAGE 1 - TRAVEL BEHAVIOUR CHANGE AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Page 5
1 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 1 APPROACH TO TRAVEL BEHAVIOUR CHANGE AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 1.1 Relevant Previous Engagement and Consultation The project consultation builds on the community dialogue undertaken by Argyll and Bute Council (ABC) during 2018 in support if the early exploration of Phase 2 route alignment options to extend the completed phase 1 Active Travel route around Camsail Bay to the ‘Y’ junction at the Castle Caravan Park. The report makes reference to other relevant assessments including the ABC 2019 Place Standard Assessment. 1.2 Stakeholder Mapping A stakeholder mapping matrix was developed in conjunction with the design team's relevant experience best practice stakeholder mapping. The stakeholder mapping provides a contact database for those to be involved within the study setting out each stakeholders forecast level of influence in the design process. The mapping process was led by the council using their knowledge of the community and appropriate experience. The stakeholders were categorised into engagement tiers reflecting their engagement hierarchy using the mapping matrix (shown opposite). The process was collaborative with members of the study steering group helping to define the map which evolved through the project lifecycle. 1.3 Engagement Planning A Consultation and Engagement Plan was developed setting out the studies Stage 1 engagement programme. The plan was used to identify all proposed activities, the activity order, potential audience and engagement method. The plan would provide a reference point during the study progress meetings to ensure that all parties were aware of forthcoming actions and had a chance to contribute or influence the approach. This provided the opportunity to incorporate local Tiered Stakeholder Mapping Developed Mapping Matrix
Page 6
2 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com knowledge and procedural best practices. The plan identified a range of activities, which, if realised, would support comprehensive engagement. A summary of the key project engagement activities considered in support of stage 1 is summarised as follows: • Study Branding Identity. • Project Press Release. • Study Facebook Page. • Regular Community Visits. • Study Website Space. • Engagement with Local Groups. • Press and Media Support. • Community Feedback Tool (CFT). • Schools Engagement. • Public Community Engagement Event. • Community Group Meetings. • Stakeholder Meetings (virtual and face to face). A summary of each action plan is provided in the remainder of this chapter. 1.4 Study Branding / Study Identity Whilst active travel studies do benefit from the development of a bespoke study branded title and logo, it was agreed with the project steering group, at the project outset that no branding should be applied to this project. The primary reason being that the study is considered to be strategically less significant. 1.5 Project Press Release From our experience of other active travel projects, whilst the project is managed by Argyll and Bute Council (ABC) Strategic Transportation Delivery Team, other council divisions may not be aware of the project. This can generate confusion and on occasion, conflicts between projects where more than one project is being developed, each with differing aims. To assist in ‘setting the right project message’ and reducing confusion risk, the study team strongly recommended authoring and issuing a Project Press Release (PPR) and engaging the council’s Marketing and Communications (M&C) team for support. The PPR is typically authored by the lead council sponsor in conjunction with the M&C team. The resulting PPR would then be circulated internally to all council departments and issued externally to local press and media outlets. ABC manage a portfolio of active travel projects, where all projects are advertised and communicated within and across the council. The programme supports the sharing of project information. Through discussion, it was agreed that no PPR would be necessary for this project. 1.6 Facebook Study Page As part of the study lifecycle, provision of a bespoke study Facebook Page was discussed but again was not provided as the project is too small to benefit from a dedicated page. As an alternative the existing Rosneath and Cylinder Community
Page 7
3 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Councils and Rosneath Community Facebook pages were utilised. Our design team posted updates that encourage anyone with an interest in the study to engage with the study team at any point. The Facebook Page was effective with the community engaging to ask questions throughout the duration of the study. The page was used as a direct channel of communication between the design team and the community. Our study team managed the page daily to maintain responsiveness. The page was used to inform the community of upcoming project events, advertise the teams’ visits to the community and publish our visit itinerary. The page was also used to share post visit photos and video. These were produced to provide a post event snap-shot of the design team's community interaction and would assist those unable to attend in person to appreciate what the design team had been doing. 1.7 Regular Community Visits A key ambition of the project delivery was to ensure the community remained central to the project delivery and would feel strong collaboration through ‘face to face’ meetings. To achieve this aim, our engagement strategy centred around the design team being physically present within the community where appropriate. Using the community Facebook Pages, we advertised our intended visits which included a day within the community where the design team invited and met with local groups, school and community councils. We advertised an itinerary of our visits providing an opportunity for the community to ‘drop-in’ to our evening public event. To support the conversations, we used our digital ‘platform’ of materials. These included our pre-prepared constraints mapping used to record ideas and note comments, barriers and aspirations. The plan was then digitised, comments added to our Community Feedback Tool (CFT) and used as the foundation of the constraints mapping process and route option development. The ability to demonstrate to the community how their comments had been considered is key to developing trust and engagement between the design team and the community. The Community Facebook Page was Well Used to Support the Project
Page 8
