Transport Links to Eastriggs

Transcription

SWestrans
Improved Transport
Links for the
Eastriggs area
May 2009
www.colinbuchanan.com
Draft STAG Report
Improved Transport Links for the Eastriggs
area
Draft STAG Report
Project No: 157741
May 2009
Telephone: 0141 229 0652
Fax: 0141 229 6521
Email : [email protected]
Prepared by:
Approved by:
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
Louisa Martin
John Halliday/Duncan Birrell
Status: Draft
Issue no: 1
Date: 5/14/2009
eastriggsstagreport14may - rev cost final.doc
(C) Copyright Colin Buchanan and Partners Limited. All rights reserved.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the commissioning party and unless otherwise agreed in writing by Colin
Buchanan and Partners Limited, no other party may copy, reproduce, distribute, make use of, or rely on the contents of the report.
No liability is accepted by Colin Buchanan and Partners Limited for any use of this report, other than for the purposes for which it
was originally prepared and provided.
Opinions and information provided in this report are on the basis of Colin Buchanan and Partners Limited using due skill, care and
diligence in the preparation of the same and no explicit warranty is provided as to their accuracy. It should be noted and is expressly
stated that no independent verification of any of the documents or information supplied to Colin Buchanan and Partners Limited has
been made
Improved Transport Links for the Eastriggs area
Draft STAG Report
Contents
Summary
1
1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
Introduction
The Brief
Review of Existing Policies
Review of Previous Work
The Study Area
3
3
3
3
4
2
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
Analysis of Problems and Opportunities
Introduction
Problems
Opportunities at Eastriggs
Issues
Constraints
6
6
6
8
9
10
3
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
3.10
3.11
3.12
3.13
3.14
3.15
Objective Setting
Pre-existing objectives and policies
National Transport Strategy
Regional Transport Strategy
Structure plan
Local plans
Single Outcome Agreement
Community Plan
STAG Requirements
Environment
Safety
Economy
Integration
Accessibility and social inclusion
Maximising opportunities
SMART study objectives
11
11
11
11
12
13
13
13
14
14
14
15
15
16
17
17
4
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
Option generation, sifting and development
Preliminary options
Options for Stage 1 appraisal
Do minimum
Reference case
18
18
19
19
19
5
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
5.7
5.8
5.9
Part 1 Appraisal
Introduction
Assessing the options against the transport planning objectives
Anticipated impacts on the STAG criteria
Impacts on policy directives
Feasibility
Affordability
Public acceptability
Participation and Consultation
Options selected for further consideration
20
20
20
21
22
23
23
23
24
24
6
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.5
Part 2 Appraisal
Introduction
Options
Expected patronage
Feasibility
Review of transport planning objectives
26
26
26
26
27
27
Draft STAG Report
6.6
6.7
STAG criteria
Participation and consultation
28
46
7
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
Cost to Government
Investment costs
Station operating costs
Grant and subsidy payments
Revenues
Indirect taxation impacts
48
48
48
48
49
49
8
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
Risk and Uncertainty
Risk management
Quantified Risk Assessment
Optimism bias
Sensitivity analysis
50
50
50
52
52
9
9.1
Option Summary Tables
Option summary tables (OSTs)
53
53
10
10.1
10.2
10.3
Monitoring
Introduction
Proposed monitoring plan
Key performance indicators
56
56
56
56
11
11.1
11.2
Evaluation
Introduction
Proposed evaluation plan
58
58
58
12
12.1
12.2
Conclusions
Options Analysis
Business Case
59
59
59
Appendix 1
Part 1 ASTs
60
60
Appendix 2
Part 2 ASTs
80
80
Appendix 3
Noise and Vibration Report
94
94
Appendix 4
Local Air Quality Report
95
95
Appendix 5
Water quality, drainage and flood defence report
96
96
Appendix 6
Biodiversity and habitat report
97
97
Appendix 7
Economy Report
98
98
Appendix 8
Rail Operational Assessment Report
99
99
Appendix 9
Full list of public consultation meeting invitees
100
100
Draft STAG Report
Tables
Table 2.1:
Approximate travel times by public transport from Eastriggs
9
Table 5.1:
Assessment of options against study objectives
20
Table 5.2:
Anticipated impact of options on the STAG criteria
21
Table 6.1:
Station Ranking in Scotland
26
Table 6.2:
28
Table 6.3:
Eastriggs site - habitats
33
Table 6.4:
Economic appraisal (all figures are NPV in 2002 prices)
40
Table 8.1:
Quantified risks
51
Table 9.1:
OST: Option 2a(i) – reinstate Eastriggs Station
54
Figures
Figure 1.1: Study area
5
Draft STAG Report
Summary
Overview
Colin Buchanan was commissioned by Dumfries and Galloway Council on behalf of SWestrans to
review options to improve transport links to Eastriggs in accordance with Scottish Transport Appraisal
Guidance (STAG).
The analysis of problems and opportunities has identified that the main driver is the opportunity for a
step change improvement in the transport system in the area. This has the potential to support
improved accessibility to education, employment and other services and facilities for the local
population.
The transport planning objectives that guided this study were:

