15. DirApp - B714 Update - Post Pre Agenda - FINAL - 27-08-25
North Ayrshire Council · 2 September 2025
Back to Cabinet — 2 September 2025 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
NORTH AYRSHIRE COUNCIL 2 September 2025 Cabinet Title: B714 Upgrade Purpose: To update Cabinet on the progress of the B714 Upgrade. Recommendation: That Cabinet: a) Notes the progress made to date on the project. b) Agrees to the submission of the attached Final Business Case to the UK Government for approval. c) Agrees, subject to approval of the Final Business Case and funding allocation by UK Government that Services progress land acquisition and delivery of the project 1. Executive Summary 1.1 The upgrade of the B714 is a strategic transport priority of the Council. It aims to increase the potential for economic development and tourism by significantly improving connectivity to Glasgow, the Central Belt and wider motorway network. Cabinet approved the submission of an application for the project to the first round of the UK Government’s Levelling Up Fund in June 2021. 1.2 The outcome of the application was confirmed in October 2021, providing a £23.7m funding award. Cabinet approved the acceptance of the award and the delivery of the project, subject to securing the necessary consents and permission in January 2022. 1.3 Tenders were issued and following the evaluation process the successful bidder was Will Bros Civil Engineering Ltd. 1.4 The final tender prices have now been incorporated into the Final Business Case which is attached at Appendix 1. Cabinet is asked to agree to the submission of the Final Business Case to UK Government for approval. 2. Background 2.1 The UK Government’s Levelling Up Fund (LUF) identified North Ayrshire as a ‘priority one’ category authority given our socio-economic and connectivity challenges. The Fund focussed investment on projects funding across three themes: town centre and
Page 2
high street regeneration; local transport; projects and maintaining or explaining cultural and heritage assets. 2.2 Cabinet approved the submission of the B714 Upgrade on 15 June 2021 to Round One of the Fund as a key transport project. The application was submitted to UK Government on 18 June 2021 and the outcome received on 27 October 2021. This confirmed an award of £23.7m which equated to approximately 90% of the projected costs at the time of submission. This was match funded by a £3m allocation from the Council’s Investment Fund providing the 10% match funding required by the Levelling Up Fund. 2.3 The upgrade of the B714 will significantly improve connectivity between North Ayrshire and Glasgow, the Central Belt and wider motorway network. This will substantially increase the potential for tourism and economic development and provide enhanced links to the Arran and Cumbrae Ferry services. It will contribute to the repopulation of our islands and rural areas by providing improved access between the ferry terminals, mainland settlements, Glasgow, the Central Belt and wider motorway network. This will contribute to ensuring that those living in our rural, remote and island communities are well connected and have equitable access to services as those living in the rest of Scotland. It will also divert a significant volume of traffic accessing the A78 away from Kilwinning as traffic will connect directly to the A78 via the new upgraded B714. 2.4 The Levelling Up Fund requires that a Full Business Case (FBC) be prepared and approved before larger transport schemes can formally commence and the full funding package is confirmed. The UK Government further confirmed its commitment to the project on 25 July 2025 as part of the Spending Review. To date the Department for Transport (DfT) has supported the project through the provision of Development Funding to enable the preparation of the Outline Business Case (OBC) and design. 2.5 The B714 Project Team was formed comprising of representatives from Economic Development, Growth and Regeneration and Neighbourhood Services alongside the economic and design consultants. The Project Team has progressed the preparation of the OBC and design for submission to the DfT. Regular liaison has also been maintained and progress reporting undertaken with DfT during this period to meet the funding requirements. This has been overseen by the B714 Upgrade Project Board comprised of cross Service representatives and the Place Project Board. 2.6 Extensive consultation has been undertaken with landowners and a broad range of stakeholders during this period. This included a public consultation and exhibition in November and December 2022 on the preferred option. Detailed ground investigations and surveys including environmental and ecological surveys have also been undertaken with the landowners’ approval. The feedback and information obtained from this process has informed the Business Case and design development. 2.7 Construction costs substantially increased since the submission of the LUF application due to the impact of the pandemic and economic climate. This has resulted in increases in the projected costs. The Project Team investigated several design and value engineering opportunities to deliver the project within the available £26.7m funding envelope.
Page 3
2.8 The OBC submitted proposed that: • The project be delivered across two phases with Phase One commencing at Girthill to the Hillend Roundabout with on-line improvements between Meiklelaught and Muirlaught. • A roundabout be constructed to connect the upgraded road to the Hillend Roundabout. • Phase Two between the Sharphill Roundabout and Muirlaught be delivered at a later date, subject to funding. • The electric vehicle charging facilities and elements of the environmental enhancements be delivered through alternative funding sources. • Active travel infrastructure and associated earthworks along the route be removed and delivered through alternative sources at future date. • Localised active travel improvements within Dalry and Saltcoats be delivered through funding secured from Strathclyde Partnership for Transport’s Capital programme and other external funding sources. 2.9 This resulted in a cost estimate for the project of £31.7m, inclusive of contingency and inflation allocations, to support the submission of the business case. This was without a significant reduction in benefits as it contributed to the Levelling Up objectives by: • Improving the resilience of and enhancing the most direct link between Glasgow and the Three Towns; • Improving safety and contributing to accident reduction on the B714 through increased width and improved road alignment over the most sub-standard sections from Girthill to Hillend Roundabout and Meiklelaught to Muirlaught; and • Contributing to alleviating congestion and air quality related issues in Kilwinning. 2.10 The OBC was subsequently issued to and approved by the DfT. The funding package for the project required to be confirmed to allow the progress of both the Business Case through the formal DfT process and the Compulsory Purchase Order Process (CPO). The draft Final Business Case (FBC) was issued to DfT in February 2025 for initial feedback to inform the development of the final version and ensure continued progress of the project within the Fund’s timescales. Feedback was received in August 2025 and is being progressed by the Project Team. 2.11 A parallel landowner negotiation and CPO process was progressed for the land requirements for the project to ensure that the land acquisition can be achieved, and the project delivered within the funding timescales. 2.12 With approval of the OBC, tenders were issued and following the evaluation process the successful bidder was Will Bros Civil Engineering Ltd with a tender value of £23,813,537.64. Following further value engineering process this has been reduced to £23,455,544.94. As a result, the overall estimated project cost, allowing for suitable contingency and wider project costs, has been confirmed as £34,457,509.48. This represents a shortfall of £2,764,066.48 based on current cost assumptions and assessed contingency. This funding will be earmarked from the Council’s Capital Flexibility budget and access to this funding considered through ongoing monitoring of the project spend, including any required contingencies.
Page 4
2.13 This allows the formal submission of the FBC to the UK Government for approval with sufficient funding in place. It is anticipated that a formal decision on the FBC will be received within a maximum 12-week period of its formal submission. This will determine whether the project can proceed as planned. 2.14 Subject to approval of the FBC and funding allocation by UK Government it is proposed that Services progress land acquisition and implementation of the project. 3. Proposals 3.1 That Cabinet: a) Notes the progress made to date on the project. b) Agrees to the submission of the attached Final Business Case to the UK Government for approval. c) Agrees, subject to UK Government’s approval of the FBC, that Services progress land acquisition and delivery of the project 4. Implications/Socio-economic Duty Financial 4.1 The project budget requirement is £34,457,509.48. The FBC will secure funding of £23,693,443 from the DfT via the Levelling Up Fund. North Ayrshire Council will contribute up to £10,764,066.48, inclusive of contingencies. This position includes previously secured Council funding of £5million approved at Cabinet on 29 August 2023. Human Resources 4.2 The estimated cost of the staffing requirements for the project were included in the application and business case submitted. These have been refreshed in the updated estimates. This includes project management and legal staffing requirements to support the land acquisition process. Legal 4.3 A parallel landowner negotiation and Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) process was undertaken to progress the land requirements for the B714 project. This was to ensure that the land acquisition can be achieved, and the project delivered within the funding timescales. This was proposed due to the length of the route, number of landowners and timescales for delivery. The estimated cost of the CPO process was included within the funding application and business case submitted. This has been refreshed in the updated estimates. Engagement with landowners is ongoing. Further engagement will be undertaken informed by the outcome of this report and the FBC consideration by UK Government.
Page 5
Equality/Socio-economic 4.4 The project will assist in meeting our socio-economic duty as set out in the Fairer Scotland Duty. It seeks to reverse economic, social and physical decline and reduce socio-economic disadvantage. It aims to build community wealth and tackle local deprivation by improving connectivity to support economic development and the repopulation of our islands which will contribute to the regeneration of our communities. Climate Change and Carbon 4.5 The project aligns with the Sustainable North Ayrshire Strategy. The upgraded B714 project will also reduce the impact of transport on our communities, specifically it will reduce the volume of traffic travelling through Kilwinning past four schools, reducing pollution, congestion and the potential for accidents. Key Priorities 4.6 The project will contribute to the four Council Plan priorities and key activities of: Ensuring our places and spaces where we live, work and visit are well maintained and accessible; Developing infrastructure to support business growth; Working with communities to adopt low carbon behaviour change; Transitioning to low and zero carbon travel; and Focusing our investment on priorities. Community Wealth Building 4.7 The project will contribute to Community Wealth Building and will have a significant positive impact on the Council’s ambitions under the following pillars. Procurement: Local supply chain opportunities will be created through the project. The EDGR Business Development team will review opportunities for the North Ayrshire business base and provide supplier development support as required. Fair Employment: The project will create employment opportunities particularly within the construction sector. Where North Ayrshire is the contractor for services, through our enhanced Community Benefits approach we will ensure the creation of local training and work experience opportunities. Furthermore, the upgrade of the B714 will provide enhanced connectivity to help those from rural areas access work. Financial Power: The project will invest in localities and leverage external national investment into North Ayrshire. Islands Communities Impact Assessment (ICIA) 4.8 An Islands Communities Impact Assessment is not required. The project will however contribute to the repopulation of our islands by providing improved access between the ferry terminals, mainland settlements, Glasgow, the Central Belt and wider motorway network. This will contribute to ensuring that those living in our island communities are well connected and have equitable access to services as those living in the rest of Scotland.
Page 6
United Nations Rights of the Child (UNCRC) 4.9 None. Consumer Duty 4.10 The upgrade of the B714 will assist road users and other consumers through significantly improving connectivity between North Ayrshire and Glasgow, the Central Belt and wider motorway network. This will substantially increase the potential for tourism and economic development which will benefit local communities and businesses. The project will also contribute to ensuring that those living in our rural, remote and island communities are well connected and have equitable access to services as those living in the rest of Scotland. It will also divert a significant volume of traffic accessing the A78 away from Kilwinning as traffic will connect directly to the A78 via the new upgraded B714. 5. Consultation 5.1 The project has been informed by the Regeneration Delivery Plan (RDP). The RDP sets out the Council’s priorities for regeneration until 2026 and was the subject of extensive consultation including workshops with Council Officers; workshops with Elected Members; reports to and feedback from North Ayrshire Ventures Trust and the Community Wealth Building Expert Panel; and public engagement via Consul. It was also informed by the Locality Partnerships’ priorities and previous public consultation exercises including Charettes. 5.2 The Business Case and design has been informed by extensive consultation with Elected Members, landowners, communities, road users, transport providers, transport industry and community organisations. This included a public consultation and exhibitions in November and December 2022. 5.3 Letters of support were received for the funding application from a range of sources including: the Rt Hon Patricia Gibson MP; Kenneth Gibson MSP; Jamie Greene MSP; and the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority. This support and that of local communities has continued throughout the development of the Business Case. RUSSELL McCUTCHEON Executive Director (Place) For further information please contact Louise Kirk, Head of Service – Economic Development Growth , on 01294 324766. Background Papers Cabinet Report, Levelling Up Fund, 15 June 2021 Cabinet Report, Levelling Up Fund – Round 2, 2 November 2021 Cabinet Report, Levelling Up Fund B714 Upgrade, 25 January 2022 Cabinet Report, B714 Upgrade, 29 August 2025
Page 7
B714 Upgrade 26/08/2025 Reference number GB01T24D70 B714 UPGRADE FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 8
B714 Upgrade 26/08/2025 Reference number GB01T24D70 Page 2/ 192 B714 UPGRADE FULL BUSINESS CASE IDENTIFICATION TABLE Client North Ayrshire Council Project B714 Upgrade Study Full Business Case Type of document Report Date 26/08/2025 File name B714 UpgradeFull Business Casev3.1.docx SYSTRA reference number GB01T24D70 Number of pages 192 APPROVAL Version Name Position Date Modifications 1.0 Authors Katie Kelly Daniel Smith Faqhrul Islam Valentia Nacar Assistant Consultant Principal Consultant Senior Consultant Principal Consultant 13/12/2024 DRAFTv1.0 Checked by Ian Bruce Associate Director 13/12/2024 Approved by Malcolm Neil Director 13/12/2024 1.1 Authors Katie Kelly Daniel Smith Faqhrul Islam Valentia Nacar Assistant Consultant Principal Consultant Senior Consultant Principal Consultant 28/01/2025 DRAFTv1.1 incorporating feedback from NAC Checked by Ian Bruce Associate Director 28/01/2025 Approved by Malcolm Neil Director 28/01/2025
Page 9
Page 3/ 192 APPROVAL Version Name Position Date Modifications 2.0 Authors Katie Kelly Daniel Smith Faqhrul Islam Valentia Nacar Consultant Principal Consultant Senior Consultant Principal Consultant 30/04/2025 v2.0 incorporating feedback from DfT Checked by Ian Bruce Associate Director 01/05/2025 Approved by Malcolm Neil Director 02/05/2025 3.1 Authors Katie Kelly Daniel Smith Valentia Nacar Consultant Principal Consultant Principal Consultant 15/08/2025 v3.1 for Submission Checked by Ian Bruce Associate Director 22/08/2025 Approved by Malcolm Neil Director 26/08/2025
Page 10
Page 4/ 192 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 11 1.1 PURPOSE 11 1.2 BACKGROUND 11 1.3 PREVIOUS APPRAISAL STUDIES 12 1.4 THE PROPOSED SCHEME 13 1.5 RELEVANT SCHEMES 16 2. THESTRATEGIC DIMENSION 18 2.1 INTRODUCTION 18 2.2 ORGANISATION OVERVIEW 18 2.3 POLICY BACKGROUND:BUSINESS STRATEGY AND WIDER STRATEGIES 19 2.4 EXISTING ARRANGEMENTS 25 2.5 PROBLEMIDENTIFICATION 42 2.6 IMPACT OF NOT CHANGING 53 2.7 SMARTSPENDING OBJECTIVESAND MEASURES OF SUCCESS 54 2.8 STRATEGIC BENEFITS 59 2.9 SCOPE 62 2.10 RISKSAND CONSTRAINTS 62 2.11 INTERDEPENDENCIES 65 2.12 STAKEHOLDERS’VIEWS AND REQUIREMENTS 65 2.13 STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS 68 2.14 PROPOSED B714UPGRADE SCHEME 78 2.15 ACHIEVEMENT OF OBJECTIVES 82 3. THEECONOMIC DIMENSION 84 3.1 INTRODUCTION 84 3.2 LONG LIST APPRAISAL 85 3.3 TRANSPORT MODELLING 87 3.4 SCENARIO DEVELOPMENT 89 3.5 ECONOMICIMPACTS METHODOLOGY 90 3.6 WIDER ECONOMICIMPACTS METHODOLOGY 95 3.7 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS METHODOLOGY 98 3.8 PUBLIC ACCOUNTS 100 3.9 ECONOMICIMPACTS -TRANSPORT ECONOMICEFFICIENCY (TEE) 100 3.10 ECONOMICIMPACTS -WEIS 108 3.11 ECONOMICIMPACTS:SOCIAL IMPACTS 112
Page 11
Page 5/ 192 3.12 ECONOMICIMPACTS:ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 114 3.13 ECONOMICIMPACTS:DISTRIBUTIONAL IMPACTS 114 3.14 ANALYSISOF MONETISED COSTS AND BENEFITS 121 3.15 OTHER NON-MONETISED IMPACTS 122 3.16 APPRAISAL SUMMARY TABLE 127 3.17 SENSITIVITY TESTS 127 3.18 SUMMARY AND VALUE FOR MONEY STATEMENT 128 3.19 FORECAST IMPACTS OF PROPOSED SCHEME 129 4. THE FINANCIALDIMENSION 135 4.1 INTRODUCTION 135 4.2 SCHEME COSTS 135 4.3 REVENUE 137 4.4 FINANCIAL PROFILE 137 4.5 FUNDING 138 4.6 FINANCIAL RISKS 138 4.7 FUTURE MAINTENANCE 139 5. THECOMMERCIAL DIMENSION 140 5.1 INTRODUCTION 140 5.2 OVERVIEW OF COMMERCIAL APPROACH 140 5.3 REVIEW OF MARKET SUPPLY CAPABILITY 141 5.4 OUTPUT-BASED SPECIFICATION 141 5.5 PROCUREMENT STRATEGY 141 5.6 HUMAN RESOURCES ISSUES 143 5.7 SOURCING OPTIONS 144 5.8 PAYMENT MECHANISMS 145 5.9 PRICING FRAMEWORK AND CHARGING MECHANISMS 145 5.10 RISK ALLOCATION AND TRANSFER 145 5.11 CONTRACT LENGTH 146 5.12 CONTRACT MANAGEMENT 147 6. THE MANAGEMENT DIMENSION 148 6.1 INTRODUCTION 148 6.2 EVIDENCE OF SIMILAR PROJECTS 148 6.3 GOVERNANCE,ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE AND ROLES 149 6.4 ASSURANCE 151 6.5 PROJECT REPORTING 152 6.6 PROJECT DEPENDENCIES 154
Page 12
Page 6/ 192 6.7 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION 154 6.8 PROJECT PLAN 154 6.9 STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT AND COMMUNICATIONS 157 6.10 RISK AND ISSUES MANAGEMENT 157 6.11 LESSONS MANAGEMENT 159 6.12 BENEFITS MANAGEMENT 160 6.13 MONITORING AND EVALUATION PLAN 160 6.14 DATA AND INFORMATION SECURITY 168 6.15 PROJECT CLOSURE 168 6.16 CARBON MANAGEMENT 169
Page 13
Page 7/ 192 APPENDIX 1A:NORTHAYRSHIRESTRATEGIC ROUETING STUDY 170 APPENDIX 2A:STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT PLAN 171 APPENDIX 2B:STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOP FINDINGS 172 APPENDIX 2C:PUBLIC CONSULTATION REPORT 173 APPENDIX 2D: OPTIONS ASSESSMENT REPORT 174 APPENDIX 3A:B714 FBC SRTM LMVRREPORT 175 APPENDIX 3B:SCHEMECOSTS 176 APPENDIX 3C:COSTS PROFORMA 177 APPENDIX 3D: WIDERECONOMIC IMPACTS REPORT 178 APPENDIX 3E:APPRAISALSUMMARYTABLE 179 APPENDIX 3F: TEE, PA AND AMCB TABLES 180 APPENDIX 3G:COBA-LT ANALYSIS FILES 181 APPENDIX 3H:TUBA ANALYSIS FILES 182 APPENDIX 3I:B714 ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT REPORT 183 APPENDIX 3J: CARBON SUMMARYTABLE 184 APPENDIX 4A:BREAKDOWN OFSCHEMECOSTS 185 APPENDIX 5A: OUTPUT BASEDSPECIFICATION 186 APPENDIX 6A: PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION 187 APPENDIX 6B:PROJECT PLAN 188 APPENDIX 6C:RISK REGISTER 189 APPENDIX 6D:BENEFITS REALISATION PLAN 190 APPENDIX 6E:CARBON MANAGEMENT PLAN 191
Page 14
Page 8/ 192 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Road connectivity in NorthAyrshire 12 Figure 2. 2016 Routeing Study options 13 Figure 3. Schemelayout and location of shortlistedoptions 15 Figure 4. Locationofthe proposed upgraded sectionof theB714 (Phase1) 16 Figure 5. Locationof A737 improvementschemesand theB714 17 Figure 6. ‘Goldenthread’of schemealignmentwith relevant policies 21 Figure 7. Map ofNorth Ayrshire 26 Figure 8. Distribution ofincomeacross North Ayrshire 29 Figure 9. Breakdownof employmentby industry in theThreeTowns (2023) 30 Figure 10. Survival rateof businessesfounded in 2018 (Source: ONS) 31 Figure 11. Levelsof deprivation within the Three Towns, Kilwinning and Dalry 33 Figure 12. Trend ofONS wellbeing tracking statistics for North Ayrshire, 03/2011 to 03/2022 34 Figure 13. Overviewof road networkwithin and around North Ayrshire 35 Figure 14. North Ayrshire rail networkand stations 37 Figure 15. Overviewof cyclerouteswithin North Ayrshire 40 Figure 16. Modeoftransportto workor study (Source: 2022 Census) 41 Figure 17. Heatmapof commuter flows (by allmodes) from theThreeTowns 42 Figure 18. Overviewof road network in and around North Ayrshire 43 Figure 19. Strategic road connectivity to/from ThreeTowns 44 Figure 20. The route locations used inTable11 46 Figure 21. A737/A738(T)and A738(T)/A78(T)locations 47 Figure 22. Queueing alongthe A737 southbound into Kilwinning towncentre in2022 48 Figure 23. Observed journey timevariation during AM and PM peak periods in November2021 49 Figure 24. Map showing road accidents in North Ayrshire from 2019 to 2023 50 Figure 25. Noise pollutionfrom roadsaround theThreeTowns and Kilwinning 52 Figure 26. Schemelogicmap 61 Figure 27. Map ofenvironmentalconstraints surrounding B714 64 Figure 28. 2016 Routeing Study options 69 Figure 29. Schemelayout and location of shortlistedoptions 75 Figure 30. ProposedB714 upgradescheme(Phase1) 76 Figure 31. Summary of schemeoptioneering process 77 Figure 32. Map ofproposedscheme 79 Figure 33. Indicativecross-sectionof9.3m wide singlecarriageway 80 Figure 34. Indicativecross-sectionof13.5m wideDAL 80 Figure 35. Indicative layoutofDAL 81 Figure 36. Sight lines from accessesand minorroad junctionsconnecting withthe B714 81 Figure 37. Original and revised roundabout design at northernend of B714 82 Figure 38. AST impacts 86 Figure 39. SRTM geographicalcoverage 87 Figure 40. Observed datasite locations 91 Figure 41. COBA-LTstudy area 93 Figure 42. COBA-LTlocalaccident links 93 Figure 43. TELMoS18 zonesand macro zones 97 Figure 44. Time-marching sequence 97 Figure 45. LUTI interaction 98 Figure 46. PreferredoptionTEEbenefits profile 105 Figure 47. Post-TUBAmasking sectors 106 Figure 48. Absolute difference in employment(DS–DM),2050 108 Figure 49. DS-DM,2035 percentage difference in employment 109 Figure 50. DS-DM,2050 percentage difference in employment 109 Figure 51. COBA-LTaccidentanalysis 113
Page 15
Page 9/ 192 Figure 52. Place-based analysis –spatial compositionofuser benefits 115 Figure 53. DI study area 119 Figure 54. Income deprivation level 120 Figure 55. Reliability/COBALT network extents 123 Figure 56. Impacton trafficvolumeswith scheme: % changefrom Reference Case (2045, AADT) 131 Figure 57. Journey times between theThreeTowns andthe Garnock Valley: AM peak,2045 133 Figure 58. Governance structure 149 Figure 59. Summary project plan 156 Figure 60. Communication andengagement approach 157 Figure 61. ROAMEFcycle (Source: Magenta Book) 161 Figure 62. Schemelogicmap 163 Figure 63. Monitoring and evaluationgovernance structure 167 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Strategic dimension requirements 18 Table 2. Relevant national, regionaland local policies 22 Table 3. North Ayrshire and Scotland demographic profile 27 Table 4. Economicmetrics by region 28 Table 5. Proportionof North Ayrshire’s datazonesin 15%most deprived in Scotland by domain 32 Table 6. ONS wellbeing indicatorsfor North Ayrshire,04/2021 – 03/2022 33 Table 7. Percentageof householdsaccording to car availability 36 Table 8. Overviewof rail services from stationswithin North Ayrshire 38 Table 9. Estimatesofstation usageand performance within North Ayrshire 39 Table 10. Commuter flowsfrom North Ayrshire 41 Table 11. Proportionof HGVs usingkey routes between theThree Townsand Dalry 45 Table 12. Accidentson theroad corridors between TheThree Towns andDalry 51 Table 13. Regional road traffic forecasts 53 Table 14. TEMPro growth rates for North Ayrshire 53 Table 15. Modelled changesin trafficflows onkey routes, 2018 to 2045 53 Table 16. B714 Upgradeschemeobjectives and associatedmeasures ofsuccess 55 Table 17. Main project risks 62 Table 18. Long-listofoptions 70 Table 19. Summary of initialsift 72 Table 20. Offline link sifting summary 74 Table 21. Achievementofobjectives– B714 Upgrade 82 Table 22. Economic dimensionrequirements 84 Table 23. Committedtransport schemes 88 Table 24. Annualisation factors 91 Table 25. Distributional impacts process 95 Table 26. Preferred scheme TEE benefits by time period(£000sin 2010 marketprices,discounted to 2010) 101 Table 27. Preferred scheme TEE benefits by time period(£000sin 2010 marketprices,discounted to 2010) 102 Table 28. Preferred scheme TEE benefits by journey purpose(£000s in2010 marketprices, discountedto 2010) 103 Table 29. Preferred scheme TEE benefits by timesaving (£000sin 2010 marketprices,discounted to 2010) 104 Table 30. Masked sectors 107
Page 16
Page 10/ 192 Table 31. Partial scheme: PVB Level 2 and PVBLevel3 forScotlandandtheAyrshiresbenefits (£000sin 2018 market prices, discountedto 2010) 111 Table 32. Partial Scheme: PVBLevel2 and PVB Level 3forBenefits (£000s in2018 market prices, discountedto 2010) intheThreeTowns 111 Table 33. Partial schemesummary ofPVB– WEIs (£000sin 2018 market prices, discountedto 2010) 111 Table 34. MonetisedEnvironmental Impacts(£000s in2010 market prices, discountedto 2010) 114 Table 35. Distributional impacts screening pro forma 116 Table 36. Scopeof socio-demographic analyses forDIs (Step 2b) 119 Table 37. Population profileof NorthAyrshire 121 Table 38. AMCB –partial scheme (£000s in2010 market prices,discountedto 2010) 122 Table 39. Do Something scheme stress-based quantitativeassessment 123 Table 40. AMCB –Growthsensitivity tests(£000s in2010 market prices,discounted to 2010) 127 Table 41. CAS Sensitivity tests (£000sin 2010market prices, discounted to 2010) 128 Table 42. Switching values 128 Table 43. PreferredoptioneconomicSummary and BCR (monetary values in£000s) 129 Table 44. Change in daily trafficvolumes(with& without scheme,2045, AADT) 130 Table 45. Change in vehicle km (with& withoutscheme,2045, SRTM region) 132 Table 46. Change in road journey times: min:sec(with& without scheme,2045, AM peak) 133 Table 47. Change in road journey times: min:sec(with& without scheme,2045, inter-peak) 133 Table 48. Change in road journey times: min:sec(with& without scheme,2045,PM peak) 134 Table 49. Casualty reductions by type over60 years dueto scheme 134 Table 50. Financial dimension requirements 135 Table 51. Construction costsoverview 136 Table 52. Spend profile including riskand contingency (£000s,out-turn prices) 137 Table 53. Spend Profile including riskand contingency (£000s,out-turn prices) 138 Table 54. Commercial dimension requirements 140 Table 55. Risk allocation 145 Table 56. Proposedcontract dates 147 Table 57. Management dimension requirements 148 Table 58. Key governance bodies 150 Table 59. Schemedelivery roles andresponsibilities 151 Table 60. Key project assurance milestones 152 Table 61. Project key milestones 155 Table 62. Main project risks 158 Table 63. Datacollection 165 Table 64. Monitoring and evaluationtimescales 168
Page 17
Page 11/ 192 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose 1.1.1 This Full Business Case (FBC) supports a bid to the UK Government’s Levelling Up Fund (LUF) by North Ayrshire Council (NAC) for funding towards the upgrade of a section of the B714 in North Ayrshire,which runsbetween theA78 and A737. 1.1.2 The LUF was announced in the March 2021 Budget and will directly support communities across the UK, making available up to £4.8 billion up to 2024/25 for local infrastructure that hasavisibleimpactonpeopleandtheircommunities.TheB714upgradeschemewasawarded funding of £23.7m inround1 ofLUF in October 2021. 1.1.3 The FBC represents the final stage in the business case development process. It follows the initial Outline Business Case (OBC) submitted to support the original LUF application in June 2021.TheOBCwassubsequentlyupdatedtoreflectthedesignandcostchangestothescheme since the LUF application, as well as the public consultation undertaken in 2022. The updated OBCwassubmittedinJuly2023andapprovedbytheDfTtoprogresstoFBCstageinMay2024. The FBC reflects comments and approval conditions set out as part of the OBC review. It updates the information on the formal procurement process being run to appoint a contractor for the construction phase. It also updates the scheme costs and value for money positionon thebasis ofthe confirmed tender costs. 1.1.4 AspertheOBC,theFBChasbeendevelopedinlinewiththeHM Treasury’sGreenBook’sfive- case model and the Department for Transport’s (DfT) Transport Analysis Guidance (TAG). The FBC contains: thestrategicdimension–demonstratesthatthereisarobustcaseforchangethatfitswith wider public policy objectives (section 2) the economic dimension – demonstrates that the scheme will deliver value for money (section3) the commercial dimension – demonstrates that the scheme will be commercially viable (section4) the financial dimension – demonstrates that delivery of the scheme will be affordable (section5) the managementdimension –demonstratesthattheschemecanbedelivered(section6). 1.2 Background 1.2.1 One of the primary barriers to economic growth in The Three Towns (the collective name for the towns of Ardrossan, Saltcoats and Stevenston located on the North Ayrshire coast) is the poor transport connectivity between North Ayrshire and Glasgow and the rest of Scotland, particularly by strategic road routes. Local studies and analysis1,2 have identified improving transportconnectivity as being a key factorin helping promote economic growthand tackling local deprivation. 1.2.2 Currently the A737(T) provides themost direct route between North Ayrshireand Glasgowas shown in Figure1 below. 1 North Ayrshire Economic Review, Fraser of Allander Institute, University of Strathclyde, 2018 2 Ayrshire – Transport and theEconomy, SYSTRA (formerly MVA), 2006
Page 18
Page 12/ 192 Figure 1. Road connectivity in North Ayrshire 1.2.3 Asaresultoflongstandingroadcongestionissuesalongthetrunkroute,severalimprovement schemes have recently been completed or are under construction with the aim of addressing these congestion issues, including the Dalry bypass (opened 2019), the Den realignment between Dalry andBeith (completed in2019), andtheproposed improvements at Beith. 1.2.4 However, the A737 remains largely sub-standard from Howwood to Kilwinning. The route suffers from high levels of congestion, particularly in Kilwinning; the only alternative good standard trunk route is via the M77/A77 which involves a longer distance diversion via Kilmarnock(see Figure1 above). 1.3 Previous appraisal studies 1.3.1 ThedevelopmentoftheB714schemebeganin2016viathe NorthAyrshireStrategicRouteing Study3 (hereafterreferred to as‘theRouteing Study’).This is provided in Appendix 1A. 1.3.2 NAC commissioned SIAS (now SYSTRA) to undertake the Routeing Study ‘to identify and evaluate options for managing the strategic road network within North Ayrshire, focusing on the A737 trunk road route and connected arterial routes’. This study involved stakeholder consultation and identified several potential schemes to address the issues in and around Kilwinning. 1.3.3 The Routeing Study involved: An unconstrained option generation exercise at the Pre-Appraisal stakeholder workshop. This resulted in 34 options. An option sifting exercise in conjunction with NAC to identify and remove options that would clearly notachievethe intendedobjectives and/oraddressthe problems identified. 3 North Ayrshire Strategic Routing Study – STAG Report (Pre- and Part 1 Appraisal), SYSTRA, 2016
Page 19
Page 13/ 192 1.3.4 This resulted in a setof15optionsthatwere taken forward to thePart1 Appraisal. 1.3.5 Of the 15 options recommended in the Routeing Study, five were considered to have the potential to address the key aim i.e. improving the strategic road connectivity to/from The Three Towns. These included three variations of a Kilwinning western bypass connecting the A737 and the A78 (options 1 to 3), a Kilwinning eastern bypass connecting the A737 and the A78 (option4) and an upgrade ofthe B714 (option5).Theseoptions are shown inFigure 2. Figure 2. 2016 Routeing Study options 1.4 Theproposed scheme Assessmentof options 1.4.1 Since the 2016 Routeing Study, some significant changes have occurred such as Covid-19 and the Ukrainian-Russian war which have changed the economic and transport environment. Therefore, in recognition of this, a new options assessment report (OAR) was undertaken (Appendix 1B) to consider and assess a wider range of options including non-highways solutions and identify a preferredoption.This is discussed in more detailin section 2.13. 1.4.2 The sifting exercise undertaken as part of the options assessment identified two options as having the strongest strategic fit: upgrade of the B714 western bypassofKilwinning. Original preferred option 1.4.3 The B714 upgrade was selected as the preferred option over a western bypass of Kilwinning for the following reasons:
Page 20
Page 14/ 192 the B714 upgrade is a significantly cheaper option being largely online improvements (rather thana wholly offline link) andtherefore,represents the bettervalueformoney anupgradedB714wouldofferaquickerroutebetweentheThreeTownsandDalry,thereby maximising connectivity between these settlements and reducing pressure on the road networkwithin and around Kilwinning upgrading the B714 wouldbe leastdisruptive to localresidents the B714 upgrade could bedelivered relatively quickly the B714 upgrade hasthemost support from NAC and local stakeholders. 1.4.4 Originally, the scheme was designed to be a whole corridor improvement between the Sharphill roundabout on the A78 and the recently constructed A737 Dalry Bypass, which consisted of: 10 online improvement sections from the A78 roundabout to Dalry to improve the geometric standardoftheroutewith realignmentof certain sections anewofflinelinkbetweentheB714andtheA737attheHillendroundaboutatthenorthern end ofthe corridor segregated3m-wideactivetravel path running the length of the route. 1.4.5 For theofflinelink,5 options were developed: three options connected to the A737 Hillend roundabout via an improved intermediate roundaboutwith the B714 two optionsconnected directly in to theexisting at-grade A737 Hillend roundabout. 1.4.6 A high-level assessment was undertaken to identify those that best improve geometric standards and facilitate a connection to the A737 Dalry Bypass. This optioneering is discussed further in section2.13 andresulted inthreeshort-listed options (Figure3): Upgrade of the B714 including an offline link which would connect via an improved intermediate at-grade roundabout junction north-west of the existing A737 Hillend roundabout (labelledoption 13 inFigure 3) UpgradeoftheB714includinganofflinelinkwhichwouldconnectdirectlyintotheexisting at-grade A737 Hillend roundabout as a proposed additional 4th arm and connect to the existing B714 northof Craighead Farm (option14) UpgradeoftheB714includinganofflinelinkwhichwouldconnectdirectlyintotheexisting at-grade A737 Hillend roundabout as a proposed additional 4th arm and connect to the existing B714 southof Craighead Farm (option15).