4 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 1.8 Study Website To support the lifecycle of the project, a study webpage was developed and hosted within the Connected Transport Planning Ltd (CTP) website. The use of our study website removes the constraints of traditional website hosting costs and the costs associated with the use of expensive service providers such as Commonplace. The website utilised our project template which was personalised to reflect the project community using images of the village’s recognisable buildings to assist in making the space familiar to the community. The website provided the ‘spine’ of the project, designed to be accessible at any point and not just a ‘bolt on’ point of reference. The site provided access to all public exhibition and reference material, videos, a range of feedback tools and general project information. The site also incorporated a range of functions including a news feed, a Facebook link and an interactive constraints and option map from where a series of micro-animations visualisations could also be accessed. These animations were developed from local photos taken at key points along the study route and designed to present a vision to the audience that would assist their understanding of the project’s possible outcomes. The website enabled those unable to speak with us in-person to view and comment on any of the materials at any point that suited them. Noting the remoteness of the community, the use of the website was a perfect tool to support wide-reaching engagement on Rosneath. Constraint Mapping and Face – Face Meetings were Constructive
Page 9
5 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com The website was open to access by the public for a period of 2 weeks following the stage 1 public event. 1.9 Bespoke Survey Questionnaire A survey questionnaire was developed for the project to provide a platform for the community to share with us their concerns and barriers to active travel. The survey was designed using our experience of supporting similar projects, where we noted that to maximise community feedback, the survey should be less than 15 questions to minimise survey fatigue and maximise the chance of receiving complete responses. Using the questions from previous studies as a reference, a bespoke stage 1 survey questionnaire was developed that would capture core community demographics relating to age and health and sought to learn how the community used the existing travel route and their aspirations for a future design. The survey formed a core component of the engagement process and was the primary informant of quantitative feedback, used to support the design process. To maximise accessibility by all possible user groups and abilities, the survey was hosted online via the study website using QR codes, website URLs and by contact email. The survey also included links to the study website tools such as the Community Feedback Tool (CFT) which would assist the community in providing comments by location on a map. Physical copies of the survey were also distributed at various locations within Rosneath and nearby Kilcreggan such as the Rosneath Primary School, butchers, St.Gildas Church and Castle Caravan Park. The leaflets were also hand issued by the design team for a period during a day outside the Rosneath CO-OP shop with a number of community representatives supporting wider distribution. The Rosneath, Phase 2 Marina to ‘Y’ Junction Website including Custom Local Images
Page 10
6 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 1.10 Media Support To raise the community’s general awareness of the study, the local press and media platforms that cover the study area were contacted. The main news publication in the community is Lochside Press and the community Facebook Page. The paper prints provided physical and digital advertisement of the study and was again used to advertise our contact details. ABC’s Marketing and Communications (M&C) team were also approached for marketing engagement support. A series of event advertisement leaflets were developed to advertise the community events. A number of the locations planned to post the flyers either couldn’t accept the flyer or were unable to display it. Notwithstanding, the flyers were successfully posted at various locations. These included: • GP Surgery/ Medical Centre, • Rosneath primary school; • Butchers; • St.Gildas Church; • Castle Caravan Park; • Kilcreggan Bar; • Kilcreggan Costcutter. The flyers were also utilised post-event as a ‘Thank You’ to the community and to continue the promotion of the digital feedback options offered via the project website. This approach meant that those members of the community unable to attend the advertised event would still have the option to provide feedback or ask the design team questions, enabling wide-reaching community engagement. Public Event Flyer Advertising the Event
Page 11
7 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Lochside Press Coverage of the Study Helped Raise Awareness
Page 12
8 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 1.11 Community Feedback Tool (CFT) Developed as an alternative to the Commonplace platform, our bespoke engagement platform that supports community feedback using a project map and comment pins. The tool allows comments to be added by location with comments visible to everyone. The tool was hosted within the project website and again used a series of QR codes, website URLs and a named email contact to support access to other feedback methods and information platforms. The CFT was prepopulated with some of the designs teams own observations using the constraint plan. 1.12 Schools Engagement Rosneath Primary School Rosneath Primary School catchment extends to include the community of Rosneath and adjacent Clynder. The school role includes around 80 pupils from primary 1 to primary 7. The design team arranged to visit the Primary 6 and Primary 7 pupils (36 pupils) for a 2-hour period to learn more about the younger generation's hopes for the route. The timing of the meeting worked well as it developed on the classes ongoing theme of problem identification and solutions. Following introductions and an appropriate project discussion, an interactive Hands-up Survey (HuS) exercise was undertaken using stickers and travel mode pictures. The use of this approach energised the children to participate in the engagement discussion whilst also providing a visual result of their current travel mode decisions. The results of the HuS are shown in Appendix A. and shows that around 50% of the children currently walk or travel by car. Following the HuS, the team discussed with the children and teachers how they would feel about the project path if it were to be constructed. 100% (36) of the children and 100% (2) of the teachers supported the proposal and agreed it would be a positive addition. A summary of the school children’s feedback about what they think is important in the design is shown in the following figure. Community Feedback Tool (CFT) allows Comments to be added by Location
Page 13
9 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Rosneath Primary School Provided Good Design Insight