Minimise the environmental impact that transport has on the study area while
balancing the demand for travel to / from the area.
Improve the safety of travel and improve the sense of safety felt by those who
travel, especially vulnerable groups.
Improve the levels and attractiveness of public transport in support of tourism and
economic growth for Eastriggs.
Improve journey times, reliability and punctuality for people travelling to / from
Eastriggs.
Increase the levels of accessibility to employment, education and healthcare for the
local population.
Capitalise on the potential opportunities for increasing travel options and
connectivity to/from the study area.
Transport planning objectives were developed taking account of existing policies and in agreement
with community and transport industry stakeholders.
Alternative options to meet the transport planning objectives have been appraised and this has
identified that the option to provide a train station to serve Eastriggs offers the way forward. This
conclusion has been reached because adding to existing bus services produces fewer (marginal)
benefits than the rail option. This is due to the fact that it would be necessary to add new buses and
pay for this cost as opposed to using existing rolling stock.
Rail is of benefit in terms of user choice (it is a recognised fact that people prefer to use rail over bus),
safety(rail travel is measurably safer than other forms of transport), reliability and access to the wider
public transport network compared with bus alternatives.
Significant progress has been made to engage with industry partners, including Transport Scotland,
First ScotRail and Network Rail. Indeed Network Rail in Scotland has agreed that there is merit in
taking the project forward and has approved the Project Proposal for a station to serve Eastriggs. We
are awaiting full endorsement and resource allocation approval from Network Rail’s Investment Panel
to review the technical aspects in more detail. There is widespread community support for a train
station.
At this level of study (early stage option appraisal), given earlier work done by others, there appears to
be no significant technical obstacle to the development of a rail option at Eastriggs. Clearly, further
detailed technical work is required, hence the steps taken to engage with Network Rail.
1
Draft STAG Report
Developing a transport economic case for rail stations in rural locations is notoriously difficult and
Eastriggs is no different. We have found that the economic case for Eastriggs is marginal, however,
other factors such as accessibility and the social inclusion of the community are key in supporting the
case for the reinstatement of a rail station.
Modular design has been suggested through our Network Rail consultation as a means of reducing
the cost of the design and construction of the station, although comparative costs are not available for
this study. While this would reduce the capital cost of the project, the key factor in improving the case
for the station lies in identifying the positive benefits of the scheme.
The business case has been evaluated based on the existing rail patterns. The timetable modelling
work undertaken for this study indicates that stopping services may not entirely support the aspirations
of the community and any potential economic opportunities, for example, for employment outwith the
area. We have not been able to investigate the forthcoming rail timetable changes due in December
2009; data was not available. A conclusion we have therefore drawn is that consideration should be
given to the potential to adjust the rail timetable to better suit community needs and build the business
case around social accessibility.
While the rail station option is preferred among the alternatives, developing the project beyond this
stage will need to take account of key issues: capital costs, the level of revenue impact on the rail
franchise, the performance impact on rail services and the development of a commercial rail service
timetable being uppermost.
The case for a replacement rail station could be progressed on the basis of the wider social and
community benefits that such a facility could confer.
2
Draft STAG Report
1
Introduction
1.1
The Brief
1.1.1
Colin Buchanan (CB) has been commissioned by Dumfries & Galloway Council on behalf
of SWestrans to investigate the possibility of addressing transport problems in MidNithsdale with specific reference to the opportunities which may be presented by the reopening of closed stations on the Glasgow and South Western Railway Line.
1.1.2
The stated aims of the project brief are to:

