STANTEC - Boat of Garten A1 Event Panels.pdf

ACT­IVE TRAVEL IMPROVEMENTS

As part of Her­it­age Hori­zons: Cairngorms 2030, an ambi­tious pro­gramme is under­way to put act­ive and sus­tain­able travel at the heart of a green­er future for the Nation­al Park.

The Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity (CNPA) are work­ing with loc­al com­munit­ies to make it easy and safe for res­id­ents and vis­it­ors to get around in vil­lages in Badenoch and Strath­spey without a vehicle. By improv­ing act­ive travel infra­struc­ture and pub­lic spaces, we want to make it more enjoy­able for every­one to walk, cycle or get around using a wheelchair.

Listen­ing to loc­al views and ideas will be cent­ral to devel­op­ing the pro­pos­als. Ini­tially the focus of this pro­ject is on five vil­lages, whilst sup­port­ing oth­er act­ive travel ini­ti­at­ives cur­rently ongo­ings in the area. Along with many oth­er pro­jects this work will place act­ive travel at the heart of a green­er and health­i­er future.

Take the Survey!

Please take the time to read through the sur­vey and give us your ideas and com­ments about the cur­rent pro­pos­als in Boat of Garten and how you would like to see it improved in the future. It will take about 5 – 10 minutes.

You can access the sur­vey on your per­son­al device either through the link or the QR code found below.

https://​cairngorm​s2030​.com​mon​place​.is/

transport@​cairngorms.​co.​uk

01479 873 535

Bene­fits of Act­ive Travel

Eco­nomy — Although vehicle access is not unim­port­ant in rur­al com­munit­ies, stud­ies have shown that provid­ing easy and safe access for people not arriv­ing by car can bene­fit the eco­nomy (e.g. Sus­trans, 2016). Sup­port­ing activ­ity-focused tour­ism based around walk­ing and cyc­ling with appro­pri­ate and safe infra­struc­ture can con­trib­ute fur­ther to that.

Envir­on­ment — In 2019 trans­port pro­duced 27% of the UK’s total emis­sions. Of this, the major­ity (91%) came from road trans­port vehicles (DFT, 2019). Fur­ther­more, with trans­port being one of the only sec­tors where emis­sions are rising, action is needed. A 2,000 per­son study by the Uni­ver­sity of Oxford found that those who switched from car-driv­ing to cyc­ling for just one trip per day reduced their car­bon foot­print by about 0.5 tonnes over a year.

Health — Walk­ing, and phys­ic­al activ­ity gen­er­ally, can reduce the risk of depres­sion, demen­tia and Alzheimer’s and can help reduce the risk of dis­ease pro­gres­sion for many ser­i­ous health con­di­tions such as heart dis­ease and a vari­ety of can­cers (Nation­al Walk­ing Strategy, 2014). Recent research, (Baker et al, 2021) out­lined that walk­ing and cyc­ling makes up 13 – 15% of all com­mut­ing jour­neys in Scot­land, bring­ing with it an annu­al eco­nom­ic health bene­fit of over £660m.

Equal­ity — The modes of trans­port that people use are influ­enced by their income. Evid­ence shows that people in lower income house­holds are more likely to take the bus, while people in high­er income house­holds are more likely to drive or take the train (Trans­port Scot­land, 2018, 2019). An access­ible loc­al envir­on­ment is fun­da­ment­al to dis­abled people’s abil­ity to both par­ti­cip­ate in their loc­al com­munity activ­it­ies and to link into wider trans­port networks.

Safety — Redu­cing the num­ber and speed of vehicles on our streets dra­mat­ic­ally improves safety for both ped­es­tri­ans and roads users. A recent study by the European Com­mis­sion (2020) found that across it’s 27 mem­ber states, fatal­it­ies over­whelm­ingly occurred in col­li­sions involving cars and trucks — high­light­ing the need to increase the pro­tec­tion of vul­ner­able road users such as ped­es­tri­ans, wheel­ers and cyclists.

COM­MUNITY ENGAGEMENT

Engage­ment Process

In the second half of 2022, a com­pre­hens­ive engage­ment exer­cise was under­taken to under­stand what act­ive travel improve­ments the Boat of Garten com­munity would like to see made.