Page 14
10 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com With the children in ‘problem-identification mode’, the team utilised our bespoke primary school asset pack to work with the children to develop their own ideas for a streetscape and how they would solve the travel issues they had earlier identified. The children were then split into three groups and tasked with developing/exploring ideas using the kit, using drawings and plasticene to help people and animals move around within the space they had created. Some very creative options were explored and positive feedback from parents via the Facebook Page. Rosneath Primary made Great Use of the Asset Pack to Design a Streetscape Feedback from the Rosneath Primary School was Positive
Page 15
11 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 1.13 Parent Teacher Association (PTA) To maximise the reach of the engagement, the school was approached to advertise awareness of the project through communication with the local parents via the Parent Teacher Association (PTA). 1.14 Community Public Event Following the physical and digital advertisements, an event was hosted by the design team and ABC within Rosneath on the 7th of November 2023. The event opened to the public at 16:00 to 20:45 with the start time set to maximise attendance. 10 large format, graphically designed A0 presentation boards were displayed to provide the audience with a story map of the study, process and consultation purpose. The event was advertised to the community through the use of banners and bunting that was installed. The team also posted live Facebook updates. All visitors were given the choice of completing the project survey questionnaire or accessing our range of digital tools to provide feedback via QR codes and URL links. A key advantage of the digital platform is, that even with the adverse impact of winter weather on attendance, the materials could still be accessed and commented upon at a time that best suited the consultees. This was particularly relevant noting the event took place on a dark winter’s weekday night with only 32 people managing to meet the team. A register extract of those attending the event is shown in Appendix B. Engineers of the Future?
Page 16
12 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com A weekday dark winter night may have had an adverse impact on the Communities Attendance
Page 17
13 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 1.15 Micro-Visual Transition Animations To assist the public in understanding how and what an active travel route may look like within their community a series of transition animations and sketches of the future were developed. Each animation was based on a photographed viewpoint of locations along the route that the public would recognise. The transitions lasted 10 seconds and showed the transformation of the existing viewpoint to a proposed future vision. The animations were hosted as part of the study website experience and embedded within the large format constraints and options maps. 1.16 Community Group Meetings A number of requests to meet were issued to the various local groups within the community. Unfortunately, no responses were received from the groups noting their members may still have provided representation through the public survey questionnaire and online materials. Micro-Transition Animations were effective in showing what could be developed
Page 18
14 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com STAGE 1 - SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS
Page 19
15 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 2 STAGE 1 - SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS 2.1 Sources of Community Feedback The multiple engagement platforms made available to the community supported the community to engage with the project providing feedback both digitally and physically. A summary of the received feedback by the various engagement platforms used is summarised in the following table. Format Responses Received Survey (Paper) 5 Survey (Digital) 75 Community Feedback Tool (Digital) 13 Total Quantitative Responses 93 Community Public Event Attendees 32 Stakeholder Meetings 11 Total Non-Quantitative Responses 43 1 https://statistics.gov.scot/atlas/resource?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fstatistics.gov.sc ot%2Fid%2Fstatistical-geography%2FS12000006&inactive=true 2.2 Survey Sample Validation A total of 93 quantitative responses were received from Rosneath’s population of 1,2601 residents. This represents a sample size of 7% which is slightly lower than the 10 – 15% aimed for. The lower-than-expected sample may reflect that the projects is not viewed as contentious as it is simply seeking to extend the phase 1 section of the route which has already been constructed. The winter dark nights / changing of the season may also have impacted on the community’s appetite to attend the public event. It was also noted that none of the 93 survey respondents identified as an interested land owner.
Page 20
16 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 2.3 Participant Demographics Of the participant responses received the majority (41%) were aged between 40- 59. 14% were younger than 40 with 3% of these younger than 21. 40% were older than 60. These results highlight that the survey has not captured the views of the younger community (0% younger than 15) noting however that the school event was well attended and their views have been recorded through less prescriptive measures than the survey questionnaire. This question was asked as it is important to capture the views of people with varying levels of life experience to assist in the design process. Of the total respondents, 56% were women / girls and 36% as men / boys. No respondents identified as non-binary and 8% of respondents indicated that they would prefer not to say. Overall, we consider that the respondents reflect a reasonable cross-section of the community however the results are slightly skewed more towards the views of females.
Page 21
17 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Respondents were asked if they lived on Rosneath. This question was relevant to ask as it is important to understand if the respondent is responding with longer term experience of the community or as a tourist/visitor. 76% of respondents are full time residents in the community and 24% have either lived in the community historically, or visited at least once a year. The majority of participants considered themselves to be able-bodied and did not have a health or disability that impacted on their everyday mobility (64%). 6% indicated they did have some health or disability which limits their day-to-day activity a lot, 24% indicated their disability or health issue would affect them a little. 6% of respondents indicated that they would prefer not to say.