Page 21
Page 15/ 192 Figure 3. Scheme layout and location of shortlisted options 1.4.7 Owing to access restrictions to the two farmson the existing route, option 14 was selected as the preferred option and accordingly formed the basis of North Ayrshire’s bid to the Levelling Up Fund in June 2021 forfunding towardsthe upgrade oftheB714. Revised preferred option 1.4.8 ByNovember2022,theschemecostshadincreasedmarkedly(duetoacombinationoffactors including high levels of inflation impacting construction costs). As the LUF funding award was fixed, theoriginal schemebecame unaffordableto NAC withoutexternal funding. It therefore became necessary to revise thescopeof theschemeto delivertheschemeto budget. 1.4.9 Therefore, AECOM (as the design and cost consultant) undertook cost engineering and value management work in order to identify a feasible scheme which could be delivered to budget which would still meet the scheme objectives, and which would align with the strategic objectives of thescheme(with regardsto theLUF)and otherrelevant policies. 1.4.10 Consequently, the projectwill now be delivered in two phases: Phase 1 will improve the B714 to current design standards of a 3.5km section of the road between Girthill Farm and Kilwinning Road. It will no longer include the active travel path (althoughitremainsanaspirationofNACtocompletethisfeatureinfutureonceadditional funding is found). Phase2willimprovetheremainderoftheB714fromGirthillFarmtotheA78.Thisissubject to additional funding being availableand no timescaleis currently set for its delivery. This FBC concerns only the Phase 1 element.
Page 22
Page 16/ 192 1.4.11 The location ofthephase1 elementis shown in Figure4 below. Figure 4. Location of the proposed upgraded section of the B714 (Phase 1) 1.4.12 Phase 1 (hereafter referred to as ‘the scheme’) will improve the geometric standard of the 3.5km section of the B714 between Girthill Farm and Dalry, with other targeted on-line improvements between Diddup Farm and Girthill Farm leading to a total scheme length of around4.4km.Theseimprovementschemescompriseofminorupgradestothecross-section, horizontalandverticalgeometry,toremoveexistingsub-standardelementsthatposeasafety hazard to road use. The single carriageway cross-sections will be 9.3m wide (two 3.65m wide lanes with1m hard stripson either side), in linewithtrunk road standards. 1.4.13 The offline link element will connect the B714 to the recently completed A737 Dalry Bypass. Thisconnectionisproposedto beviaanewroundaboutonKilwinningRoadnorth-westofthe existing Hillend Roundabout. 1.5 Relevant schemes 1.5.1 Since the2016 Routeing Study, severalA737 improvementschemeswhich are relevantto the B714 Upgradehavebeencompleted,orare proposed: Dalry Bypass – construction of a new off-line bypass to the east of the town of Dalry and associated junctions to connect to the existing A737 trunk road. The bypass opened to traffic inMay 2019. The Den Realignment – construction of a new offline section of single carriageway, over a length of 1km. The project removed substantial bends on the existing A737 carriageway and introduced safety benefits. Thisschemeopened in 2019. Improvements at Beith – improvement of the following sub-standard junctions on the A737 areproposed by Transport Scotland: Headstreet/ Wardrop Street (A737 Headstreet/Wardrop Street(A737/B777) Barrmill Road(A737/B706) Substandard road widthbetween Barrmill Road (B706) and Roebank Road.
Page 23
Page 17/ 192 The B714 upgrade scheme therefore represents the final stage in improving the northern link between North Ayrshire and the Central Belt via Glasgow, providing a direct route between The Three Towns and Glasgow without passing through any major settlements. This would offera faster and more reliable connectionbetween theThreeTownsand key markets,allowing the areato benefit from improved road connectivity. 1.5.2 The locationsof thesethree schemes in relationto the B714 is shown in Figure5 below. Figure 5. Location of A737 improvement schemes and the B714
Page 24
Page 18/ 192 2. THE STRATEGIC DIMENSION 2.1 Introduction 2.1.1 Thestrategicdimensiondemonstratesarobustcaseforchange,whichisalignedwithnational, regional and local policy objectives. It identifies the issues and problems in the local area and sets scheme objectives to address these. The process of option assessment and scheme selection isalso documented. 2.1.2 Table1 setsouttheTAG requirementsfor thestrategic dimension including status and report section. Table 1. Strategic dimension requirements ELEMENT STATUS SECTION Organisationoverview Completed 2.2 Business strategy and wider strategies Completed 2.3 Existing arrangements Completed 2.4 Problem identification Completed 2.5 Impactof notchanging Completed 2.6 Spending objectives and measuresof success Completed 2.7 Strategic benefits Completed 2.8 Scope Completed 2.9 Risks and constraints Completed 2.10 Interdependencies Completed 2.11 Stakeholders’views and requirements Completed 2.12 Strategic assessmentofoptions Completed 2.13 Proposedscheme Completed 2.14 Forecast impactsofproposed scheme Completed 3.19 2.2 Organisation overview 2.2.1 NAC is one of 32 local authorities in Scotland, located in the south of west of Scotland in the wider Ayrshire region. The Council has a range of responsibilities within North Ayrshire, including education, housing, planning matters, and the localroadnetwork. 2.2.2 With regards to the latter, NAC carries out maintenance on the current road network and associatedinfrastructure(suchasstreetlights),seekstoimproveexistingroutesandbuildnew routes where appropriate and deliverable, and has an aspiration to support long-term modal shiftsinthewayinwhichpeopletravele.g.throughtheprovisionofelectricvehicle(EV)charge points and active travelinfrastructure.
Page 25
Page 19/ 192 2.2.3 TheaimsandvisionoftheCouncilwithregardstothewayinwhichpeopletravelaroundNorth AyrshirearebestespousedwithintheLocalTransportandActiveTravelStrategy(2023–2028), which setsout specific transport policiesto beadopted and the actionsto be implemented to guide the planning and improvement of North Ayrshire’s local transport and active travel networks, as well as behaviour change initiatives aimed at supporting and encouraging wider uptake of sustainable transport. 2.2.4 The Strategy guides and enables the Council to improve all types of transport within North Ayrshire over the coming years. This is inclusive of all modal types (i.e. active travel, bus, rail, ferryandcar),andcruciallyhowintegratingthesetransportmodeswillmaketravelbyseveral modes easier for all. 2.3 Policy background: business strategy and wider strategies 2.3.1 Thissectionprovidesanoutlineoftheexistingnational,regionalandlocalpolicycontextwithin which the scheme has been developed: it is vital that any significant public investment aligns to policies at various spatial levels and contributes to the achievement of their respective objectives. 2.3.2 The key strategies and policies that theschemeis aligned with include: National (UK & Scotland) policies: National TransportStrategy StrategicTransport Projects Review2 TransportInvestment Strategy The Levelling Up WhitePaper Decarbonising Transport: ABetter, GreenerBritain A Long-term VisionforActiveTravel in Scotland2030. Regional policies: Strathclyde Partnership for Transport Regional Transport Strategy for the West of Scotland2023-2038 Ayrshire RegionalEconomic Strategy. Localpolicies (North Ayrshire Council): LocalTransport and ActiveTravelStrategy 2023-2028 LocalDevelopmentPlan2 RegenerationDelivery Plan 2021 –2026 Economic Recovery and Renewal Approach Safer North AyrshireStrategy 2020 –2025 Road AssetManagementPlan Sustainable NorthAyrshireStrategy 2024-2027. 2.3.3 Since the approval of the OBC in May 2024, a new UK Government has been elected. The strategies and priorities of the new Government are set out in its ‘Plan for Change’4. This sets out six missions including ‘Kickstarting Economic Growth’ which will aim to raise living standards in every part of the UK and rebuild Britain. This mission references the need for investment in key infrastructure including transport to drive future productivity and higher livingstandards.TheB714Upgradeschemeandtheeconomicbenefitsitwilldelivertherefore remain alignedwithUK Governmentstrategy. 4 Plan for Change
Page 26
Page 20/ 192 2.3.4 The ‘golden thread’ linking the above policies and the B714 upgrade scheme is shown diagrammaticallyinFigure6below,whilstanoverviewofeachoftheabovepoliciesisprovided in Table 2 below.
Page 27
Page 21/ 192 Figure 6. ‘Golden thread’ of scheme alignment with relevant policies
Page 28
Page 22/ 192 Table 2. Relevant national, regionaland localpolicies LEVEL POLICY/STRATEGY ORGANISATION&DATE DESCRIPTION National (Scotland) NationalTransport Strategy ScottishGovernment,2020 Sets out thevision for Scotland’s transport system for the next 20years:to havea sustainable, inclusive, safe and accessible transport system,helpingdeliver a healthier, fairerand more prosperous Scotlandfor communities, businesses and visitors. Vision is underpinned by four Priorities. National (Scotland) StrategicTransport ProjectsReview2 Transport Scotland, 2022 A review of Scotland’s strategic transport network’s performanceto support transport investment in Scotland from 2022-2042by providingevidence-basedrecommendationsto inform future transport investment decisions. National (UK) Plan forChange UKGovernment,2024 Sets out UKGovernment’s six missions and associated milestones it aimsto achieveby the end of theParliament in2029. The‘Kickstarting EconomicGrowth’ mission will includebuilding vital infrastructuresuch as roadsneededfora modern economy tothrive and drive future productivity and higherliving standards. National (UK) TransportInvestment Strategy UKGovernment,2017 Sets out the Department forTransport’s(DfT) priorities and approach for futuretransport investment decisions, and how transport investment can deliver astronger,fairerBritain National (UK) Levelling UpWhite Paper UKGovernment,2022 Sets out theUKGovernment’s approachto ‘levelling up’theUnitedKingdom, i.e. directing investment out of London and theSouthEast andtowards theUK’s otherregions, thereby achieving growthand boosting quality oflifemetrics inthese areas. National (UK) Decarbonising Transport: A Better, Greener Britain UKGovernment,2021 Sets out theUKGovernment’s commitments and necessaryto decarbonisetheUK’stransport system,by setting out a pathwayto net zero transport in theUK,the wider benefitsnet zero transport candeliver, andthe principlesthat underpin delivery ofnet zerotransport solutions National (Scotland) A Long-termVision for ActiveTravel inScotland 2030 Transport Scotland, 2014 Sets out how infrastructure,transport integration, cultural and behaviour change, community ownership andplanning canachievethe ScottishGovernment’s long-termvision foractivetravel in Scotland, byencouragingmore peopleto walk and cycle everyday
Page 29
Page 23/ 192 LEVEL POLICY/STRATEGY ORGANISATION&DATE DESCRIPTION Regional RegionalTransport Strategy fortheWest of Scotland2023-2038 StrathclydePartnership for Transport (SPT),2023 Sets out SPT’s vision fortransport,thegoals sharedwithits 12 west of Scotlandcouncils, transport objectives anditsstrategic priorities Regional Ayrshire GrowthDeal Scottish andUKGovernments and East,North andSouth Ayrshire Councils,2019 Commitment to createa growing, innovative, more productive and inclusive economy, developing Ayrshire’s core strengths and ensuringthat communitiesbenefit fromeconomic growth. Its vision is for Ayrshireto be ‘a vibrant, outwardlooking,confident region,attractivetoinvestors and visitors,making amajorcontributiontoScotland’sgrowth and localwell-being, andleading the implementationof digital technologies andthe next generation ofmanufacturing.’ Local LocalTransport and ActiveTravelStrategy 2023-2028 NAC,2023 Sets out the Council’svision, objectives andproposals forlocal transportation inNorth Ayrshire. The LTS defines a number ofobjectivesto realisethis vision and relate tothe five STAG objective areas(Economy,Accessibility and Social Inclusion, Safety, Environment and Integration). Local LocalDevelopment Plan NAC,2019 States out howNACaims toguide development andinvestment inthearea overthenext 20 years. It sets out 35 detailedpolicies which are categorised into4 chapters, one ofwhich is A ConnectedNorth Ayrshire which includes policies designed to support bettertransport connectivityand recognisestransport asan economic driver. Local AyrshireRegional EconomicStrategy NAC,EAC & SAC,2023 Sets out a bold10-yearvision fortheAyrshireEconomywith akey priority of improving physical infrastructureaddressing poor road linkages. Local RegenerationDelivery Plan NAC,2021 Sets out the priorities for delivering onthe Council's ambitions toredevelop strategic regeneration sites and places, working in partnership with communitiesfocusing on the delivery of physical regeneration across NorthAyrshire. Local EconomicRecovery and Renewal Approach NAC,2020 Sets out the Council’s approach torebuildingtheNorthAyrshireeconomy inthewake ofthe Covid-19 pandemic, particularlythrough climate- and community-focused growth. Local Safer North Ayrshire Strategy2020 –2025 NAC,2020 Sets out howtheCouncil will improveroad safety andreduce the number of peoplewho are killed or injured onthe roadnetwork.
Page 30
Page 24/ 192 LEVEL POLICY/STRATEGY ORGANISATION&DATE DESCRIPTION Local Road Asset Management Plan NAC,2019 Sets out the Council’s approach forthemanagement and maintenance ofitsroad assets Local SustainableNorth AyrshireStrategy2024- 27 NAC,2023 Sets out the Council’s commitment totackling climate change by achieving net-zero carbon emissions by 2030, halt biodiversity loss and be nature positive.
Page 31
Page 25/ 192 2.3.5 The B714 Upgrade scheme is part of a coherent and comprehensive place-based strategy which together would assist in achieving levelling up outcomes and deliver transformational change to the Three Towns. This includes recent or proposed improvements to the A737 corridor, themain arterialroute between North Ayrshire and Glasgow(seesection 1): Dalry Bypass The Den realignment improvements atBeith. 2.3.6 Improvedaccesswilladdressperceptionsofremotenessfrommarketsandlabourencouraging business investment in North Ayrshire by existing and new businesses, resulting in local economicgrowth.ThisincludesimprovingconnectivityandaccesstotheHunterstonStrategic Development Area on the A78 which include the Hunterston Port and Resource Centre (PARC)5,6. PARC is Scotland’s largest strategic deep-water port with direct rail and grid connections,the site hasacritical role in Scotland’s energy, blueeconomy,offshore wind and the circular economy futures. In addition, other projects are planned for the nearby coastal area such as the International Marine Science and Environment Centre being developed as part of the Ayrshire Growth Deal as well as access to other strategic projects such as the Ardrossan Coastal Quarter and the planned campus and commercial area. There is also the Ardrossan harbourside development that is designed to retain and improve the service from Ardrossan to Brodick in Arran from a connectivity perspective and help support the government’s ambition to enable our tourism and events industry to grow further and to attractmorevisitors to Scotland. 2.4 Existing arrangements 2.4.1 An overview of North Ayrshire is provided below to set the proposed scheme in context including the economic, demographic and social conditions, and existing transport provision. This will providea baselinefrom whichto measurefuture improvements. Geographical context 2.4.2 North Ayrshire is located on the south-west coast of Scotland and borders several other Scottish council areas: South Ayrshire, East Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, East Renfrewshire, and Inverclyde (Figure 7). The Council area encapsulates settlements on the mainland and the islands of Arran, Great Cumbrae, and Little Cumbrae. The mainland coastline, approximately 67km inlength, stretches from Skelmorlie inthe northto approximately 4km south of Irvine. 2.4.3 North Ayrshire’s land area totals 886km², divided between the mainland (441km²) and the islands (445km²). 2.4.4 The areafeatures avarietyof different conurbationsand land uses, including: townswithvaried residential and commercialofferings coastal townsoffering portaccesses and notabletourist attractions industrial developments rural areas,which are predominantly agriculturalwithsomeleisureofferings. 5 320-acre deep-water port and marine yard on the North Ayrshire coast 6 www.ayrshiregrowthdeal.co.uk/service/hunterston-port-resource-centre/
Page 32
Page 26/ 192 2.4.5 Other than the part of North Ayrshire that encompasses Clyde Muirshiel Regional Park, the mainlandpartofNorthAyrshireconsistsoffairly flatterrain,withno notablepeaksorvalleys. Figure 7. Map of North Ayrshire Demographical context In contrast to Scotland as a whole, the population of North Ayrshire has been declining over the last two decades and this trend is forecast to continue. The region also has a higher proportionofolderpeoplethan the Scottish average. 2.4.6 North Ayrshire’s major town and administrative centre is Irvine, situated on the mainland towards thesouth ofthe Council’s boundary, andwith a population ofapproximately 40,000. 2.4.7 Othermajor settlements include (populations based on the 2021 Census): Kilwinning (population approx.17,000) The Three Towns (Saltcoats, Stevenston, and Ardrossan, which have a total combined populationof approx.31,300) Kilbirnie (population approx. 7,100) Dalry (population approx. 5,300) Beith (population approx.5,750). 2.4.8 The smaller towns and village conurbations of Seamill, West Kilbride, Fairlie, Largs, and Skelmorlie are located along North Ayrshire’s northern coastline, whilst the Isle of Arran has an approximatepopulationof4,600, and Cumbrae apopulationof around 1,300. 2.4.9 Key demographicstatisticsfor North Ayrshireandwider Scotland areshowninTable 3 below.
Page 33
Page 27/ 192 Table 3. North Ayrshire and Scotland demographic profile7 DEMOGRAPHIC METRIC NORTHAYRSHIRE SCOTLAND Current Population (mid-2023) 133,570 5,490,100 PopulationDensity (personsper sq. km,mid-2020) 152 69 HistoricalPopulationGrowth (1998 –2020) -2.3% +7.7% ForecastPopulation Growth (2018 –2028) -3.1% +1.8% Gender (2023) 52.1% Female 47.9%Male 51.4% Female 48.6%Male Age Groups by % (2023) < 16: 15.8% 16 –64: 60.0% >= 65: 24.2% < 16: 16.3% 16 –64: 63.4% >= 65: 20.3% Life Expectancy at Birth(2022 Female: 79.3 years Male: 74.9 years Female: 80.8 years Male: 76.8 years Education level (2023) RQF4 and above: 54.3% RQF3 and above: 69.7% RQF2 and above: 85.6% RQF1 and above: 86.7% Other qualifications: 3.7% No qualifications: 9.6% RQF4 and above: 55.1% RQF3 and above: 73.7% RQF2 and above: 87.1% RQF1 and above: 87.9% Other qualifications: 3.9% No qualifications: 8.2% Healthy life expectancy (2019-21) Female: 52.1 years Male: 56.5 years Female: 61.1 years Male: 60.4 years 2.4.10 The region’s demographicprofile showsthat: North Ayrshire has the 15th highest population out of all 32 council areas in Scotland in 2023,and a relatively highpopulation density the population of North Ayrshire has declined over the last 20 years and this trend is expected to continueoverthe next decade (in contrast to a growing Scottish population) North Ayrshire has ahigherproportionof femalesthan Scotlandoverall (52.1%vs. 51.4%) North Ayrshire has a relatively ageing population, with a higher proportion of residents aged 65 and overthan theScotland average(24.2%vs. 20.3%) The population of North Ayrshire generally has a lower educational attainment level than the Scotland average, although almost 70% of the North Ayrshire population has at least a RQF3 (A-levelor equivalent) qualification. 7 Source:Mid-2023PopulationEstimates,NationalRecords ofScotland;ONSAnnualPopulation Survey; Scottish Government Scottish Health Survey.
Page 34
Page 28/ 192 Economic context The North Ayrshire economy is weaker than the rest of Scotland and the UK. The region suffers from high levelsofdeprivation and unemployment. 2.4.11 Several indicators show that North Ayrshire falls behind economically when compared to the Scotland and the UKas awhole, asshown in Table 4 below: Gross Value Added (GVA) per capita and GVA per hour worked – these measures of economic activity are significantly lower in North Ayrshire than Scotland and the United Kingdom as a whole. Its GVA per filled job is 97% and 92% of the Scotland and United Kingdom averages respectively. In contrast, GVA per filled job in Edinburgh is nearly 1.5 times higher than in North Ayrshire, and GVA per head in Edinburgh has nearly doubled since devolution,whilst growth in North Ayrshire wasaround half thatrate. Average (median) weekly earnings are slightly higher in North Ayrshire than in Scotland (ONS, 2023) UnemploymentishigherinNorthAyrshirethaninScotlandandtheUnitedKingdom.North Ayrshire hasthe lowestemploymentratein thewholeof Scotland (65.2%). Economic inactivity in North Ayrshire isalso atthe highest levelacross Scotland (31.5%). NorthAyrshirehadaround44,000 jobsin2023,28,000ofwhichwerefulltime.Jobdensity inNorthAyrshire(theratiooftotaljobsrelativetotheworkingagepopulation)was0.57in 2022,whichwas the 4th lowestrateforScottish localauthorities (outof32). TheScottishGovernment’sAdvisoryGrouponEconomicRecoveryhasidentifiedthatNorth Ayrshire hasthe lowest level ofregionalresilience in Scotland8. Table 4. Economic metrics by region9 METRIC NORTH AYRSHIRE10 SCOTLAND UNITED KINGDOM GVA per filled job (2021) £55,494 £56,985 £60,428 GVA per hourworked(2021) £38.70 £36.70 £39.10 Mean Annual GrossPay (alljobs, 2023) £32,124 £33,669 £35,393 Gross Disposable Household Income per capita (2021) £17,332 £19,630 £21,679 Unemployment (model-based, aged 16 and over) (July 2023 - June2024) 4.3% 3.5% 3.7% Job density (2022) 0.57 0.81 0.87 2.4.12 Within North Ayrshire, income levels are unevenly distributed as shown in Figure 8. Incomes are particularly low inTheThreeTowns. 8 North Ayrshire Economic Recovery and Renewal Approach: Building back better, fairer and greener, NAC (2020) 9 ONS 10 Values GVA per capita and GVA per hour worked are for East Ayrshire and North Ayrshire mainland
Page 35
Page 29/ 192 Figure 8. Distribution of income across North Ayrshire 2.4.13 Moreover, those who live in North Ayrshire earn more on average (median weekly wage of £596) than those who work in North Ayrshire (median weekly wage of £500), suggesting that residentsof North Ayrshirecommuteoutsideof NorthAyrshireto higher-paying jobs, likely in Glasgowand beyond. 2.4.14 North Ayrshire'straditionalemploymentsectorof heavy industry,particularly inthe steeland textile industry has long since declined, although there has been a recent shift towards the services sector (SOC Groups 1-7), with approximately 78% of those in work employed in this sector (ONS, 2022). However, this remains lower than the overall Scottish and Great Britain averages and is reflected in a higher than national average of workers employed in the manufacturing and construction sectorswithin NorthAyrshire. 2.4.15 A breakdownof employment by industry withinthe Three Townsis shown in Figure 9 below.
Page 36
Page 30/ 192 Figure 9. Breakdown of employment by industry in the Three Towns (2023)11 2.4.16 Intermsofbusinesssurvivalrates,NorthAyrshirelagsbelowtheoverallratesforScotlandand theUKasawhole(seeFigure10below),suggestingthatakeyelementofenhancingeconomic growth in North Ayrshireisboosting productivity andprospects for new businesses. 11 Business Register & Employment Survey
Page 37
Page 31/ 192 Figure 10. Survivalrate of businesses founded in 2018 (Source: ONS) 2.4.17 However, North Ayrshire benefits from a number of strategic business locations including Hunterston, Ardeer, and i3 Enterprise Park that present business and employment opportunities. North Ayrshire is also strategically located to benefit from sea and rail freight connectionswhich arecurrently underutilised, withmost freight being transported by road. 2.4.18 ItisnotedthatNorthAyrshirecontained942hectaresofvacantandderelictlandasof2023/24 (according to the Scottish Vacant and Derelict Land survey). This constitutes 1.06% of North Ayrshire’s total land area, which compares to an overall land vacancy and dereliction rate for Scotland asa wholeof0.11%. Deprivation and wellbeing North Ayrshire suffers from high levelsof deprivation and is theoneof themost deprived Council areas in Scotland. 2.4.19 The Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) provides an area ranking of deprivation dividing Scotland into nearly 7,000 data zones, each containing around 350 households, and showsthat: North Ayrshire is the 5th most deprived Council area in Scotland (out of 32) with 27% of North Ayrshire’s data zones12 in the15%most deprived. Within North Ayrshire, the Three Towns is the most deprived area (39% of data zones in the 15% most deprived) with Irvine (36%), Kilwinning (27%) and Garnock Valley (26%) also having above average deprivation. As shown in Table 5 below, North Ayrshire deprivation is mainly concentrated in the income, employment, health and education domains, ranking in the top 10 most deprived Council areas for each. 12 for the purposes of the SIMD, Scotland is split into 6,976 small areas called ‘data zones’ with roughly equal populations
Page 38
Page 32/ 192 Table 5. Proportion of North Ayrshire’s data zones in 15% most deprived in Scotland by domain13 DOMAIN % NORTHAYRSHIRE ZONES IN 15% MOST DEPRIVED NORTH AYRSHIRE DEPRIVATION RANKING (OUT OF32) Overall Deprivation 27% 5th Income 37% 3rd Employment 31% 4th Health 27% 6th Education 18% 9th Access 12% 20th Crime 12% 19th Housing 4% 17th 2.4.20 LevelsofdeprivationareillustratedgraphicallyinFigure11below,withtheredareasindicating the most deprived areas. Large pockets of deprivation are evident in Ardrossan, Saltcoats, Stevenston,Kilwinning andDalry. 13 Source: SIMD, 2020
Page 39
Page 33/ 192 Figure 11. Levels of deprivation within the Three Towns, Kilwinning and Dalry14 2.4.21 With regards to levels of wellbeing within North Ayrshire, Table 6 below shows that North Ayrshire had the lowest levels of life satisfaction in Scotland from April 2021 to March 2022, and ranked amongstthebottom 5 Scottish localauthoritiesforallother indicators. Table 6. ONS wellbeing indicators for North Ayrshire, 04/2021 – 03/202215 METRIC LIFE SATISFACTION WORTHWHILE HAPPINESS ANXIETY Score(outof10) 7.2 7.5 7.2 3.4 Scotland Rank (outof32) 32nd 29th 29th 30th UK Rank(out of 369) 363rd 343rd 326th 318th 14 SIMD, 2020: https://simd.scot/#/simd2020/BTTTFTT/9/-4.0000/55.9000/ 15 Source: ONS Annual Population Survey, 2022
Page 40
Page 34/ 192 2.4.22 As shown in Figure 12 below, all of the ONS wellbeing tracking statistics were trending in a positive direction within North Ayrshire from 2011 to 2018, but this trend reversed markedly during the Covid-19 pandemic. Although this trend was observed across the UK, the pandemic’simpactsonpersonalwellbeingmay havebeenmoreacutelyfeltinareaswithhigh levelsofdeprivationsuch as North Ayrshire. Figure 12. Trend of ONS wellbeing tracking statistics for North Ayrshire, 03/2011 to 03/2022 Levelling up prioritisation North Ayrshire was ranked as the 29th highest local authority with regards to Levelling Up prioritisation(outof368),aheadofthefirstroundofLevellingUpFundbidsubmissionsin 202116. 2.4.23 Taking unemployment, qualifications, and productivity into account, North Ayrshire was placed in category 1 of the Levelling Up prioritisation list, along with 122 other Local Authorities.NorthAyrshirewasoneofthe13LocalAuthoritiesinScotlandto beplacedinthis category,outofa totalof32 ScottishLocal Authorities. 2.4.24 As part of the Levelling Upprioritisation process, North Ayrshire was also ranked as the third- highestLocalAuthorityinneedofeconomicrecoveryandgrowthwithinScotland,behindonly GlasgowCity and neighbouring East Ayrshire. 16 Levelling Up Fund: Prioritisation of places methodology note (2021); Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities
Page 41
Page 35/ 192 Transportcontext Roads 2.4.25 The following two trunkroads provide connectivity to and from North Ayrshire: A737trunkroadconnectstheM8atJunction29tothewestofGlasgowtotheA78(T)north of Irvine A78 trunk road route follows the coastline from Greenock (Inverclyde) in the north, along the North Ayrshire coast,bypassing Irvine,to Monkton (South Ayrshire) inthe south. 2.4.26 There are also three further major (non-trunk)roads: A736,totheeastofandparalleltotheA737whichprovidesaroutefromtheM8atJunction 26 to the A78(T)/A71 atIrvine A71 connects the A78(T) just east of Irvine to the A77/M77 at Kilmarnock which runs northwardsto southern Glasgow A760 provides a link from the A737, northof Beith, to Largs on the A78(T) on the northern North Ayrshire coastline. 2.4.27 Minor local roads provide additional connectivity between these strategic links including the B714 and B780. Thekey strategic and local routes areshown in Figure13 below. Figure 13. Overview of road network within and around North Ayrshire 2.4.28 Intermsofcarownership,intheNorthAyrshirewardswithinthevicinityoftheB714(Garnock Valley, Ardrossan, Kilwinning, and Saltcoats and Stevenston), non-car availability is slightly higher than the Scotland average (seeTable7 below).
Page 42
Page 36/ 192 Table 7. Percentage of households according to car availability17 CARAVAILABILITY NORTHAYRSHIRE (SELECTEDWARDS) SCOTLAND No carsorvans 29% 26% 1 carorvan 43% 43% 2 carsorvans 21% 24% 3 carsorvans 5% 5% 4 ormore carsorvans 2% 2% Rail 2.4.29 NorthAyrshireisservedbyScotRailrailservicesontheAyrshireCoastLinewhichconnectsthe Ayrshire coast to Glasgow. It has three branches to Largs, Ardrossan Harbour and Ayr, with direct rail services connecting North Ayrshire northward with Glasgow, and southward with Troon and Ayr,as shown inFigure 14 below. 17 2022 Scotland Census
Page 43
Page 37/ 192 Figure 14. North Ayrshire rail network and stations 2.4.30 Kilwinning is thearea’s railhub with quarter-hourly servicesto and from Glasgowin the peak, althoughthereislessfrequentserviceprovisionbetweenGlasgowandstationsontheGlasgow – Ardrossan and Glasgow–Largs lines, as shownin Table 8 below.
Page 44
Page 38/ 192 Table 8. Overview of rail services from stations within North Ayrshire STATION LINE(S) NO. OF SERVICES PER HOUR TYPICAL JOURNEY TIME TO GLASGOW(MIN) Ardrossan Harbour Glasgow – Ardrossan Harbour 1 46 Ardrossan South Beach Glasgow – Ardrossan Harbour Glasgow–Largs 2 41 Ardrossan Town Glasgow – Ardrossan Harbour 1 44 Dalry Glasgow – Ardrossan Harbour Glasgow–Largs Glasgow– Ayr 3 33 Fairlie Glasgow – Largs 1 54 Glengarnock Glasgow – Ardrossan Harbour Glasgow–Largs Glasgow– Ayr 3 29 Irvine Glasgow – Ayr 2 41 Kilwinning Glasgow – Ardrossan Harbour Glasgow–Largs Glasgow– Ayr 4 33 Largs Glasgow – Largs 1 59 Saltcoats Glasgow – Ardrossan Harbour Glasgow–Largs 2 39 Stevenston Glasgow – Ardrossan Harbour Glasgow–Largs 2 37 WestKilbride Glasgow – Largs 1 49 2.4.31 Moreover, Table 9 below shows station usage within North Ayrshire in 2023-24. Station demand generally reflects the level of service provision associated with each station, whilst Kilwinning also has the highest number of interchanges as it links the Glasgow – Ardrossan, Glasgow–Largs and Glasgow– Ayr lines.
Page 45
Page 39/ 192 Table 9. Estimates of station usage and performance within North Ayrshire18 STATION ENTRIES &EXITS (2023-24) INTERCHANGES (2023-24) Ardrossan Harbour 107,452 0 Ardrossan South Beach 171,736 314 Ardrossan Town 17,304 0 Dalry 161,684 0 Fairlie 36,164 0 Glengarnock 282,374 0 Irvine 628,382 0 Kilwinning 709,802 80,687 Largs 383,736 0 Saltcoats 260,294 0 Stevenston 97,974 0 WestKilbride 124,900 0 Bus 2.4.32 With regardsto bus services, the primary bus connection to Glasgowis thehourly X36 service offered by Stagecoach, from Ardrossan via Dalry, Kilbirnie and Beith. Stagecoach also offers the hourly number 25 service which runs between Irvine and Beith, via Kilbirnie, Dalry and Kilwinning;aswellasthenumber11servicewhichlinksArdrossantoKilmarnockviatheThree Towns, Kilwinning and Irvine with busesevery 12 minutes atpeaktimes. 2.4.33 Further localbus services are offered by ShuttleBusesand McGills largely on anhourly oroff- peak basis. These services typically link outlying towns and villages to Kilwinning town centre. In recentyears,in thewakeoftheCovid-19 pandemicandcostoflivingcrisisthere havebeen substantial reductions in bus services. Activetravel 2.4.34 In terms of cycling provision, the following National Cycle Network (NCN) routes are found within NorthAyrshire: NCN Route753 followsthecoastline from Ardrossan town centreto Seamill NCN Route 73 follows the coastline from Ardrossan eastwards through Saltcoats and Stevenston, the heads inland towards Kilwinning. South of Kilwinning, it merges with NCN Route7,but resumes in Irvine and heads eastwards to Kilmarnock NCN route 7 runs north-south through North Ayrshire, through Irvine and Kilwinning, and to the eastofDalry. 18 Source: ORR, 2023
Page 46
Page 40/ 192 2.4.35 These NCN routes aswellas localpaths are shown in Figure 15 below. Figure 15. Overview of cycle routes within North Ayrshire 2.4.36 Activetravelon foot is also possibleacross North Ayrshire, viathe following routes: Irvine and Kilwinning NewTownTrail walking and cycling paths through the ThreeTowns, particularly along thecoast several walking routeswithin and around Dalry andLargs. 2.4.37 An Active Travel Strategy was included in the recently approved Local Transport and Active Travel Strategy to further the extent of active travel opportunities within North Ayrshire and ensure thatappropriate infrastructureis in place. Travel Patterns 2.4.38 Figure 16 below shows the 2022 Census modal share for travel to work/study trips for the NorthAyrshirewardswithinthevicinityoftheB714.Thisshowsthatcaristhedominantmode with over halfof local residents drivingto their placeof workor study.