improve public transport provision for local communities;
enhance access to services in nearby settlements (particularly Dumfries);
improve linkages to the Central Belt and England;
open up the area for inward tourism and economic development; and
reduce deprivation resulting from poor accessibility.
1.2
Review of Existing Policies
1.2.1
A number of existing policies have been reviewed to establish how the potential
interventions could contribute to achieving strategic aims. Relevant documents include:
Single Outcome Agreement, National Transport Strategy, Regional Transport Strategy,
Local Transport Strategy, Structure Plan, Local Plan and Community Plan. These are
considered in greater detail in chapter 3.
1.3
Review of Previous Work
1.3.1
CB has undertaken a review of the available background documents. However, it must be
noted that there are numerous contradictions between the various reports, particularly
relating to the results of the economic analysis. In addition, a number of the assumptions
regarding the timetabling and consequent feasibility of new stations have changed as a
result of the recent Annan to Gretna double tracking.
1.3.2
Glasgow to Stranraer, Glasgow-Dumfries-Carlisle Rail Study for Dumfries & Galloway
Council (internal report, November 2005). This was an assessment of the Glasgow to
Stranraer and Glasgow to Carlisle (via Dumfries) rail lines with a view to improving the
accessibility and service to the public in the Dumfries & Galloway Council area. Particular
attention was paid to the southern ends of both routes and to station reinstatements at
Dunragit, Thornhill and Eastriggs.
1.3.3
The conclusion was that all three of these stations could be accommodated within the
existing timetable. Estimates were provided of future passenger numbers and the
interaction with freight services was detailed.
1.3.4
However, the timetabling work which was completed:

was limited in scope;
ignored constraints outwith the Dumfries & Galloway area;
was limited in time frame, looking only at the period 07:00 to 12:00 on a weekday;
did not use the rules of the plan, relying instead on technical (signalling) headways
and margins;
is outdated having been superseded by the re-doubling of the Annan to Gretna
track; and,
did not appear to have buy-in from either Network Rail, First ScotRail or Transport
Scotland.
3
Draft STAG Report
1.3.5
The Regional Transport Strategy (RTS) resulted in the identification of nine priority
implementation packages as follows:

A709 corridor upgrade;
bus network quality strategy;
A75 Dumfries southern bypass;
Dumfries town centre bus station and compensatory parking;
Dumfries town centre public realm improvements including walking and cycling
enhancements;
rail services upgrade;
region-wide new stations strategy;
Stranraer waterfront and town centre public realm improvements including public
rail / bus interchange hub and walking and cycling enhancements;
region-wide cycling and walking projects, including the completion of the National
Cycle Network.
1.3.6
The Dumfries & Galloway area has been subject to a high number of station closures.
Considering only lines with existing passenger services, there are disused and / or
dismantled facilities on the line between Kilmarnock and Gretna at Carronbridge,
Thornhill, Closeburn, Auldgirth, Killylung (Holywood), Racks, Ruthwell, Cummertrees,
Eastriggs and Rigg. On the line between Carstairs and Gretna there are similarly disused
facilities at Beattock, Wamphray, Nethercleugh, Ecclefechan and Kirtlebridge. On the line
between Ayr and Stranraer such facilities can be found at Glenwhilly, New Luce, Dunragit
and Castle Kennedy.
1.3.7
South West Scotland Regional Transport Partnership - Region Wide Rail Station Strategy
(Atkins, March 2007) Following on from the RTS, this was a review of the existing and
proposed rail stations in Dumfries & Galloway. This examined the case for implementing
new stations and for carrying out accessibility enhancements at existing stations.
1.3.8
The Region-Wide Rail Station Strategy considered opportunities at Thornhill, Eastriggs,
Dunragit and Beattock. Together these represent the closed station sites most likely to be
viable, lying, as they do, near to the largest un-served settlements along each line. In
addition these sites are those identified as potential reinstatement locations in the current
Structure and Local Plans. Following an appraisal of the various rail options it was
concluded that it was not feasible to take forward the re-opening of Beattock or Dunragit
stations in the short term. Subsequently, this study was commissioned to investigate the
issues and opportunities at Eastriggs.
1.3.9
Transport for Development: Improved Connectivity to Edinburgh Feasibility Study,
prepared for South West Scotland Regional Transport Partnership (MVA, June 2007)
While not directly related to the study in hand, this work was an examination of the
potential for improving the connectivity between Dumfries & Galloway and Edinburgh.
The conclusion of the study was that most people in Dumfries & Galloway are not
travelling to Edinburgh or Glasgow, presumably due to the long distances and travel
times involved. In fact, 90% of Dumfries & Galloway residents work in Dumfries &
Galloway and a further 6% work in England.
1.3.10
94% of journeys to work were made by car with the majority of the remainder by bus. The
level of rail usage in Dumfries & Galloway is low.
1.4
The Study Area
1.4.1
The study area focuses on Eastriggs, a small town east of Annan, some 31 kilometres
east of Dumfries in Dumfries & Galloway (See Figure 1.1).
4
Draft STAG Report
Figure 1.1: Study area
© Crown copyright. All rights reserved. Licence Number: 100017967
5
Draft STAG Report
2
Analysis of Problems and Opportunities
2.1
Introduction
2.1.1
The STAG guidelines state that “identified or perceived problems or potential
opportunities with the transport system are the essential starting point for any STAG
study”. This chapter explores the problems and opportunities to be found within the study
area.
2.2
Problems
General problems in Dumfries & Galloway
2.2.2
Ageing and declining population: Dumfries & Galloway is a large, and largely rural
area in southwest Scotland. The current structure plan (published in December 1999)
noted that it was likely that the population of Dumfries & Galloway would slightly decline
and age over the plan period (to end 2009).
2.2.3
Published mid-year population estimates indicate that the total estimated population of
the area in mid-1999 was 147,170 and in mid-2001 was 147,780 with the slight increase
due to inward migration. This suggests that the population may not fall as much as was
anticipated over the plan period though current projections still suggest that the
population will decline slightly in the longer term with the estimated total for mid-2009
being 147,695 and for mid-2019, 147,509.
2.2.4
In mid-1999 the population comprised 19% aged under 16, 62% aged between 16 and 64
and 19% aged 65 and over. By 2007 the proportion of those under 16 had fallen to 17%
and the proportion of those aged 65 and over had risen to 21%. In fact, according to the