Page 22
18 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Of the respondents indicating they did have a health-related disability, 52% indicated their disability was related to mobility or stamina but not breathing related. 4% indicated a challenge relating to hearing, 4% related to poor vision, and 26% indicated they’d prefer not to say. These questions are important to ask as they assist the design team in designing for all user groups, including those with protected characteristics. Participants were asked to qualify their employment status. This question was relevant to ask as the design team will need to consider how the project would support economic activity and support the movement of people to and from places of work. 23% of respondents indicated that they are currently not employed. 40% indicated they were employed either part time or full time, 6% indicated they were self-employed and 31% of respondents said they were retired or not applicable.
Page 23
19 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 2.4 Comparison with 2011 Census To assist in understanding more about how representative the study demographics are, the survey results were compared with the 2011 Census for Rosneath2. The results indicate that the project feedback demographic by age and all genders is broadly comparable with the census analysis. The community has a marginally higher proportion of female to males and a mature population with 23% over 65 years of age. 2.5 Participant Travel Habits 2 https://www.citypopulation.de/en/uk/scotland/argyll_and_bute/S19002469__ro sneath/ Overall, the study results are considered to capture a good sample of the community, capturing the views of both able bodied and those less able, those in work and those unemployed. 2.6 Views on Opportunities and Barriers to Walking, Cycling & Wheeling? Participants were asked how often they walked or cycled. This question is relevant as it helps us understand the popularity of walking and cycling within the community at present. 59% of respondents indicate that they walk or cycle every day, 13% less than twice a week and 28% between 2 and 4 times a week. These results indicate the community is relatively active and that cycling and walking is a popular travel mode.
Page 24
20 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Following on from this question, participants were then asked how often they typically visited the Rosneath Castle Caravan area (Castle Bay). Only 11% of respondents indicated that they visit the castle caravan area every day, 56% less than twice a week and 33% between 2 and 4 times a week. The results of this question indicate that participants don’t regularly visit Castle Bay frequently. To help us understand how participants currently travel along the route, participants were then asked if they currently walk, cycle or wheel between Rosneath and Rosneath Caravan Park (Castle Bay). Only 6% suggested they currently travel between Rosneath and the caravan area by walking, cycling, or wheeling, every day. 23% indicated they travelled the route between 2 and 4 times a week and 71% indicated they travel the route less than twice a week. Considering the results cumulatively. The project route, whilst the only travel route between both ‘places’ is only occasionally used.
Page 25
21 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Participants were asked to provide an insight into the factors influencing their travel mode decisions. Participants provided a variety of reasons they viewed to be barriers to travel by sustainable travel modes along the project route. To enable the processing and presentation of data, the responses were categorised into a number of themes. A summary of the themes is presented as follows and shown by descending popularity in the following chart: • High Speed Traffic. • Missing Footpath. • Lack Of Lighting. • Debris on Footpath. Considering the responses received, with the exception of inclement or adverse weather which cannot be influenced, the majority of travel barriers relate to the perception traffic speed, a lack of street lighting, the fact that there is no current complete footpath and debris from passing cars. Many of these issues are within the scope of this project design and could be directly addressed through design development.
Page 26
22 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 2.7 Future Opportunities to Improve Active Travel Participants were asked to consider if they believed that the provision of a car free route within the project area would encourage them to walk or cycle more often. 82% of respondents believed that the provision of a route as described through the public engagement process would encourage them to walk and cycle more often and 18% said it would not. To assist the design team in developing the most appropriate route corridor, the community was asked two questions related to the location of the route. Participants were asked if ABC should develop the route on the seaward side of the existing road. 89% of respondents supported the route should be developed on the seaward side of the existing road and 11% would like to consider other possibilities.
Page 27
23 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com The other question asked was, should ABC develop the route away from the road and through the woodlands area. 54% of respondents would rather follow the road route and 46% of respondents said yes, consider other possibilities. Overall, it is reasonably clear that the community are in favour of a project route which would be supported for community use. The route is preferred to be developed on the seaward side of the existing B833 road or as an alternative, a route through the quarry. Widening of the road on the inside of the road within the road verge would appear to be the least popular option. As a final question, participants were asked about their thoughts and aspirations for the considerations the proposed design should take cognisance of. To enable the processing and presentation of the responses, the responses were again categorised into a number of themes. A summary of the themes is presented as follows and shown by descending popularity in the following chart. • Lower Speed Limit. • Good Maintenance. • Tarmac Path. • Minimise Road Crossings. • Cycle Lane. • Scenery. • Accessibility. • Improve Safety.