Page 47
Page 41/ 192 Figure 16. Mode of transport to work or study (Source: 2022 Census) 2.4.39 In terms of commute destinations, Census data from the also shows the following ranking of commute destinations from North Ayrshire ataLocalAuthority-widelevel. Table 10.Commuter flows from North Ayrshire19 DESTINATION LOCAL AUTHORITY TOTAL COMMUTER FLOW FROM NORTH AYRSHIRE % OF TOTAL COMMUTER FLOWS FROM NORTH AYRSHIRE % OF TRIPS MADEBY CAROR VAN % OF TRIPS MADEBY TRAIN OR BUS % OF TRIPS MADEBY ACTIVE TRAVEL Within North Ayrshire 25,609 55.7% 52.0% 7.8% 6.2% GlasgowCity 5,532 12.0% 34.9% 14.2% 11.0% East Ayrshire 4,319 9.4% 56.0% 5.5% 5.9% South Ayrshire 3,504 7.6% 52.6% 5.4% 7.0% Renfrewshire 3,480 7.6% 48.9% 8.8% 5.5% Inverclyde 1,450 3.3% 47.3% 8.5% 6.2% Other (Scotlandonly) 2,124 4.6% 77.0% 6.9% 1.6% TOTAL 46,018 100.0% N/A N/A N/A 2.4.40 Table10aboveshowsthatwhilstthemajorityofcommutingjourneysoriginatingwithinNorth Ayrshire have a destination that is also in North Ayrshire, a high proportion of commuting journeys to Glasgow are undertaken using public transport. However, it should also be noted 19 Source: 2011/2022 Scotland Census
Page 48
Page 42/ 192 that the total number of journeys to Glasgow is dwarfed by that which are completed wholly within NorthAyrshire,many ofwhich are undertakenby carorvan. 2.4.41 It is also worth noting that Ardrossan port is identified as a key port in the National Planning Framework 4. The Ardrossan – Brodick ferry route carried 692,500 passengers in 2022 (The Scottish Transport Statistics), making it the busiest route within the Clyde and Hebrides Ferry ServicesNetworkintermsofnumberofpassengerscarried.ThisreinforcesArdrossan’scurrent andfutureimportance asagateway fromtheNorthAyrshiremainlandtotheoutlyingislands. 2.4.42 When translated to a heat map, it is evident from Figure 17 below that although commuter flows from the Three Towns specifically are predominantly local, a notable proportion of commuter trips are made to locations within the Ayrshires, as well as Renfrewshire and Glasgowcity centre. Figure 17. Heat map of commuter flows (by all modes) from the Three Towns 2.5 Problem Identification 2.5.1 Thissectionidentifiesthelocaltransportproblemsthatjustifytheneedforthescheme.Italso provides the evidence base that supports their existence and demonstrates that they are real and notmerely perceived. 2.5.2 The identification of problems and the underlying cause has been informed by the following, undertaken aspartof the STAG Part1 Appraisal conducted during the2016 routeing study: a stakeholderengagementworkshopwith20 attendees analysis of a range of traffic data to support the identification of problems, underpinning and evidencing the real, perceived and sometimes anecdotal problems identified from the engagement workshop.
Page 49
Page 43/ 192 Underlying cause The underlying cause of the local transport problems and one of the main barriers to growthinTheThreeTownsspecifically isthe poor strategic road connectivity toGlasgow and the restof Scotland. 2.5.3 As shown in Figure 18, the A737 starts at junction 29 of the M8 to the west of Glasgow. The roadisdualcarriagewayuntilsouthofJohnstone,afterwhichitissinglecarriageway.Theroute bypasses Beith and nowalso Dalry,following theopening of thenewbypass in2019. Figure 18. Overview of road network in and around North Ayrshire 2.5.4 South of Dalry, the most direct route to The Three Towns and the Garnock Valley area would beviatheB714.However,thepoorverticalandhorizontalalignmentsontheB714 contribute to slower journey times and detract from the attractiveness of the route resulting in the majorityoftraffictravellingsouthfromDalryontheA737throughKilwinningtothePennyburn roundabout then north-west alongthe A78 (see Figure 19 below).
Page 50
Page 44/ 192 Figure 19. Strategic road connectivity to/from Three Towns 2.5.5 Local studies and analysis20,21 have identified improving transport connectivity as being a key factorinhelpingpromoteeconomicgrowthandtacklinglocaldeprivation.TheNorthAyrshire Economic Review identified improving transport connectivity in the region as priorities to increase accessof people to jobs and goodsto market. Current transport-relatedproblems 2.5.6 In addition to the barrier to economic growth, the poor strategic road connectivity within North Ayrshire creates a number of transport-related problems and which the scheme will need to address: over-utilisationof theA737 through Kilwinning by HGVtraffic high levelsofcongestionand lack of road capacity inKilwinning proximity oftrunk road to four local schools unreliable journey times higher accident rates limitedactivetravelopportunities poorair quality and noise pollution inbuilt-up areas excessive road maintenance costs. 2.5.7 Each oftheabove issues are discussed infurther detail below. 20 North Ayrshire Economic Review, Fraser of Allander Institute, University of Strathclyde, 2018 21 Ayrshire – Transport and theEconomy, SYSTRA (formerly MVA), 2006
Page 51
Page 45/ 192 Over-utilisation of theA737 by HGVtraffic 2.5.8 As a result of the poor strategic route connectivity described above, an excessive amount of traffictravelsbetweenTheThreeTownsandtheGarnockValleyviatheA737.Thisaddstothe existing numberof HGVs already using the A737, given its designation asa trunkroad. 2.5.9 Table11 belowshowstheproportionofHGVsusingkey routesbetweentheThreeTownsand Dalry in 2019, according to DfT Traffic Count data. Importantly, the data presented for the B714 routeisfrom 2023 DfT Traffic Count data asthiswas themostrecent data available,but this was notavailable for the other routeslisted. Table 11.Proportion of HGVs using key routes between the Three Towns and Dalry COUNT ID ROUTE&LOCATION OF COUNTER AVERAGEDAILY TRAFFIC FLOW AVERAGEDAILY HGV FLOW % HGVS 74439 A737 (Dalgarven) 8,001 328 4.1% 10905 A737 (Kilwinning town centre) 8,481 347 4.1% 10756 A738 (southof A78) 22,695 670 3.0% 80401 A738 (northof A78) 10,739 321 3.0% 811476 B714 4,639 81 1.7% 2.5.10 Figure 20 shows the locations ofthe sites listed in Table 11 usedto exploretrafficcount data.
Page 52
Page 46/ 192 Figure 20. The route locations used in Table 1122 2.5.11 Whilst it is acknowledged that a notable proportion of HGVs will likely use the A737 as a strategic route anyway given its designation as a trunk route between key settlements, Table 12 nonethelessshowsthataproportionofHGVtraffictravellingnorthwardstowardsGlasgow could be shifted onto underutilised alternative routes such as the B714, especially for traffic coming from Saltcoats, Ardrossan and further west. 2.5.12 Thesefindingsaresupportedbytheresultsofpublicconsultation,wherelocalHGVdriversand operators expressed concerns about the suitability of the B714 in its current state to accommodate HGV traffic, which consequently forces HGVs to utilise the A738 and A737 via Kilwinning even if thisconstitutesa longer andmore indirect route. 2.5.13 The resulting over-utilisation of the A737 by HGV traffic (alongside the under-utilisation of alternative direct routes such as the B714) contributes to the exacerbation of existing congestion issues in Kilwinning, as well as associated safety and environmental impacts, all of which are discussed further below. Highlevels ofcongestion in Kilwinning 2.5.14 Amajorimpactresultingfromthepoorstrategicroadconnectivityandresultingoverutilisation of the A737 by HGVs is high levels of congestion on the A737 in Kilwinning, particularly at the 22 Road traffic statistics - Local authority: North Ayrshire
Page 53
Page 47/ 192 junctionoftheA737 andA738,andontheA738 approachto theA78Pennyburnroundabout, (as shown in Figure 21 below), which was identified through the STAG appraisal previously undertaken in2016 as partofthe Routeing Study. Figure 21. A737/A738(T) and A738(T)/A78(T) locations 2.5.15 As part of the STAG appraisal, historical traffic data was analysed to provide a full picture of traffic conditionsonthe A737, A738(T) and A78 including: the ScottishRoadsTrafficDatabase (SRTDb)forsiteson the A737 and A738(T) turncountsurveysatPennyburnRoundabout,EglintonInterchange,A737/A738(T),andon the A737 journey time surveysthrough Kilwinning future year forecast traffic modelling outputs from work undertaken to understand potential impacts of the North Ayrshire Local Development Plan (NALDP) and aid the developmentofmitigationmeasures to supportthePlan. 2.5.16 The key findings from thisanalysis included: heavy goods vehicle (HGV) traffic accounts for a higher proportion of traffic compared to other key roads such as the A78, accounting for 10% of total flows at the A737 and 8% on the A738(T) high peak hour traffic flows in Kilwinning particularly on the southbound approach to Pennyburnroundaboutwherethemorningandeveningpeakhourflowisover700vehicles per hour long queues of over 50m present at several locations in the morning and evening peak including on theA737 southbound approachto the A737/A738(T)junction,onthe A738(T) eastbound approach to the A737/A738(T) junction and on the A738(T) southbound approach to Pennyburn roundabout unreliable journey times for a numberofroutes into and within Kilwinning
Page 54
Page 48/ 192 evidence from stakeholderengagementof ‘rat-running’ to avoid theA737/A738 junction. 2.5.17 QueuesareoftenobservedattheA78PennyburnRoundaboutjunction,aswellasinthecentre ofKilwinning(Figure22).TrafficsurveydatafromNovember2021showsthatqueuesfromthe A738westboundontothePennyburnroundaboutcanreachlengthsofupto18vehiclesduring themorning peak period, and 15 vehicles during theevening peakperiod. 2.5.18 The volume of the traffic travelling along the A78 during peak periods, as well as the unsignalised nature of the Pennyburn Roundabout, also presents congestion and queueing issuesforthosetravellingnorthboundalongtheA738andjoiningthePennyburnRoundabout. Trafficsurveydatarevealedthatonthisstretch,queuesinexcessof30vehicleswereobserved during the evening peak period, with congestion during themorning peak slightly lower. Figure 22. Queueing along the A737 southbound into Kilwinning town centre in 2022 2.5.19 The observed congestion issues signify a severe lack of road capacity within and on approach to the centre of Kilwinning, which would be exacerbated by future increases in traffic levels (seesection2.6below)leadingtotheworseningofexistingpinch-pointandrat-runningissues. 2.5.20 Moreover,giventhataround14%ofalltrafficfromStevenstonutilisestheA737toaccessDalry and locations to the north, the shifting of this traffic onto alternative routes such as the B714 would free up capacity on key routes such as the A737 and A738 for the potential implementationof bus priority measuresor active travel corridors.
Page 55
Page 49/ 192 Unreliablejourney times 2.5.21 ThecongestionontheA737notedaboveandonotherroadsisnotuniformandwillvaryacross the time of year, day and time period. For this reason, there is significant daily variation in journey times between key points on the A737, B714 and A78 (based on observed data from November2021),as shownin Figure 23. 2.5.22 Typical journey times northbound between theThreeTownsand the intersectionof theB714 and the A737 south of Dalry vary slightly during the morning peak period, but substantially during the evening peak period. Similar variations in journey are observed during both peak periods inthe southbounddirection. 2.5.23 Typical journey times between the A78 Pennyburn Roundabout and the A737 in the centre of Kilwinning vary substantially during both the morning and evening peak periods, in both the eastbound and westbound directions. There are multiple instances where the difference betweenminimum andmaximum observed journey time is in excessof5 minutes. Figure 23. Observed journey timevariation during AM and PM peak periods in November 2021 2.5.24 This variation means journey times particularly in the peak periods are unreliable and people travellingto workor to anappointment need to buildin more time to avoidbeing delayed. Higher accident rates 2.5.25 The 2016 North Ayrshire Strategic Routeing Study presented a detailed analysis of accident data on the A737 and its arterial routes based on analysis of accident data between 2011 and 2013.This showedthat: themajorityofrouteshaveahigherproportionofslightaccidentsthanwouldbeexpected for a roadofequivalentstandard three sections of the road network were noted to have a higher proportion of serious or fatal accidents including the B714 for which a separate report23 identified poor visibility at a number of locations on the route, sub-standard horizontal and vertical alignment and a lackof safeovertaking locations. 23 B714 Dalry to Sharphill Geometry Report, AECOM, 2014
Page 56
Page 50/ 192 2.5.26 This analysis has now been updated with more recent accident statistics. As shown in Figure 24 below, analysis of historical collision records over the most recent 5 years (2019 to 2023) showsaconcentrationofcollisionsaroundtheintersectionoftheA737andA738inKilwinning towncentre, severalof which were categorised asserious. Figure 24. Map showing road accidents in North Ayrshire from 2019 to 2023 2.5.27 Table 12 presents accidents between The Three Towns and Dalry on the B714 and A737/A78 via Kilwinning corridors. It is observed that the number of accidents on these two corridors in the last 5-year period (2019 – 2023) are lower than the previous 5-year period (2014 – 2018). This is likely because of the impact of Covid 19 pandemic which suppressed traffic levels (and therefore fewer accidents would be expected), and localised network improvements undertaken by NAC including: high-frictionsurfacing,roadmarkingandvergemarkersontheB714 nearMuirlaughtFarm (2022) resurfacing betweenGirthill Farm andYonderhouses(2021) refreshedroadmarkingsandnewsignagealongthefulllengthoftheB714aspartofNAC’s Road Accident Reduction Plan (2021) installationof road studs along the full lengthof theB714 (2018). 2.5.28 However, as shown in Table 12, casualty rates along the B714 and A737 corridors remain greater than the Scotland average for the same 5-year period with the rate on the B714 33% higher (277 per billion vehicle km compared to the Scottish average of 207). It is noted that the Scotland average includes all types of roads, and the accident and casualty rates are typically greater in rural areas.
Page 57
Page 51/ 192 Table 12.Accidents on the road corridors between The Three Towns and Dalry ACCIDENT SEVERITY A737/A78 B714 2019 – 2023 2014 – 2018 2019 – 2023 2014 – 2018 Slight 7 21 5 13 Serious 6 7 3 5 Fatal 0 1 0 0 Total 13 29 8 18 Casualty rate (per billion veh-km) 220 823 277 430 Casualty rate for Scotland (per billion veh-km)24 207 352 207 352 2.5.29 Furthermore, there is a perception locally that the road is unsafe as evidenced through stakeholderengagement including: Road safety on the B714 was identified as a key concern in stakeholder workshops held in October and November 2021 (see section 2.12 and Appendix 2B). Groups attending the workshops included: landowners along the B714, community groups including the Police Service Scotland, transport groups, local businesses and elected members. Specific concerns with the B714 included the lack of visibility and sharp bends, and slow-moving vehicles leading to driverstaking risks by overtaking. Concerns have been raised in Kilwinning about road safety including the volume of HGV trafficon the narrow roadswithin thetown centreadjacent to schools (seesection 2.12) In the questionnaire developed to support the public consultation for the Project in November 2022, ‘improved road safety and fewer accidents’ was identified as the most important benefit to the local area that the Project should deliver (see section 2.12 and Appendix 2C). Limited activetravel opportunities 2.5.30 The poor alignment of the B714 and congestion on the A737 through Kilwinning limits the attractiveness and accessibility of active travel between The Three Towns and the Garnock Valley; the nearest National Cycle Network (NCN) route is to the east of Kilwinning. This lack of active travel opportunities is evidenced through analysis of demand from the Strava which showslittleactivetravel demand along the B714 corridor compared to otherroutes. 24 DfT Statistics, RAS0402.
Page 58
Page 52/ 192 Sub-optimal air quality and noise pollution in built-up areas 2.5.31 Whilst there are no air quality management areas (AQMAs) in the study area or corridors where air quality breaches legal thresholds, the high levels of congestion and associated emissionsinKilwinningnotedabovewouldimplythatairqualityissub-optimal.Concernshave also been raised by local stakeholders including Kilwinning Community Council and local schools (see section 2.12) about traffic emissions in the town and particularly the impact this may have onchildren walking to/from school. 2.5.32 Given North Ayrshire’s apparent deprivation with regards to health and its ageing population (see section 2.3.5), it is reasonable to suggest that pollution issues caused by high volumes of road traffic and associated health implications will have a greater impact on the local populationthan would otherwisebe the case. 2.5.33 Noise pollution impacts are also monitored across the most-heavily populated areas of North Ayrshire.Thenoise impactsofroad trafficonmajorroads in andaroundtheThree Townsand Kilwinning are shown in Figure 25 below, with the largest impacts observed on the A78 and A737 particularly in and around Kilwinning. Figure 25. Noise pollution from roads around the Three Towns and Kilwinning25 Increasedroad maintenance costs 2.5.34 The high volume of traffic on the A737 and other local roads has resulted in increased maintenance issues in recent years including: structural damage including vergeoverrun and structural edge damage wheeltrackrouting and associated poor drainage surface failureand structural damage. 2.5.35 These issues have resultedin increased roadmaintenance costs for NAC. 25 Scotland’s Environment, 2018: https://noise.environment.gov.scot/noisemap/
Page 59
Page 53/ 192 2.6 Impactof not changing 2.6.1 Road traffic mileage in the Ayrshire region is forecast to increase by nearly 20% in 2037 compared to 2017 (see Table 13 below). Table 13.Regional road traffic forecasts26 SUB-NATIONALAREA ROADTRAFFIC (BILLION VEHICLE MILES P.A.) 2017 2027 2037 Ayrshire 1.40 1.55 1.66 % increase cf.2017 - 11% 19% 2.6.2 Futuretraveldemandcanalso bepredictedusingTEMPro(v8.1),whichprovidesgrowthrates for allmodesoftransport in the North Ayrshire area. 2.6.3 Relevantorigin-destinationtraveldemandgrowthratesfortheNorthAyrshireareaareshown in Table 14 below. Table 14.TEMPro growth rates for NorthAyrshire YEAR WALKING CYCLING CAR DRIVER BUS/COACH RAIL COMBINED 2024 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 2030 0.9568 0.9672 1.0301 0.9341 0.9590 0.9945 2045 0.8499 0.8802 1.0438 0.7841 0.8518 0.9526 2.6.4 From Table 14, it can be seen that whilst demand for all modes other than private car use is expected to decrease over time, the demand trend for private car use is expected to trend in the opposite direction, increasing in each futureyearconsidered. 2.6.5 In the absence of intervention, regional traffic modelling also shows that from 2018 to 2045, daily traffic levels along the A78 and B714 are expected to increase markedly, whilst the fact thattheA737featuressimilarfuturetrafficlevelssuggeststhattherouteisalreadyatcapacity. 2.6.6 A summary ofthemodelled traffic flowsis shown inTable 15 below. Table 15.Modelled changes in traffic flows on key routes, 2018 to 2045 ROUTE 2018 TWO-WAY FLOW 2045 TWO-WAY FLOW % CHANGE, 2018 TO2045 A737 10,450 10,614 1.6% A78 36,139 41,399 14.6% B714 6,821 8,058 18.1% 26 Source: Transport Forecasts 2018, Transport Scotland
Page 60
Page 54/ 192 2.6.7 Theanticipatedriseinprivatecarusealongkeyroutessignifiesaneedtoensurethatstrategic routes within North Ayrshire are fit for purpose and can meet traffic demands. The B714 Upgrade aims to meet this need by improving links between the Three Towns and Dalry and removing congestion from Kilwinning, which would beexacerbated by a sustained increase in demand for privatecar travel givenexisting capacity issues. 2.6.8 Unless there is intervention to improve transport connectivity, road congestion is likely to worsen and journey times will become longer and less reliable as the network becomes less resilient which will affect both public and private road transport. This will have knock-on impactswithregardstoroadsafety,environmentalandnoisepollution,andanincreasedneed for unplanned road maintenance worksas a resultofhigher trafficvolumes. 2.6.9 These worsening transport-related problems will have wider consequences, including continuingtoinhibiteconomicgrowthanddevelopment,particularlyinTheThreeTownsarea. 2.7 SMART spending objectives and measures of success 2.7.1 The overarching aim of the B714 Upgrade is to support economic growth in The Three Towns and North Coast of North Ayrshire by improving the strategic road connectivity to/from the area. 2.7.2 ToachievetheaimoftheB714Upgrade,specificschemeobjectiveshavebeenset.IntheNorth Ayrshire Routeing Study, specific Transport Planning Objectives (TPOs) were identified. These have been developed to address theproblemsidentified in section2.5. 2.7.3 ForthepurposeofthisFBC,theseobjectiveshavebeendevelopedfurthertoreflectthewider transport, economic and land-use policy set out in section 2.3. The objectives developed are all SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant and Timebound), in line with TAG and STAG. 2.7.4 It is also important at this stage to set out what will constitute the successful delivery of the scheme objectives by identifying measures of success. This will inform the development and appraisalofthescheme,selectionofapreferredoptionandsubsequently themonitoringand evaluationof thescheme’sperformance post-opening. 2.7.5 The SMART objectives andassociatedmeasuresof success are setout inTable16.
Page 61
Page 55/ 192 Table 16.B714 Upgrade scheme objectives and associated measures of success OBJECTIVE CHALLENGE SUMMARY MEASURE OF SUCCESS SMART OBJECTIVES Specific Measurable Achievable Relevant Time-bound 1 To reduce the volume of strategic and HGV traffic passing through Kilwinning on the A737 Kilwinning experiences high volumesoftraffic and a high proportionof HGV traffic dueto the sub-standards of alternative routes between the ThreeTowns and the Garnock Valley Reductionin volumeof traffic and proportionof HGV trips using A737 through Kilwinning 5% reduction in general traffic and 10% reduction in HGV traffic on A737 Traffic surveys at 1 year and5 years post- opening will be required as part of theM&E plan to evidence this change Reduction targets should be achievable 5 years post- opening Reductionin congestion through the settlement will havemarginal externaland improved quality of lifeimpacts for residents improving overall welfare. Within 5 yearsof schemeopening 2 To reduce journey times and improve journey reliability between The ThreeTowns towards the Garnock Valley and beyond towards Glasgow The poorvertical and horizontal alignmentson the B714 contribute to slower journey times and detract from the attractivenessof the route resulting in the majority oftraffic travelling between the ThreeTowns and Reductionin journey time and improved journey time reliability between The ThreeTowns and the Garnock Valley Reductionin journey times and 10% reduction in journey time variability on themain routes between the three settlements TrafficMaster data ormoving observersurvey required at1 year and5-year post-opening will be required as partof the M&Eplan to evidence this change Reduction targets should be achievable 5 years post- opening Improved journey time reliability will reduce impacts for businesses and transport users enhancing overall welfare. Within 5 yearsof schemeopening
Page 62
Page 56/ 192 OBJECTIVE CHALLENGE SUMMARY MEASURE OF SUCCESS SMART OBJECTIVES Specific Measurable Achievable Relevant Time-bound the Garnock Valley using the A737 and A78 via Kilwinning. 3 To reduce traffic emissions and improve local air quality within Kilwinning Congestion at peak times resulting in delays, stationary traffic and increasing local air pollution Reductionin queuing at key junctions resulting in less stationary traffic and lower tailpipe emissions locally Reductionin GHG emissions, NOX, PM10 and PM2.5 emissions locally. Emissions monitoring data will be required for carbon and particulate matter emissions at 1 year and5 years post-opening as part oftheM&E plan to evidence this change. High likelihood of target being achievable coupled with the moveto electric vehicles and the reduction in HGVs through the settlement. Contributes towards national and international emissions reductions targets. Within 5 yearsof schemeopening
Page 63
Page 57/ 192 OBJECTIVE CHALLENGE SUMMARY MEASURE OF SUCCESS SMART OBJECTIVES Specific Measurable Achievable Relevant Time-bound 4 To improve the resilience of the transport network in the Garnock Valley, Kilwinning and the ThreeTowns, and reduce pressureon road maintenance budgets Volumeof traffic on local roads is currently higher than they were designed for which has resulted in structural damage, poor drainage and surface failure; this ismost evidentonmany routesacross North Ayrshire including the B714. Reductionin road maintenance costsand reduction in numberof road closures due to flooding and surface damage Reductionin road maintenance costsand numberof road closures. Reductionin the numberof recorded incidents by 10% from previously recorded. If recordsof incidents are incomplete, then average recorded incidents from National Highway's "Resilience Technical Annex: Valuing a Quick Recovery (Oct 2022)" Appendix A will be used as the counterfactual. Reduction targets should be achievable 5 years post- opening Contributes towards national objectives for a reliable and resilient network. Within 5 yearsof schemeopening 5 To reduce the number of accidents in urban areas such as High levelsof congestionon the A737 and poor horizontal and vertical alignment Reductionin accidents by absolute number and/or 10% reduction in accidentson B714/A737 (Dalry – A78) Reviewof STATS19 accident database post opening and Achievable based on COBA-LT forecast accident Contributes towards national objectives for accident reductions. Within 5 yearsof schemeopening
Page 64
Page 58/ 192 OBJECTIVE CHALLENGE SUMMARY MEASURE OF SUCCESS SMART OBJECTIVES Specific Measurable Achievable Relevant Time-bound Kilwinning, and the severity of accidentson rural roads between the Garnock Valley, Kilwinning and the ThreeTowns (e.g. the B714) and reduced visibility onthe B714 are factors thatmay be contributing to higher ratesof accidentson the local road networkthan would be expected for roadsof equivalent standard shifting severity classification in first 5 yearsof scheme opening compared to previous5 years comparisonof projected accidents withoutthe scheme from COBA-LTwith actual STATS19 recorded accidents savings. Comparison of STAT19 5-yeardata to establish count- factual.
Page 65
Page 59/ 192 2.8 Strategic benefits 2.8.1 To illustrate the strategic benefits that the scheme will aim to deliver, a logic map has been developed which shows the expected relationship between the scheme inputs, outputs, outcomes and long-term impacts(Figure26). 2.8.2 ThetransportandintermediateoutcomesareconsistentwiththeSMART spendingobjectives setout in section2.7. 2.8.3 Inaddition,thereareexpectedto bewiderstrategicoutcomesandimpactsresultingfrom the scheme linked to theimproved connectivity betweenNorth Ayrshire and Glasgow. 2.8.4 Most significant is the economic impact of improving the transport connectivity between North Ayrshire and Glasgow. As noted previously, one of the primary barriers to economic growth in The Three Towns is the poor transport connectivity between North Ayrshire and Glasgow and the rest of Scotland, particularly by strategic road routes as evidenced in local studies and analysis: The NorthAyrshireEconomicReview1identifiedimprovedtransportconnectivity asalever that could improve economic performance through facilitating accessto jobs. Ayrshire – Transport and the Economy2 identified poor quality transport links within and between Ayrshire and the rest of Scotland / UK as a contributory factor to the underperformance of the Ayrshire economy as it transitions from an economy based on traditional manufacturing industries to one driven by knowledge-based service industries. The study undertook modelling to give indicative results for the potential effects of transport improvements in terms of employment, GVA and population. This found that road schemes including upgrades to the A737 corridor were more beneficial than public transport improvements. 2.8.5 TheB714 Upgradeschemewillfurtherenhancetheconnectivity betweenNorthAyrshire(and specifically the Three Towns) and Glasgow following the recently completed improvement schemes on the A737 (the Dalry bypass and the Den realignment) and deliver better quality road infrastructure and faster journey times. This will facilitate economic growth and help tacklelocal deprivationthrough: improved access from The Three Towns to job opportunities in Glasgow and the Central Belt expanded labour pool for jobs in Glasgow and the Central Belt making recruitment easier and boosting economicgrowth in theGlasgow area increased economic competitiveness and attractiveness of North Ayrshire through improved access to markets for freight, services andemployment greater investment in North Ayrshire. 2.8.6 Otherexpectedwider impactsof theschemeinclude: increased tourism in North Ayrshire and the Isle of Arran (through improved access to the ThreeTowns including theferry port at Ardrossan andthe GarnockValley) enhanced quality of life in Kilwinning (through a reduction in traffic volumes through the towncentre) improvedhealthoutcomesthroughimprovedairqualityandfewerroadaccidents(through reduced congestion in Kilwinning and improved horizontal and vertical alignment of the B714)
Page 66
Page 60/ 192 contributiontotherepopulationoftheislands(duetoimprovedaccesstotheferry portat Ardrossan). 2.8.7 Theselonger-termimpactswillbemoredifficulttomeasuredirectlyandbeattributabletothe scheme but are the expected logical consequences of successful achievement of the scheme objectives.
Page 67
Page 61/ 192 Figure 26. Scheme logic map
Page 68
Page 62/ 192 2.9 Scope 2.9.1 The proposed scheme relates only to infrastructure improvement of the B714 in North Ayrshire, consisting of a 3.5km stretch between Girthill Farm and the recently constructed A737 Dalry Bypass,aswellas associated improvements to farm accesses. Thiswillconsist of: online improvements to the existing corridor to improve the geometric standard of the route, with realignment of certain sections and widening to 9.3m wide single carriageway cross-sections (two 3.65m wide laneswith1m hard strips on either side) anewofflinelinkofaround0.6km comprisinga9.3mwidesinglecarriageway betweenthe B714 and a new roundabout on Kilwinning Road, which will include overtaking opportunities with a differential acceleration lane on the uphill element west of the proposed roundabout where the gradient approaches8% targetedonline improvements undertaken betweenDiddup Farm access and Girthill the potential to retain the existing B714 link into Dalry as a dedicated traffic-free active travelcorridor a Sustainable UrbanDrainage (SuDs)network to control rainfall runoff from the route associated improvements to driver visibility at the numerous priority junctions and field accessesalongthelengthoftheB714,particularlybetweenDiddupFarmandGirthillFarm. 2.9.2 The following are considered outout-of-scopeas partofthe proposed scheme: improvementstotheB714betweentheSharphillroundaboutontheA78 andGirthillFarm (previously included in the scheme, but excluded during scheme descoping due to cost constraints) improvements to the B714 southof the Sharphill roundabout onthe A78 active travel corridor which will now be delivered separately or as part of the B714 improvements between the A78 and Girthill Farm provision of any public transport facilities or services (considered and dismissed as part of the initialoptions sifting, see section 2.12 below for details). 2.10 Risks and constraints Main schemerisks 2.10.1 All risks to the scheme that have been identified are recorded in the risk register which is provided in Appendix 6C. The risk register is a live document, and the status of each risk will be subject to regular reviews and updates via the Project Board meetings during the detailed design and construction phases. 2.10.2 Atotalof30 riskshavebeenrecordedinthecurrentriskregister(Appendix6C).Thefivemain risks andmitigating actionsas ofJanuary 2025 areshown in Table17. Table 17.Main project risks RISK DESCRIPTION CONSEQUENCES MITIGATION 1 Suitability ofsitewon material: percentage assumedre-useableis significantly less than expected Increased costs to dispose of unsuitablematerial and import suitablematerial Early ground investigation
Page 69
Page 63/ 192 RISK DESCRIPTION CONSEQUENCES MITIGATION 2 Earthworkquantities: increased quantities result in a surplus ofmaterialto be disposedonoroff-site Increased costs and land required to disposeof surplus material Early andwell-scoped investigations 3 Land acquisition: landownerobjectionto extentofland required for constructing the scheme Delay to programmeand requirement to pursue Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) Early andongoing landowner liaison. Awaiting outcome ofCPO public inquiry (held November2024). 4 Historical mineworkings extents: moreextensive and/or remedial costs are higher Delay to construction programmeand increased constructioncosts Early ground investigation 5 Historical mineworkings collapse: failureto sufficiently identify and remediate historicalmine workings Delay, additional remedial/ stoppagecosts and potentialharm to site staff Detailed investigation/ remediation Constraints 2.10.3 The following typesof constraint have been considered, and are summarised inturn below: physical environmental financial legal and institutional. Physicalconstraints 2.10.4 With regards to physical constraints, the area between the Three Towns and Dalry is largely undeveloped (particularly north of the A78, west of Kilwinning) and comprises mainly agricultural land with sparsely located farms and other properties. Whilst there are no insurmountable physical constraints, there are several constraints that the option development stage hastaken into account including: the River Garnock running between Dalry and Kilwinning and other bodies of water including Lugton Water and Ashgrove Loch the usedKilwinning- Glasgow railway which lies to the west andeastofthe A737 a disused railway lineto the eastof theA737 a large solar farm and golfcourseto thenorthoftheA78 eastofthe Sharphill roundabout steepembankment between the A737 Hillend roundabout andDalry.
Page 70
Page 64/ 192 Environmental constraints 2.10.5 Environmental constraints were considered in both the design of the scheme and in the appraisal of its costsand benefits. 2.10.6 A qualitative environmental appraisal of the area was undertaken in 2021, with reference to the Scottish Transport Appraisal Guidance (STAG) Environment sub-criteria. Ecological and cultural heritage designations were identified and reviewed in terms of potential environmental impacts,resulting in the following key areasof potentialsensitivity: Lynn Sprout waterfall near Dalry (Site of Specific Scientific Interest (SSSI) and geological conversation review) AshgroveLoch (SSSI) potentialformercoalmines and workings between the B714 and A737 RiverGarnock and associated fluvial floodrisk. 2.10.7 Mitigation measures have been identified to minimise potential environmental impacts, particularly around the SSSIs noted above. Some of the identified environmental constraints are shown in Figure27 below. Figure 27. Map of environmentalconstraints surrounding B714 Financial constraints 2.10.8 The primary financial constraint is scheme funding: NAC does not have the funds available to deliverthismajorschemewithoutfundingsupportfromcentralGovernment.Theschemewill thereforeneedtobedeliveredwithinthefundsmadeavailableandanyassociatedcriteriae.g. delivery timescales.