The stake­hold­er and com­munity engage­ment is being informed by the pre­par­a­tion of an Equal­ity Impact Assess­ment (EqIA).

Iden­ti­fied Com­munity Objectives

• Improve safety for walk­ing, cyc­ling and using a wheelchair
• Bet­ter con­nectiv­ity with and between exist­ing infrastructure
• Bet­ter accom­mod­ate every­day jour­neys to shops, schools, ser­vices and employ­ment by act­ive travel
• Improve pub­lic spaces and access to them

Com­mon­place Website

A Com­mon­place web­site was used to under­take an Act­ive Travel Sur­vey which asked a num­ber of ques­tions about how people cur­rently travel and allowed them to com­ment on spe­cif­ic loc­a­tions using an inter­act­ive map.

Engage­ment Findings

Res­ults from the engage­ment helped from a long list of poten­tial improve­ments aligned to where the com­munity felt act­ive travel improve­ments were most needed.

Not­able inter­ven­tions raised by the com­munity were traffic calm­ing along Deshar Road, meas­ures to improve the feel­ing of safety at the Post Office and a need for improve­ments at Drumuillie.

As a part of the engage­ment exer­cise, the Boat of Garten com­munity was asked to indic­ate their sen­ti­ment towards the cur­rent act­ive travel net­work in the com­munity; scor­ing a range of themes from 1 to 10. The graph­ic on the right shows the res­ults of the sen­ti­ment survey.

Sen­ti­ment Sur­vey Results:

• 4.8: How safe is it to cycle around your community?
• 5.6: How many attract­ive and pleas­ant places exist in your com­munity for people to spend time or meet others?
• 4.0: How do you rate the amount of traffic driv­ing through your community?
• 3.5: How do you exper­i­ence traffic speeds in your community?
• 4.5: How suit­able are the pave­ments in your com­munity for people with bug­gies, wheel­chairs and oth­er mobil­ity aids?

DESIGN PRO­CESS

Poten­tial Funding

The most likely source of fund­ing is through Places for Every­one, a fund­ing mech­an­ism admin­istered by Sus­trans Scot­land to alloc­ate fund­ing for act­ive travel pro­jects. The aim of Places for Every­one is to cre­ate safer, more attract­ive, health­i­er places by increas­ing the num­ber of trips made by walk­ing, cyc­ling and wheel­ing for every­day jour­neys. Design prin­cipals guid­ing the devel­op­ment behind Places for Every­one are:

• Devel­op ideas col­lab­or­at­ively and in part­ner­ship with communities
• Facil­it­ate inde­pend­ent walk­ing, cyc­ling and wheel­ing for every­one, includ­ing an unac­com­pan­ied 12 year old
• Design places that provide enjoy­ment, com­fort and protection
• Ensure access for all and equal­ity of oppor­tun­ity in pub­lic space
• Ensure all pro­pos­als are developed in a way that is con­text-spe­cif­ic and evidence-led
• Real­loc­ate road space, and restrict motor traffic per­meab­il­ity to pri­or­it­ise people walk­ing, cyc­ling and wheel­ing over private motor vehicles

Design Pro­cess

The fig­ure below sets out the design process:

1. Engage­ment with loc­al com­munity to define prob­lems and oppor­tun­it­ies (Second half of 2022)
2. Identi­fy poten­tial pre­ferred improve­ments, based on repor­ted need, impact and deliv­er­ab­il­ity (Second half of 2022)
3. Pre­pare concept designs and test with stake­hold­ers and com­munity (Early 2023)
4. With fur­ther input from stake­hold­ers and the com­munity, viable concept designs are worked up in more detail (Detailed Design) (2023÷2024 — Sub­ject to secur­ing funding)
5. Once all stat­utory per­mis­sions and oth­er require­ments are in place, a tech­nic­al pack­age is pre­pared (Tech­nic­al Design) (2023÷2024 — Sub­ject to secur­ing funding)
6. Appoint a to con­struct the works (Con­struc­tion) (2025 Onwards — sub­ject to secur­ing funding)

Sur­veys and Investigations

A num­ber of sur­veys and invest­ig­a­tions are being under­taken to inform the project:

• Road Safety Audits
• Eco­lo­gic­al Survey
• Traffic Speeds/​Volume Survey
• Topo­graph­ic­al Survey

REDU­CING TRAFFIC SPEEDS

What is Traffic Calming?