Page 28
24 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com The feedback from the community to this question provides a good level of insight into the challenges the design is required to address. A number of points offered are directly opposed to each other and highlights the challenges in maintaining a design balance that will address all the points proportionately.
Page 29
25 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com STAGE 1 - COMMUNITY FEEDBACK TOOL (CFT) RESULTS
Page 30
26 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 3 STAGE 1 - COMMUNITY FEEDBACK TOOL (CFT) RESULTS A total of 12 responses were received through the Community Feedback Tool (CFT). The responses were provided anonymously and no age or origin details of the recipient were recorded. Participant's comments were located along the route. In the majority, comments were positive with participants providing concerns relating to visibility, a lack of maintenance and excessive vehicle speeds. Some of the comments provided detailed summaries of localised challenges which will greatly assist the design development process. The feedback received is presented graphically and verbatim as follows.
Page 31
27 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Community Feedback Tool Comments by Location
Page 32
28 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 1 This is the primary road into and out of the peninsula connected ferry with base. 2 distinct hump in road might impact on visibility. 3 Phase 2 starts here 4 Many cyclists use this route to cycle around the peninsula. Travel to Kilcreggan is popular 5 bend is potentially dangerous. realignment might be better 6 Road bend impacts on visibility. Drivers speed along here quickly 7 deer on road may be a collision risk 8 lack of lighting can add to safety concerns. 9 potential to create space to support future path. will improve road safety 10 Caravan Park has now added 40+ motor home hard standings. likely to increase the number of larger vehicles using the route 11 frequency of traffic likely to increase due to expansion of the caravan park.
Page 33
29 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 2019 PLACE STANDARD TOOL RESULTS
Page 34
30 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 4 2019 PLACE STANDARD TOOL RESULTS Between May and October 2019, the Community Planning Partnership (CPP) used the Place Standard tool to engage residents in Argyll and Bute on how they feel about the place(s) that they live and work in Argyll and Bute. The results of the survey indicated that the thematic areas of Natural Space, Feeling Safe, Identity and Sense of Belonging and Social Contact came out with the highest scores, needing the least improvement, when considering Argyll and Bute as a whole. The following themes were recorded as areas for improvement within the Rosneath Community: • Moving Around; • Social Interaction; • Public Transport; • Care and Maintenance; and • Influence and Sense of Control. The community like most other rural communities will face additional challenges associated with moving around to undertake everyday journeys including access to employment are areas for improvement. The feedback from the Place Standard Tool provides a strong indicator of the value of a project such as this, which will support the movement of people, social interaction and moving around.
Page 35
31 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com STAGE 1 - STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK
Page 36
32 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 5 STAGE 1 - STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK To support the design optioneering process, a number of stakeholders identified within the stakeholder mapping were engaged with. A range of engagement methods were used for each group. Stakeholder Meetings The study team met with a range of stakeholders identified through the study mapping process. We utilised consultation mandates to plan 1-2-small group workshop sessions with key stakeholders to introduce the team and discuss the study. Stakeholders included: • Key council staff; • Key local groups; • Local Community Councils; • Other key stakeholders. The workshops followed a similar format providing an introduction to the study, setting ambitions, and introducing the team. ABC Network Management The team met with Raymond Kane of ABC Network Management virtually to discuss the Rosneath project. Following a presentation of the project to date, a constructive conversation explored a number of topics including: • Route alignment challenges, particularly relating to the marina access junction planning approval, details of the Roads Construction Consent (RCC) and implications arising through changes introduced by this project. • A key outcome of the session was to note the application is long standing and all parties have a wish to conclude it ASAP; • The application whilst approved does not yet have an approved Roads Construction Consent (RCC). • The applicant is proposing to reduce the road speed limit from 60mph to 40mph. This is required to allow their design to be technically deliverable within the space available. • The proposal to change the speed limit is not publicly known and is subject to a separate public Traffic Regulatory Order (TRO). Whilst the outcome of the TRO cannot be prejudged, the process will only be progressed if it is highly likely to be positively concluded. • The proposed 40mph reduction is not yet approved as acceptable by ABC. • Any development of the Active Travel route on the seawards side of the road is noted to be only achievable through creation of a new breakwater. Cantilevering a facility is not possible as the existing wall is not structurally suitable.
Page 37
33 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com ABC Planning The team met with Kirsty Sweeney of ABC Planning Team virtually to discuss the Rosneath project. Following a presentation of the project to date, a constructive conversation explored a number of topics including: • Details of Marina Planning Application 09/01089/DET were discussed; • The officer is relatively new to ABC but has been briefed on the application history; • The developer is likely to be / confirmed is in breach of a number of planning conditions. These extend to include ecological considerations; • Any development of the Active Travel route on the seawards side of the road is noted to be only achievable through creation of a new breakwater. • Any changes to the breakwater that are located above the high wate line can be managed through the council planning system but will include SEPA; • Any changes below the high-water line will require involvement of other statutory consultees including through application for a Marine Licence.