Page 71
Page 65/ 192 2.10.9 DeliverywillalsobedependentonreceiptofatenderpriceacceptabletoNACandtheapproval of theFBC by theDfT. Legal and institutionalconstraints 2.10.10Withregardstolegalandinstitutionalconstraints,anybarrierstoschemedeliveryarelikelyto ariseasaresultoflandownershipissues,asanyneworupgradedroutewouldalmostcertainly have to cross or utilise land from multiple agricultural farms, which would more than likely involve a variety of landowners. To limit the impact of this constraint NAC is also progressing a parallel Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) process. The outcome of the public inquiry relating to theCPO isexpected in early 2025. 2.10.11Relevant planning consents have now been obtained by NAC with the agreement of various national, regional and localstakeholders. 2.11 Interdependencies 2.11.1 The upgrade of the B714 is not dependent on the successful delivery of any other schemes. Similarly, there are currently no proposed schemes which are themselves dependent on delivery of theB714 upgrade scheme. 2.11.2 Nonetheless, the upgrade of the B714 would encourage the shifting of traffic from the A738 and A737 through Kilwinning onto the B714, which would free up road capacity on approach to and within Kilwinning. This increased road capacity could potentially be used to introduce busprioritymeasures,therebyimprovingbusjourneyreliabilityandattractivenessinlinewith the aspirationsof NAC. 2.11.3 Similarly, the upgrade of the B714 could also allow for the provision of improved active travel infrastructurealongtheroute,withdedicatedlinksateachendoftheB714 intoSaltcoatsand Dalry, potentially utilising parts of the current B714 which would not be part of the upgraded road. This would reflect wider national policy aspirations formodal shift towards active travel (e.g. the Scottish Government’s long-term 2030 vision for active travel) as a tool for decarbonisation. 2.12 Stakeholders’ views and requirements 2.12.1 To facilitate engagement with stakeholders, a Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) has been prepared (see Appendix 2A). The SEP contains a detailed breakdown of the project’s stakeholders and sets out how and when each of them were to be engaged. It also set out high-level key project messages, feedback mechanisms and clear communications and reporting protocols. 2.12.2 An extensive programme of stakeholder engagement has been undertaken in the developmentof the scheme dating backto 2016: stakeholderworkshopas part oftheoriginal RouteingStudy in2016 a series of workshops to gather views, ideas and experiences from residents, businesses and otherstakeholders in2021 following awardingof funding from the LUF public consultations in2022 and 2024.
Page 72
Page 66/ 192 Routeing Study stakeholder workshop (2016) 2.12.3 Aspartofthe2016RouteingStudy,astakeholderworkshopwasheldincludingrepresentatives from NAC, Transport Scotland, the Freight Transport Association, local businesses (e.g. Hunterston B Powerstation), and local bus operators (e.g. Stagecoach). The objectives of the workshopwere to: analyseexisting and potential problems,opportunities, issues andconstraints set transportplanning objectives and ensure these address problemsidentified generateoptions to take forward to thePart1 Appraisal. 2.12.4 The workshop resulted in a list of 34 potential options which were then sifted to 13 final options, oneof whichwasthe upgrade oftheB714 (see section2.14). Post-LUFsubmissionstakeholder workshops (2021) 2.12.5 Following the awarding of LUF funding, a series of workshops were held in October and November2021 with the following key stakeholder groups: NAC Elected Members landownersalong the B714 who would potentially beaffectedby the scheme community groups transport groups local businesses and business groups. 2.12.6 The objectivesofeachworkshopwereto: validate the existing issues along the A737 corridor and highlight the scale of these issues in light of changesover recent years. discuss and collect viewson the B714 upgrade asthesolution to theissues. for landowners,understand howthey could be impacted by the scheme. identify further opportunities to maximisethe benefits of any scheme introduced. 2.12.7 The findings of the workshop are presented in Appendix 2B and the key issues raised and actionsto betakenare reflected inthe SEP. Public consultation 2.12.8 To support the development of the OBC, NAC conducted a public consultation on the scheme with local residents and stakeholders. Theobjectivesof the consultationwereto: provide information aboutthe proposals for the scheme including the design and features of theupgraded road, itsobjectives, and its likely benefits and impacts understand the level oflocal support forthe scheme understand local people’s views and feedback on the proposals to inform the future developmentof the scheme. 2.12.9 The consultation consistedof thefollowing activitiesand events: three public exhibitions held in November 2022 in Kilwinning, Saltcoats and Dalry (when the full scheme was beingconsidered) online consultation eventin November 2022 a questionnaire
Page 73
Page 67/ 192 a further three public exhibitions held in February 2024 in Kilwinning, Saltcoats and Dalry with theinformation updated as perchanges to the schemedesign (see section2.14) informationon the schemeonlinevia the Council website. 2.12.10ThepublicexhibitionsandonlineconsultationeventheldinNovember2022were attendedby over 100 people where they had the opportunity to view information about the scheme and askquestionstorepresentativesfromNACandstafffromconsultanciessupportingNACinthe scheme design and business case development. Theschemequestionnairereceived94responsesandshowedaveryhighlevelofsupport for the scheme: - 96% of respondents strongly agreed or agreed that the upgrade of the B714 should proceed whilst3% strongly disagreed - 94% of respondents strongly agreed or agreed that the B714 Upgrade represents the best way of addressing current issues as opposed to other route options such as a Kilwinning bypass - 93% of respondents strongly agreed or agreed that the preferred alignment option (with a direct connection into the A737 Hillend roundabout) represents the best alignmentoptionfortheB714Upgradeasopposedalternativesincludingaconnection into a new roundaboutnorth ofthe Hillend roundabout. 2.12.11Full detail on the public consultation and the questionnaire findings is provided in the Public Consultation Report(Appendix 2C). 2.12.12All stakeholder engagement and public consultation undertaken to date has shown broad support from local residents and businesses for schemes that would address the road congestion issues, particularly in Kilwinning. Statements supporting the scheme have been received including from Kilwinning Community Council and local schools. “Wehopethatan upgraded B714 will significantly reduce the volumeof heavy vehiclesdriving through Kilwinning. An improved B714 willallow thesevehicles to connect directly onto the A78, ThreeTowns by-pass.Thiswill reduce theirtravel timeby avoiding themanytraffic lights and congestion inKilwinning. Itwill reduce pollution in the town and improve road safety.” Kilwinning Community Council “Thisvolumeoftraffic[in Kilwinning] is unbearable forlocal residentsand families like mewho would liketo walkour children to school andat some point, not beableto let our childrenwalkto schoolon their own. Atthis timethere isabsolutely no way Iwould allowmy childrento walksuch a dangerous path ontheir own. We arequiteoften blown off courseby the HGVswho make no allowance for pedestriansorespecially someofthe children who simply want to make itto school.” Abbey Primary SchoolParent Council
Page 74
Page 68/ 192 2.12.13NAC is not aware of any local stakeholders, groups or campaigns who actively oppose the scheme. Political endorsement 2.12.14AsprovidedintheLUFapplicationin2021,endorsementhasbeenprovidedfortheprojectby: RtHonPatriciaGibson,MPforNorthAyrshireandArran(MPatthetimeoftheapplication) Rt HonDrPhilippa Whitford, MP forCentral Ayrshire (MP at the timeofthe application). 2.12.15The scheme is also supported by the new MP for North Ayrshire and Arran,IreneCampbell.27 2.12.16Further lettersof support for thescheme have also been receivedfrom: Kenneth Gibson,MSP forCunninghame North Jamie Greene, MSP forWest Scotland Region Andrew vanderLem, Government AffairsDirector,NuclearDecommissioning Authority Cllr John Bell,Chairof theLochshoreDevelopment Group. 2.13 Strategic assessment of options Previous optioneering 2.13.1 The previous North Ayrshire Strategic Routeing Study (Appendix 1A) documents the option generation,siftinganddevelopmentthatwasundertakenaspartoftheSTAGPart1Appraisal. 2.13.2 In summary,this involved: 1. AnunconstrainedoptiongenerationexerciseatthePre-Appraisalstakeholderworkshop (as described in section2.11),which resulted in34 options. 2. An option sifting exercise in conjunction with NAC to identify and remove options that would clearly not achieve the intended objectives and/or address the problems identified.Thisresultedinasetof13optionstakenforwardtotheSTAGPart1Appraisal. 27 https://www.ardrossanherald.com/news/24691036.uk-government-confirm-funding-upgrade-b714- road/. “Overtheyears,theschoolhas noticed asignificant increasein traffic,especially heavy lorries passing theschoolentrance in both directions. Dalry Roadhas areas withvery narrow pavements that lackbarriers for addedsafety. It can be a busy thoroughfareas young people, children,and adults walkto and from Kilwinning Academy and Abbey Primary School.Reducing trafficwill also help protect the local environment, lessen the numberof potholeson theroadand reduce the traffic noise asthe heavy lorries passthe school. Once the upgrade iscompleted,weexpect asubstantial reduction in trafficflow, resulting in amuch calmerand safer walking environment.” Kilwinning Academy
Page 75
Page 69/ 192 2.13.3 Ofthe13optionstakenforwardintheRouteingStudy,fivewereconsideredto addressto key aims (i.e. improving strategic roadconnectivity to/from The Three Towns),which were: 1. A western Kilwinning Bypass from a point north of the A737(T)/A738(T) junction in Kilwinning, with aroute to the north-westof thetownconnecting nearto the A78(T)at Pennyburn Roundabout. 2. As peroption1, butconnecting to the A78(T)at Sharphill Roundabout. 3. As per option 1, but connecting to a new junction on the A78(T) between Sharphill and Pennyburn Roundabouts. 4. An eastern Kilwinning Bypass from a point north of the A737(T)/A738(T) junction in Kilwinning, with a route to the east of the town connecting into the A78(T) at either Eglington Interchange or a new junction on the A78(T) to the south-east of Kilwinning, possibly usingtheold railway line. 5. An upgrade of the B714. 2.13.4 AsshowninFigure28below,theoptionsbroadlyconsistedofthreebypassoptionstothewest of Kilwinning (options 1 to 3), one bypass option to the east of Kilwinning (option 4), and the upgrade of the B714 (option 5). 2.13.5 These options were considered within the Options Assessment Report (Appendix 2D), which fullydetailstheassessmentandselectionofviablebest-performingoptionswhichhasfedinto this OBC. Figure 28. 2016 Routeing Study options 2.13.6 The STAGPart1 Appraisal involved agenerally qualitativeassessmentof theoptions against: the Study TransportPlanning Objectives(TPOs) STAG criteria (Environment, Safety, Economy, Integration, Accessibility, and Social Inclusion) established policy directives feasibility,affordability, and public acceptability.
Page 76
Page 70/ 192 2.13.7 Thisrecommendedthatoptions1to3(westernbypass)and5(B714upgrade)shouldbetaken forward for further development and appraisal. Option 4 (eastern bypass) was discounted on the basisthat itwasjudged to havea ‘high’ deliverability risk compared to theother options. Further options generation 2.13.8 Since the 2016 Routeing Study, the Covid-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on travel demand, particularly commuting travel patterns with the shift to home-working. It was thereforedeemedappropriatetorevisitthepreviousoptionsproposed,aswellasconsidering other non-highways-basedmodes. 2.13.9 Althoughtheeasternbypassoptionhadpreviouslybeendiscounted,itwasreconsideredgiven the lengthof time betweenthe completionof the Routeing Study and themost recentoption assessmentprocess,even if this servedonly to confirm the findings oftheRouteing Study. 2.13.10An exercise was conducted in liaison with NAC to generate a long-list of options for consideration, including non-road-basedoptions.Thislong-list is shown inTable18 below. Table 18.Long-list of options CATEGORY OPTION DESCRIPTION Non-road- based options 1. Active travel improvements This option assumes a wide package of active travel improvements in and around North Ayrshire including expanding localised segregated cycle lanes and/or shared facilities and improving the quality of crossing points and existing infrastructure. 2. Rail-based public transport improvements This option assumes a wide package of rail base improvements in and around North Ayrshireincluding higher frequency of service to/from Glasgow. 3. Bus-based public transport improvements This option assumes a wide package of bus-based improvements in and around North Ayrshire including bus priority measures. Road-based options 4. Kilwinning by- pass western alignment This option assumes the construction of a Kilwinning Bypass from a point north of the A737(T)/A738(T) junction in Kilwinning, with a route to the north-west of the town connecting into either: a) near to the A78(T) at Pennyburn Roundabout b) the A78(T) at Sharphill Roundabout c) a new junction on the A78(T) between Sharphill and Pennyburn Roundabouts Assumed that the bypass would be a single carriageway road. 5. Kilwinning by- pass eastern alignment This option assumes the construction of a Kilwinning Bypass from a point north of the A737(T)/A738(T) junction in Kilwinning, with a route to the east of the town, and connecting into the A78(T) at either Eglington Interchange or a new junction on the A78(T) to the south-east of Kilwinning. It is assumed that the bypass would be a single carriageway road. 6 B714 upgrade and realignment This option assumes the B714 between the A737 (T) (south of Dalry) to the A78(T) at Sharphill Roundabout would be
Page 77
Page 71/ 192 CATEGORY OPTION DESCRIPTION upgraded to provide a Kilwinning Bypass. The upgrade of the B714 assumes a new link from the A737(T) at the new Dalry Bypass junction (south of Dalry), to the B714. The B714 would potentially then be adopted as part of the trunkroad network, with the A737(T) south of Dalry downgraded to non-trunk status,and its management and maintenance falling under Local Authority remit. It is assumed that the bypass would be a single carriageway road. Initial Option Sifting 2.13.11As per overarching TAG guidance, this step aimed to identify any ‘showstoppers’ that were likely to prevent anoptionprogressing and discounted options whichwere unlikely to: meet the schemeobjectives align with national, regional and local policies, programmes, strategies and/or wider government priorities be viableoracceptableonthe groundsof not being: deliverablein an economic,environmental, geographical orsocial context technically sound financially affordable acceptableto stakeholdersand the public. 2.13.12TheDfTLevelling UpToolkit also statesthatoptionsshould beassessedto ‘identify thosethat have a strong strategic alignment to achieving the SMART spending objectives and delivering to levelling up priorities’. 2.13.13Therefore,theinitialsiftingcombinedtheseconsiderationstoassessandcomparethelonglist of options, with the purpose of identifying any ‘showstoppers’ for which it would be inappropriate to assessfurther. Thethreecriteria were: strategicfit: schemeobjectives strategicfit: policy alignment deliverability. 2.13.14Theobjectives assessmentfocusedonthespecificschemeobjectives identified in section2.7: 1. To reduce strategic and HGV traffic passingthrough Kilwinning on A737. 2. To reduce journey times and improve reliability between The Three Towns and the GarnockValley. 3. To reduce trafficemissionsand improveair quality in Kilwinning. 4. To increase levels of active travel opportunities in and between Dalry, Kilwinning and the Three Townsarea. 5. ToimproveresilienceofthetransportnetworkinDalry,KilwinningandtheThreeTowns. 6. ToreducenumberandseverityofaccidentsonroadnetworkbetweenDalry,Kilwinning and the Three Towns area. 2.13.15The initial sifting process also incorporated assessment of the options against the relevant policies identified in section 2.3 andthe deliverability of theoptions.
Page 78
Page 72/ 192 Results of Initial Sift 2.13.16As outlined in the DfT’s Levelling Up Toolkit only “options that provide strategic fit can be regarded as value for money” and only these options should be short-listed for detailed cost- benefit analysis. Therefore, in line with this guidance options should be discarded at the longlist stage if they “do not achieve the SMART spending objectives and do not show a clear contribution to delivering the levelling up strategic priorities”. 2.13.17Theinitialsiftingprocessassessedthelonglistofoptionsagainsttheserecommendations.The three criteria areas were assessed independently using a RAG-rating scale and then categorised to determine the level of compliance with the assessment criteria (fit with the schemeobjectives, alignment with relevant policies,and deliverability). For clarity, the RAG-rating system was used to demonstrate the extent the option has against the strategic fit and deliverability, with optionsratedas follows: red (R)– strong negative impactwiththe criteria amber(A) –minimalor small contribution to the criteria green (G)– strong positiveimpactwiththe criteria grey (Y) –neutralor no impact,or irrelevant. 2.13.19A summary of the assessment is presented in Table 19. The assessment identified that road- based options demonstrate the strongest strategic fit and all other options would be discounted as discussedfurther below. Table 19.Summary of initial sift OPTION SIFTING CRITERIA SHORTLIST Objectives Policy Alignment Deliverability Do Minimum R R R 1 ActiveTravel A A G 2 Rail A A Y 3 Bus A A Y 4 Western by- pass G G Y 5 Eastern by-pass G G Y 6 B714 upgrade G G G 2.13.20The reasons for discounting the following options include: Option1(ActiveTravel)–whilelikelytobesmallerscaleandconsequentlylikelytomitigate significant engineering or public acceptability, a package of measures would be unlikely to deliver the scale of change required to align with Levelling Up and decarbonisation aspirations and meet some of the specific scheme objectives (particularly removing strategictrafficand HGVs from built up areas).
Page 79
Page 73/ 192 Option 2 (Rail) – as with active travel, rail improvements would be unlikely to deliver the scaleofchangerequiredtoalignwithLevellingUpanddecarbonisationaspirationsormeet someoftheschemespecificobjectives.Existingconstraintsonthenetworkmay beunable to fulfil additional services and this may not be commercially viable due to the low mode share. Option 3 (Bus) – as above, bus improvements would be unlikely to deliver the scale of changerequired.Increasingthenumberofservicesto/fromtheThreeTownsmay bemore feasible but dueto lowmode sharemay also not becommercially viable. Option 5 (Eastern by-pass) – the alignment of this option would be unlikely to directly benefit the Three Towns area as other routes would still present more direct and quicker routes. Furthermore, whilst part-utilising a disused railway route, the construction work required would be significant and include greenfield land which includes areas of designated landscapeand requires crossing watercourses. 2.13.21However, it was nonetheless acknowledged that whilst they have been discounted as a result of the initial sifting process, options such as more minor active travel and bus improvements have the potential to be used in conjunction with the road-based solutions that have been taken forward in order to boost any expected impacts. Shortlisting of options 2.13.22Since the 2016 Routeing Study, NAC has progressed development of an upgrade of the B714. This waspreferred to awestern Kilwinning Bypass forthe following reasons: the B714 upgrade is a significantly cheaper option being largely online improvements (rather thana wholly offline link) andtherefore,represents the bettervalueformoney anupgradedB714wouldofferaquickerroutebetweentheThreeTownsandDalry,thereby maximising connectivity between these settlements and reducing pressure on the road networkwithin and around Kilwinning upgrading the B714 wouldbe leastdisruptive to localresidents the B714 upgrade could bedelivered relatively quickly the B714 upgrade hasthemost support from NAC and local stakeholders. 2.13.23Giventhatitwillimproveconnectivity andalleviatecongestion,theB714 upgrade isexpected to have an overall positive impact on the strength of North Ayrshire’s local economy and therefore go some way towards addressing the issues noted within section 2.2 of this FBC, particularly with regardsto lowearnings and high levels of deprivationwithin North Ayrshire. 2.13.24AECOM, as the design and cost consultant for the scheme, therefore developed the upgrade of the B714 option into a whole corridor improvement between the Sharphill roundabout on the A78 and the recently constructed A737 Dalry Bypass, whichconsistedof: 10 online improvement sections from the A78 Sharphill roundabout to Dalry – these improvethe geometric standard of theroutewith realignmentof certain sections anewofflinelinkbetweentheB714andtheA737attheHillendroundaboutatthenorthern end ofthe corridor. 2.13.25For the offline link, 5 options were developed (note that these options were designated by AECOM as Options11 to 15): Options 11 to 13 connect to the A737 Hillend roundabout via an improved intermediate roundaboutwith the B714
Page 80
Page 74/ 192 Options 14 and 15 connect directly in to the new at-grade A737 Hillend roundabout with Option14 passing northofCraighead Farm and Option 15 passing south ofit. 2.13.26AECOMandNACthenundertooksiftingofthese5optionsto agreeuponashortlistofoptions to take forward to the next stage of development and assessment. This sifting is summarised in Table 20. Table 20.Offline link sifting summary OPTION SIFTING SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION 11 Options 11 and 12 have minimal earthworks cut, so would require the import of a significant volume of suitable material to achieve an improved the vertical profile. This adds significantly to their estimated costand tothe environmentalimpactcaused by haulage. Each of these options also requires a new bridge structure at their crossing of the Caaf Water, with significant fill close to the existing watercourse. In terms of connection to the A737 Hillend Roundabout, neither significantly reduces the distance from the existing priority junction Not recommended to progress to next stage 12 13 Option 13 has minimal earthworks cut, so would require the import of suitable material to achieve its vertical profile. However, the volumed required by remaining south of Caaf Water means it is not as significant a factor as for B714/A737 link options 11 and 12. Its connection to the A737 Hillend Roundabout is also improved, compared tolinkoptions 11and 12,given its closerproximity ofthe proposed at-grade roundabout on the B714 to the A737 Hillend Roundabout. Recommended to progress to next stage 14 Options 14 and 15 both connect directly to the A737 Hillend Roundabout as a proposed additional 4th arm. This will require the agreement of Transport Scotland, who have responsibility for the Trunk Road network. Both alignments pass through the hill immediatelywestofHillendroundaboutwhichgeneratessignificant cut volume that could be used as site-won fill material elsewhere along the route. It is estimated that, even with the extended cut of the recently completed A737 Hillend Roundabout,sufficient surplus material remains for the remainder of the route and potentially some environmental mitigation at critical locations. Recommended to progress to next stage 15 2.13.27It was therefore decided to progress whole route scheme options incorporating B714/A737 link options 13, 14 and 15 to the next stage of development and assessment. The layout and locationof thethree shortlistedoptionsareshownin Figure 29 below.
Page 81
Page 75/ 192 Figure 29. Scheme layout and location of shortlisted options Identification of preferredoption 2.13.28One of the main issues left outstanding at this stage was the provision of access to the two farms(Craigmilland Craighead) within thevicinity of the offlinkline, asshown inFigure 29. 2.13.29Options13and14wouldpassnorthofCraigheadFarm,whilelinkOption15wouldpasstothe south, meaning access to Craighead Farm and Craigmill Farm would differ for each option. As the link to Option15 included a roundabout withtheB714, a fourth arm could connect to the retained B714 and provideonward connectionto bothproperties. 2.13.30Itwasdecidedthatitwouldbebeneficialnottohaveaccesstoeitherpropertyonthehorizonal bend of link Options 13 and 14, due to the impact of the widening required to achieve compliant stopping sight distance and the excessive vertical gradient required for the improvement optionsat this location. 2.13.31Therefore, a preference was expressed for the farms’ respective accesses to the B714 to be retained in both cases. Craighead Farm would then also share a new priority junction access on theB714 withthe adjacent kennels and associatedbuildings. 2.13.32Onthisbasis,Option14wasselectedasthepreferredoptionandaccordinglyformedthebasis of NorthAyrshire’sbid to the Levelling UpFund inJune2021 forfunding towardstheupgrade of theB714.
Page 82
Page 76/ 192 Option revision 2.13.33In November 2022, it became necessary to revise the scope of the scheme in order to deliver the scheme to budget, given that the costs of the scheme had increased markedly (due to a combinationoffactors)andtheamountawardedthroughLUFisnotsettoincrease,therefore making theoriginal scheme proposedviaLUF unaffordable to NAC withoutexternal funding. 2.13.34Therefore, AECOM undertook cost engineering and value management work in order to identify a scheme which could be delivered to budget and would still meet the objectives set out in section 2.7. 2.13.35Consequently, the projectwill now be delivered in two phases: Phase 1 will improve the B714 to current design standards of a 3.5km section of the road between Girthill Farm and Kilwinning Road (as shown in Figure 30 below). It will no longer include the active travel path (although it remains an aspiration of NAC to complete this feature in future once additional funding is found). Phase 1 will be delivered according to the original delivery programme using the funding available from the LUF. Phase2willimprovetheremainderoftheB714fromGirthillFarmtotheA78.Thisissubject to additional funding being availableand no timescaleis currently set for its delivery. This FBC concerns only the Phase 1 element. Figure 30. Proposed B714 upgrade scheme (Phase 1) 2.13.36Asummaryofthefulloptioneeringprocessfromschemeinceptionviathe2016RouteingStudy to the finalPhase1 optionshown above is provided inFigure 31 below.
Page 83
Page 77/ 192 Figure 31. Summary of scheme optioneering process
Page 84
Page 78/ 192 2.14 Proposed B714 upgradescheme 2.14.1 Phase1willinvolvethere-alignmentofa3.5kmsectionoftheB714betweenGirthillFarmand a proposed roundabout on Kilwinning Road, adjacent to the recently constructed Hillend roundabout (A737 / Kilwinning Road). 2.14.2 A mapof thePhase1 scheme is shown in Figure32.
Page 85
Page 79/ 192 Figure 32. Map of proposed scheme
Page 86
Page 80/ 192 2.14.3 Phase1 will include: A 9.3m wide single carriageway cross-section, comprising two 3.65m lanes with a 1.0m hard-strip at each side betweenGirthill Farm and Craighead Farm (Figure 33). An 250m long wide DAL on the 6% uphill gradient between the proposed roundabout at Kilwinning Road and Craighead Farm which will provide a safe opportunity for overtaking slow-moving vehicles as they accelerate uphill from the roundabout. This will be 13.5m widecomprisingthree3.5mlaneswitha1.0mhatchedbufferbetweenopposingdirections and a 1.0m hard-strip ateach side (Figure34 and Figure 35). Re-alignedjunctionsimprovingvisibility forbothvehiclesontheB714 andthosewaitingto join theB714 up to 215m in both directions(see Figure 36). TargetedimprovementstotheretainedsectionoftheB714 southofGirthillFarm.Thiswill provide increased visibility at Meiklelaught and Muirlaught Farms and warning lights for cattlecrossing atMeiklelaught Farm. Figure 33. Indicative cross-section of 9.3m wide single carriageway Figure 34. Indicative cross-section of 13.5m wide DAL
Page 87
Page 81/ 192 Figure 35. Indicative layout of DAL Figure 36. Sight lines from accesses and minor road junctions connecting with the B714 2.14.4 Whilst in the original design the offline section tied in directly to the Hillend roundabout, the costs associated with the significant earthworks, rock cutting and disposal has meant this has been revised and anadditional roundabout is nowproposed onKilwinning Road(Figure 37).
Page 88
Page 82/ 192 Figure 37. Originaland revised roundabout design at northern end of B714 2.14.5 Withtheinclusionofanewroundaboutandjunctions,theschemehasthepotentialto create severanceissues,particularlyforwalkers,cyclistsandmobility-impairedusers.Tomitigatethis a continuous shared path along the east side of the new roundabout is included within the proposals. The Council is also investigating the provision of an active travel route from the new roundabout towards the proposed Putyan Burn active travel route. This will consider options for providing off-road activetravel facilities between the upgrade B714, linking to the PutyanBurn activetravel routeand thereby completing the routeto Dalry railway station. 2.15 Achievement of objectives 2.15.1 Table21setsouthowtheproposedB714upgradeschemewillachieveitsintendedobjectives. Table 21.Achievement of objectives – B714 Upgrade OBJECTIVE WILL BE ACHIEVED? RATIONALE FBC REFERENCE To reduce thevolumeof strategicand HGV traffic passing through Kilwinning on theA737 B714 scheme is forecast to reduce traffic volumes forecast by 11% along A737 and by 5% along A738 through Kilwinning SeeFigure56andTable44 To reduce journey times and improvejourney reliability between The ThreeTowns towards Dalry,theGarnock Valley and beyondtowards Glasgow B714 scheme is forecast to reduce road journey times 1 to 2 minutes (6-8%) between the Three Towns and the Garnock Valley See Table 46 to Table48
Page 89
Page 83/ 192 OBJECTIVE WILL BE ACHIEVED? RATIONALE FBC REFERENCE To reduce trafficemissions and improvelocalair quality withinKilwinning B714 scheme is forecast to reduce traffic volumes forecast to reduce by 11% along A737 and by 5% along A738 through Kilwinning – generating a slight subsequent benefit to Local Air Quality SeeFigure56andTable44 To improve theresilience of thetransport networkin Dalry,Kilwinning and the ThreeTowns, and reduce pressureon road maintenance budgets B714 scheme will provide improved alignment and faster journey times to/from Three Towns, diverting motorists from Dalry (Lynn Bridge pinch point) and Kilwinning – providing a higher quality alternative to travelling through urban areas. See Figure 56, Table 44, Table 46 to Table48 To reduce the numberof accidents in urban areas such as Kilwinning, and the severity ofaccidents on rural roads betweenDalry, Kilwinning and the Three Towns B714 scheme is forecast to result in 144 fewer accidents compared to without See Table 49 2.15.2 Inachievingthesescheme-specificobjectives,itisexpectedtheschemewillalsocontributeto achieving the following longer-term impacts: improved access from The Three Towns to job opportunities in Glasgow and the Central Belt reduced levelsof deprivation and unemploymentwithin The Three Towns increased economic competitiveness of North Ayrshire through improved access to markets for goods, servicesand employment increased tourism in NorthAyrshire enhanced quality of life in the built-up areaof Kilwinning improved road safety on A737 and itsarterialroutes contributeto repopulationof theislands,especially the Isleof Arran.
Page 90
Page 84/ 192 3. THE ECONOMIC DIMENSION 3.1 Introduction 3.1.1 The economic dimension sets out the preferred option under consideration at this FBC stage, how it has been appraised and presents the Appraisal Summary Table (AST). The appraisal assessments have been carried out in accordance with the DfT’s Transport Assessment Guidance (TAG) and the specific requirements of the DfT Investment Planning Guidance: Levellingupprospectus,asthescheme’sprimaryfundingsourceistheUKGovernmentviathe Levelling Up Fund. 3.1.2 Theoptioneeringprocesssummarisedinthestrategicdimensionidentifiedthatanupgradeof the existing B714 provided the strongest alignment with the local, regional and national objectives, aswellas with the schemespecificobjectives. 3.1.3 As set out in the strategic dimension, due to recent cost escalation a partial scheme is the preferred option assessed within the economic dimension, which involves an upgrade of the B714 between Girthill Farm in the south to a new roundabout just north of the A737 Hillend roundabout,comprising both online improvements and a newofflinelink. 3.1.4 Table 22 sets out the TAG requirements for the economic dimension including status report section. Table 22.Economic dimension requirements ELEMENT STATUS SECTION Longlistappraisal Completed 3.2 Methodologies,assumptions and data Completed 3.5 -3.7 Social cost-benefit analysisof shortlist Completed 3.9 Distributional analysis Completed 3.11 Place-based analysis Completed 3.11 Wider analysis Completed 3.10 Value formoney Completed 3.18 Uncertainty analysis Completed 3.17 Appraisal Summary Table (AST) Completed 3.16
Page 91
Page 85/ 192 3.2 Long list appraisal 3.2.1 As detailed within the strategic dimension (section 2.13), extensive option testing has been undertaken. Previous optioneering was undertaken as part of the Routeing Study in 2016 which developed and shortlisted variousoptions. 3.2.2 Subsequently,furtheroptiontestinghasbeenundertakingfollowingtheimpactsoftheCovid- 19 pandemic on travel which assessed a broader range of options including non-road-based options. The OAR (presented in Appendix 2D) concluded that two options were shortlisted including the B714 Upgrade and westernby-passoptions. 3.2.3 Since the production of the OAR, the options have been revisited due to ongoing cost escalations.Thisresultedinachangeto thepreferredoption,witharevisedscopeto apartial upgrade of the B714 with a proposed active travel link running alongside the B714 removed from the scope. While NAC remain committed to the delivery of the full scheme, the current optionpresented within this FBC nonetheless contributes to the solutionof theproblems and the achievement of objectives identified above for thefollowing reasons: It would offer a more attractive route for HGVs, thereby removing a large proportion of HGV traffic from the centre of Kilwinning, with HGV route signage included as part of the proposed improvement. Reduced congestion in Kilwinning and the bypassing of the one-way access across Lynn Bridge would improve the reliability of journey timesto and from theThreeTowns. The removalofcongestionfrom Kilwinning would reduce localisedemissions. An upgraded B714 would be constructed to DMRB standards which would enable it to handle an increased volume of traffic (particularly HGV traffic), whilst also reducing traffic impactsontheA737andA738,therebyimprovingtheresilienceoftheroadnetworkwithin North Ayrshire. An improved road alignment of the B714 would reduce the potential for accidents on the B714 caused by loss of control, whilst reduced congestion in Kilwinning could lead to a reduction inslight accidents resulting from lessqueuing of traffic. 3.2.4 In line TAG unit ‘Guidance for the Technical Project Manager’, an appropriate, proportionate andtransparentapproachhasbeenadoptedto assessingtheschemeoptions.Thereisaneed to tailor the level of detail of the appraisal to the stage of development of the proposal. As defined in TAG Unit A2.1, there are three levels of analysis which are differentiated based on the maturity of the analytical techniques. The valuation of some quantifiable impacts will be done atlevel1 asdefined in TAG Unit A2.1 forthis stage ofthe business case i.e.FBC. 3.2.5 For the purpose of presenting a coherent preferred option for which all assessments are progressed to a satisfactory level, the partial scheme has progressed to more detailed economic assessment. No alternative options have been presented as these have now been discounted as viableoptions within the FBC. 3.2.6 Figure 38 below lists alltheimpacts to beincluded in the Appraisal Summary Table (AST).
Page 92
Page 86/ 192 Figure 38. AST impacts 3.2.7 Impactshavebeencategorised basedon thefollowingcriteria: Monetised and reported in the Transport Economic Efficiency (TEE), Public Accounts(PA)and AnalysisofMonetised Costs and Benefits (AMCB)tables Notmonetisedbut qualitative assessment produced and presented in AST. It is currently unfeasible to monetise or it will not be quantified for this scheme so qualitativeorquantitative analysis willbereported in theAST. 3.2.8 In addition, to the impacts outlined above in Figure 38 which are included within a ‘initial’ BenefittoCostRatio(BCR)widereconomicimpactshavebeenincorporatedintoan‘adjusted’ BCR. 3.2.9 TransportScotland’sStrathclydeRegionalTransportModel(SRTM)hasbeenusedforassessing the scheme and developing this business case. The area covered by the SRTM is shown in Figure 39.