Traffic calm­ing is nor­mally used in res­id­en­tial and urb­an areas. Phys­ic­al fea­tures are installed to reduce the speed and amount of traffic passing through an area to make roads safer for all road users. By doing this, the qual­ity of the loc­al envir­on­ment can also poten­tially be improved.

Types of Traffic Calming

• Foot­way Build-outs
• Reduced Speed Limits
• Mini Round­abouts
• Cent­ral Islands
• Pri­or­ity Junctions
• Chi­canes
• Road Humps

Bene­fits of Traffic Calming

• Encour­age more walk­ing and cycling
• Reduce the num­ber and sever­ity of cas­u­al­ties res­ult­ing from road traffic col­li­sions, espe­cially those involving ped­es­tri­ans and cyclists
• Dis­cour­age heavy vehicles and ​‘through traffic’ from using unsuit­able routes
• Provide a great­er feel­ing of safety
• Reduce speed­ing
• Improve the urb­an street envir­on­ment for loc­al communities

If hit by a per­son driv­ing at:

• 20 MPH: Per­son Sur­vives the Col­li­sion (90%) / Res­ults in a Fatal­ity (10%)
• 30 MPH: Per­son Sur­vives the Col­li­sion (60%) / Res­ults in a Fatal­ity (40%)
• 40 MPH: Per­son Sur­vives the Col­li­sion (20%) / Res­ults in a Fatal­ity (80%)

Source: Vis­ion Zero Two-Year Action Strategy

SAFETY AND ACCESSIBILITY

Chal­lenges Faced by People with Impaired Mobility

The needs of all people are being con­sidered when as part of this pro­ject. We know there are many chal­lenges faced by people with mobil­ity impair­ments which can cause them to be heav­ily depend­ant on oth­ers to help them move around. Cre­at­ing and main­tain­ing an access­ible pub­lic realm is cru­cial for ensur­ing that dis­abled people are not excluded from play­ing a full role in soci­ety. Dis­ab­il­it­ies and impair­ments can come in many forms:

• Mobil­ity Impair­ments: includes people who use wheel­chairs and those who can walk but only with dif­fi­culty, often using some form of aid such as a stick or walk­ing frame.
• Vis­ion Impair­ments: vis­ion impaired people include blind people and par­tially sighted people.
• Hear­ing Impair­ments: RNID reports that there are 12 mil­lion people in the UK with hear­ing loss great­er than 25dB, of whom 151,000 are Brit­ish Sign Lan­guage (BSL) users (www​.rnid​.org​.uk).
• Lim­it­a­tions with Reach­ing, Stretch­ing and Dex­ter­ity: these are fre­quently the res­ult of arth­rit­is, which can make these move­ments pain­ful and dif­fi­cult, or of mus­cu­lar dys­trophy caus­ing a loss of mus­cu­lar strength, or of com­plaints of the nervous system.
• Neur­o­lo­gic­al and Learn­ing Dif­fer­ences: includ­ing those mak­ing it hard to under­stand com­plic­ated inform­a­tion or use com­plex machines (like some tick­et machines).

Accord­ing to the Nation­al Health Ser­vice (www​.nhs​.uk/​c​o​n​d​i​t​i​o​n​s​/​v​i​s​i​o​n​-loss), there are almost 2 mil­lion people in the UK liv­ing with sight loss. Of these, around 360,000 are registered as blind or par­tially sighted.

Approach­ing 70% of dis­abled people have a mobil­ity impair­ment; those with walk­ing dif­fi­culties out­num­ber wheel­chair users by about 10:1.

Although the main pur­pose of inclus­ive design is to provide good access for dis­abled people, designs that sat­is­fy their require­ments also meet the needs of many oth­er people. People trav­el­ling with small chil­dren (includ­ing in prams) or car­ry­ing lug­gage or heavy shop­ping will all bene­fit from an access­ible envir­on­ment, as will people with tem­por­ary mobil­ity prob­lems (e.g. a leg in plaster) and many older people.

The photo above shows a loc­a­tion in New­ton­more, where a per­son is push­ing someone in a wheel­chair in the middle of the road where the foot­way is not wide enough for them.