Page 38
34 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 5.1 Council Statutory Consultees A summary of the other stakeholder feedback received is summarised as follows. 5.2 Non-Council Statutory Consultees A summary of the non-council stakeholder feedback received is summarised as follows. 5.3 Community Groups Community groups have been engaged through the public engagement process. No direct response has been provided. 5.4 Traditionally Harder to Reach Groups / Individuals Engagement was undertaken with the residents of the community. Unfortunately, no representative of those with protected characteristics took part in the engagement. The Royal National Institute for the Blind (RNIB) was consulted and highlighted that there is no specific representation for Rosneath. 5.5 Landowners and Affected Parties The design team worked with the local community / stakeholder feedback to identify a total of 8 potentially impacted landowners. The Registry of Scotland (ROS) was contacted to obtain current legal land ownership details. These details were included within our landowner engagement tracker and recorded within our stakeholder mapping and constraint mapping (shown in circles). ABC Marine Operations Not Consulted ABC Fleet Public Transport No Issue ABC Outdoor Access No Issue ABC Youth Services No Issue ABC Community Development Team No Issue ABC Economic Development No Issue SEPA Not Consulted Scottish Water No Issue SSE No Issue
Page 39
35 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com At this stage in the route identification process, not all landowners would be impacted as the route corridor is yet to be agreed. To assist in assessing landowner support for each of the identified route options, the landowners likely to be required for each of the routes were contacted by email and where possible by telephone. Where appropriate written letters, including ROS extracts were issued to the addresses provided. A summary of the engagement status by each landowner is presented as follows: • Plot 1. No impact forecast. • Plot 2. No impact forecast. • Plot 3. Is subject to redevelopment with an approved planning application 09/01089/DET. The development includes alteration to the site access junction including the provision of a ghost right turn lane and extension of the 2.5m active travel route along the site frontage. Unfortunately, the planning approved design standard of the planning approved path is for a 2m wide footway with 0.5m verge which is narrower than the guidance recommended 2.5m wide as set out within Scottish Governments Cycle by Design. The landowner is supporting of the active travel project and will reserve a 1.5m land strip to the rear of the approved development footway for development by ABC. • Plot 4. No response to any approaches. • Plot 5. No response to any approaches.
Page 40
36 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com • Plot 6. No response to any approaches. • Plot 7. Marine Licence Dependent Below High-Water Line. ABC above High-Water Line. • Plot 8. No impact forecast. • Plot 9. Understood to be ABC owned to High Water Line. • Plot 10. No impact forecast. A copy of the landowner’s engagement tracker is included in Appendix C.
Page 41
37 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com STAGE 1 - BARRIERS AND OPPORTUNTIES TO ACTIVE TRAVEL
Page 42
38 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 6 STAGE 1 - BARRIERS AND OPPORTUNITIES TO ACTIVE TRAVEL 6.1 The Challenges to Active Travel The community engagement programme has identified a number of barriers to travelling sustainably. These have been categorised and summarised as follows: • A perception of high road traffic speeds along Camsail Bay. • Walking or cycling along the bay is unsafe as no continuous footway is provided. • A lack of street lighting discourages use of the path in the evening or winter. • Perception that buses (and larger vehicles) are too wide to fit within the narrow road space. • Visibility of cyclist and pedestrians along the route is poor. • Utility and services such as a new water main are located within the road. These will influence the options. • Development of Rosneath Caravan Park will increase the number of and type of larger vehicles such as caravans and campervans accessing the area. • General lack of route connection to Kilcreggan and the Rosneath to Kilcreggan circular walking and cycling trail.
Page 43
39 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 6.2 The Opportunities to Travel Actively The community engagement programme has identified a number of opportunities to travel sustainably. The feedback received can be grouped by specific design themes. These have been categorised and summarised as follows: Route Selection • Coastal widening of the route is the most preferred option. • A route managing the speeds on the road would be most supported. • Options to reduce the severity of the road bend would be popular. • Off-road route through the quarry is popular, even when considering a lack of visibility of path users. Social, Safety and Wellbeing • The design should take cognisance that the more mature road users will need more time to give way to oncoming cyclists. • The design should take cognisance of the interaction between different user groups and the potential for collision. • Speeding on the route is a concern. • Physical separation of the route from the road is preferred as car users will use the route as a passing place. • Road debris a concern. • Minimise road crossings required. • Improve visibility of users. Placemaking • The opportunity to create dwell spaces is welcomed, but not considered necessary. There was no mention of creating space for sightseeing or visitors stopping. • Spaces should include robust low-maintenance equipment such as benches. • Maximise scenery. Design • Lighting is preferred. Signage and Wayfinding • No specific signage or wayfinding strategy is considered necessary as the road is a single route. The formation of information points was noted as a positive feature. • Any signage must make clear that pedestrians have priority over cyclists. Accessibility • Users of the proposed Phase 2 of the route would need to have been able to travel along the completed phase 1. Character and appearance • No specific comments received.