Page 93
Page 87/ 192 Figure 39. SRTM geographical coverage 3.2.10 Modelling outputs have been inputted into TUBA (industry standard software for TAG appraisal) to understand the user and provider impacts. The TUBA version used is v1.9.23, using the latest available economics file (v1.9.24 corresponding to the latest TAG Data book values (v1.24 released in November 2024 using 2010 price bases) which were the current values availableat the timeof developing theeconomic assessment at FBC. 3.3 Transport modelling 3.3.1 The appraisal of the traffic impacts of the scheme has been undertaken using the SRTM forecast year multi-modal variable demand model (VDM) scenarios, available from the Transport Scotland modelling library of Regional Models. A 2030 forecast year was used as a proxy for the 2028 scheme opening year and the 2045 scenario was used as final year of forecasting.Thisisconsideredaproportionateandconservativeapproach,giventhemodelling tools available and level funding sought. 3.3.2 The SRTM was reviewed and modified to take better account of the local traffic conditions in thestudyarea.Additionalmicrosimulationmodellinghasalsobeenundertakentoensurethat theschemehasnodetrimentalimpactonthetrunkroad,asrequestedbyTransportScotland. Modifications are reported in the B714 FBC SRTM Local Calibration Technical Note (Appendix 3A).
Page 94
Page 88/ 192 3.3.3 For the assessment of the scheme, the SRTM was used to assess what the future impacts of the upgraded B714 would be on the overall transport network. For the FBC, in order to give a Value forMoney (VfM) category, this includedassessmentsof: DoMinimum(DM):theexistingprovisionplusthecommittedschemesaspresentedbelow, and Do Something (DS) Preferred Option: DM plus online improvements on B714 from Girthill farmtoDalrywithanofflinebypasssectionconnectingintoanewat-graderoundaboutjust northof theA737(T) Hillend roundabout. 3.3.4 Anumberofcommittedroadandrailschemeshavebeenincludedinthemodelscenario runs with and without the scheme in place. The committed road schemes with the relevant inclusion datesarelisted inTable23. Table 23.Committed transport schemes AREA / ORGANISATION SCHEME(S) TransportScotland M8/M73/M74 motorway Improvements including A8/A725 amendments(2017)and M8 J29a Bishopton Junction(2022) A737 Dalry Bypass(2022) A737 ‘The Den’ (2022) A77 MayboleBypass(2022) GlasgowCity Glasgow East End Regeneration Road Phase 3 (from M8 J13 to Biggar Street)(2022) Renfrewshire Clyde Waterfront & Renfrew Riverside including Renfrew Yoker Bridge and RenfrewNorthDevelopmentRoad(2027) South Lanarkshire Cathkin Relief Road (2017) Greenhills Road (2022) North Ayrshire B714/Kilwinning Road junction improvement (priority to mini- roundabout junction upgrade: 2023) Localised safety measureson theB714,including: High Friction Surfacing and road marking, verge markers corner nearMuirlaught Farm (2022) Girthill Farm to Yonderhouse resurfacing (2021) Refreshed road markings, new signage as part of Road Accident ReductionPlan(full length: 2022) Junction C87 to St Andrews Gardens resurfacing and edge strengthening (2020) Installationof road studs (full length: 2018) Muirlaught Farm to Girthill road widening and resurfacing (2018) Anti-skid surfacing (700 square metres near Yonderhouse: 2017).
Page 95
Page 89/ 192 3.3.5 Intermsofrail,improvementsaremadetovarioustimetables(frequency,journeytime,stops) and to capacity / rolling stock. 3.3.6 The demand forecasts reflect the impact of committed interventions and a number of assumptions whichseek to representthe future should the following circumstances arise: people's behaviour in thefuture generally remainsthe same as it istoday only those interventionswhich are currently committed are delivered the assumptions regarding the economy, population, fuel prices, parking, fares, land use etc allmaterialise as described. 3.3.7 The forecast development land-use projections were taken from the Assembly of Planning Policy2016(APPI2016)datacollectedbyTransportScotland.Thisresidentialandemployment- based allocation data was fed into TELMoS to generate the TELMoS18 2018-2040 forecast planning data. These data sets were subsequently utilised to inform the SRTM18 Trip generationmodelandgeneratethe2030and2045forecastyearrunsusedfortheassessment of thisscheme. 3.3.8 To forecast changes in trip making to and from areas external to the SRTM coverage, TMfS18 road, public transport and park and ride forecasts were utilised by creating a cordon of the relevant TMfS18 forecastyear scenarios. 3.4 Scenario development 3.4.1 As part of the forecast modelling, guidance requires a level of uncertainty to be modelled to reflect forecasttrends in demand. Assuch, three demand forecasts havebeen developed and presented within this FBC, which form the basis of the economic appraisal undertaken on the preferredoption. These include: A ‘Core’ growth scenario, including the current core traffic growth forecasts and development growth. This represents a ‘current trajectory’ forecast in line with Transport Scotland’s“withoutpolicy” scenario. A‘High’growthscenario,whichappliesthemethodologyoutlinedinsection4.2‘Treatment of National Growth in Demand’ of TAG Unit M4 ‘Forecasting and Uncertainty’, based on a proportion of base year demand added to the demand from the core scenario, consisting of a“P” valueof4% for highway demand and3%forPublic Transport. A ‘Low’ growth scenario, applying the inverse (negative) reduction in the “P” values to the Corescenario asapplied for the ‘High’ scenario above. 3.4.2 Further sensitivity tests have also been produced following the introduction of the Common Analytical Scenarios (CAS) guidance, allowing for a consistent application of several scenario considered,andresultspresentedsuchthatdecisionmakerscanhaveareasonableamountof confidence whenconsidering each ofthepotential impacts. 3.4.3 The current modelling and appraisal approach outlined in the ASR that underpins this FBC would suggest that the B714 upgrade is a “low impact project”, and therefore only the following scenarios havebeen tested: Low and High growth utilising the TAGM4 Unit guidance as noted above. CAS High Technology scenario (undertaken inTUBA). CAS Mode Balanced Scenario (undertaken inTUBA). CAS High ElectricVehicleUptake Scenario (undertaken in TUBA).
Page 96
Page 90/ 192 3.4.4 In line with the TUBA advice note “Common Analytical Scenario Guidance” released in June 202428, post-TUBA run adjustments to the CAS outputs have been undertaken to adjust the output TEE and AMCB tables as required within the aforementioned guidance. This has been undertakenusingthe“CASTemplate”spreadsheetavailableontheTAGSoftwarewebsiteand reflected in thecombinedTEE,PA and AMCB tables(inclusiveof theother appraisal elements i.e. COBALT and WEI values) forthe CASreported in section3.17 and included in . 3.4.5 Furthermore,‘switchingvalue’costandbenefitsensitivitieshavealsobeenincludedaspartof the VfM appraisal and presented in Section3.17. 3.5 Economic impacts methodology TUBA 3.5.1 Modelling outputs from runs of the SRTM have been inserted to TUBA (software version v1.9.23, latest available at the time of developing economic assessment, using the latest v1.9.24economicsfilecorrespondingtothelatestavailablereleaseoftheTAGDatabookv1.24 fromNovember2024)toproduceuserandproviderimpactsforeachoftheoptions.TheSRTM has a large detailed modelled area and also represents longer distance travel movements to/fromtherestofScotland(ascanbeseeninFigure39above).Toavoidspuriousresultsfrom areaslocatedfurtherawayfromtheNorthAyrshirestudyarea,specificmovementshavebeen excluded from theassessment. 3.5.2 ThedetailedTUBAoutputshavebeenusedtocapturetheimpactsoftheschemewhilstamore detailed inspectionwas undertaken inareasin the immediatevicinity ofthescheme. 3.5.3 The annualisation factors used to convert the results for each SRTM modelled time period to representannual impacts are those developedspecifically for theSRTM. 3.5.4 TUBA guidance suggests using the factors for project appraisals with professional judgement. Therefore,analysisofsuitabilitywasundertakenusingobserveddatafromfourrepresentative count sites within the model area. The four sites surveyed in June 2024 and used in the re- validationofthebasemodel(asdescribedinthemodelupdatenoteinAppendix3A),include: ATC1: B714 north ofMeiklelaught Dairy Farm. ATC2:A737 southofwelcometo Dalgarvensign. ATC3: Stevenston Roadwest ofPennyburn Road. ATC4: IrvineRoad south ofWoodmill. A location planof the foursites isprovided in Figure40. 28 https://www.tagsoftware.co.uk/assets/downloads/tuba/TUBA%20v1.9.23%20CAS%20Guidance.pdf
Page 97
Page 91/ 192 Figure 40. Observed data site locations 3.5.5 It should be noted that the annualisation factors applied in the appraisal (and the TUBA assessment)havebeenupdatedfromthosepreviouslyreportedintheOBC. Previously,SRTM standard factors were applied, based on the national Scottish LATIS framework. As the underlying data usedin thecalculation ofthese factors is now considered outofdate, revised annualisationfactorshavebeenappliedusinglocalcountdata.Acomparisonofthecalculated factorsis providedin Table24 below. Table 24.Annualisation factors TIME PERIOD LATIS ANNUALISATION FACTORS LOCALCOUNT DATA FACTORS NOTES AM peak 550 671 Expansion from 1 hourto AM period calculated using AM shoulder hours 07.00-10.00. Interpeak 3900 (includes off peak and weekend hours) 3358 (includes off peak and weekend hours) IP to OP factor calculated using flow- weighted averages. Weekend hours calculated using flow-weighted averages.
Page 98
Page 92/ 192 TIME PERIOD LATIS ANNUALISATION FACTORS LOCALCOUNT DATA FACTORS NOTES PM peak 660 712 Expansion from 1 hourto PM period calculated usingPM shoulder hours 16.00-19.00 3.5.6 The schemehasbeenappraisedinTUBAwithan appraisalperiodof60 years.Thisreflectsthe infrastructures’likely lifespan and the scheme costs inline withTAG guidance. 3.5.7 The benefits calculated in TUBA include journey time savings (VoTs), vehicle operating costs (VOCs), greenhouse gasesand indirect taxation. 3.5.8 The scheme costs provided by AECOM (Appendix 3B) were processed to form the Present Value Costs (PVC). Capital costs were inputted to TUBA, split by Construction, Land, Preparation, and profiled over the spend period up to the first year of opening of the scheme in 2026. CostBenefitAnalysis –Light Touch(COBA-LT) 3.5.9 The DfT’s Cost Benefit Analysis – Light Touch (COBA-LT v2.8: Jan 2025 release) software program was used to assess road traffic accident benefits associated with the scheme with trafficvolumesextracted from the SRTM. 3.5.10 COBA-LT predicts the number of accidents for the do minimum and do something scenarios and converts‘Passenger Injury Accidents’ to amonetary value. 3.5.11 The study area has been defined using traffic flow difference plots in the three modelled periods. Based on the flow difference plots, the main corridors impacted by the scheme are identified in Figure41.
Page 99
Page 93/ 192 Figure 41. COBA-LT study area 3.5.12 Representative SRTM road links (including continuous routes with AADT exceeding 1,000 vehicles and key local roads) have been used to extract traffic volumes and identify road carriageway characteristics (i.e. road distance, classification and speed limit attributes). The ‘links and junctions combined’ modein COBA-LTwas applied. 3.5.13 STATS19 accident data (2014-2018 inclusive) has been used to assign accidents to links in the local area (as defined in Figure 42), which represent a full 5-years of accident data up to the modelbaseyearof2018.Allotherroadlinkswithinthewiderstudyareaasshownabovehave utilised theDfTdefaultcollision values. Figure 42. COBA-LT local accident links
Page 100
Page 94/ 192 3.5.14 COBA-LTusesdataatanAADTlevelwithtrafficflowsfactoredupfromthepeakhoursapplied inthemodel.AADTflowshavebeencalculatedfromtheSRTMusingfactorsfromasiteonthe A78 with adequate coverage in a fullyearforthe2018 baseyear,and 2030 and2045 forecast years. 3.5.15 Having analysedthe accident data and classified therelevant road linkswithin the study area, COBA-LTwasrun to compare theDo Minimum againsttheDo Something scenario. Distributional Impacts Process 3.5.16 Distributional impacts appraisal compares the distribution of scheme benefits against the distributions of specific social group populations to assess the extent to which scheme benefits are experienced by those groups comparedwith thegeneral population. 3.5.17 The benefits and disbenefits of the scheme may be experienced to different extents by different specific social groups. These may include: children, older people, people with a disability, Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) communities, people without access to a car and peopleon low incomes. 3.5.18 It is important to make sure that people who belong to vulnerable groups are not disadvantagedfurtherby receiving adisproportionately lowshareoftheschemebenefits,or a disproportionately high share ofthescheme disbenefits. 3.5.19 There are eight transport benefit indicators that are assessed in the distributional impact appraisal, theseareas follows: user benefits. noise. air quality. accidents. security. severance. accessibility. personal affordability. 3.5.20 Eachoftheindicatorsareassessedagainstthesocialgroupsoutlinedaboveinaproportionate mannerdependingonthoseidentifiedwithintheDIprocessandscreening.Table25outlines theprocessofscreening,assessmentandappraisalundertaken,detailingkeydecision-making points asillustratedby thethree identified steps
Page 101
Page 95/ 192 Table 25.Distributional impacts process STEP DESCRIPTION OUTPUT 1 Screening Process: Identificationof likely impacts for each indicator. Screening Proforma 2 Assessment: Confirmation of the area impacted by the transport intervention(assessment area); Identification of social groups in the assessment area; and Identificationofamenitiesin the assessmentarea. DIs social groups statistics and amenities affected within the assessmentarea 3 Appraisal of Impacts: Coreanalysisofthe impacts; and Full appraisal ofDIs and input into AST. Appraisal worksheets and AST Inputs. 3.6 Wider economic impacts methodology 3.6.1 Thewidereconomicimpacts(WEIs)refertotheadditionalbenefitsordisbenefitsthatcanarise as the impact of transport improvements are transmitted into the wider economy, beyond thosebusinessesand passengers that are directly affected by thetransport change. 3.6.2 The key metric is ‘economic welfare’, rather than GVA or GDP; this is the basis for including non-monetary, non-tradedbenefits suchas timesavings in leisuretravel. 3.6.3 Thewiderimpactscalculator(WIC)–isaPythonbasedalternativetotheDfT’sWITAsoftware, that was originally developed for Transport for the North (TfN) but has been modified for integration with DELTA land-use models. WIC produces TAG-compliant WEI measures for the follow three impacts: labour supply impacts (MPIW). move to more(or less)productive jobs(M2MPJ). productivity impacts (agglomeration). 3.6.4 Thesecategoriesarediscretenon-overlappingstreamsofbenefits,althoughtheyusethesame underlying data and inputsto the calculations. 3.6.5 The employment effects calculations are described in TAG unit A.2.3 and its implementation in WIC is not complex. It encompasses two separate types of benefits, moves to more/less productive jobs, and laboursupply effects. 3.6.6 Moves to more/less productive jobs (M2MPJ) requires as an input, the two forecasts of employment from the TELMoS18A runs produced for the appraisal, with and without the scheme. As suchthey areadynamic land-use“level3” impactonly. 3.6.7 The otheremployment effect isthe calculation oflabour supply impacts(MPIW)as a resultof changes in thecommutingcosts.Theestimation follows theguidance setout inTAG A2.3.
Page 102
Page 96/ 192 3.6.8 The calculation of productivity wider economics impacts (agglomeration) again follows the underlying TAG unit 2.4, equations 2.1 – 2.3. It should be noted that the calculation of agglomeration is the most complex of the three measures, and the guidance allows the user some scope in applying the methodology, specifically around the availability of data and averagingovermode. Additional rebalancing and regeneration benefits 3.6.9 In addition to the calculations of the WEIs presented above, we have also tried to measure some of the benefits which policies or investments are seen as delivering to specific areas or regions. They are represented by: The shadow value of relocating jobs to a target area. This assumes that generating jobs in defined regeneration areas, or (better) generating jobs that are taken up by residents in defined areas of deprivation, creates benefits even if those jobs are displaced from other (non-regeneration or less deprived) areas; and argues that the value of the job must be equal to or greater than the costs incurred in generating such jobs through other policies (assuming that those other policies are rational and reasonably efficient). The present calculationsthereforeapplyavalueperadditionaljobinmostdeprivedareasthatisderived from “average costs per job created” figures published by English Partnerships. The issues of “other infrastructure” capacity relate to the costs of “other” infrastructure, apart from the “scheme” we are evaluating, that would need to be provided in different places as a result of the scheme’s impact, and where this would have cost implications for the public sector. The most obvious categories where such needs arise (as a matter of clearlydefinedpolicyofprovision)andwherethecostswouldmostclearlyfallonthepublic sector would be in education and health. We have therefore included estimates of the additional costof land arising from populationlocating in differentplaces. Additional costs can arise from moves within regions aswell as from moves between regions. Land-use model 3.6.10 The WIC uses the variables that are forecast by the underlying land-use model (TELMoS18A). TELMoS18A is one half of the national land-use/transport interaction model of Scotland. It is anapplicationoftheDELTApackage,usedininteractionwiththeTransportModelforScotland (TMfS), as the main modelling framework for Transport Scotland’s Land-Use and Transport Integration in Scotland (LATIS) programme. 3.6.11 TELMoS18A was developed primarily to support Transport Scotland’s Strategic Transport Projects Review 2 (STPR2), though other applications have also arisen. STPR2 is a Scotland- wide review of the strategic transport network to identify interventions required to support the delivery of Scotland’s Economic Strategy and to inform transport investment in Scotland for the next 20 years.The STPR2 reportwaspublished on 20 January 2022. 3.6.12 The TELMoS18A model covers the whole of Scotland, with external zones representing the regions ofEngland and Wales. In DELTA models, the area ofmost interest and detail is known astheFullyModelledArea(FMA).InTELMoS18A,theFMAcoversallofScotland,thereare787 FMA zones (same as in TMfS) and 16 external zones. The zones in DELTA models are also aggregated to higher-level spatial units called macrozones representing functional economic areas (based on Census Travel to Work areas) which the regional economic model (REM) and migration modeloperateon.
Page 103
Page 97/ 192 Figure 43. TELMoS18 zones and macro zones 3.6.13 TheTELMoS18Amodelrunsinone-yearstepsanditinteractswiththetransportmodel(TMfS) every 5 years. Itis currently set up to forecast land-use variables from 2019 to 2050. Figure 44. Time-marching sequence 3.6.14 The inputs to the land-usemodel are: demographic and economic scenarios planning policy inputs base year database transport plans. 3.6.15 The land-use model forecasts the future year land-use data which are then used to calculate the transport demand forTMfS.
Page 104
Page 98/ 192 3.6.16 The diagram in Figure45 belowshowsthe interactions betweenthe twomodels. Figure 45. LUTI interaction 3.6.17 One of the key issues in LUTI modelling is whether the overall scenarios are taken strictly as given or may be modified by the interventions tested (as indicated the red arrows upwards from ‘TELMoS’ inFigure 45 above). 3.6.18 TELMoS18AplanningdatainformstheTMfSnationalmodelandthevariousRegionalTransport models (RTMs) that have been developed in the past 15 years with the aim to have a better and more detailed representationof the network in specific areas. 3.6.19 There is not a full land-use model that interacts with each of the RTMs and this means that in order to understand the land-use impacts of the B714 partial scheme we need to use the difference in costs between the partial scheme compared to the Reference case that are producedbytheSRTMregionalmodeltoinformthechangesincostsintheTELMoS18Azones. These changes in generalised costs cause changes in accessibility, which is one of the drivers of the location of households and jobs the Land-use model. The output produced by TELMoS are forecasts of the land-use variables that are needed to calculate the Wider Economic impacts. 3.6.20 A more detailed description of the methodology used to calculate the WEIs and the underpinning Land-use model can be found in Appendix 3D. 3.7 Environmental and social impacts methodology 3.7.1 Thereareimpactswhichhavepreviouslybeenassessedandclassifiedasneutral/negligibledue to interventions incorporated as part of the scheme that will have little or no impact. These have been revisited at the FBC stage to reflect, following a review of the analytical requirements post-OBC submission, on the adjusted scope to include the preferred scheme onlyappraisal.Assuchthefollowingimpactshavebeendesignatedasneutralforthepurposes of thisassessment:
Page 105
Page 99/ 192 Security. It is not anticipated that there will be a change to the likely incidence of crime or fear ofcrime. Assuch, thescheme is unlikely to impact on Security. Accesstoservices.Accessibilityimpactsneedonlybeidentifiedwheretheinterventionhas been designed to address accessibility. The scheme is not intended to do so as a key element and it will notadversely affect accessibility inany way. Severance.Theschemeisto bedeliveredontheruralroadnetwork,anditisthereforenot expected to have any severance impacts. Optionvalues.Astheschemeisnotaffectingpublictransportdirectly,serviceswillnotlead to a ‘step change’ in the level of service offered. In accordance with the guidance, a step change includes ‘the introduction of/ loss of transport mode or the provision of a significantly better facility than currently exists (such as a new motorway or high-speed line)’. As such,the schemeis unlikely to impact on theOptionvalues. 3.7.2 The following environmental impacts have been assessed quantitatively: NoiseimpactscausedbytheschemehavebeenassessedusingappropriateDfTWorkbook. The scheme has a positive impact on noise and offers a monetary benefit of £0.46m over the 60-year appraisal period. Air quality impacts caused by the scheme have been assessed using appropriate DfT Workbook. The scheme has a slight positive impact on air quality and offers a monetary benefitof £0.010m overthe 60-year appraisal period. Greenhouse gases have been calculated using DEFRA’s Emissions factor toolkit and the resulting traded and non-traded carbon values included within the DfT carbon impacts workbook. These have been treated in the same way as the economic impacts as outlined in section 3.6, using the same AADT inputs used for both the COBA-LT and AQ impact assessments. 3.7.3 The remaining impacts have been assessed qualitatively with more details on each provided below. It should be noted that the environmental assessment has been based on STAG and using equivalent templates. This is because the scheme will be going through the Planning and otherapprovals underthe ScottishLawand government processes. Physical activity. As outlined in the Strategic Dimension, the B714 corridor upgrade will abstract traffic from the A737 corridor which offers a direct link between Dalry and Kilwinning offering the opportunity for a non-motorised user provisions to be put in place onthatcorridor.Asdiscussedpreviously,duetoinflationarypressuresandcostescalations, the 3-metre segregated shared pathway has dropped out of scope for this funding allocation. As such the benefits will not release directly within this funding arrangement although there is a commitment from NAC to safeguard the land and source alternative funding arrangement. Nonetheless, slight physical activity benefits may be realised from the abstraction of traffic from Kilwinning making the town centre more attractive for non- motorised trips. Journey quality. The proposed scheme options are expected to have a positive impact on journey quality by providing a better alignment and more direct routes. Simultaneously, the abstraction of traffic towards the B714 will remove strategic traffic through Kilwinning generatingslightjourneyqualityimprovementsforactivetravelmodesastheenvironment becoming lesscar dominant. Affordability impacts need only be identified where intervention has been designed to address affordability. Personal Affordability is concerned with the out-of-pocket non- business user costs. As the proposed intervention does not introduce road user charging andhasno effectonpublictransportfares,theaffordability analysishasbeenrestrictedto changes in vehicleoperating costs (VOCs) from TUBA. Townscape, Landscape, Biodiversity, Historic environment. The impact of the proposed schemeoptionshas been assessed qualitatively in linewith STAGguidance.
Page 106
Page 100/ 192 3.8 Public accounts Formulation of schemecosts 3.8.1 Theestimationofschemecostsisacrucialpartoftheschemeappraisal.Asmentionedabove, economicassessmentconsidersboththeactualcostofthescheme,togetherwithanychanges in the capitalcostofmaintenance in future years. 3.8.2 The costs used in scheme appraisal differ from the outturn costs used for funding decisions and presented intheFinancial Dimension.Costsforschemeappraisalareadjusted to theTAG standard present value year for appraisal (2010) to allow direct comparison with the monetised benefits and the costs presented in calendar years. The scheme costs used for funding submissions are the outturn costs in the expected years of expenditure and are in financial years. 3.8.3 The scheme costs have been developed by AECOM, NAC’s design and cost consultant using SPONS 2025 rates (Q4 2025 base price). Capital costs for Government and Local Authority (match) have been provided by AECOM and are discussed in detail in the financial dimension. The following stepshavebeen applied for the economic dimension costs: theinclusionofanallowanceformaintenance(basedonmaintenanceschedulingandcosts compared to the do minimum29) the inclusion of an allowance for monitoring and evaluation (0.5%30 of the total constructioncostandprofiledbasedonapost-year1andpostyear5reportingprogramme) adjustment to market prices to covert SPONS 2025 to include VAT (using the DfT TAG Databook value formarketfactorconversion) the inclusion of optimism bias at 20% in line with TAG guidance unit A1-2 (appropriate for stage3 orFBClevelassessmentto reflect theprevious designand investigationofthesite) uplifting costs to reflect the likely spend profile using the TAG GDP deflator to reflect the current inflationary pressures in themarket. discounting and deflatingto 2010 prices. 3.8.4 ThecalculationofinitialPVChasbeenundertakeninTUBAinlinewithTAGUnitA1-2(Scheme Costs)andtheprinciplesoftheTAGworksheet:CostProforma,whichprocessedthebasecosts through the above steps. This results in a PVC of £17.422m in 2010 market prices discounted to 2010. Indirect taxrevenues 3.8.5 IndirecttaxhasbeencalculatedinTUBAandtreatedinthesamewayastheeconomicimpacts as outlinedin section3.6. 3.9 Economic impacts - Transport Economic Efficiency (TEE) 3.9.1 The overall travel time outputs from the do minimum scenario were compared with the do something scenario (preferred scheme) in order to assess the benefits of the scheme option. TocalculatetraveltimeandVOCbenefits/disbenefits,matriceswereextractedfromtheSRTM 29 Withinthebespokeappraisaltool,themaintenancecostsofthedominimumandpartialschemehave been calculated and the maintenance ‘saving’ deducted from the PVC of the partial scheme. The assumption was that the existing B714 requires extensive maintenance (in the short term) which will continue approximately every 15 years compared to every 20 years for the partial scheme (with maintenance at every 15 years for the south B714 which is not being upgraded as part ofthe scheme). 30 Deemed appropriate due to the value of the scheme and compared against the cost of baseline surveys conducted in November 2021
Page 107
Page 101/ 192 indicatingtripvolumes,traveltimesanddistancesbetweeneachoftheoriginanddestination zone pairs forthe do minimum and do something scenarios. 3.9.2 The TUBA economic file contains the relevant information from TAG on VoT parameters and changes in value for future years. This file was amended to accommodate the SRTM user classes. 3.9.3 Standard DfT tables for TEE, Public Accounts (PA) and the Analysis of Monetised Costs and Benefits(AMCB) have beenproduced and are provided in Appendix 3F. TEE benefits by time period 3.9.4 Table 26 provides a summary of the TEE benefits for the preferred scheme option disaggregated by time period. 3.9.5 This indicates that the Inter-peak period generates the largest proportion of the overall benefits with £12.0m, as a function of the higher annualisation factor (including the off-peak and weekend periods as noted in Table 24) applied for this period. The AM and PM periods have alower proportionofthe overall benefits, with £2.5m and£3.1m respectively. Table 26.Preferred scheme TEE benefits by time period (£000s in 2010 market prices, discounted to 2010) TIME PERIOD TIME (£M) USER CHARGES (PT) VOC (£M) OP REV INDIRECT TAXATION (£M) TOTAL AM 2030 £54 £0 -£7 -£4 £5 £48 2045 £59 £0 -£4 -£4 £2 £53 60- years £2,774 -£4 -£199 -£154 £71 £2,488 IP 2030 £283 £0 £13 -£5 £4 £295 2045 £237 £0 £7 -£4 £0 £240 60- years £11,790 £3 £344 -£190 £21 £11,968 PM 2030 £73 £0 -£3 -£4 £4 £70 2045 £66 £0 -£2 -£3 £1 £62 60- years £3,241 £2 -£95 -£144 £57 £3,061 3.9.6 VoTbenefitsmakeupthemajorityoftheTEEbenefitsacrossallthreetimeperiods,asaresult of reduced journey times resulting from the upgraded carriageway standard and reduced congestion acrossthemodelled area. TEE benefits by vehicle type 3.9.7 Table 27 provides a summary of the TEE benefits for the preferred scheme option disaggregated by vehicle classification.
Page 108
Page 102/ 192 Table 27.Preferred scheme TEE benefits by time period (£000s in 2010 market prices, discounted to 2010) VEH TYPE PERIOD TIME (£M) USER CHARGES (PT) VOC (£M) OP REV INDIRECT TAXATION (£M) TOTAL Car 2030 £273 £0 -£9 £0 £14 £278 2045 £242 £0 -£6 £0 £2 £238 60- years £11,911 £0 -£281 £0 £163 £11,793 LGV Person al 2030 £5 £0 -£1 £0 £0 £4 2045 £5 £0 £0 £0 £0 £5 60- years £228 £0 -£29 £0 £1 £200 LGV Busines s 2030 £91 £0 -£5 £0 £1 £87 2045 £79 £0 -£3 £0 £0 £76 60- years £3,891 £0 -£136 £0 £17 £3,772 OGV1 2030 £17 £0 £5 £0 -£1 £21 2045 £15 £0 £3 £0 £0 £18 60- years £724 £0 £139 £0 -£21 £842 OGV2 2030 £17 £0 £13 £0 -£4 £26 2045 £15 £0 £8 £0 -£2 £21 60- years £724 £0 £357 £0 -£85 £996 PT 2030 £7 £1 £0 -£14 £2 -£4 2045 £7 £0 £0 -£11 £2 -£2 60- years £327 £1 £0 -£488 £70 -£90 3.9.8 Themajorityofbenefitsareassociatedwithcarprivateusers,makingupthemajorityoftraffic users across the network, over the full 60-year appraisal period. The only vehicle type to see an overallreductioninon benefitsacrossthenetworkarePTbus users,dueto the increasein indirect taxationoffsettingany VoT benefits.
Page 109
Page 103/ 192 TEE benefits by journey purpose 3.9.9 Table 28 provides a summary of the TEE benefits for the preferred scheme option, disaggregated by journey purpose. Business users are expected to see the largest overall proportionofthebenefitswith£8.4moverthe60-yearappraisalperiod. Thisisacombination ofVoTandVOCbenefits,indicatingthatthereisareductioninfuelconsumption(andnon-fuel VOC) as aresultofareduction inoverallvehkm travelled. Thiswould imply thatHGV trafficis likelytotravelshorter,moredirectroutesasaresultoftheB714upgrade,astheyhavehigher VOC costscomparedto cars and LGVs. Table 28. Preferred scheme TEE benefitsby journey purpose (£000s in 2010 market prices, discounted to 2010) JOURNEY PURPOSE PERIOD TIME (£M) USER CHARGES (PT) VOC (£M) OP REV INDIRECT TAXATION (£M) TOTAL Business 2030 £176 £0 £24 -£2 -£3 £195 2045 £153 £0 £14 -£1 -£2 £164 60- years £7,570 -£2 £665 -£51 -£87 £8,095 Commuting 2030 £101 £0 -£9 -£1 £6 £97 2045 £91 £0 -£3 £0 £1 £89 60- years £4,455 £0 -£192 -£22 £71 £4,312 Other 2030 £132 £1 -£14 -£11 £10 £118 2045 £118 £0 -£9 -£10 £3 £102 60- years £5,780 £3 -£422 -£414 £162 £5,109 3.9.10 Commuting and other journey purposes are expected to see approximately half of the VoT benefitsofBusinessusers,withbenefitstotalling£4.3m and£5.1m overthe60-yearappraisal period.
Page 110
Page 104/ 192 TEE benefits by timesaving 3.9.11 Table 29 provides a summary of the TEE benefits for the preferred scheme option, disaggregated timesavingbandings and journey purpose. Table 29.Preferred scheme TEE benefits by time saving (£000s in 2010 market prices, discounted to 2010) VEHICLE TYPE PURPOSE TIME SAVING BYTIME BANDING (IN £000S) < -5 mins -5 to -2 mins -2 to 0 mins 0 to2 mins 2 to5 mins > 5 mins Car Business £0 -£8 -£358 £2,582 £0 0 Commuting £0 -£51 -£1,017 £5,475 £31 0 Other £0 -£11 -£829 £6,088 £7 0 LGV Personal Business £0 £0 £0 £0 £0 0 Commuting £0 £0 £0 £0 £0 0 Other £0 -£5 -£28 £250 £10 0 LGV Freight Business £0 -£85 -£476 £4,275 £170 7 Commuting £0 £0 £0 £0 £0 0 Other £0 £0 £0 £0 £0 0 OGV1 Business £0 £0 -£156 £837 £42 2 Commuting £0 £0 £0 £0 £0 0 Other £0 £0 £0 £0 £0 0 OGV2 Business £0 £0 -£156 £837 £42 2 Commuting £0 £0 £0 £0 £0 0 Other £0 £0 £0 £0 £0 0 PT Business £0 £0 -£11 £23 £0 0 Commuting -£1 £0 -£5 £21 £0 0 Other -£9 -£4 -£101 £405 £5 4 3.9.12 Overall, the majority of benefits arise within the 0-2 minute banding, indicating that the average time saving per vehicle trip is likely to be less than 2 minutes. No ‘dis-benefits’ of greater than an increase of more than 5 mins for a trip is seen for any vehicle or journey purpose.