Oth­er mobil­ity safe and inclus­ive design con­sid­er­a­tions include:

• Ton­al and col­or contrast
• Width and height clearance
• Inclines / gradients
• Ramps
• Seat­ing
• Street fur­niture
• Sur­face mater­i­als and maintenance
• Guard­rails
• Road cross­ings
• Steps and stairs
• Shared use routes
• Dropped kerbs and raised crossings
• Street works and oth­er poten­tial hazards
• Foot­bridges and underpasses
• Plat­forms: rail services

RECOM­MEN­DED INTERVENTIONS

A long list of options was cre­ated through engage­ment with the com­munity and key stake­hold­ers, site vis­its and a desktop review / baseline ana­lys­is of the exist­ing trans­port infra­struc­ture and travel char­ac­ter­ist­ics with­in Boat of Garten.

An option apprais­al was then under­taken to rank and identi­fy pri­or­ity options, with options being assessed against a range of com­munity object­ives and the deliv­er­ab­il­ity of each option. The map below shows the options which are recom­men­ded to be con­sidered to be taken forward.

• Deshar Road Improve­ments: This work will look to address safety con­cerns and access­ib­il­ity issues along Deshar Road, by deliv­er­ing inter­ven­tions BG1, BG2, BG3, BG5, BG7, BG8 and BG12.
• BG1 Raised Table Along Deshar Road Foot­way at Recyc­ling Yard
• BG2 Gate­ways Approach­ing Boat of Garten (OUT OF MAP EXTENTS)
• BG3 Deshar Road Traffic Calming
• BG5 Deshar Road / Church Drive Junc­tion Improvements
• BG7 Deshar Road / Kin­churdy Road Junc­tion Improvements
• BG8 Ped­es­tri­an Cross­ings on Deshar Road
• BG11 Craig Aven­ue to Pine­wood Road Connection
• BG12 Bicycle Park­ing at Boat of Garten Shops
• BG15 Path­way Upgrade to Dru­muille (OUT OF MAP EXTENTS)

These recom­men­ded options to be taken for­ward are being developed fur­ther into concept designs. The options that have not been taken for­ward remain val­id and could be con­sidered fur­ther at a later date.

CROSS­INGS AND TRAFFIC CALMING

A num­ber of loc­a­tions for improved cross­ings have been iden­ti­fied with a view to cre­at­ing a safer envir­on­ment for ped­es­tri­ans, par­tic­u­larly vul­ner­able road users such as older people, chil­dren and those who identi­fy as hav­ing a disability.

Some of the options for ped­es­tri­an cross­ings also act as traffic calm­ing fea­tures. In addi­tion, oth­er traffic calm­ing fea­tures could be provided. Traffic calm­ing has been shown to increase safety for cyc­lists on the road by redu­cing vehicle speeds.

Type	Descrip­tion	Pros and Cons
1. Dropped Kerbs (not at junctions)	These provide step free cross­ings, they could be accom­pan­ied by a dif­fer­ent mater­i­al across the road to indic­ate to drivers that people are likely to be cross­ing the road at this point.	Pros: Min­im­al changes to the lay-out mean these would be suit­able in places where traffic speeds are already suit­ably low. Cons: drop kerbs involve lower­ing the foot­way to the same level as the road; this makes the foot­way uneven which is dif­fi­cult to nav­ig­ate for some people such as wheel­chair users and it can become an increased haz­ard dur­ing sub-zero temperatures.
2. Dropped Kerbs (at junctions)
3. Raised Crossing
4. Raised Table (junc­tions)	The road is raised to foot­way level. This can be across the main road, at side road or over the whole junction.	Pros: These types of cross­ing are use­ful in places where traffic speeds make people feel unsafe when cross­ing the road. Like drop kerbs, the raised fea­tures provide step free cross­ings which are bet­ter for people with mobil­ity impair­ments, people in wheel­chairs and people push­ing prams. Vehicles are encour­aged to slow down. These types also do not have the draw­backs of the drop kerbs. The raised cross­ing makes is more obvi­ous to drivers that it is a place people may be cross­ing the road. Cons: these types of fea­tures may require more main­ten­ance com­pared to drop kerbs.
5. Con­tinu­ous Foot­way Cros­sov­er (junc­tions)
6. Con­trolled Cross­ing (not at junctions)	This could be traffic lights or a zebra crossing.	Pros: these give more pri­or­ity to ped­es­tri­ans and / or are safer for ped­es­tri­ans, par­tic­u­larly vul­ner­able road users Cons: there is an increase cost in terms of con­struc­tion and maintenance.
7. Pave­ment Build Outs / Lane Deflec­tion (not at junctions)	The image shows lane deflection.	Pros: these fea­tures slow vehicles mak­ing it a safer envir­on­ment, par­tic­u­larly for people cyc­ling. Cons: these fea­tures do not work so well in places with a high num­bers of vehicles passing through.
8. Pave­ment Build Outs / Lane Deflec­tion / Ped­es­tri­an Crossing