Page 44
40 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Construction and Maintenance • The path, if remote from the road, will not be adopted by the council. Consideration should be given to exploring community ownership. • A road-based route is preferred due to improved accessibility for future works from the roadside. • Any remote path will increase construction costs as the route formation will require to support the weight of maintenance vehicles at 7.5 tonnes. • Development of the coastal side will likely require changes to the breakwater. • The route should include pedestrian and cyclist counters to support future route monitoring.
Page 45
41 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com STAGE 2 – DEVELOPING THE CONCEPTS
Page 46
42 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 7 STAGE 2 – DEVELOPING THE CONCEPTS 7.1 Further Engagement Following the conclusion of the stage 1 consultation and completion of the stage 1 Options Feasibility Report, Options 1 and 2 were shortlisted for further development. To support the process, the engagement plan as described within the stage 1 section of this report was repeated. A second public event was again held within the Howie Pavilion within Rosneath on the 6th February 2024. 7 large format graphically designed A1 and A0 presentation boards were displayed and the event was advertised to the community through the use of local press coverage, distributed of 1,000 event advertising leaflets, event banners and bunting. To further bolster event publicity, the design team also attended a 3-hour pop-up event within the foyer of the local Co-Op store where QR codes and website links were distributed to shoppers. The team also again posted regular updates using social media. Leaflets were also distributed to the local school for onward distribution to the communities All visitors attending the event were given the choice of completing the project survey questionnaire or accessing our range of digital tools to provide feedback via QR codes and URL links. A key advantage of the digital platform is, that even with the adverse impact of winter weather on attendance, the materials could still be accessed and commented upon at a time that best suited the consultees. This was particularly relevant noting the event took place on a dark winter’s weekday night. A total of 16 people managing to meet the team. A register extract of those attending the event is shown in Appendix B.
Page 47
43 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com
Page 48
44 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com STAGE 2 - SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS
Page 49
45 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 8 STAGE 2 - SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS 8.1 Sources of Community Feedback The multiple engagement platforms made available to the community supported the community to engage with the project providing feedback both digitally and physically. A summary of the received feedback by the various engagement platforms used is summarised in the following table. Format Responses Received Survey (Paper) 2 Survey (Digital) 55 Community Feedback Tool (Digital) 9 Total Quantitative Responses 66 Community Public Event Attendees 16 Stakeholder Meetings 3 Total Non-Quantitative Responses 19 3 https://statistics.gov.scot/atlas/resource?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fstatistics.gov.sc ot%2Fid%2Fstatistical-geography%2FS12000006&inactive=true 8.2 Survey Sample Validation A total of 66 quantitative responses were received from Roseneath’s population of 1,2603 residents. This represents a sample size of 5% which is slightly lower than the 10 – 15% aimed for and lower than the equivalent stage 1 (93-7%). The lower-than-expected sample may reflect that the projects is not viewed as contentious as it is simply seeking to extend the phase 1 section of the route which has already been constructed. The winter dark nights / changing of the season may also have impacted on the community’s appetite to attend the public event. It was also noted that none of the 66 survey respondents identified as an interested land owner.
Page 50
46 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 8.3 Participant Demographics Of the participant responses received the majority (75%) were aged between 60- 79. 20% were younger than 60 and 5% of these over than 80. 5% were older than 60. These results highlight that the survey has not captured the views of the younger community (0% younger than 15). This question was asked as it is important to capture the views of people with varying levels of life experience to assist in the design process. Of the total respondents, 55% were women / girls and 45% as men / boys. No respondents identified as non-binary and none of the respondents indicated that they would prefer not to say. Overall, we consider that the respondents reflect a reasonable cross-section of the community however the results are slightly skewed more towards the views of females.
Page 51
47 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Respondents were asked if they lived on Rosneath. This question was relevant to ask as it is important to understand if the respondent is responding with longer term experience of the community or as a tourist/visitor. 69% of respondents are full time residents in the community and 31% have either lived in the community historically, or visited at least once a year. The majority of participants considered themselves to be able-bodied and did not have a health or disability that impacted on their everyday mobility (73%). No one indicated they have some health or disability which limits their day-to-day activity a lot, 22% indicated their disability or health issue would affect them a little. 5% of respondents indicated that they would prefer not to say.
Page 52
48 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Of the respondents indicating they did have a health-related disability, 64% indicated their disability was related to mobility or stamina but not breathing related. 14% indicated a challenge relating to hearing, 7% related to poor vision, and 7% indicated they’d prefer not to say. These questions are important to ask as they assist the design team in designing for all user groups, including those with protected characteristics. Participants were asked to qualify their employment status. This question was relevant to ask as the design team will need to consider how the project would support economic activity and support the movement of people to and from places of work. 4% of respondents indicated that they are currently not employed. 34% indicated they were employed either part time or full time, 11% indicated they were self-employed and 52% of respondents said they were retired or not applicable.