Page 111
Page 105/ 192 TEE benefits profile 3.9.13 Figure 46 illustrates a projection of the benefitsof thescheme from theopening year of 2028 to the final appraisalyearof 2087. Figure 46. Preferred option TEE benefits profile 3.9.14 Thisindicatesthattheschemedeliversthegreatestbenefitsfollowingthefirstyearofopening, with benefits slowly reducing to the design of the scheme in 2045. Benefits over the full 60- year appraisalperiodfurther deteriorate dueto theimpactof furtheryear inflation. TUBA sector geographicalanalysis 3.9.15 A sector-to-sector geographical analysis of the masked TUBA results was undertaken to identify the levelof benefits relating to the local study area. 3.9.16 The sector analysis of the TUBA results31 shows £13.1m (equal to 74% of the TEE benefits) of benefitbeingattributedwithintheThreeTownsarea,whichisaspecifictargetedareatoalign with the scheme and fund objectives. This reflects a betterment in connectivity for trips starting and ending in thevicinity of thescheme. TUBA sector masking process 3.9.17 Amaskingprocesshasbeenappliedtotheinputtime,distanceanddemandskimsbeforebeing run through TUBA. This masking effectively allows modelled noise to be mitigated, and more focuson therelevantareasanticipatedto be impacted by theschemeproposals. 31 Assessed within the maskingprocess
Page 112
Page 106/ 192 3.9.18 Figure 47 illustrates the sectors which have included some level of masking. The masking doesn’t exclude these sectors entirely but considers the origin and destination of trips as presented inTable30. Figure 47. Post-TUBA masking sectors 3.9.19 Input and out files from the TUBA appraisal for all scenarios presented in the Economic Dimensionare provided inAppendix 3H: TUBA Analysis files.
Page 113
Page 107/ 192 Table 30.Masked sectors 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 – Ardossan 2 – Saltcoats 3 – Kilwinning 4 – Stevenston 5 – Dalry 6 – Beith 7 – South Ayrshire 8 – Glasgow North 9 – Lanarkshire 10 -Inverclyde 11 – Dunbartonshire 12 – Irvine PrestwickAyr 13 – Kilmarnoc 14 – WestKilbride 15 – Kilbirnie 16–RuralNorthAyrshire 17 – Barrhead 18 – Paisley 19 – East Kilbride 20 – Stewarton 21 – Glasgow South 22 – External North 23 – External East 24 – External South
Page 114
Page 108/ 192 3.10 Economic impacts - WEIs Land-use impacts inthe partial scheme 3.10.1 The changes in costs produced by the opening of the B714 partial scheme cause changes in accessibility -which is a key concept in the land-use model-. There is no single measure of accessibilityinTELMoS18A,butthereisarangeofdifferentvariablesofdifferentkindsatboth zone and macrozone levels. The accessibility measures therefore combine land-use data output in TELMoS18A with transport data (from SRTM converted to TMfS18 zones). Accessibilities can change because of land-use changes even when transport costs are not changingatall;thisplaysasignificantroleinthelinkagesbetweendifferentland-useactivities. 3.10.2 Changes in accessibility drive the location choices of Households and Jobs. Everything else being equal, places that experience an increase in accessibility (i.e. places that are better connected) tend to attractmore jobs and households. 3.10.3 The land-useimpactsofthe B714 partial schemearemodestin termsofjobsand households, which is in line with the small changes in costs and in accessibility produced by the scheme. Figure 48 shows the difference in employment between Do Something and Do Minimum in 2050 (the last land-use forecast year) in North Ayrshire. Changes in jobs start to occur from the very first year after the introduction of the scheme. Jobs in North Ayrshire and in each of the three towns steadily increase up to 2040 and then they stabilise until the end of the forecast period. Figure 48. Absolute difference in employment (DS – DM), 2050 3.10.4 North Ayrshire is attracting jobs from the neighbouring LADs, mainly from South Ayrshire (hence the positive balance for the LAD) and gains overall 77 jobs (0.17% increase in jobs) in different sectors. 3.10.5 Stevensonisthetownthatshowsthelargestincreaseinjobs(41extrajobsby2050),followed by Saltcoats (20 extra jobs by 2050) and Ardrossan (13 extra jobs by 2050). The jobs that the threetownsgainaremorethanthetotaljobsthatNorthAyrshiregains:thishappensbecause jobs arerelocating from other zoneswithin North Ayrshire to thethree towns. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Saltcoats Ardrossan Stevenson Rest of North Ayrshire North Ayrshire AbsoluteDifferenceinEmployment EA-CAin2050
Page 115
Page 109/ 192 3.10.6 Figure 49 below shows the difference in employment between the DS and the DM 10 years after the introduction of the B714 partial scheme in 2040. It clearly shows that jobs start to movearemoving from zones within North Ayrshiretowards thethree towns. Figure 49. DS-DM, 2035 percentage difference in employment 3.10.7 Figure50belowshowsthepercentagedifferenceinjobsinthefinalforecastyear(2050),which aligns closely with and ismore pronounced comparedto the trends observed in2040. Figure 50. DS-DM, 2050 percentage difference in employment
Page 116
Page 110/ 192 3.10.8 The impacts of the B714 partial scheme on households and population are small in North Ayrshire and in the Three Towns and not as significant as the employment impacts. Households’ location tends to follow the employment location, but the impacts are usually smallerand developlater. 3.10.9 The full set of results in terms of accessibility, employment and households’ location are presented in Appendix 3D. Wider economic impacts in the partial scheme 3.10.10As described in the methodology, the WIC calculator heavily relies on the land-use variables that TELMoS18A forecasts. 3.10.11Staticclustering,laboursupplyimpactsandoutputchangeinimperfectlycompetitivemarkets are included in level 2 analysis. Dynamic clustering, move to more/less productive jobs and dependent developmentsare included in level3 analysis. 3.10.12Table 31 and Table 32 below summarize the Level 2 benefits for the whole of Scotland, the Ayrshires LADs and the rest of Scotland and separately for the Three Towns. The Level 3 benefits are presented at total national level. Level 2 Benefits 3.10.13Static agglomeration impacts reflect changes to productivity brought about by a change in effective density (also known as access to economic mass). The impacts are driven by the changes in transport generalised costs, land-use is assumed to remain unchanged between scenarios. As expected, North Ayrshire receives the highest Level 2 benefits from theopening of the B714 partial scheme because that’s where the largest reductions in generalised costs occur. 3.10.14There are also some small benefits deriving from the increase in the number of people that decide to enter the labour market as result of lower commuting costs to employment opportunities in North Ayrshire. Table 31 below shows the welfare gain due to increased laboursupplyfromreductionsincommutingcost,asformulatedinTAGandcalculatedbyWIC (MorePeopleinWork).Thewelfareisexpressedasthetaxwedgefromtheearningsofworkers brought into work. This is assumed to be 40%, a proportion reflecting the lower productivity ofmarginal workers. 3.10.15The PVB Level 2 represents the summation of static agglomeration benefits and more people in work welfare gains. Level 3 Benefits 3.10.1 The dynamic agglomeration effect considers the land use dynamics in terms of changes in employment location. They are intended to capture the effect of shifting employment location on agglomeration. To have a clearer picture of the Level 3 benefits, we cannot only considerthebenefitsofthe LADsmost proximateto the scheme, butwealso need to lookat the benefits at a national level. Both dynamic agglomeration and moves to more productive jobsmustthereforebe presented at a national level. 3.10.2 Both static and dynamic agglomeration benefits for Scotland are positive. The PVB for the whole of Scotland is the sum of the Level 2 benefits, the dynamic agglomeration benefits and the ‘moveto more productive jobs’ benefitsand they sum to £1.21m. 3.10.3 TheLevel2benefitsarealsoreportedfortheThreeTowns:Saltcoats,ArdrossanandSteveston inTable32.Stevensonisthetownthatexperiencesthegreateststaticagglomerationbenefits.
Page 117
Page 111/ 192 Table 31.Partialscheme: PVB Level 2 and PVB Level 3forScotlandandtheAyrshiresbenefits (£000s in 2018 market prices, discounted to 2010) LOCAL AUTHORITY STATIC AGGLOME -RATION BENEFITS MORE PEOPLE IN WORK PVB LEVEL 2 BENEFITS DYNAMIC AGGLOME -RATION BENEFITS MOVE TO MORE PRODUCTI VE JOBS PVB LEVEL 3 BENEFITS TOTAL PVB (LEVEL 2 + LEVEL 3) East Ayrshire £1 £2 £3 - - - - North Ayrshire £669 £33 £702 - - - - South Ayrshire -£4 £0 -£3 - - - - Rest of Scotland £62 £28 £90 - - - - Total Scotland £728 £63 £791 £351 £1,610 £415 £1,206 Table 32.PartialScheme: PVB Level 2 and PVB Level 3forBenefits (£000s in 2018 market prices, discounted to 2010) in theThreeTowns AREA STATIC AGGLOMERATION BENEFITS MORE PEOPLEIN WORK PVB LEVEL2 Saltcoats £14 £2 £16 Ardrossan £69 £2 £71 Stevenston £359 £7 £366 Total for the Three Towns £441 £12 £453 3.10.4 Theextrabenefitsthatderivefromtherebalancingandregenerationeffectsgeneratedbythe land-usechangesduetotheB714partialschemeimplementationinNorthAyrshirearearound £1.5m. The shadow value of jobs for workers moving to more deprived zones is partly offset by the increasein thesocial infrastructureconsumptions in North Ayrshire. 3.10.5 Table33summarisestheWEIsforthescheme.TheLevel2PVBforadjustedBCRis £0.8M.The Level 3 PVB for adjusting the indicative BCR is £0.4M and the Additional Benefits (rebalancing and regeneration effect) are £1.5M Table 33.Partialscheme summary of PVB – WEIs (£000s in 2018 market prices, discounted to 2010) ELEMENT VALUE(£000S) PVB TotalScotland Level 2Benefits (foruse in adjusted BCR) £791 PVB TotalScotland Level 3Benefits for use in Indicative BCR £415 Additional Benefit (rebalancing & regeneration effects) £1,476
Page 118
Page 112/ 192 3.10.6 Further detailon the widereconomic impacts is provided within Appendix3D. 3.11 Economic Impacts: Social impacts 3.11.1 In line with TAG Units A4 (Social and distributional impacts), where impacts are considered important and proportionate, these impacts have been monetised. This section presents the monetised assessment for accidents assessment (with all other social impacts assessed qualitativeanddiscussedfurtherinsection3.13),theoutcomesfrom theplace-basedanalysis (TAG Unit A4.3). Accident assessment (COBA-LT) 3.11.2 The accident assessment using COBA-LT was undertaken. There is an overall benefit for the partial scheme of £4.87m due to suppressed traffic using more appropriate roads with the scheme in place. TheCOBA-LT filesarepresented in Appendix 3G. 3.11.3 Basedon theCOBA-LT analysis, the totalnumberof casualties saved by scheme are: fatal =2.2. serious=16.9. slight = 125.3. 3.11.4 The upgrade will significantly increase the volume of traffic but will remove existing poor alignment and improve road safety. The majority of benefits (around £2.329m) are expected on the improved B714 which was experiencing higher than average accidents per million vehicle kilometres. As shown in Figure 51 below, this is made up of around £3.8m of benefits to the northern upgraded section of the B714 resulting from the improved standard of the road. In conjunction, there is expected to be approximately £131k in disbenefits on the retained section, which is not being upgraded, with the disbenefits accruing due to the increased traffic flows. However, it must be noted that the granularity of the model didn’t permit the localised online improvements in the southern section of the B714 to be included within the COBA-LT assessment. These upgraded sections will improve road standards and address known accident hotspots. Therefore, the disbenefits are likely of greater magnitude than expected.
Page 119
Page 113/ 192 Figure 51. COBA-LT accident analysis 3.11.5 The upgraded route is likely to act as a bypass of Kilwinning and is therefore likely to attract traffic, including a not insignificant volume of HGV traffic, to the B714 from otherlocal routes (such astheB777 andB706), increasingthesafety ontheselocal routes. The A737(T)/A738(T) through Kilwinning currently routes past a number of schools and residential areas. The construction of an improved B714 will improve the safety for all road users (car, public transport, cyclists, etc.) in Kilwinning by reducing traffic through the town. Therefore, the alternative route passing through Kilwinning (between the Hillend roundabout the B714/A78 roundabout) isexpected to generate around £0.737m of accident savings. 3.11.6 Pedestrians,andinparticularschoolchildreninKilwinningwillbenefitfromreducedtrafficand a safer roadenvironmentwith improved journey ambience. Place-based analysis 3.11.7 Place-basedanalysisisconcernedwithdisaggregatingtheschemeslikelyoutcomes.Duetothe nature of theobjectives from the scheme and the funding source, it was deemed appropriate toundertakeamoredetailedspatialanalysisoftheschemeoutcomes.AsdetailedintheGreen Book, place-based analysis is required due to the scheme containing ‘an objective that is specific to aparticular place orareaortype ofarea’.
Page 120
Page 114/ 192 3.11.8 One of the key scheme objectives is ‘to reduce journey times and improve reliability between TheThreeTownsandtheGarnockValley’.Dueto thelevelsofdeprivationintheThreeTowns areatheschemehasbeendirectedataddressthisandconsequentlyaligningwiththeLevelling Up objectives also. As can be seen in Figure 52 below, the biggest benefits are for users travelingto and from theThree Townsclosely followed by Southern Glasgow.This specifically illustrates the distribution of the user benefits (including journey time savings and VOC savings). 3.12 Economic Impacts: Environmental impacts 3.12.1 A summary ofthemonetised environmental impacts is provided in Table 34. IMPACT ‘CORE’ GROWTH ‘HIGH’ GROWTH ‘LOW’ GROWTH Noise £457.43 £457.43 £457.43 LocalAir Quality £10.53 £10.53 £10.53 Greenhouse Gases (EFT) -£1,140.03 -£1,341.89 -£859.57 Table 34.Monetised EnvironmentalImpacts (£000s in 2010 market prices, discounted to 2010) 3.12.2 A carbon summary table for the scheme isprovided inAppendix 3J: Carbon Summary Table. 3.13 Economic Impacts: Distributional Impacts DI Screening 3.13.1 A DI screening pro-forma has been produced in Table 35 outlining the DI analysis undertaken in Step 1 as part of this FBC submission. Based on the screening output the following criteria have been taken forwardfor step 2 assessment: user benefits noise. accidents.
Page 121
Page 115/ 192 Figure 52. Place-based analysis – spatialcomposition of user benefits
Page 122
Page 116/ 192 Table 35.Distributional impacts screening pro forma INDICAT OR (A) APPRAISALOUTPUT CRITERIA (B) POTENTIAL IMPACT (YES / NO, POSITIVE/NEGATIVE IF KNOWN) (C) QUALITATIVECOMMENTS (D) PROCEED TOSTEP 2 User benefits The TUBAuser benefit analysis softwareor anequivalent processhas been used inthe appraisal and/or thevalue of user benefits TransportEconomicEfficiency (TEE) table is non-zero. Yes- positive impact Up to 2 mins journey timesavingson theB714 between Beith and TheThree Towns.Slight decongestion benefitsonthe A737 in Kilwinning. Yes Noise Any change in alignmentoftransportcorridororany links with significantchanges (>25% or <-20%) invehicle flow, speedor %HDV content. Also notecommentin TAGUnit A3. Yes- positive impact Significant reductionoftraffic onthe existing B714 nearDalry and Slightdecongestion benefitson theA737 in Kilwinning. Yes Airquality Any change in alignmentoftransportcorridororany links with significantchanges invehicleflow, speedor %HDV content: • Change in24-hour AADTof 1000 vehiclesormore • Change in24-hour AADTof HDVof200 HDVvehicles or more • Change in daily averagespeed of10kphormore • Change in peak hourspeed of20kph ormore • Change in road alignmentof5m ormore Yes- slight positive impact Air quality is impacted dueto changein flows on theB714 betweenDalry and The Three Town. However,this areahas very few properties whichare also set back. No Accidents Any change in alignmentoftransportcorridor(orroadlayout) thatmay havepositiveornegative safety impacts,or any links with significantchanges invehicleflow, speed,%HGVcontent or any significant change(>10%) in the numberof pedestrians,cyclistsormotorcyclists using road network. Yes- positive impact Reduced congestionon theA737 inKilwinning and the upgraded B714 willhavea positive impacton accidents. Yes
Page 123
Page 117/ 192 INDICAT OR (A) APPRAISALOUTPUT CRITERIA (B) POTENTIAL IMPACT (YES / NO, POSITIVE/NEGATIVE IF KNOWN) (C) QUALITATIVECOMMENTS (D) PROCEED TOSTEP 2 Security Any change in public transportwaiting/interchange facilities including pedestrian accessexpected to affect user perceptionsof personal security. No impact No impact isexpecteddueto the scheme. No Severance Introduction orremovalofbarriers to pedestrianmovement, either through changesto road crossing provision,or through introduction ofnewpublictransportorroadcorridors. Any areas with significantchanges (>10%) invehicle flow,speed, %HGV content. No impact No impact isexpecteddueto the scheme. No Accessibility Changes in routingsortimings of current public transport services, any changesto public transportprovision, including routing, frequencies,waiting facilities (busstops / rail stations) and rolling stock,or any indirect impactson accessibility to services(e.g. demolition & re-locationof a school). No impact No impact isexpecteddueto the scheme. No
Page 124
Page 118/ 192 INDICAT OR (A) APPRAISALOUTPUT CRITERIA (B) POTENTIAL IMPACT (YES / NO, POSITIVE/NEGATIVE IF KNOWN) (C) QUALITATIVECOMMENTS (D) PROCEED TOSTEP 2 Affordability In caseswherethe following charges wouldoccur; Parking charges (including where changes in the allocationoffreeor reduced fee spacesmay occur); Carfuel and non-fuel operating costs (where,forexample, rerouting orchanges in journey speedsand congestionoccur resulting in changes in costs); Roaduser charges (including discounts and exemptions for different groups oftravellers); Public transportfarechanges (where, forexample premium fares are seton neworexistingmodesorwheremulti-modal discountedtravel tickets becomeavailable dueto new ticketingtechnologies); orPublic transport concession availability (where, forexample concessionarrangements vary as a resultof amove in service provision from bus to light rail or heavy rail,where such concessionentitlement is notmaintained by the localauthority[1]). No impact No impact isexpecteddueto the scheme. No
Page 125
Page 119/ 192 DI study area 3.13.2 The study area of the DI assessment is the same as that identified for the COBALT analysis, as illustrated Figure53. Figure 53. DI study area Identification of social groups in theimpactarea 3.13.3 As per TAG 4.2, the scope of socio-demographic analysis for the impact of above criteria are setout inTable36. Table 36.Scope of socio-demographic analyses for DIs (Step 2b) DATASET / SOCIALGROUP USER BENEFITS NOISE ACCIDENTS IncomeDistribution Children: proportion ofpopulation aged<16 Young adults: proportion of populationaged16-25 Older people: proportion of populationaged70+ 3.13.4 A qualitative assessment has been undertaken considering the level of impact and scope of this assessment.
Page 126
Page 120/ 192 DI of user benefits 3.13.5 The scheme shows user benefits due to journey time savings of up to 2 mins between Beith and The Three Towns. Hence, people travelling by car to and from The Three Towns and Isle ofArranviatheB714willbenefitfromthejourneytimesavings.SIMDdatashowshighincome deprivation for majority of data zones in the Three Towns and about half of the data zones in Dalry and Beith. Therefore, the impact will be distributed among the car users, and especially thosewith low income willbe beneficial. Figure 54. Income deprivation level 3.13.6 The applied rating for inclusion within the ASTis: 0-20% income group: Moderate Beneficial. 20-40% income group: Moderate Beneficial. 40-60% income group: Moderate Beneficial. 60-80% income group: Neutral. 80-100% income group: Neutral. DI ofNoise 3.13.7 The traffic model shows significant increase in flows on the B714. However, there are very properties,andtheyallsetback.Somepositiveimpactsareexpectedduetoreductionoftraffic from the B714 near Dalry and the decongestion on the A737 in Kilwinning. As per Table 37, NorthAyrshirehasaslightlygreaterpercentageofagedpeople(70+)comparedwithScotland. They will benefit from noise reduction dueto decongestionimpactof thescheme.
Page 127
Page 121/ 192 Table 37.Population profile of North Ayrshire AGEGROUP NORTHAYRSHIRE SCOTLAND Children: proportion ofpopulation aged<16 16% 16% Young adults: proportion of populationaged16-25 10% 12% Older people: proportion of populationaged70+ 17% 14% 3.13.8 The applied rating for inclusion within the ASTis: Children & Young Persons: SlightBeneficial Older People: Slight Beneficial. DI of Accidents 3.13.9 Accident impacts are associated with flow changes and analysed for the age groups set out in Table 1.Basedon the COBA-LT analysis, the total numberof casualtiessaved by scheme are: Fatal =2.2. Serious= 16.9. Slight = 125.3. 3.13.10There the scheme would have positive impacts on the residents, especially on children, younger driversand olderpeople. 3.13.11The applied rating for inclusion within the ASTis: Children & Young Persons: SlightBeneficial. Older People: Slight Beneficial. User Groups: Neutral. 3.14 Analysis of Monetised Costs and Benefits 3.14.1 Table38presentstheanalysisofmonetisedimpactscostsandbenefits(AMCB)ofthescheme. ThisshowsthattheinitialBCRisexpectedtobe1.23,representing‘Low’valueformoney.With the inclusionoftheWEIs,the adjusted BCR rises to 1.38 representing ‘Low’value formoney.
Page 128
Page 122/ 192 Table 38.AMCB – partialscheme (£000s in 2010 market prices, discounted to 2010) IMPACT INITIAL ADJUSTED Noise £457.4 LocalAir Quality £10.5 Greenhouse Gases -£1,140 Journey Quality N/A PhysicalActivity N/A Accidents £4,874.0 Economic Efficiency: ConsumerUsers(Commuting) £4,262.0 Economic Efficiency: ConsumerUsers(Other) £5,262.0 Economic Efficiency: Business Users and Providers £7,733.0 WiderPublic Finances(Indirect Taxation Revenues) £146.0 Wider Economic Impacts: Level2 N/A £791.0 Wider Economic Impacts: Level2 N/A 415.0 Wider Economic Impacts: Rebalancing & Regeneration Effects N/A £1,476.0 Total Present Value ofBenefit (PVB) £21,411.9 £24,093.6 Present Value of Cost(PVC) £17,422 Net Present Value (NPV) £3,989.0 £6,671.6 BenefitCostRatio (BCR) 1.23 1.38 Value for Money (VfM) category Low Low 3.15 Other non-monetised impacts 3.15.1 This section summarises the assessment of non-monetised impacts which have not been considered as negligible or scoped out in section 3.14. The non-monetised impacts’ assessmentsareexpectedto besimilaracrossthe three options. Reliability 3.15.2 A stress-based reliability assessment has been undertaken for the Do Something schemes in accordance with TAG Unit A1.3 ‘User and Provider Impacts’: Appendix C. The extents of the network are identical to the COBALT network. AADT flows have been calculated for each link within the networkas illustrated in Figure55.
Page 129
Page 123/ 192 Figure 55. Reliability/COBALT network extents 3.15.3 The summary of the resultsofthe assessmentare presented in Table 39. Table 39.Do Something scheme stress-based quantitative assessment STRESS-BASED RELIABILITY IMPACT DM ROUTE DS ROUTE WithoutschemeStress (a) 75% N/A With scheme Stress (b) 75% 75% Difference in stress(c= a-b,restricting a and b to the range75% -125%) 0% 75% With scheme AADT flow(d) 8,555,842 8,760,704 Overallimpacts (e=c*d) 0 6,570,528 Overallassessment (e(i)+e(ii)) 6,570,528 OverallImpact LargeBeneficial 3.15.4 The overall impact of the quantitative assessment has been categorised in accordance with guidance, with a qualitative textual rating applied based on the following excerpt from Paragraph C.5.7 from TAGUnit A1.3:
Page 130
Page 124/ 192 3.15.5 Overall,itisanticipatedthattheschemewillhavealargebeneficialimpactonreliabilityacross the impactedarea. Construction and maintenance impacts 3.15.6 The Impacts during constructionofthe scheme are expectedto beminimal. 3.15.7 The approach to minimising disruption is to tackle the“Off-Line” elementsof theworks as far as is possible with minimal intrusive traffic management on the roads save for establishment ofsiteaccesses,plantcrossingandadvancesignageetc.whichwillrequireshorttermoff-peak 2-way lights. 3.15.8 Congestion on the B714 / surrounding roads will be minimised through designated plant crossingsthat providesafeaccessforconstruction equipment. 3.15.9 Signage will be used to prevent motorists travelling from the A78 and A737 along the B714 unknowing of the road closure. Optimal locations have been identified for Advanced Warning signage where visibility of traffic managementwill bemaximisedforroad users. 3.15.10 A collaborate approach between the contractors andNAC will help you progresstowards the goal of Net Zero emissions by 2030 by delivering industry best practice decarbonisation measures on the B714 scheme. The Carbon Management approach is based on the PAS 2080 principlesofreducingcarbonintandemwithcoststhroughintelligentdesignandconstruction techniques. 3.15.11The contractor has committed to a minimum reduction of 10% across life cycle stage A1-A5 emissions (double what is outlined in your Carbon Management Plan). This will be achieved through the below measures which have delivered up to 20% on our road schemes and >30% on other recentinfrastructure schemes. The contractor will establish clearly marked and segregated traffic & pedestrian routes as per agreed robust traffic management plan subjected to regular safety audits. The B714 is a 60mph road so they will deploy a temporary speed limit of likely 30mph. To keep disruption to a minimum this will be concentrated to the compound entrance and works areas/access points along the B714. Deployment of water filled barriers to provide adequate protection for the workforce as well asthetravelling public from the works. Advance warning signs will be installed along the B714 at least a week in advance advising the travelling publicof theupcomingworks. The contractor will establish a 24-hour emergency hotline and advertise it clearly on VMS boards and site signage. They will log all issues on inspection sheets for immediate TSCO attention.
Page 131
Page 125/ 192 The constructionsequenceis designed to absolutelyminimise disruptionto theroad going public and local residentswhile theworksare undertakenon behalfof NAC. Minimising Disruption through DetailedPlanning andSequencing 3.15.12The contractor will minimise the overall disruption cause by the works by tackling the “Off- Line”elementsoftheworksasfarasispossiblewithminimalintrusivetrafficmanagementon the roads. This will require the use of short term 2-way lights to establish site accesses, plant crossing and advance signs, but these will only be used out of peak hours to minimise traffic buildup.TheB714willneedtobeclosedtothroughtrafficanddiversionsputinplacebetween Dalry and SaltcoatsviatheA737/A78 to safely complete themost intrusive activities. 3.15.13The contractor will track this closure closely in the programme so communications to the public are accurate in the lead up to these disruptive works. Surfacing and finishing elements within theprogrammefocus onthearearequiredto re-open assoonaspossible, i.e. theroad constructionwithinour areas 3,4 and5. 3.15.14The impacts of maintenance have not been quantified due to restrictions on modelling scenarios available. Nonetheless, the impacts are impacted to be minimal compared to the dominimum,asthemaintenanceoftheexistingscenarioisexpectedtobemoreintensiveand frequent. Landscape 3.15.15Most of the road is located within an area of LCT 66 Agricultural Lowlands – Ayrshire. There are no particularly sensitive landscape receptors that would be directly or indirectly affected by improvements to the B714 and the LCT is already characterised by roads and settlements ofvarying scales. 3.15.16Assuming careful routing of any realignments and adequate design mitigation measures, the potential for widespread significant adverse landscape and visual effects would be very limited. 3.15.17There is potential for localised effects on landscape features (Lynn Glen) or visual amenity at nearby residential properties resulting from local carriageway realignments, earthworks and road boundary treatments.It is however anticipated that the design processwill mitigate and limit any adverseimpact asfar as ispracticable. 3.15.18As a result, it isanticipatedthat theschemewill havea slightadverse impacton landscape. Townscape 3.15.19Townscape is defined in STAG as the physical and social characteristics of the built and non- built urban environment. It relates to a sense of place or identity, and can take the form of buildings, structures and spaces. The social characteristics are determined by how these are used and managed. Townscape incorporates all aspects of urban form, not just those of an historic nature or value. The impacts on the historic environment are appraised separately below. 3.15.20The scheme would impact on a greater number of visual receptors as the requirement to upgradetheB714 increasesthelengthoftheBypassscheme.However,itwouldhavepositive impactsin Dalry andKilwinning as less through trafficwill be passingthrough theurban area. 3.15.21The B714 corridor is a rural route which passes isolated farmhouses and associated buildings in predominantly open countryside. Direct effects on townscape in nearby settlementswould not beanticipated due to separation distance and intervening landscape.
Page 132
Page 126/ 192 3.15.22All options will remove vehicular traffic from Dalry and Kilwinning. This includes the town centresofbothsettlements,whicharecurrentlyimportantretaildestinationswithpedestrian movements. 3.15.23Overall,it isanticipated that theschemewill have a slight beneficial impactontownscape. Historic environment 3.15.24There are no listed buildings or Scheduled Ancient Monuments in the immediateproximity of the B714 route. 3.15.25There are a number of Category B and C listed buildings in Dalry and Saltcoats though these are largely separated from the B714 route by virtue of distance and intervening buildings / landscape. 3.15.26Subject to appropriate mitigation through archaeological investigation in a form agreed with HES / WoSAS, it is anticipated that impacts on cultural heritage would be minor / negligible and affect non-designatedand locally significant assets. 3.15.27There are no statutory heritage assets in the immediate proximity of the proposed route and impacts on the setting of listed buildings, conservation areas, and gardens and Designed Landscapes in the wider area are anticipated to be minor / negligible due to separation distance from theroute and mitigation in the form oflandscape screening. 3.15.28Overall, it is anticipated that the scheme will have a slight adverse impact on historic environment. Biodiversity 3.15.29Potentialimpactsonbiodiversityhavebeenassessedfortheconstructionandpost-openingof the scheme for notable protected species, habitats and designated sites, with ecological surveys being undertaken in October2021. 3.15.30Therefore, it is anticipatedthat theschemewill havea neutral impacton biodiversity Water environment 3.15.31The scheme scope includes a change to the highway drainage system and meansof discharge bywayofaSustainableUrbanDrainage(SuDs)network,whichwillcontrolrainfallrunofffrom the route and isto be implemented alongside the partial B714 upgrade. 3.15.32TheSuDsnetworkwillbeabletocopewiththeexpectedamountofrainfallandtrafficutilising the B714, so asto avoid potential drainage issues andbetterprotect the localenvironment. 3.15.33 Therefore, it is anticipated that the scheme will have a slight beneficial impact on the water environment. Physical activity 3.15.34The scheme will reduce traffic on the A737 corridor will allow for it to be a more direct quiet route between Kilwinning and Dalry. In particular, the removal of traffic through Kilwinning will improvethepedestrian environment andprovidea safer andmorepleasantenvironment for non-motorised userswhich may increase physicalactivity inexisting and newtrips. 3.15.35Overall, it is anticipated that the scheme will have a slight beneficial impact on physical activity.
Page 133
Page 127/ 192 Journey quality 3.15.36Based on the proposed interventions which include the upgrade of the B714 and reducing congestion on existing routes, it is expected that the scheme options will have a slight beneficial impacton journey quality. Affordability 3.15.37The scheme is forecast to deliver minor vehicle operating cost benefits for Commuting and Other users of £0.615m, therefore it is expected to have a slight beneficial impact on affordability. 3.16 Appraisal Summary Table 3.16.1 The AST produced in line with the FBC phase of the Business Case process is provided in Appendix 3E along with theSTAG assessmentforenvironmental impacts. 3.17 Sensitivity tests 3.17.1 A range of sensitivity tests have been conducted to reflect the potential uncertainty around the scheme scope, level of traffic growth and cost/benefit variations. The impact on the scheme’s BCR and VfM has been assessed as presented below. It should be noted that the sensitivitytestsareshownforthe‘initialBCRs’onlyandthereforeexcludethewidereconomic impactsmonetisedvalueswithin thePVB. Traffic growth scenarios 3.17.2 Table 40 showstheimpactof thehigh and low growthforecasts. Table 40.AMCB – Growth sensitivity tests (£000s in 2010 market prices, discounted to 2010) IMPACT ‘HIGH’ GROWTH ‘CORE’ GROWTH ‘LOW’ GROWTH Total Present Value of Benefit (PVB) £22,869.5 £24,093.6 £23,409.42 PresentValueofCost(PVC) £17,422 £17,422 £17,422 Net Present Value(NPV) £5,447.5 £6,671.6 £5,987.4 BenefitCostRatio (BCR) 1.31 1.38 1.34 Value for Money Category (VfM) Low Low Low CAS Scenarios 3.17.3 Additional sensitivity testing has been undertaken on the preferred option Core growth scenario,accounting for the impactsofthe followingCommon Analytical Scenarios (CAS): mode-balanced decarbonisation (‘Mode-balanced’). vehicle-led decarbonisation (or ‘High EV’ uptake). technology scenario (‘Technology’).
Page 134
Page 128/ 192 3.17.4 CAS sensitivity tests have been applied using TUBA only and arepresented in Table 41. Table 41.CAS Sensitivity tests (£000s in 2010 market prices, discounted to 2010) IMPACT ‘CORE’ GROWTH MODE BALANCED HIGHEV TECHNOLOGY PVB £23,093.6 £23,159.6 £24,192.6 £23,242.6 PVC £17,422 NPV £6,671.6 £5,737.6 £6,770.6 £5,820.6 BCR 1.38 1.33 1.39 1.33 VfM Low Low Low Low Switching values 3.17.5 To supplement the sensitivity tests outlined above a switching value exercise has been undertaken to demonstrate the level of change with the PVB and PVC required to generate change in the VfM category. Table 42 presents the outcomes of this on the core adjusted benefits and BCR: i.e. including WEIs. Table 42.Switching values IMPACT CORE PVB CHANGE PVC CHANGE Total PVB £24,093.6 £17,443.0 (28% decrease) £26,133.0 (8% increase) £34,844.0 (45% increase) £24,093.6 PVC £17,422.0 £24,093.6 (38% increase) £16,062.4 (8% decrease) £12,046.8 (45% decrease) BCR 1.38 1 1.5 2 1 1.5 2 3.18 Summary and Valuefor Money Statement 3.18.1 Awiderangeofoptionshavebeenconsideredtosolvetheidentifiedproblem.Theproposalis now at the FBC stage, with the assessment developed on available modelling of SRTM developed and maintained by Transport Scotland. The 2030 and 2045 model runs were used intheeconomicappraisaltoinformthisapplication.Theeconomicassessmenthasconsidered one final preferred option, due to being considered the only affordable option remaining on the table (see Financial dimension for further detail) which is a preferred scheme involving upgrading the B714 between Girthill farm in the south to a new roundabout just north of the A737 Hillend roundabout via a new offline link and targeted improvements to two existing accident hotspotson the southern sectionof theB714.