PATHS AND PUB­LIC REALM

Path Examples

Below are some examples of mater­i­als that could be used to con­struct footpaths.

When choos­ing the sur­face type it is import­ant to con­sider issues such as cost, drain­age and main­ten­ance and a mater­i­al that is with­in the char­ac­ter of the sur­round­ings. Even a bit­mac sur­face will not be totally main­ten­ance free; they do need inspect­ing and some planned, routine main­ten­ance dur­ing their useable lives.

Bound sur­faces

• 1. Bit­mac Path
     • very dur­able, easy to main­tain and suit­able for most path user types, allow­ing all year-round use
     • more com­fort­able for use by cyc­lists and wheel­chair users due to the very smooth finish
     • lower annu­al main­ten­ance liab­il­ity due to high levels of durability
     • can be applied to steep ramps where it will res­ist water scour­ing far bet­ter than unbound and semi-bound materials
     • rel­at­ively simple to repair dam­age (e.g. potholes) than some oth­er bound surfaces
     • exper­i­enced ​‘tar­ring’ con­tract­ors are read­ily avail­able through­out Scotland
     • typ­ic­al lifespan of 30+ years
• 1. Res­in bound

Semi-bound sur­faces

• 1. Cedec path
     • 100% recycled and inert product made from screened con­struc­tion waste, blaes and road planings
     • a suit­able and cost-effect­ive altern­at­ive to unbound sur­faces or where a bound sur­face is either too expens­ive and/​or not aes­thet­ic­ally acceptable
     • highly dur­able sur­face and espe­cially suited to wood­land paths where water drip­ping off trees would quickly ​‘wash out’ an unbound surface
     • lower install­a­tion costs than a bound surface
     • rel­at­ively straight­for­ward to main­tain and repair areas of restric­ted damage
     • typ­ic­al lifespan of 10 – 15 years
• 1. Ulti­trec path

Pub­lic Realm Examples

Below are some examples of pub­lic space improve­ments that could be incorporated.

• Met­al frame inter­pret­a­tion panel
• Stone ori­ent­a­tion panel
• Inform­a­tion board
• Wooden way-mark­er
• Bri­dle­way plaque on wood sign
• Met­al fingerpost
• Carved stone dir­ec­tion­al sign
• NCN stick­er on post
• Inform­a­tion board
• Gate­way panel

DESHAR ROAD IMPROVEMENTS

Note: The fol­low­ing sec­tions ask for feed­back on spe­cif­ic pro­posed improve­ments to Deshar Road.

BG1 Raised Table Along Deshar Road Footway

Improve the ped­es­tri­an foot­way and cross­ing points at the recyc­ling yard entrances to pri­or­it­ise people walk­ing, wheel­ing and cycling.

Poten­tial Features:

• New con­tinu­ous foot­way with vehicle cros­sov­er at entrance to recyc­ling yard
• Oppor­tun­ity to intro­duce meas­ures such as benches, plant­ing, pub­lic art, inform­a­tion boards and/​or oth­er pub­lic spaces

Cross­ing Examples:

• 1. Dropped Kerbs (at junctions)
• 1. Raised Table (junc­tions)
• 1. Con­tinu­ous Foot­way Cros­sov­er (junc­tions)

Feed­back Questions:

• Do you agree that an improved cross­ing should be provided at this location?
• What type of cross­ing should be provided (see examples)?
• What green­spaces / pub­lic realm improve­ments could be made in this area?

BG3 Deshar Road Traffic Calming

Imple­ment traffic calm­ing meas­ures along Deshar Road to slow vehicles down.