Page 53
49 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 8.4 Comparison with 2011 Census To assist in understanding more about how representative the study demographics are, the survey results were compared with the 2011 Census for Rosneath4. The results indicate that the project feedback demographic by age and all genders is broadly comparable with the census analysis. The community has a marginally higher proportion of female to males and a mature population with 23% over 65 years of age. 8.5 Participant Travel Habits 4 https://www.citypopulation.de/en/uk/scotland/argyll_and_bute/S19002469__ro sneath/ Overall, the study results are considered to capture a good sample of the community, capturing the views of both able bodied and those less able, those in work and those unemployed. 8.6 Views on the Concept Options? Participants were asked how often they visited the Camsail Bay area. This question helps us understand the number of individuals who visit or pass through the area, within the community at present. 20% of respondents indicate that they visit the Camsail Bay area every day, 40% less than twice a week and 40% between 2 and 4 times a week. These results indicate the community is relatively active and that cycling and walking is a popular travel mode.
Page 54
50 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Following on from this question, participants were then asked which of the designs would best solve the community’s needs. Only 22% of respondents indicated that they would prefer option 1 (Coastal Widening with new sea defence) and 78% chose option 2 (Widen inland and include a new path on the coast side.) The results of this question indicate that the majority of participants would prefer option 2 (Widen inland and include a new path on the coast side.). To help us understand how participants currently feel about the designs, participants were then asked whether either of the designs successfully address their concerns about travelling between Rosneath and the Castle Bay Caravan Park. 73% stated that most of the issues had been resolved, 11% indicated that there are many issues still to be addressed and 16% of the participants weren’t sure. Considering the results cumulatively. Most of the community’s concerns have been addressed through each of the two designs.
Page 55
51 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Participants were asked what changes they would like the design to include more of. Participants provided a variety of things they would like to see in the design. To enable the processing and presentation of data, the responses were categorised into a number of themes. A summary of the themes is presented as follows and shown by descending popularity in the following chart: • Improved Speed Limits • Improvement to bend at junction • Reduce Flooding • More Street Signs • Safe Walking Route • Improved Street Lighting • Cyclists Lane It is noted that the majority of participants did not provide a response to this question. Of those providing a response, the majority of travel barriers relate to the perception traffic speed, a lack of street lighting and safety. Many of these issues are within the scope of this project design and could be directly addressed through design development.
Page 56
52 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 8.7 What would you like the concept to Exclude? Participants were asked what they would like the design to exclude. It is noted that none of the participants responded to this question.
Page 57
53 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com STAGE 2 - COMMUNITY FEEDBACK TOOL (CFT) RESULTS
Page 58
54 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 9 STAGE 2 - COMMUNITY FEEDBACK TOOL (CFT) RESULTS A total of 2 responses were received through the Community Feedback Tool (CFT). The responses were provided anonymously and no age or origin details of the recipient were recorded. Participant's comments were located along the route. Both comments were positive noting the need to ensure views across the sea defence are maintained and the importance of a buffer zone to protect pedestrians and cyclist from road traffic. The feedback received is presented graphically and verbatim as follows.
Page 59
55 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com Community Feedback Tool Comments by Location
Page 60
56 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 13 Protective parapet should be low enough to see over for wheelchair users. 14 2.5 metre with 1 metre buffer excellent benefit to all road users with this option.
Page 61
44 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com 10 OUR LESSONS LEARNT During the engagement plan, records of each activity were maintained to assist in the evaluation of how effective the engagement process has been. The review process included two design team workshop sessions, where the teams’ thoughts and ideas were shared to assist in ‘destressing’ and improving future engagement both during Stage 2 of this study but also all future studies. The summarised results of the workshop sessions are summarised as follows: Observation / Issue Mitigation Face to Face meetings have been most effective in supporting feedback Maximise time within the Community Lack of engagement with traditionally harder to reach groups Work with care centres to capture views of older and younger community members including those with registered disabilities Under representation from younger adults Focused workshop with teenagers during Stage 2 Pop-Up event in the Coop did not promote additional event attendance Try using the pop up as an advertising point. Use colour leaflets with QR codes, include more visuals to capture interest Low event turnout Avoid winter or spring community engagements
Page 62
45 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com APPENDIX A – ROSNEATH PRIMARY SCHOOL - HANDS UP SURVEY 2023 Travel Mode Morning Trip Afternoon Trip Walk 19 20 Cycle 1 1 Bus 0 0 Scooter 0 0 Car 14 14 Interactive Hands Up Survey got the children to engage
Page 63
46 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com APPENDIX B – CONSULTATION EVENT REGISTER OF ATTENDANCE
Page 64
47 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com
Page 65
48 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com APPENDIX C – CONSULTATION STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP NOTES Supplied separately
Page 66
49 | P a g e www.connectedtp.com APPENDIX D – STATUTORY STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHOP NOTES Supplied separately