Page 135
Page 129/ 192 3.18.2 Detailed economic assessment hasbeenrun for the preferredoptionwithBCRcalculated and presented inTable43 below. Table 43.Preferred option economic Summary and BCR (monetary valuesin £000s) IMPACT INITIAL ADJUSTED TotalPresentValueof Benefit (PVB) £21,411.9 £24,093.6 Present ValueofCost (PVC) £17,422.0 Net Present Value(NPV) £3,989.9 £6,671.6 BenefitCostRatio (BCR) 1.23 1.38 Value for Money Category (VfM) Low Low 3.18.3 Additionally, the preferred scheme is expected to have beneficial impacts for reliability (all users), townscape, water environment, journey quality and affordability. It will have slight adverseimpactsforlandscapeandthehistoricenvironment.Allotherimpactsareexpectedto have neutral impacts. When considering the core benefits, the preferred option delivers a Low VfM in the 60- year appraisal period reflecting the delivery of benefits over the 60 years. With the inclusion ofWEIsin theadjusted benefits calculationthe VfM category remains ‘Low’. 3.18.4 Further details of the Economic Appraisal of the scheme are provided in Appendix 3I: B714 Economic AssessmentReport. 3.19 Forecastimpacts of proposed scheme 3.19.1 The success of the proposed scheme will depend on the extent to which it will address the problems identified (section 2.5)and achievethe scheme’sobjectives(section2.7). 3.19.2 The scheme logic map presented in Figure 26 illustrates how and why the proposed scheme will contribute towards the achievement of objectives but it cannot itself determine the strengthof each link in thecasual chain.
Page 136
Page 130/ 192 3.19.4 Theextenttowhichtheobjectivesareachievedwillbelargelydependentontheconsequences of the changesin thepattern oftrafficmovementon the localroad networkonce the scheme is in place asforecast by the Strathclyde RegionalTransportModel (SRTM) (discussed inmore detail in section 3). 3.19.5 The following section describes the forecast traffic impacts of the proposed B714 scheme produced using theSRTM modelling. Trafficanalysisincludes the following comparisons: totaltrafficvolumes (Annual Average Daily Traffic Volumes,AADT). overallvehicle-kilometrestravelled(veh km). road journey times. 3.19.6 Thesetypesoftrafficdataforecastsarealso usedto informtheschemeeconomicassessment process,whereoveralltraveltimesavingsarederivedusingchangesintraveldemandandroad journey times between areas (described in Section3). Traffic impacts: Traffic volumes 3.19.7 The expected impactof theproposed scheme on traffic volumes along roadswithin the study areaaredescribedinTable44andillustratedinFigure56.Thisshowsthedifferencesbetween theforecast2045 ‘DoMinimum’scenario andthe2045 B714 Schemescenario. Trafficfigures representtotal two-way flows (combining cars and goodsvehicles)over a24-hour period. Table 44.Change in daily traffic volumes (with & without scheme, 2045, AADT) ROAD LOCATION REFERENCE CASE 2045 B714 SCHEME 2045 CHANGE WITH SCHEME % CHANGE WITH SCHEME B714 Northof A78 8,060 10,140 2,080 26% B714 South ofA78 11,390 11,730 340 3% A737 North East ofHillend 16,230 17,180 950 6% A737 South ofHillend 10,610 9,470 -1,140 -11% B780 Northof A78 530 460 -70 -13% A738 North ofPennyburn 15,310 14,610 -700 -5% A78 Westof Sharphill 20,200 20,390 190 1% A78 Eastof Sharphill 26,790 27,430 640 2% A78 EastofPennyburn 41,400 40,760 -640 -2% Average 16,720 16,910 190 1%
Page 137
Page 131/ 192 3.19.8 For the 2045 scenario comparison, the modelling predicts an increase in traffic flows of 26% along the B714 between Dalry and the A78 as motorists choose to travel via the upgraded route. This stems from a 6% increase in traffic volumes to the north of Dalry, which reflects trafficdivertingfromotherroutesandalsosuggeststhepotentialforinducedtrafficeffectsas accessibility acrossthe road network isimproved. 3.19.9 The strategic modelling forecasts a reduction in total traffic volumes along the A737 (-11%) and A738 routes via Kilwinning (-5%), and also along the neighbouring B780 (-13%), as motorists chooseto divertvia theB714. 3.19.10The predicted changes in traffic volumes are relatively similar for both the 2030 and 2045 forecast year modelled scenarios. On average, the modelling suggests an overall increase in trafficvolumesofapproximately 1%across theseroutes. Figure 56. Impact on traffic volumes with scheme: % change from Reference Case (2045, AADT) Traffic impacts: Vehicle kilometres 3.19.11This section details the forecast changes in vehicle kms with the proposed B714 scheme in place for the 2045 forecast year compared to the ‘Do Minimum’ scenario (comparing overall vehicle travel distance across the SRTM modelled network). Predicted changes in veh km for the AM peak,inter-peak and PM peakmodelled timeperiods are shown inTable45.
Page 138
Page 132/ 192 Table 45.Change in vehicle km (with & without scheme, 2045, SRTM region) TIME PERIOD REFERENCE CASE 2045 B714 SCHEME 2045 CHANGE WITH SCHEME % CHANGE WITH SCHEME AM PeakHour 2,030,908 2,031,419 511 0.025% Inter Peak Hour 1,601,639 1,601,703 64 0.004% PM Peak Hour 2,033,754 2,034,102 348 0.017% 3.19.12The vehicle kilometre analysis shows a slight increase in vehicle kilometres across the SRTM network for all modelled time periods. All changes in vehicle kms are shown to be relatively small, andwith percentagechanges less than0.05%. 3.19.13This increase invehiclekilometres islikely to stem from two key effectsof thescheme: The scheme provides a shorter distance alignment between the A737 and B714, which wouldreducetraveldistancefortripscurrentlyusingtheB714,andalsoforsomemotorists choosing to divertvia theproposed scheme. Through improving accessibility, the scheme may also create induced traffic effects, generating a higher number of trips across the network. The analysis suggests that on balance these impactsresult in a slight increasein total vehicle kilometres. Impacton road journey times 3.19.14PredictedchangesinroadjourneytimeswiththeproposedschemeinplaceareshowninTable 46 to Table 48 for the SRTM AM peak, inter-peak and PM peak modelled time periods, and also illustrated in Figure 57 for the AM peak scenario. This compares 2045 forecast year journey times betweenthe‘ThreeTowns’(Ardrossan,Saltcoats and Stevenston),the Garnock Valley(representedbyBeith),andthewiderregion(representedbyGlasgowAirport). Journey times reflect average modelled road travel times between these origin and destination locations (i.e. roadtravel time betweenmodelled zonal areas). 3.19.15The analysis demonstrates an improvement to road journey times of around 1 to 2 minutes with the proposed scheme in place between the Three Towns and the Garnock Valley (compared to the without scheme scenario). Journey time savings are relatively consistent acrosstheAMpeak,inter-peakandPMpeaktimeperiodsandboththe2030and2045forecast years. 3.19.16 With the scheme in place, the modelling suggests road journey times would reduce by approximately 8% between Saltcoats and Beith, by 6% between Ardrossan and Beith, by 6% between Stevenstonand Beith, and by around3%to the M8 corridorat GlasgowAirport. 3.19.17The journey times show the benefit to motorists travelling via the new alignment and access points, with time savings reflecting the shorter distance and improved B714 carriageway alignment, faster vehicle speeds and avoiding travelling via the current traffic signals at Lynn Bridge. Thissuggeststheproposedschemeoffersafasterroute(i.e.betweenStevenstonand Beith) as an alternative to travelling via the A738/A737 through Kilwinning (where motorists would need to negotiate several signalised junctions with lower urban road speeds.
Page 139
Page 133/ 192 Figure 57. Journey times between the Three Towns and the Garnock Valley: AM peak, 2045 Table 46.Change in road journey times: min:sec (with & without scheme, 2045, AM peak) ROUTE/ MOVEMENT REFERENCE CASE 2045 B714 SCHEME 2045 CHANGE WITH SCHEME % CHANGE WITH SCHEME SaltcoatsDalry Rd to Beith 16:27 15:13 01:14 -7.5% Stevenston Glencairn St to Beith 19:19 18:08 01:11 -6.1% Ardrossan Harbour to Beith 21:25 20:09 01:16 -5.9% ArdrossanHarbourtoGlasgow Airport 54:06 52:55 01:11 -2.2% Table 47.Change in road journey times: min:sec (with & without scheme, 2045, inter-peak) ROUTE / MOVEMENT REFERENCE CASE 2045 B714 SCHEME 2045 CHANGE WITH SCHEME % CHANGE WITH SCHEME SaltcoatsDalry Rd to Beith 16:13 14:55 01:19 -8.1% Stevenston Glencairn St to Beith 19:09 17:50 01:19 -6.9% Ardrossan Harbour to Beith 21:09 19:50 01:19 -6.3% ArdrossanHarbourtoGlasgow Airport 47:25 46:08 01:17 -2.7%
Page 140
Page 134/ 192 Table 48.Change in road journey times: min:sec (with & without scheme, 2045, PM peak) ROUTE/ MOVEMENT REFERENCE CASE 2045 B714 SCHEME 2045 CHANGE WITH SCHEME % CHANGE WITH SCHEME SaltcoatsDalry Rd to Beith 16:10 14:55 01:15 -7.8% StevenstonGlencairn St to Beith 19:07 17:58 01:09 -6.0% Ardrossan Harbour to Beith 44:55 43:41 01:14 -2.8% Ardrossan Harbour to Glasgow Airport 21:16 19:59 01:17 -6.0% Impacton road safety 3.19.18AssessmentofaccidentswithandwithouttheschemehasbeenundertakenusingCOBA-LT(as discussedinsection3.5.9).Thisshowstherewillbe144fewerroadcasualtiesasaresultofthe scheme compared to without overthe60-yearappraisal period(Table49). Table 49.Casualty reductions by type over60 years due to scheme CASUALTY TYPE REDUCTION OVER 60 YEARS Fatal 2.2 Serious 16.9 Slight 125.3 Total 144.4
Page 141
Page 135/ 192 4. THE FINANCIAL DIMENSION 4.1 Introduction 4.1.1 The financial dimension sets out the financial profile for options to improve the B714. This includes detail on howmuch the project will cost,who is paying for it, what typesof costs are expected, what the financial risks or dependencies are and what the accounting implications are. 4.1.2 Table50setsouttheTAGrequirementsforthefinancialdimensionincludingstatusandreport section. Table 50.Financial dimension requirements ELEMENT STATUS SECTION Introduction to affordability Completed 4.1 Budgets and funding cover Completed 4.5 Costs Completed 4.2 Accounting implications Completed 4.3 – 4.7 4.2 Scheme costs 4.2.1 The scheme costs have been developed by AECOM, NAC’s design and cost consultant. Capital costs for Government and Local Authority (match) have been provided by AECOM and are presented in Appendix 3B: Scheme costs. The costs are broadly split into internal costs and external costs. External costs are indicative and will be refined after procurement which is expected to be finalised in April 2025 following the completion of the tender process and selectionof the contractor. 4.2.2 Table 51 presentsan overviewof the scheme costsforthe scheme.
Page 142
Page 136/ 192 Table 51.Construction costs overview COST ELEMENT COST (2025 VALUES) Value engineering £357,993 Series100: Preliminaries £4,528,764 Series200: Site Clearance £234,916 Series300: Fencing £232,084 Series400: RoadRestraintSystem £195,903 Series500: Drainageand Service Ducts £4,030,713 Series600: Earthworks £7,912,502 Series700: Pavement £3,945,128 Series1100: Kerbs, Footways andPaved Areas £340,412 Series1200: Traffic Signs and RoadMarkings £115,805 Series1300: RoadLighting Columnsand Brackets £109,261 Series1400: ElectricalWork forRoad Lighting and Traffic £13,876 Series2700: Accommodation Works £724,733 Series2400: Brickwork,Blockwork and Stonework £0 Series3000: Landscape and Ecology £708,794 Maintenance Period £362,654 Total construction(excluding contingency) £23,813,538 Contingency 15% £3,572,031 Total construction(including contingency) £26,885,568 Utilities £2,205,453 land costs £1,611,936 othercosts (design, preparation, supervision) £3,666,244 EV charging (Estimated attimeof reporting) £500,000 Total cost £34,869,201
Page 143
Page 137/ 192 4.2.3 In totaltheexpected schemecosts are £34,868.2m.Assumptions within these costsinclude: a 2025 basecost (developed using SPONS 2025 whichuses Q3 2025 prices). Excludes VAT. Includes additional risk andcontingency layer(approx.£3.666.2m). a contingency allowance made up of: SPONS rate fluctuations. Design development. 4.2.4 The costsinclude an additional estimated£0.5m forelectricvehicle charging infrastructure. 4.2.5 Further breakdownofthe construction costs is presented in Appendix4A. 4.3 Revenue 4.3.1 Income revenue will not begenerated forthe partialor full scheme. 4.4 Financial profile 4.4.1 Based on the costs and revenue, the financial profile for the partial and full scheme is set out in Appendix 4A: Breakdown of scheme costs. As shown in Table 52 and Table 53 the financial profilefortheschemeshowsthatexpendituretodateandthatconstructionwillbeginin2025 and the opening yearwill be 2028. Table 52.Spend profile including risk and contingency (£000s, out-turn prices) YEAR CONSTRUCTION LAND PREPARATION SUPERVISION 2025 16.1% 90.0% 80.0% 0.0% 2026 60.3% 10.0% 20.0% 76.4% 2027 20.5% 0.0% 0.0% 20.5% 2028 3.2% 0.0% 0.0% 3.2% TOTAL 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
Page 144
Page 138/ 192 Table 53.Spend Profile including risk and contingency (£000s, out-turn prices) FINANCIAL YEAR INVESTMENT COST (IN PRICE YEAR BASE EXCLUDING RISK) COST INCLUDING REAL COST INFLATION (BASE COST) RISK ADJUSTED COST BASE COST INCLUDING OPTIMISM BIAS BASE COST INCLUDING OB DEFLATED AND DISCOUNTED TO 2010 MARKET PRICES 2025 £5,027.5 £5,027.5 £5,601.3 £6,033.0 £5,548.0 2026 £18,871.9 £18,871.2 £21,025.8 £22,646.3 £8,918.0 2027 £6,401.4 £6,401.4 £7,132.0 £7,681.6 £2,589.0 2028 £996.4 £996.4 £1,110.2 £1,195.7 £377.0 TOTAL £31,297.2 £31,297.2 £34,869.2 £37,556.6 £17,422.0 4.4.2 The net impact of the project for the entire lifecycle is estimated to be £34.9m. NAC cannot afford to deliverthis scheme without funding support. 4.5 Funding 4.5.1 As stated, NAC does not have funds available internally to deliverthe partial scheme. 4.5.2 It is requested that Government fund the partial scheme through the Levelling Up Fund. The amountrequestedis£23.693mforthepartialscheme.NACwillfund£11.176mthroughaLocal AuthorityContribution,asperthepreviousLUFapplication.Afurtherestimated£500kforthe EV charging elementoftheschemewill besourced separately. 4.6 Financial Risks 4.6.1 As discussed in section 6.10, a Quantified Risk Assessment (QRA) has been undertaken and risks to the scheme identified in the risk register(Appendix 6C). 4.6.2 Key financial risksand howthesewill bemitigated aresetout asfollows: Limited funding granted 4.6.3 NAC has received from their Cabinet to deliver improvements on the B714 and request grant funding from the Government’s Levelling Up Fund. There is a risk that the Government does not grant funding to the level requested. This may mean the Council cannot deliver their scheme in accordance withwhat isagreedat Cabinet. 4.6.4 Ifanyreducedgrantfundingisoffered,NorthAyrshireCouncilwilldeterminetheacceptability of the level of funding being offered and will undertake a value engineering exercise to determineiftheschemeisviable.Anysubsequentsignoffproceduresrelatingtosuchrevision will be required.
Page 145
Page 139/ 192 Contractor procurement 4.6.5 NAC is currently procuring the contractor to construct the scheme. There therefore remains some uncertainty regarding somecost items. 4.6.6 NAC has advised that some costs may be subject to change after procurement is completed. To account for some of this uncertainty, an additional risk contingency has been applied to construction costs within the financial dimension. The lack of contractor availability and capacity is specifically included with the riskpremiumwithin theQRA. Delays to delivery 4.6.7 Delays to the delivery could lead to a changein costs. 4.6.8 NAC has produced a Project Plan (see Appendix 6B) to ensure delivery timescales are as realistic as possible, at thisstageof scheme development. Increasing costs 4.6.9 Additional site surveys have been undertaken for this latest round of detailed designs. However, there still remains significant risk to the scheme cost which has been quantified within theQRA including: earthwork quantities– excavation and processingof site wonmaterials. suitability of sitewonmaterial – site wonmaterial unactable for construction. damageto existing utilities– existing utilitiesare damaged during construction. utility diversion requirements – extent and cost of utilities diversion requirements are greaterthan anticipated. historicalmineworking extents –extentof historicalmineworkings and remediation. blasting or hard rock excavation – extent of blasting or hard rock increases excavation requirements. unknown privatewater supplies – scheme impacts onunknown privatewater supplies. existing ground model - topographic survey – variation between topographic survey and LIDAR data. 4.7 Future Maintenance 4.7.1 NACwilltakeresponsibilityforfuturemaintenanceofthenewinfrastructureandwillbeadded tothemaintenanceinventoryandfundedfromNorthAyrshireCouncil’smaintenancebudgets. The delivery of the partial and full scheme will deliver expected savings compared to the existing situation as the maintenance timescales are reduced. An allowance for this has been incorporated into the economic dimension.
Page 146
Page 140/ 192 5. THE COMMERCIAL DIMENSION 5.1 Introduction 5.1.1 The purpose of the commercial dimension is to provide evidence of the commercial viability of the scheme and the procurement strategy and processes that will be used to engage the market and implementthescheme. 5.1.2 Table 54 sets out the TAG requirements for the commercial dimension including status and reportsection. Table 54.Commercial dimension requirements ELEMENT STATUS SECTION Overviewof commercial approach Completed 5.2 Reviewofmarketsupply capability Completed 5.3 Output-based specification Completed 5.4 Procurementstrategy Completed 5.5 Human resources issues Completed 5.6 Sourcing options Completed 5.7 Paymentmechanisms Completed 5.8 Pricing framework and charging mechanisms Completed 5.9 Risk allocation and transfer Completed 5.10 Contract length Completed 5.11 Contractmanagement Completed 5.12 5.2 Overview of commercial approach 5.2.1 The Council does not have the in-house capability to deliver the business case development, design and constructionofthe B714 Upgrade schemeand therefore theseservices have been andwillbedeliveredexternallyviaaprocurementprocess.TheCouncilhasalreadyundertaken and will continue to explore a rangeof procurement routesto secure theseservices: anexistingframework(ScotlandExcelEngineeringandTechnicalConsultancy Framework- ref0820)wasusedtoprocurethedetailedschemedesignwhichincludedatenderprocess to obtain bestvalue. the business case development was procured via a direct award through the Council’s existing Scotland ExcelEngineering and Technical Consultancy Framework. the construction phasewillbe procuredvia a competitivetenderprocess.
Page 147
Page 141/ 192 5.2.2 This was the best and most effective approach available considering existing frameworks and the timescales of the scheme. Given the design and business case development stages have been procured already and are underway, the remainder of this section focusses on the procurementfortheconstructionphase.Itsetsouttherationalefortheprocurementstrategy selected and why thisis appropriate forthe scale andnature ofthescheme. 5.2.3 The procurement strategy is in line with the principles of HM Government’s The Sourcing Playbook. 5.3 Review of market supply capability 5.3.1 TheCouncil’sprocurementteamiskeptup-to-dateonthetenderprocessviaregularmeetings to discuss forthcoming projects. 5.3.2 A Prior Information Notice (PIN) was issued and a bidders’ event was held in April 2024 to generateinterest inthe project. 5.4 Output-based specification 5.4.1 An output-based specification has been prepared based on the scheme design and sets out the outputs that will be delivered. The specification has been refined following the detailed design stage. The specification provided to bidders will accurately define the requirements of the scheme to bedelivered. 5.4.2 The expected scheme outputs are: 3.5km of continuous 9.3m wide single carriageway (two 3.65m wide lanes with 1m hard strips on either side), largely offline from the existing route between Girthill and a new roundabout connectionwith Kilwinning Rd. differential acceleration overtaking lane between Craighead Farm and the Kilwinning Rd roundabout. short online improvement of the Kilwinning Rd to connect with the existing A737 Hillend Roundabout. targetedonline improvements betweenDiddup Farmaccessand Girthill. 5.4.3 Therewill also berequirements for: improved junctionsand accesses. Landscaping. sustainable drainage system (SuDS) works. Underpasses. ecologicalmitigation. 5.4.4 The output-based specification is provided in Appendix 5A: OutputBased Specification. 5.5 Procurement strategy 5.5.1 This section outlines the Council’s procurement strategy in relation to the construction phase including: form ofcontract. form ofprocurement. contract strategy.
Page 148
Page 142/ 192 5.5.2 The Council states as part of its Corporate Procurement Strategy32 that it aims ‘to utilise our external procurement expenditure to derive the maximum social, economic, and environmental benefit for North Ayrshire residents, through legally compliant procurement processes. Actively encourage and support a growing, diverse, and resilient local business base’. 5.5.3 Furthermore, as part of the Council’s Community Wealth Building Strategy33 the council aims to ‘work across all our services and wider local and regional partners to implement Scotland’s first approach to Community Wealth Building’ including the procurement processes as the Council aims to ‘use their spend to actively encourage and support a growing, diverse and resilient local business base, and to support theirnetzero carbon ambitions’. 5.5.4 Reflecting these aims, the Council’s approach to procurement for this scheme has been selected to ensure the following outcomes: achievecostcertaintyinthedeliveryoftheschemesuchthatitcanbedeliveredwithinthe available funding (whichhas informed the form ofcontract– see below). ensure best value by minimising costsand ensuring appropriate quality is delivered. development of an achievable and realistic delivery programme that fits with the LUF funding timescale constraints. obtain design/construction input into risk management, including mitigation measures, to reduce construction risk. enhance capability and experience within the supply chain. 5.5.5 The strategy has been agreed and approved by the B714 Project Board and this type of procurement approach has also been employed by the Council successfully on the delivery of otherschemes. Form of contract 5.5.6 The Council is using the New Engineering Contract Version 4 (NEC4) Engineering and Construction Contract to deliver the scheme owing to its flexibility and the Council’s in-house familiarity with this form ofcontract. 5.5.7 Established in 1993, the NEC is commonly used to deliver buildings and engineering schemes in the UK. It consists of a set of standard contracts which are designed to promote good communication and management to deliver projects. It encourages a collaborative approach between the parties involved to deliver schemes on programme and budget. It offers five conditionsofcontractoptionsfordeliveryofengineeringprojectsincludingpriced,targetcost and cost reimbursable contracts. The difference conditions, based around common core clauses, seek to allocate risk management to the appropriate party and promote non- adversarialworking.TheContractisadministeredbyanappointedProjectManager.Thelatest version (NEC4)was published in 2017 and has been endorsed by industry and government. 32 north-ayrshire.gov.uk/Documents/CorporateServices/Finance/corporate-procurement-strategy.pdf 33 https://www.north-ayrshire.gov.uk/Document-library/cwb-strategy.pdf
Page 149
Page 143/ 192 Form of procurement 5.5.8 The form of procurement defines the procurement type and delivery model for the scheme e.g. traditional,design andbuild, early contractorinvolvement(ECI). 5.5.9 Astrategywasdevelopedinorderto establishthebestroutetomarket,anddeveloparobust contract considering market research, early supplier engagement, risk management and mitigation etc. The Council is procuring scheme via a restricted tender, which is a shortlisting process which limits invitations to tender to the applicants responding to the contract notice, and which involves a pre-qualification process, for civil works which will provide greater time andcostcertainty.Thisfitsbestwiththeprogrammetimescaleswiththedetaileddesignbeing completed before contractors are invited to tender. Contractstrategy 5.5.10 The five contractoptionswithin the NECsuite are: Option A: pricedcontractwith activity schedule. Option B: pricedcontractwith bill of quantities. Option C: target cost with activity schedule. OptionD: targetcostwithbill of quantities. Option E: costreimbursable. 5.5.11 As one of the procurement strategy objectives is to achieve cost certainty, Options C and D have been ruled out as the out-turn financial risks would be shared between the Council and the contractor in an agreed proportion; similarly Option E has been ruled out as the financial risk would be largely borneby Council. 5.5.12 Options A and B are priced contracts and are more feasible contract strategies as the risk of carrying out of the work at the agreed price would be largely borne by the contractor. This would therefore minimise the Council’s risk exposure following award of contract and maximise the incentive for the contractor to the deliver the scheme by the most efficient means intermsoftime. Option A ispreferredover Option B dueto: an activity-based schedulewould increase programmecertainty. the Council’s in-house familiarity andexperiencewiththis contractoption. 5.5.13 After the procurement specification and response frameworks have been drafted, legal and finance colleagues, technical officers and procurement specialists will select and amend components of the contract. For example, change control, adherence to appropriate regulations and treatmentof intellectual property rights will all becovered by specific clauses that will be included in thecontract. 5.6 Human resources issues 5.6.1 No significant human resources e.g. personnel, people management or trade union implications have been identified which could impactthe deliverability of theproject.
Page 150
Page 144/ 192 5.6.2 Resourceswithin theCouncil havealready beenidentified to deliver the scheme: All Council staff involved in the delivery of the scheme will be existing staff members on secondment or temporary staff employed for the duration of the project. This will include an internal project manager, project leader and project officers. The project manager is a permanentCouncil employee andwill therefore beable to offer continuity to theproject. Asolicitorhasalsobeenengagedtoassistwiththelandpurchaseandcompulsorypurchase order (CPO). 5.6.3 Further details of roles and responsibilities are set out in the management dimension (see section 6.3). 5.6.4 The resource requirement will be kept under review by the Project Board and, if necessary, additional resources brought in. The scheme is one of a number of large projects currently being delivered by the Council all of which are being delivered on a similar basis. There will therefore be some interchangeability around staffing to ensure that staff requirements to deliverthe schemecan bemet. 5.7 Sourcing options 5.7.1 The Council is procuring contractor services via a competitive tender process using the UK Government’s new e-notification service that is used to post and view public sector procurement notices (this replaced the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU) process in January 2021 following the UK’sdeparturefrom theEU). 5.7.2 This has beenselectedover other processes e.g. usingan existing frameworkas it: allowed theCouncilto choosethe form of contract. allowed theCouncilto specify initial criteriathat bidders must fulfil (see below). deliversvalueformoney through a competitivetendering process. providesa clear, auditableprocurementand award process. builds in the need for tenderers to demonstrate commitment to social value to the local area. 5.7.3 Whilstthetimescalesofrunningacompetitiveprocessmaybelongerthanalternativeoptions e.g. use of existing frameworks, this has been built into the programme and the proposed timescaleswill stillmeet LUF requirements. 5.7.4 A restricted procedure will be followed comprising of a pre-qualification questionnaire (PQQ) andinvitationto tender(ITT)stages.ThePQQstagewillallowtheCouncilto setoutminimum criteria, including financial and technical capabilities that the potential bidders must satisfy andthereforelimitthenumberoftenderersatITTstage.Thisapproachispreferredasmarket researchundertakenbytheCouncil’sprocurementsuggeststhathavinganundefinednumber of tendererscan putoff bidders and possibly result in limited interest. 5.7.5 The ITT will consist of a pack of tender documents signed off by the procurement officer following input from legal,finance and technical officers. It willcontain: specification tender responseform pricing schedule call-off details NEC4 contract.
Page 151
Page 145/ 192 5.7.6 Adetailedandscheme-specificqualityevaluationwillbecarriedoutfollowingreturnoftender responses. Tenders will be evaluation on a 40% quality / 60% price basis. However, tenderers will need to meet a minimum quality threshold: those that do not will be excluded from the process and will not be evaluated on price. The evaluation will be undertaken by a selected evaluation panel including technical specialists. The decision to award the contract will need to beapproved by theCouncil Cabinet (necessary forcontractsover£2 million invalue). 5.8 Paymentmechanisms 5.8.1 The NEC4 contract will be agreed at a fixed price subject to contractual provision for compensation events if criteria arenotmet. 5.8.2 Payments will be on a monthly basis according to work completed either against completed items in an activity schedule. 5.9 Pricing framework and charging mechanisms 5.9.1 The NEC4 contract makes provision for the contractor to propose ways of achieving savings e.g. change in design scope which would be shared between the client and contractor. This is anadvantageoftheNEC4contractoverthepreviousNEC3,withriskallocationmorebalanced between client and contractor,making tendersmore attractive for prospective bidders. 5.10 Risk allocation and transfer 5.10.1 Considerationhasbeengivenregardinghowriskwillbeapportionedbetweenthepublicsector (i.e. the Council) and the contractor (Table 55). This has been based on the general principle of allocating risks between the parties best placed to mitigate or manage them, including the consequences should a risk event arise. At FBC stage, risks will be quantified in terms of percentageallocation to each party. Table 55.Risk allocation RISK RISK ALLOCATION COMMENTS Public Contractor Design The Council will hold the responsibility for specifying a scheme in line with the spending objectives. The Contractor will be responsible for providing outputs designed to achieve the objectives. Cost The Council will ensure that costs have been considered adequately, in particular during the current climate of inflationary pressures. To mitigate this, a construction cost contingency has been included in the budget to account for higher costs as well as compensation events e.g. poor weather, unforeseen circumstances, changes to design scope. Financing Whilst largely funded by the LUF, ongoing management of finance and funding of the scheme will be the responsibility of the Council to ensure funding is in place to pay for the scheme.
Page 152
Page 146/ 192 RISK RISK ALLOCATION COMMENTS Public Contractor Legislative TheCouncilandcontractormustfollowdueprocess to ensure the scheme complies with relevant legislative procedures. Construction and development The Council will retain risk for delivery of some works elements. This includes any deficiencies in the scope or the design e.g. the accuracy of information passed to the contractor, including drawings, ground investigation, environmental information etc. The contractor will be responsible for allon-siteworks. Transition and implementation The Council must enable implementation. The contractormust delivertherequirement. Resource availability The Council must deliver the resource to oversee the construction of the scheme. The contractor mustensurethatadequateresourcesareinplaceto deliverthe schemeto timeand budget. Operating The contractor must deliver the stable operation of the scheme. Residual public risk is allocated to the Council. Termination The Council must hold the risk for contract termination. Technology and obsolescence Both the Council and Contractor hold the risk for technology changes although this is viewed as low risk considering thenatureof thescheme. Control TheCouncilwillhaveultimatecontroloftheproject. Residual value The Council bears fullcontrolof this risk. 5.10.2 Scheme risks are documented in the risk register (see section 6.10). This is a live document, which will be updated by the project manager/board throughout the development and implementationofthe scheme, with ownershipof risks allocatedto therelevantparties. 5.11 Contract length 5.11.1 The key contract dates are set out in Table 56. The contract will specify a construction period of 17 months with completion by January 2027. However, tender submissions may propose a shorterperiodthanthis,astheprogrammetimescalescontainselementsofcontingencybased on therisk assessment.
Page 153
Page 147/ 192 5.11.2 The timescales presented here have been based on experience of the required activities and processes, as well as gateways in the process that need to be completed before the programme can move to the next activity. There are some interdependencies between programmeactivity whichmay causethe programmeto berevised. Table 56.Proposed contract dates PROGRAMMEACTIVITY DATES Tender period 04/2025 – 06/2025 Tender evaluation 06/2025 – 06/2025 Appointmentof contractor 08/2025 Mobilisationon site 10/2025 – 01/2026 Site establishment 02/2026 Constructionworks 10/2025 – 06/2027 Construction completion 06/2027 5.12 Contract management 5.12.1 Council staff currently have responsibility for the design and business case contracts (Gary Wilson and Claire Fitzsimmons respectively). 5.12.2 For the construction phase, an appointment to the role of Project Manager and Supervisor under the NEC4 contract will be made. They will have the designated authority to issue all instructions, notifications and other communications required under the contract and will involve: managing performance and service delivery. contract administration. managing contractor relationships.
Page 154
Page 148/ 192 6. THE MANAGEMENT DIMENSION 6.1 Introduction 6.1.1 The purpose of the management dimension is to demonstrate the scheme’s deliverability through effective developmentofplans,management and resources. 6.1.2 Table 57 sets out the TAG requirements for the management dimension including status and reportsection. Table 57.Management dimension requirements ELEMENT STATUS SECTION Evidence ofsimilar projects Completed 6.2 Governance,organisationalstructureandroles Completed 6.3 Assurance Completed 6.4 Project reporting Completed 6.5 Project scope, dependencies and constraints Completed 6.6 Project implementation Completed 6.7 Project plan Completed 6.8 Stakeholder engagement and communications Completed 6.9 Risk and issuesmanagement Completed 6.10 Lessonsmanagement Completed 6.11 Benefitsmanagement Completed 6.12 Monitoring and evaluation Completed 6.13 Data and information security Completed 6.14 Project closure Completed 6.15 Carbonmanagement Completed 6.16 6.2 Evidence of similar projects 6.2.1 Whilst NAC’s Roads Service have not delivered a major road improvement project similar to the B714 Upgrade project for some time, the Council has recently completed one major civils project and is currently constructing a second: Garnock Valley Flood Protection Scheme (£20m) – construction of a dam to form a flood water storage reservoir north of Kibirnie together with other local measures in Kilbirnie, Glengarnockand Dalry. Millport Coastal Flood Protection Scheme (£50m) – constructionof extensive offshore and onshore flood defencesinMillport,Isleof Cumbrae.
Page 155
Page 149/ 192 6.2.2 Although these are not roads projects, many of the civil engineering activities are similar to thoserequiredfortheB714 Upgradescheme.Furthermore,thesameapproachto thedesign, construction and project management will be used. These schemes have also been procured through NEC Option Acontracts. 6.3 Governance, organisational structure and roles Governance and organisational structure 6.3.1 NAC has established a scheme governance structure for this scheme. Central to the scheme’s delivery will be the in-house B714 Project Board which will lead the development of the scheme and besupportedby full design and construction teams attheappropriate stages. 6.3.2 Figure 58 defines the high-level governance structure and how the B714 Project Board fits within the overall delivery framework and the inter-relationship betweenvariousentities and their strategic rolein thedelivery of the scheme. 6.3.3 This governance structure is a tried and tested model that has been effectively used to successfully deliver similarschemes inthe authority. Figure 58. Governance structure 6.3.4 The aim and function, and frequency of meetings of each of the key bodies of the scheme governance isshown in Table 58.