Poten­tial Area of Improvements:

• Poten­tial intro­duc­tion of traffic calm­ing meas­ures (such as speed cush­ions, chi­canes, pri­or­ity work­ing etc.)
• Poten­tial ped­es­tri­an cross­ing (type to be considered)

Traffic Calm­ing Examples:

• 1. Raised Cross­ing (not at junctions)
• 1. Raised Table (junc­tions)
• 1. Pave­ment Build Outs / Lane Deflec­tion (not at junctions)

Feed­back Questions:

• Do you agree that traffic calm­ing meas­ures should be provided at this location?
• What type of traffic calm­ing meas­ures should be provided at this loc­a­tion (see examples)?
• What else should be con­sidered at this location?

BG5 Deshar Road / Church Drive Junction

Under­take minor improve­ment works at junc­tion real­loc­ate road space to pedestrians/​wheelers and improve ped­es­tri­an crossing.

Poten­tial Features:

• Poten­tial foot­way buildouts
• Poten­tial to install con­tinu­ous (raised) foot­way cross­ing or dropped kerbs with tact­ile paving

Cross­ing Examples:

• 1. Dropped Kerbs (at junctions)
• 1. Raised Table (junc­tions)
• 1. Con­tinu­ous Foot­way Cros­sov­er (junc­tions)

Feed­back Questions:

• Do you agree that an improved cross­ing should be provided at this location?
• What type of cross­ing should be provided (see examples)?
• What else should be con­sidered at this location?

BG7 Deshar Road / Kin­churdy Road Junc­tion Improve­ments & BG12 Bicycle Park­ing at Boat of Garten Shops

Intro­duce park­ing restric­tions at junc­tion and provide / improve ped­es­tri­an cross­ing facilities.

Poten­tial Features:

• New double yel­low lines
• Provide cycle park­ing at the vil­lage shops

Option A — Crossing

Option B — Cross­ing and Con­tinu­ous Footway

Poten­tial Features:

• Tie in to exist­ing double yel­low lines
• Poten­tial ped­es­tri­an cross­ing (type to be considered)

Option C – Raised Table

Poten­tial Features:

• Raised table across junc­tion with tact­ile paving

Cross­ing Examples:

• 1. Dropped Kerbs (not at junctions)
• 1. Dropped Kerbs (at junctions)
• 1. Raised Cross­ing (not at junctions)
• 1. Raised Table (junc­tions)
• 1. Con­tinu­ous Foot­way Cros­sov­er (junc­tions)

Feed­back Questions:

• Do you agree that improved cross­ings should be provided at this location?
• Which option do you prefer (see examples)? Please explain your answer.
• What else should be con­sidered at this location?

BG8 Ped­es­tri­an Cross­ings on Deshar Road

Provide ped­es­tri­an cross­ings along Deshar Road. Poten­tial loc­a­tions include near Deshar Cres­cent, Wood­land Walk and Belville.

Poten­tial Features:

• Poten­tial Ped­es­tri­an Cross­ings (type to be considered)
• Oppor­tun­ity to intro­duce meas­ures such as benches, plant­ing, pub­lic art, inform­a­tion boards and/​or play spaces

Cross­ing Examples:

• 1. Dropped Kerbs (not at junctions)
• 1. Raised Cross­ing (not at junctions)
• 1. Con­trolled Cross­ing (not at junctions)
• 1. Pave­ment Build Outs / Lane Deflec­tion / Ped­es­tri­an Crossing

Feed­back Questions:

• Do you agree that improved cross­ings should be provided at these locations?
• What type of cross­ing should be provided at each loc­a­tion (see examples)?
• What else should be con­sidered at these locations?

PATH­WAY TO DRUMUILLIE

BG15 Path­way Upgrade to Drumuillie

Form­al­ise and resur­face path­way from Spey Aven­ue to A95 on the south side of the Sawmill.

Path Sur­face Examples:

• 1. Bit­mac Path
• 1. Res­in bound aggregate
• 1. Cedec path
• 1. Ulti­trec path

Poten­tial Features:

• Exist­ing footway
• New 3m footpath

Feed­back Questions:

• Do you agree that an improved foot­path should be provided at this location?
• What type of foot­path should be provided (see examples)?
• What else should be con­sidered at this location?