Page 156
Page 150/ 192 Table 58.Key governance bodies BODY AIM& FUNCTION FREQUENCY OF MEETING Cabinet Approveallmajordecisions relating to the scheme Monthly Executive Leadership Team (ELT) Ratify any key decisions on the scheme that will need to be taken to Cabinet Monthly Place Project Board Responsibleformanagingtheoverallgovernanceandriskfor all Place Directorate projects. Every two months B714 Project Board Responsible for delivering the scheme. Also informed by progresson any relevantCouncil projects. Responsibility of theBoardwill be: to take ownership and responsibility for the successful delivery of theinfrastructure scheme to manageand communicate with scheme stakeholders to oversee the design and procurement process and review progressagainst key milestones ensure that risk management and ownership of risk is fully embedded into at scheme group level, and all risks are actively monitored and effectively managed via the risk register (seesection6.10) to oversee the construction works and review progress against key delivery milestones to oversee the legal and statutory process associated with theworks to oversee the scheme budget and ensure all externally fundedspendisinaccordance withanygrantconditions toreceive,feedbackandsignoffonquarterlymonitoring reports toapproveanyremedialactiontomanageperformance, including any scheme variation requests (outputs, timescales,finance,delivery,managementetc.) to ensure scheme completion and closure, including a post-completionplananddocumentretentionpolicy,to ensure that all relevant documents are stored securely and those future monitoring requirements are agreed; and to provide information to the HM Government relating to the scheme. Monthly
Page 157
Page 151/ 192 Roles 6.3.5 Withinthegovernancestructure,specificrolesandresponsibilitieshavebeenidentifiedwithin NAC to deliver thescheme(Table59). Table 59.Scheme delivery roles and responsibilities NAME& POSITION ROLE RESPONSIBILITY Thomas Reaney Head of Service (Neighbourhood Services) Senior Responsible Owner(SRO) Providestrategic directionand leadership forthescheme. Ensure progress againstkey milestone and managing risks,issuesand the scheme budget. Gary Wilson SeniorManager– Engineering Services Neighbourhood Services (Roads) Project Manager Manage the schemeon a day-to-day basis and report to theProject Boardon progress against theprogramme Martin Miller Team Leader– Engineering Services Project Leader Provide progressupdates from the technicalworkstream. Lead on progress of thescheme withpartners where required. Emma Mulholland Team Manager Estates Property Advisor Advise and facilitatethedelivery of aspects associatedwith land acquisition. Provide updates from landacquisition task group. Suzanne Bignell SeniorManager Procurement ProcurementLead Advise and facilitateonallprocurement aspectsofthe scheme. Michele Mccolm SeniorManager Communications Communications Lead Ensure communications plan and stakeholderengagement plan is up to date and reporton progress made. Alex Fitzharris Team Manager Risk Management Risk and Quality Assurance Report, advise and facilitate risk management David Forbes SeniorManager Finance Finance Reportand adviseon all financial aspectsofthe scheme 6.4 Assurance 6.4.1 An appropriate assurance and approvals process will be key to delivery of the scheme and to ensuring project timescales are met. Assurance will be an ongoing commitment of NAC, with monthly progress updates being presented to Project Board. These will include identification of actual and planned progress, as well as any risks or changes to the projects. Individual workstreamswillmeetmoreregularlytoprovidecontinuancemonitoringandcommunication on project performance.
Page 158
Page 152/ 192 6.4.2 The key project assurance milestones areshown in Table 60. Table 60.Key project assurance milestones MILESTONE DECISION MAKING GROUP EXPECTED DATE OBC approval DfT May 2024 Procurement pack drafted Delivery teams August – October 2024 Procurement pack review and approval to tender B714 Project Board / Place Project Board December 2024 Preferred bidder B714 Project Board / Place Project Board September2025 FBC reviewand sign-off B714 Project Board August 2025 FBC approval DfT September 2025 Contract award Cabinet September 2025 6.5 Project reporting 6.5.1 The project report arrangementsand change controlproceduresareoutlinedbelow. Highlight report 6.5.2 The main project reporting will be the highlight report which will provide a summary of the project’s status and other key information. The frequency of the reporting is subject to agreement at the Project Board but as a minimum would be provided in advance of each relevantProject Boardmeeting. The reportwill typically include: status by workstream. progress against key milestones. key achievementsand progress since lastreport. exceptions reporting. key risks and issueswith current actions. key events duein thenextperiod. dependency analysis and review. Progress report 6.5.3 AmonthlyprogressreportwillbepreparedinanagreedformattobepresentedtotheProject Board. Thereportwill contain: summary statement. key risks and issues. milestoneprogress. health and safety report. statusof procurementandsub-contractawards. change control. resource.
Page 159
Page 153/ 192 Costreport 6.5.4 A monthly cost report will be prepared and submitted to the Project Director. The report will include: current status. issues log. risks log. Milestones. advice onexternal eventsaffecting theprogramme. Change control 6.5.5 NAC has a change management process which provides guidance, definitions and template material intended to assist the relevant staff to manage the change control process. Change control is the process through which all requests to change the baseline scope of a project, programmeorportfolio are captured,evaluated andthen accepted, rejectedordeferred. 6.5.6 Thechangecontrolprocessensuresthateachchangeproposedduringthelifecycleofaproject is adequately defined, reviewed and approved before implementation. By following the proposed change control process, it will avoid unnecessary changes that might disrupt the delivery of theprogramme. 6.5.7 Change controlcontainsfour stages: 1. Proposing a change – the process gives the ability for anyone in the project team to suggestachangetotheprogramme.Theproposalmustincludeadescriptionofthechange and reason for the change. The request is then submitted to the project manager and approval authority using the change control form and subsequently added to the Change Control Log. 2. Summary of Impact – the project manager will assess the impact that the proposed changewillhaveonthedeliveryoftheprogramme.Thisprocesswillconsiderthefollowing: cost savings and benefits, risks or issues, additional resources required, impact on timescale, estimated impact on cost, impact on other schemes being delivered and any legal orregulatory reason for thechange. 3.Decision–thedecisionincludesareviewofthechangerequestbyanapprovedauthority (Project Board) who will consider all the information provided by the person making the request. The decisionwill usually be: accept, acceptwith comments, reject ordefer. 4.ImplementingaChange–ifthechangeisapproved,itisthenaddedtotheoverallproject plan to ensure progresscan be monitored. 6.5.8 Two documents are used during the change control process: Change request form – the requestor will populate the change request form and submit the proposedchange to the approved authority Change log – the project manager will update the log once a change has been requested. The logwill beused to provide a recordof all changesrequested and decisionsmade. 6.5.9 The works will be carried out under NEC 4 conditions of contract through which NAC will be maintaining an established and active risk register creating clear visibility of the potential project risks that may trigger change. This will allow NAC to manage them in a controlled manner.Whenriskseventsoccurimpactingtime,costorquality,they areescalatedinto early warnings and where applicable into CompensationEvents (CE).
Page 160
Page 154/ 192 6.5.10 All contractual obligations, design changes, defects, costs changes will be administered and managed using cloud based contractmanagementsoftwareCEMAR. 6.5.11 This will provide an auditable trail of instructions, responses and agreements. A proactive approach to managing change will be taken by engaging early with the contactor to agree timescales and costs before formal CE submission, this collaborative pre submission process ensures that CE quotations are well informed by the latest risk data, quantitative risk analysis outputsandmitigationplans.Byintegratingtheoutputsofriskreviewsandearlywarningsinto change discussions it will ensure that all decisions are backed by data and aligned with the project’s strategicobjectives. 6.5.12 Changes to project documents will be communicated promptly using the early warning and compensation event mechanisms within the contract and emphasis on transparency and collaboration in relation to this process to maintain alignment with NEC4 requirements. All changes to project documents, scope, or deliverables will be systematically reviewed, approved, recorded, and communicated. All stakeholders notified of changes in a timely and consistentmannerwithonly approvedconfigurations implemented. 6.5.13 Effectivedocumentmanagementwillbecarriedoutthroughstructuredsystemsandprocesses to make sure that all project documentation is accurate, accessible, and securely stored throughout the project lifecycle. Industry standard platforms such as SharePoint and CEMAR willbeusedtomanagedocumentsandmaintainadherencetobestpracticedocumentcontrol, accesscontroland audit trails. 6.6 Projectdependencies 6.6.1 The B714 Upgrade scheme is a standalone project and is therefore not dependent on the successful delivery of any other schemes and there are currently no proposed schemes which are themselves dependenton delivery ofthescheme. 6.7 Projectimplementation 6.7.1 Appendix 6A summarises the key work packages and tasks that will be required to deliver the scheme. 6.8 Projectplan 6.8.1 AdetailedprojectplanhasbeenproducedforthedeliveryoftheschemeasshowninAppendix 6B. The project plan identifies all the key project tasks and their duration, the critical path, interdependencies between tasks, andkey milestonesand gateways. Certaintasks have built- incontingencyto allowforrisksidentifiedintheriskregisterandwhichcouldimpacttheplan. 6.8.2 The project plan will be a live document with actual progress against tasks monitored and reported by theProject Manager viathe highlight report (seesection6.5).
Page 161
Page 155/ 192 6.8.3 Thekeymilestonesforthedelivery oftheschemearesummarisedinTable61 andasummary project plan shown in Figure 59. Table 61.Project key milestones MILESTONE EXPECTED DATE Final FBC submitted to DfT August 2025 Grant funding awarded September2025 Construction contract tender period April - July2025 Tender evaluation period August 2025 Contract awarded October2025 FBC approved September2025 Sitemobilisation September -October2025 Construction period October2025 – April2027 Construction complete June 2027 Schemeopening June 2027 First year postopening project evaluation September2028 Fifth yearpostopening project evaluation September 2032
Page 162
Page 156/ 192 Figure 59. Summary project plan
Page 163
Page 157/ 192 6.9 Stakeholder engagement and communications 6.9.1 Strong communication andengagement arevital to the public acceptance ofthescheme. 6.9.2 NAC has already undertaken extensive engagement with local stakeholders dating back to 2016 including landownersas noted in theStrategic dimension (section 2.12). This includes: stakeholderworkshopas part oftheoriginal RouteingStudy in2016 a series of workshops to gather views, ideas and experiences from residents, businesses and otherstakeholders in2021 following awardingof funding from the LUF public consultation including public exhibitions and questionnairein 2022 further public consultationon therevised scheme including public exhibitions in2024. 6.9.3 A detailed Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) has been prepared for the scheme and is provided in Appendix 2A. This been developed in line with NAC’s approach to stakeholder engagement assummarised in Figure 60. Figure 60. Communication and engagement approach 6.9.4 TheProject Boardwill be responsibleformonitoringthe effectivenessoftheconsultationand engagementprogrammeandforadjustingorintroducingactivitiesduringtheprocesstoclose any gapsor react to emerging issues. 6.10 Risk and issues management 6.10.1 Allprojectsaresubjecttoriskandopportunity.Theobjectiveoftheriskmanagementstrategy is to minimise the impact of risks, while allowing maximum advantage to be taken of any opportunities. The earlier that risk management is applied to a project, the more opportunity thereistoinfluencetheoutcome.Itisacriticalprocessunderpinningschemegovernancebest practice and achievementofobjectives in a cost-effectivemanner.
Page 164
Page 158/ 192 6.10.2 NAC has extensive experience in delivering schemes in isolation and in partnership. The risk management strategy identifies, and records risks, identifies potential mitigationto eliminate orreducethepotentialimpactofriskandallocatesortransfersrisktotherelevantpartiesthat are best able to deal with them. It specifies the ongoing review of risks as they progress through the design, implementation andoperationalphases. Quantified RiskAssessment 6.10.3 A key element of the risk management strategy is the identification and quantification of all project-related risks which may impact scheme costs via a Quantified Risk Assessment (QRA) to determine arisk-adjusted costestimate. 6.10.4 The QRA was conducted via a risk workshop in November 2022 involving key members of the scheme development team including from NAC and external consultants involved technical expertsinvolved in thescheme design. The QRAinvolved: risk identification – consideration of risks to the scheme across a wide range of risk categories including scheme design, construction, environmental, financial, funding, land ownership, statutory processes, stakeholdersetc… risk quantification – each risk has been assessed in terms of the cost impact and likelihood of theriskoccurring. risk mitigation – responsibility for each risk has been allocated to the organisation best placedtomanagethatriskaspertheriskallocationtablesetoutinTable55insection5.10 and waysin whicheach risk can bemitigated recorded. Riskregister 6.10.5 All risks to the scheme that have been identified are recorded in the risk register which is provided in Appendix 6C. The risk register is a live document which will be kept under regular reviewthroughtheProjectBoard.Thestatusofeachriskwillbesubjecttoregularreviewsand updates viatheProject Board meetings during the detailed design and construction phases. 6.10.6 A total of 30 risks have been recorded in the current risk register. The five main risks (as of January 2025) andmitigating actionsare shown inTable 62. Table 62.Main project risks RISK DESCRIPTION CONSEQUENCES MITIGATION 1 Suitability of site won material: percentage assumed re-useable is significantly less than expected Increased costs to dispose of unsuitable material and import suitablematerial Early ground investigation 2 Earthwork quantities: increased quantities result inasurplusofmaterialtobe disposedon or off-site Increased costs and land required to dispose of surplus material Early and well-scoped investigations 3 Land acquisition: landowner objection to Delay to programme and requirement to pursue Early and ongoing landownerliaison.Awaiting
Page 165
Page 159/ 192 RISK DESCRIPTION CONSEQUENCES MITIGATION extent of land required for constructing the scheme Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) outcome of CPO public inquiry (held November 2024). 4 Historical mine workings extents: more extensive and/or remedial costs are higher Delay to construction programme and increased constructioncosts Early ground investigation 5 Historical mine workings collapse: failure to sufficiently identify and remediate historical mine workings Delay,additionalremedial/ stoppage costs and potentialharm to site staff Detailed investigation/ remediation 6.11 Lessons management 6.11.1 Reviewingmajor projects for lessonslearned isstandard practice in NACand theprocesstries toidentifygoodpracticeandareaswherethereisroomforimprovement.Theprocessinvolves reviewing key aspects of projects, identifying key findings and implementing an action plan. Recent'LessonsLearned'reviewshaveidentifiedissuessuchascommunicationandintegrated working as being areaswhich arevitalto the successof complexprojects. 6.11.2 Specific lessons from the projects identified in section6.2 include: The importance of balancing design, cost, programme, and quality requirements, through the project life cycle to getbestoutcome for each. Proactive risk and change management to maintain progress. Importance of collaborative workingculture builton shared learning and early issue resolution. Importance of the whole project life cycle to prolong assets lifespan including future maintenance requirements, defect liability and value engineering to reduce resource demand e.g.materials, plant, workers, finances andmaximisefunctionality. Set up community liaison team to encourage community interest in the projects and to respond to any concerns regarding the works. Regular newsletters and NAC website updates highlighting site progress, programme and upcoming activities. Regular progress meetings with team,contractor,thelocalcommunity council and residents. importance ofmaintainingstrong controlof schedule,cost,and changemanagement. Proactive stakeholder management is important as poor management can lead to delays, cost increases, regulatory compliance problems, and reputational damage. Data led reportingandcollaborationwithstakeholderstomanagerisk,buildtrustandaccountability to achieve successful outcomes without compromising the project goals. E.g. Liaison with councillors, community groups, SEPA, etc about potential negative environmental/social impacts.
Page 166
Page 160/ 192 6.12 Benefits management 6.12.1 BenefitsduetotheB714 Upgradeschemewillberealisedassoonastheroadopensto traffic. Benefits realisation is a key element of the scheme’s success. As such benefits resulting from the scheme will need to beeffectively tracked. 6.12.2 TheBenefitsRealisationPlanisdesignedtoenablebenefits(andreduceanydisbenefits)arising from the scheme to be identified, tracked and realised. This will help demonstrate whether the scheme objectives (set out in section 2.7) have been met through the desired measures for success(section2.7). 6.12.3 Disbenefits arising from the schemeareexpectedto include: Impactsof delaysand re-routing during constructionof the scheme. Potential impactsof delaysduring future maintenance ofthe scheme. Greenhouse Gas emissions over the life of the scheme, compared to the “Do Minimum” scenario. 6.12.4 Theschemeisexpectedtohaveaminimalimpactduringtheconstructionphaseofworks. This will bemitigated through an effectiveconstruction traffic management plan. 6.12.5 As the scheme will provide new road infrastructure, there is the potential for disbenefits to accrue over the appraisal period of the scheme. However, the net effect of providing new infrastructure is expected to provide a slight benefit, as the new asset will require less maintenanceover thelifespan of the scheme compared to if no improvementisdelivered. 6.12.6 TheEFTcarbonappraisalundertakenintheEconomicDimensionasindicatedthatthescheme wouldincreasenetcarbonemissions.A‘WholeLifeCarbonApproach’hasbeenundertakenin the Carbon Management Plan provided in Appendix 6E: Carbon management plan which will seekto reduce thiswere possible. 6.12.7 The Benefits Realisation Plan is provided in Appendix6D. This demonstrates how the benefits contributeto thescheme-specific andstrategicobjectivesand howthe projectoutputs linkto the expected benefits. The table also links to the plan for evaluation of the benefits including howthey would bemeasured and who would be responsible. 6.13 Monitoring and evaluation plan 6.13.1 Themonitoring and evaluation plan setsoutthe approach for evaluatingthe scheme. Monitoring and evaluation purpose and scope 6.13.2 TheHMTreasuryMagentaBook34 setofthepurposeofevaluationas‘asystematicassessment ofthedesign,implementationandoutcomesofanintervention.Itinvolvesunderstandinghow aninterventionisbeing,orhasbeen,implementedandwhateffectsithas,forwhomandwhy. It identifieswhatcan be improved and estimates itsoverall impacts and cost-effectiveness.’ 6.13.3 The Magenta Book outlines the overall approach to the appraisal and evaluation of publicly funded investment and advocates a whole project life cycle approach using the ‘ROAMEF Cycle’(Figure61). 34 Magenta Book – Central Government guidance on evaluation, HM Treasury, 2020
Page 167
Page 161/ 192 Figure 61. ROAMEF cycle (Source: MagentaBook) 6.13.4 The DfT approach to monitoring and evaluation is consistent with the Magenta Book and is outlined in the document Monitoring and Evaluation Framework for Local Authority Major Schemes (2012). The framework sets out a proportionate and targeted approach with three tiersofmonitoring: standard monitoring. enhanced monitoring. fuller evaluation. 6.13.5 The guidance states that schemes expected to cost over £50m, or which are anticipated to have significant impact on specific indicators, be subject to enhanced monitoring (with only selectedschemesrequiringfullerevaluation).GiventheB714Upgradeschemeisestimatedto cost£32.2m, thestandardmonitoring process will beundertaken. 6.13.6 The following sections provide the information as required by the DfT guidance for a Monitoring and EvaluationPlan. Schemedescription 6.13.7 TheproposedschemeisaninfrastructureimprovementoftheB714,primarilybetweenGirthill Farm (located midway along the B714, between the Sharphill roundabout on the A78 and Dalry) and a new roundabout on Kilwinning Road to the north-west of the existing Hillend roundabout, as shown in Figure 4 in section1.
Page 168
Page 162/ 192 6.13.8 The scheme consistsof: online andoffline corridor improvements along theexisting B714 route. the retention oftheexisting B714 linkinto Dalry asan active travel corridor. a Sustainable Urban Drainage (SuDs) network, which will control rainfall runoff from the route. 6.13.9 The scheme will improve the geometric standard of the 3.5km section of the B714 between Girthill Farm and Dalry, with other targeted on-line improvements between Diddup Farm and Girthill Farm leading to a total scheme length of around 4.4km. These improvement schemes compriseofminorupgradesto thecross-section,horizontalandverticalgeometry,to remove existing sub-standard elements that pose a safety hazard to road use. The single carriageway cross-sectionswouldbe9.3mwide(two3.65m widelaneswith1m hardstripsoneitherside), in line withtrunk road standards. 6.13.10The link element will connect the B714 and the recently completed A737 Dalry Bypass. This connection is proposed to be via a new roundabout on Kilwinning Road north-west of the existing Hillend Roundabout. Schemeobjectives and outcomes 6.13.11The specific schemeobjectives are: to reduce thevolumeofstrategic and HGVtraffic passing through Kilwinningon the A737. toreducejourneytimesandimprovejourneyreliabilitybetweenTheThreeTownstowards the Garnock Valley and beyond towardsGlasgow. to reduce trafficemissionsand improvelocalair quality within Kilwinning. to improve the resilience of the transport network in Garnock Valley, Kilwinning and the ThreeTowns, and reduce pressureon roadmaintenance budgets. to reduce the number of accidents in urban areas such as Kilwinning, and the severity of accidentsonruralroadsbetweenGarnockValley,KilwinningandtheThreeTowns(e.g.the B714). 6.13.12A logic map is provided in Figure 62 which provides an overview of the inputs, outputs, outcomes and impacts of the scheme; assessment ofthe outcomes and impacts will form the basis oftheevaluation.
Page 169
Page 163/ 192 Figure 62. Scheme logic map
Page 170
Page 164/ 192 Evaluation approach and objectives 6.13.13Anoutcomeevaluationwillbeundertakentoevaluatethescheme.Thiscomparestheexisting situationi.e.beforetheinterventionagainstthesituationwiththeinterventions.Any changes observed inthemetrics being measured areassumedto beattributed to the scheme. 6.13.14The evaluation willseek to answerwhetherthescheme has resulted in: reduction in the volume of strategic and HGV traffic passing through Kilwinning on the A737. reduction in journey times and improvement in journey reliability between The Three Townstowardsthe Garnock Valley and beyond towards Glasgow reduction intrafficemissions and improvement in local air quality within Kilwinning improvement in the resilience of the transport network in Dalry, Kilwinning and the Three Towns, and a reductionin roadmaintenance costs reductioninthenumberofaccidents inurban areassuch asKilwinning,and theseverityof accidentson rural roads between Dalry,Kilwinning and the Three Towns increased levelsof employmentin theThreeTowns new businessdevelopmentand relocations within TheThreeTowns increased touristvolumes in North Ayrshire increased quality of live inNorth Ayrshire. 6.13.15This information willbe used to answer thefollowingkey evaluation questions: Havethe anticipatedoutcomesand impacts been achieved? To what extentwould the changes observed have happened anyway in the absence of the intervention? Werethereany unexpected impacts/ displacementeffects? How do the actualbenefitsand costs compared to what wasforecastatappraisal? Towhatextenthastheschemecontributedto theCouncil’sstrategicgoalsandobjectives? 6.13.16Aprocessevaluationwillalsobeundertakentoreviewtheactivitiesinvolvedinthedeliveryof aprojecttounderstandwhatlessonscanbelearnt,andwhatrecommendationscouldbemade for future appraisal of similar schemes. Process evaluation typically utilises both qualitative and quantitative data to understand objective issues (e.g. the costs and programme), as well as subjectiveissues. Data collection 6.13.17ThedatacollectionrequirementstoevaluatetheB714UpgradeschemeareshowninTable63 including data source and frequency ofcollection.
Page 171
Page 165/ 192 Table 63.Data collection CATEGORY METRIC DATA SOURCE / METHODOF COLLECTION FREQUENCY OFCOLLECTION Input Schemeexpenditure Project finance monitoringdata Quarterly Input In-kind resource provided Project finance monitoringdata Quarterly Output Deliveredscheme Full description of completed scheme including drawings and any design changes post funding approval Post-opening Outcome Annual average daily traffic by peak/non- peak periodson key routes(B714,A737) Automatictrafficcounters(ATC) Annual (including baseline data for beforeimplementation) Outcome Average AM and PM peak journey time per mileon key routes (B714,A737) Automatic number plate recognition (ANPR), journey time surveys Annual (including baseline data for beforeimplementation) Outcome Accident and casualty rates on key routes (B714, A737) STATS 19 Annual (including baseline data for beforeimplementation) Outcome Air quality (NO2 and PM2.5 concentration levels) Automaticmonitoring stationsor diffusiontubes Annual (including baseline data for beforeimplementation) Outcome Roadmaintenance costs Councilmaintenance spend Annual (including baseline data for beforeimplementation) Impact Employment levels (The Three Towns and the North Coast) BRES Annual (including baseline data for beforeimplementation) Impact Commercial rentalvalues Localcommercial and planning data Annual (including baseline data for beforeimplementation)
Page 172
Page 166/ 192 CATEGORY METRIC DATA SOURCE / METHODOF COLLECTION FREQUENCY OFCOLLECTION Impact Numberof registeredbusinesses Localcommercial and planning data Annual (including baseline data for beforeimplementation) Impact Proportionofoccupied business premises Localcommercial and planning data Annual (including baseline data for beforeimplementation) Impact Touristvolumes Tourism statistics and surveys; Arran ferry demand Annual (including baseline data for beforeimplementation) Impact Deprivationindicator SIMD Annual (including baseline data for beforeimplementation) Impact Life satisfaction ONS wellbeing indicators Annual (including baseline data for beforeimplementation) Impact Household incomes ONS household income statistics Annual (including baseline data for beforeimplementation)
Page 173
Page 167/192 Resourcing andgovernance 6.13.18The Monitoring and Evaluation Plan will be implemented in according with the governance structureshownin Figure 63. Figure 63. Monitoring and evaluation governance structure 6.13.19The groups shown above will monitor progress, change, risks, issues, opportunities, decisions and evaluation. It is expected that evaluation plan will be overseen by a designated Lead Officer internal to the Council. Delivery plan 6.13.20Themonitoringandevaluationprocessfortheschemewillusebaselinedatatobecollectedin 2024 prior to construction work starting. Data will then be collected one year post opening in 2027 and fiveyearspost opening in 2031 which will be compared against thebaseline datato quantify theextentof benefits realised. Cabinet/Council Committee PlaceBoard/ B714ProjectBoard LeadOfficer/ProjectManager WorkingGroup/ Infrastructure DeliveryTeam
Page 174
Page 168/192 6.13.21Themonitoring and evaluation timescalesareshown in Table64. Table 64.Monitoring and evaluation timescales MILESTONE EXPECTED DATE Baseline datacollection March2025 Baseline datareporting July 2025 Schemeconstruction startdate October2025 SchemeCompletion January 2027 Begin data collectionforone-year post-opening evaluation report January 2028 Publicationofone-yearpost-opening evaluation report August 2028 Begin data collectionfor five-yearpost-openingevaluation report January 2032 Publicationoffive-yearpost-opening evaluation report January 2032 Dissemination plan 6.13.22The one and five-year post-opening evaluation reports will be shared with the scheme’s key stakeholders and publishedon the Council website. 6.14 Data and information security 6.14.1 NAC has a Data Protection Policy setting out the roles and responsibilities for the handling, storage and distribution of data. Staff training is undertaken and compliance with policy is monitored. 6.14.2 NAC also has aCyber Security policy whichincludes regularly updating systemsto addressthe risk of cyber-attack; how computer systems should be used; and backing up data storage to protect againstdata loss. 6.14.3 These policies will apply to ensure the protection of critical systems, digital assets and commercially sensitive data during the scheme development and construction. NAC will also require tenderersto have in place equivalent data and informationsecurity procedures. 6.15 Projectclosure 6.15.1 Following completion of the scheme, project closureprocedures in line with best practice will be followed. Thiswill include: ensuring the work of the project is completed as measured against the project initiation document (PID). ensuring all project deliverables have beendelivered,quality controlled and accepted. ensuringresponsibilityfortheongoingoperationandmaintenanceoftheschemehasbeen transferredto the relevantcouncil department. communicating all risks that may affect the achievement of the scheme benefits to those with operation andmaintenance responsibilities.
Page 175
Page 169/192 ensuring all scheme documentation has been filed, archived and stored for future reference, including compliance with General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) requirements for any confidential orsensitivedata. holding a lessons learned session and the findings recorded and disseminated to relevant parties. 6.16 Carbon management 6.16.1 The Carbon Management Plan (Appendix 6E) for the scheme reports predicted emissions against baseline values. It sets out how risks with respect to forecast emissions will be mitigated and provides evidence of the project team’s ability to manage and reduce carbon emissions.
Page 176
Page 170/192 APPENDIX 1A: NORTH AYRSHIRE STRATEGIC ROUETING STUDY
Page 177
Page 171/192 APPENDIX 2A: STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT PLAN
Page 178
Page 172/192 APPENDIX 2B: STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOP FINDINGS
Page 179
Page 173/192 APPENDIX 2C: PUBLIC CONSULTATION REPORT
Page 180
Page 174/192 APPENDIX 2D: OPTIONS ASSESSMENT REPORT
Page 181
Page 175/192 APPENDIX 3A: B714 FBC SRTM LMVR REPORT
Page 182
Page 176/192 APPENDIX 3B: SCHEME COSTS
Page 183
Page 177/192 APPENDIX 3C: COSTS PROFORMA
Page 184
Page 178/192 APPENDIX 3D: WIDER ECONOMIC IMPACTS REPORT
Page 185
Page 179/192 APPENDIX 3E: APPRAISAL SUMMARY TABLE
Page 186
Page 180/192 APPENDIX 3F: TEE, PA AND AMCB TABLES
Page 187
Page 181/192 APPENDIX 3G: COBA-LT ANALYSIS FILES
Page 188
Page 182/192 APPENDIX 3H: TUBA ANALYSIS FILES
Page 189
Page 183/192 APPENDIX 3I: B714 ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT REPORT
Page 190
Page 184/192 APPENDIX 3J: CARBON SUMMARY TABLE
Page 191
Page 185/192 APPENDIX 4A: BREAKDOWN OF SCHEME COSTS FUNDING TYPE CONSTRUCTION LAND PREPARATION SUPERVISION TOTAL Central £17,620,417.14 £708,794.00 £5,484,326.50 £0.00 £23,813,537.64 Local £2,205,453.07 £1,611,936.00 £0.00 £3,666,243.73 £7,483,632.80 Sub-Total £19,825,870.21 £2,320,730.00 £5,484,326.50 £3,666,243.73 £31,297,170.44 Contingency £3,572,030.65 Total £34,869,201.09
Page 192
Page 186/192 APPENDIX 5A: OUTPUT BASED SPECIFICATION
Page 193
Page 187/192 APPENDIX 6A: PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
Page 194
Page 188/192 APPENDIX 6B: PROJECT PLAN
Page 195
Page 189/192 APPENDIX 6C: RISK REGISTER
Page 196
Page 190/192 APPENDIX 6D: BENEFITS REALISATION PLAN
Page 197
Page 191/192 APPENDIX 6E: CARBON MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 198
Page 192/192 SYSTRA provides advice on transport, to central, regional and local government, agencies, developers, operators and financiers. Adiversegroupofresults-orientedpeople,wearepartofastrongteamofprofessionals worldwide. Through client business planning, customer research and strategy development wecreate solutions thatworkfor real people in the real world. For more informationvisitwww.systra.co.uk Birmingham –NewhallStreet 5th Floor, LancasterHouse, NewhallSt, Birmingham, B3 1NQ T: +44 (0)121 233 7680 F: +44 (0)121233 7681 Birmingham –Innovation Court Innovation Court, 121 Edmund Street, Birmingham B3 2HJ T: +44 (0)121 230 6010 Bristol 10 Victoria Street, Bristol, BS1 6BN T: +44 (0)117 922 9040 Dublin 2nd Floor, Riverview House, 21-23CityQuay Dublin 2,Ireland T: +353 (0) 1 905 3961 Edinburgh –Thistle Street ProspectHouse, 5 ThistleStreet, Edinburgh EH2 1DF United Kingdom T: +44 (0)131 220 6966 Edinburgh –Manor Place 37 ManorPlace, Edinburgh, EH3 7EB Telephone+44 (0)131 225 7900 Fax:+44 (0)131 225 9229 Glasgow –St Vincent St Seventh Floor, 124 StVincentStreet Glasgow G2 5HFUnited Kingdom T: +44 (0)141 225 4400 Glasgow –West George St 250 WestGeorgeStreet, Glasgow, G24QY T: +44 (0)141 221 4030 F: +44 (0)800066 4367 Leeds 100 Wellington Street, Leeds, LS1 1BA T: +44 (0)113 397 9740 F: +44 (0)113 397 9741 Liverpool Cotton Exchange, Bixteth Street, Liverpool, L3 9LQ T: +44 (0)151 230 1930 London 3rd Floor, 5 Old Bailey, London EC4M 7BA United Kingdom T: +44 (0)203 714 4400 Manchester –16th Floor,City Tower 16th Floor, CityTower, PiccadillyPlaza ManchesterM1 4BT United Kingdom T: +44 (0)161 831 5600 Newcastle POBox 438, Newcastleupon Tyne, NE3 9BT United Kingdom T: +44 (0)191 2136157 Perth 13 RoseTerrace, Perth PH1 5HA T: +44 (0)1738 621 377 F: +44 (0)1738 632 887 Reading SoanePoint, 6-8 MarketPlace, Reading, Berkshire, RG1 2EG T: +44 (0)118 334 5510 Woking Dukes Court, DukeStreet Woking, SurreyGU21 5BH United Kingdom T: +44 (0)1483 728051 F: +44 (0)1483 755207 Other locations: France: Bordeaux, Lille, Lyon, Marseille, Paris Northern Europe: Astana, Copenhagen,Kiev, London, Moscow, Riga, Wroclaw Southern Europe & Mediterranean:Algiers,Baku,Bucharest, Madrid, Rabat, Rome, Sofia, Tunis Middle East: Cairo, Dubai, Riyadh Asia Pacific: Bangkok, Beijing, Brisbane, Delhi, Hanoi, Hong Kong, Manila, Seoul, Shanghai, Singapore, Shenzhen, Taipei Africa: Abidjan, Douala, Johannesburg, Kinshasa, Libreville, Nairobi Latin America: Lima, Mexico, RiodeJaneiro, Santiago, SãoPaulo North America: Little Falls, LOS Angeles, Montreal, New York, Philadelphia, Washington