mid-2007 estimates Dumfries & Galloway had the highest proportion of its population
over pensionable age of any Scottish local authority.
2.2.5
Falling average household sizes are likely to be contributing to a need for some new
housing as anticipated by the structure plan and, similarly, it is likely that there has been
no decline in the number of people seeking work as the proportion of working age has not
declined and there is a continuing increase in the number of women seeking work.
2.2.6
Decline in traditional employment sectors: The structure plan also notes that
historically Dumfries & Galloway has been economically dependent on a few key
industries and employment sectors: employment opportunities in agriculture,
manufacturing and the service sector are declining and there are unlikely to be significant
new employment opportunities in the industries which remain. The attraction and
retention of business and employment opportunities into well connected local centres like
Dumfries, Annan and Lockerbie is seen as a source of new, and more varied,
employment. The maintenance of local centres which are commercially vital and viable is
an additional important source of local employment, local expenditure and community
cohesion.
2.2.7
Overall, there is a need to pay attention to the maintenance of stable, well-balanced
communities given the changes taking place in the area as a whole.
Transport problems in Dumfries & Galloway
2.2.8
Peripherality of the area: A key factor in maintaining such communities is the perceived,
and actual, peripherality of much of the area and the difficulty of increasing the diversity in
6
Draft STAG Report
2.2.9
the economy under such constraints. The RTS notes that while there are several trunk
routes crossing the area, these are predominantly all-purpose single carriageway roads
and, as such, both less safe and more time-consuming to use than would be ideal. In
addition, while the M74 provides a clear route into Glasgow the routes into Edinburgh are
either indirect or of a non-motorway standard. In fact the “Transport for Development:
Improved Connectivity to Edinburgh Feasibility Study” concluded that those living and
working in Dumfries & Galloway largely do not consider Edinburgh as a destination and
that even if a high grade route were made available the distance and travel time involved
would still be considerable.
2.2.10
Limited rail services: In terms of rail travel the only station lying on a high speed main
line in Dumfries & Galloway is Lockerbie and even here there are concerns at a lack of
early morning and late evening trains and significant timetable gaps. Gretna, Annan,
Dumfries, Sanquhar, Kirkconnel and Stranraer are all served by more local trains
operating mainly to and from Glasgow. While these more local trains do provide a
valuable local service and are a key source of additional transport choice and point of
access to the wider rail network it is noted that fares are high particularly where the
services operate largely as ‘lifeline’ services in fragile communities.
2.2.11
Limited bus services: Bus services are problematic due to the nature of the area with
high travel times and low levels of usage. The majority of services are not commercially
viable and a high proportion are procured by Dumfries & Galloway Council / SWestrans
at a cost of around £3.5 million annually. However, taking together scheduled and
demand responsive services there is a good overall network catering for 6 million
journeys a year.
2.2.12
Dumfries & Galloway, therefore, has its share of the kinds of problems which would be
anticipated in rural areas with ageing and / or declining populations.
Problems in Eastriggs
2.2.13
The Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD, 2006) calculates relative deprivation
across Scotland using 37 indicators across 7 domains, namely: current income,
employment, health, education, skills and training, housing, geographic access and
crime. On these measures quite a number of fairly extensive regions of Dumfries &
Galloway can be seen to lie in the most deprived 20% or 40% of all regions in Scotland
and the vast majority of the rural districts score poorly for geographic access.
2.2.14
Those areas which are most deprived are typically to be found in Upper Nithsdale
(around Sanquhar), the rural areas north of Wigtown and small urban sections of
Dumfries, Annan and the other towns. Eastriggs, though not particularly low scoring
overall tends to score more poorly than the rural areas surrounding it and is in the bottom
40% for education and crime. Eastriggs and all of the areas surrounding it score in the
lowest 20% for geographic access.
2.2.15
Geographic access scores are based on the following factors:

drive time to a GP
drive time to a petrol station
drive time to a post office
drive time to shopping facilities
drive time to a primary school
drive time to a secondary school
public transport time to a GP
public transport time to a post office
7
Draft STAG Report

public transport time to shopping facilities
2.2.16
It is virtually inevitable that rural and semi-rural areas will score poorly as low population
densities increase the spacing between facilities. In many cases it is the very remoteness
of such areas from such facilities which gives them their unique character and attracts
people to them. Thus, it cannot be argued that a poor geographic access score is
necessarily a problem to be addressed in the absence of other information.
2.2.17
The relevant local plan describes Eastriggs as follows:
“Eastriggs and Lowthertown together have a population of 1,683.
Eastriggs is a planned settlement, intended to serve the munitions
industry set up at the time of the First World War. There is still a Ministry
Of Defence facility in the area. Although it no longer provides the level of
employment it once did, it remains significant at a local level.
Construction of the A75 bypass for Eastriggs has considerably reduced
the amount of through traffic, particularly heavy vehicles, and meant an
improvement of the general amenity of the settlement. It has also led to a
reduction in the amount of passing trade. On the north side of the former
A75 Eastriggs is connected to the settlement of Lowthertown by way of a
single carriageway bridge over the railway.”
2.2.18
Although Eastriggs is not particularly deprived according to the SIMD measures it does
seem to suffer from a certain level of general and transport related problems. In addition
local rates of car ownership are well above the Scottish average suggesting that the local
population sees this as the mode of choice and so opportunities to enhance local public
transport should not go uninvestigated.
2.3
Opportunities at Eastriggs
2.3.1
By its geographical location and proximity to an existing rail line the opportunity to
achieve a significant ‘step-change’ improvement in the transport system at Eastriggs is
evident. Transport at the location suffers from the road standard and traffic composition
on the trunk road and the lack of current travel choices as a result of there being no local
rail station on the rail line that passes by Eastriggs.
2.3.2
At the lowest point, post 1965, the Glasgow and South Western Railway Line (via
Dumfries) had only three stations in Dumfries & Galloway, at Kirkconnel, Dumfries and
Annan and none south of Kilmarnock in East Ayrshire. There seems little doubt that it
was not the intention at the time that passenger services on this line should continue in
the longer term. Since this point there have been station reinstatements on this line, at
Sanquhar (1994) and Gretna (1993) in Dumfries & Galloway and at Auchinleck (1984)
and New Cumnock (1991) in East Ayrshire.
2.3.3
It is not currently sensible to speculate about the reinstatement of closed lines, such as
the one which once served Wigtown, though these might well be able to address
considerable transport related problems in such areas. There is, however, proven scope
for re-opening stations on lines, particularly this line, with existing passenger services.
2.3.4
Eastriggs lies close to the trunk road network but the road in question is largely
composed of all-purpose single carriageway road and travel times on it are comparatively
long with unpredictable journey times resulting from the nature of the road and traffic
composition (Heavy Goods Vehicles representing a significant proportion of the total).
2.3.5
Those who cannot, or would prefer not to, travel by car have far fewer options. Eastriggs
has only one scheduled bus service which runs hourly to / from Dumfries and Annan and
8
Draft STAG Report
half-hourly to / from Carlisle. This is a not unreasonable level of service for commuting
trips into Carlisle and an acceptable level of service for those travelling into Dumfries.
2.3.6
Approximate travel times from Eastriggs to key destinations by bus are shown in Table
2.1. Estimated rail travel times are also shown based on those for trips from Annan.
Table 2.1:
destination
Edinburgh
Glasgow
Dumfries
Carlisle
Annan
Gretna
Approximate travel times by public transport from Eastriggs
travel time (bus)
03:45*
03:45*
00:48
00:47
00:10
00:10
travel time (rail)
~02:30**
02:10
00:16
00:25
~00:05
~00:05
times shown in white on black require connections
*bus then train options are excluded due to the extra costs involved but it is noted that these are often quicker
than the bus only options
** varies considerably depending on connections
2.3.7
Passenger trains on this line run less than hourly and irregularly but they do offer much
improved travel times to most destinations.
2.3.8
The reintroduction of a train service would, therefore, enhance local public transport
provision and opportunity for travel choice.
2.3.9
The rural areas surrounding Eastriggs also stand to benefit somewhat. Currently those
people living in these areas who wish to make rail trips need to travel to Annan or Gretna,
both further away than Eastriggs.
2.3.10
Local economic benefits: In addition to the potential for diversification of the underlying
transport network reinstatement of a station could result in local economic gains.
Eastriggs has some tourist potential as it hosts “The Devil’s Porridge Museum” dedicated
to the history of the munitions factory to which the town owes its existence. Though the
potential is probably modest, facilities to serve visiting tourists could provide some
employment and some increase in economic diversity. Similarly, increased potential for
inbound visits for shopping, education or work could also somewhat increase the range of
facilities and opportunities on offer in the town.
2.3.11
Enhanced viability of G&SW line: A final point is that, provided there is no major impact
on travel times, further station reinstatements should increase the overall attractiveness
of passenger services on the Glasgow South Western Railway Line as a whole by
offering existing, and potential future users, an increased choice of destinations and so
increasing its potential market. This should help to ‘future proof’ the line by providing
support for its long term viability.
2.4
Issues
2.4.1
There do not appear to be any major issues which would affect consideration of the
problems and opportunities in the Eastriggs area. There are no major infrastructure
projects or major development projects nearby whose advancement is in doubt. The
construction of a Dumfries Southern Bypass is still being investigated but this would not
have a major impact on the transport situation in the area.
9
Draft STAG Report
2.5
Constraints
2.5.1
As this project is primarily considering the reinstatement of pre-existing station facilities
there are few likely constraints.
2.5.2
There is likely to be a need for larger areas of parking than would have been found in
relation to the original stations but, conversely, much less requirement for goods handling
space and / or facilities. All of the locations under discussion are surrounded by a certain
amount of green space and it should be possible to identify an area sufficient for car
parking so long as environmental, access and visual intrusion concerns can be
addressed.
2.5.3
Agreement with Network Rail, First Scotrail and Transport Scotland will be essential in
order to ensure that all parties are happy to consider increased passenger stops for trains
on this line. Without agreement from all three of these bodies it will not be possible to
proceed under any circumstances. However, initial indications are that these
organisations will consider additional stops on this line, subject to further investigation.
2.5.4
Cost may well be a constraint. Although the proposals involve the reinstatement of
existing stations and, as such, their construction costs are relatively modest in
comparison to the cost of designing and building facilities from scratch, the costs are still
likely to be considerable in absolute terms and it will be necessary to identify sources of
funding before proceeding.
10
Draft STAG Report
3
Objective Setting
3.1
Pre-existing objectives and policies
3.1.1
The NTS, RTS, Structure Plan, Local Plan and Community Plan have all been produced
in consultation with stakeholders and the wider public and it is, therefore appropriate to
use the objectives outlined above as a starting point. However, there are clearly a great
many too many objectives for a study of this size and there is a need to produce a
rationalised and combined set for this study.
3.1.2
STAG calls for the consideration of objectives under five defined criteria and also for
suggested options to be in line with current planning policy.
3.1.3
A number of pre-existing sets of objectives are relevant to this study and are shown
below.
3.2
3.2.1
The NTS sets five objectives for transport projects and policy:

Promote economic growth by building, enhancing, managing and maintaining
transport services, infrastructure and networks to maximise their efficiency;
Promote social inclusion by connecting remote and disadvantaged communities
and increasing the accessibility of the transport network;
Protect our environment and improve health by building and investing in public
transport and other types of efficient and sustainable transport which minimise
emissions and consumption of resources and energy;
Improve safety of journeys by reducing accidents and enhancing the personal
safety of pedestrians, drivers, passengers and staff; and
Improve integration by making journey planning and ticketing easier and working to
ensure smooth connection between different forms of transport.
3.3
Regional Transport Strategy
3.3.1
The RTS sets ten objectives for regional transport projects and policy:

improve transport links within Dumfries and Galloway and provide fast, safe and
reliable journey opportunities to significant markets, including the national
economic centres of Edinburgh and Glasgow, as well as England and Northern
Ireland;
contribute to improve economic growth and social inclusion in the region whilst
minimising the environmental impacts of transport;
support the national transport target of road traffic stabilisation;
add value to the broader Scottish economy and underpin increased sustainable
national economic growth;
assist in getting visitors/tourists to the region from other parts of Scotland, England,
Ireland and beyond;
making it possible for more people to do business in and from Dumfries and
Galloway by providing sustainable connections to key business centres in the
Central Belt and other locations such as Ayrshire and Cumbria;
support vibrant places that provide employment, healthcare, educational and other
services that people need and want, so that their quality of life is maximised;
reduce the constraint of peripherality, both between the region’s main settlements
and its outlaying areas, and between the region and its external markets;
11
Draft STAG Report

capitalise on improvements to critical long distance corridors to create new
transport services, nodes and development opportunities for Dumfries and
Galloway; and
pursue certain transport schemes in the context of local and national economic
development, while at the same time recognising wider context of economic, social
and environmental imperatives.
3.4
Structure plan
3.4.1
The current version of the Dumfries & Galloway Structure Plan does not set objectives
but does state that the strategy must:
3.4.2
3.4.3

address the needs of the whole area;

increase the viability of services in rural areas;

link development to an integrated transport policy;

consider the needs of areas of high unemployment;

safeguard natural and built heritage sites; and,

ensure that sustainable development provides a backbone for the Plan.
It also quotes the guiding principle that the plan is intended “to encourage the growth and
development of sustainable communities in Dumfries & Galloway” and sets four aims:

to support development of the local economy;

to support urban and rural communities;

to support and protect the natural and built environment; and,

to make best use of services and facilities.
There are a number of policy proposals which may have direct relevance to this study
and these are listed below:
Policy S7: A75 Upgrading

The Council will continue to press the Government to undertake a rapid review of
its policy for the A75, to reflect its national and international role and resolve
deficiencies along the route.
Policy S8: Implementation of Route Action Plans

The Council will continue to press the Government to progress implementation of
Route Action Plans and other management measures along the A7, A76, A77 and
A701 as quickly as possible. A reappraisal of the role of each route should also be
considered, including bypasses for Langholm, Carronbridge, Sanquhar, Kirkconnel,
and the role of the A77 as a link between the Loch Ryan ports and central
Scotland.
Policy S11: Local Public Transport

The Council will continue to co-ordinate, publicise, improve and financially support
local public transport services, in response to local needs and development of a
sustainable transport strategy.
Policy S12: Rail Services

The Council will work with the rail industry and other partners to improve and
upgrade the rail network serving Dumfries and Galloway, by:1.
Seeking to enhance the level of service for passenger trains;
2.
Promoting the improvement or construction of new stations at Eastriggs,
Beattock, Dunragit/Glenluce and Stranraer;
3.
Assessing the scope for other new stations, including Eastriggs;
12
Draft STAG Report
4.
5.
Campaigning for the upgrading of the West Coast Main Line, development
and enhancement of rail services from Lockerbie and further provision of
locally oriented services between Carlisle and Central Scotland; and
Encouraging further development of facilities and services for rail freight.
3.5
Local plans
3.5.1
Again the Local Plans do not set specific objectives but there are a number of policy and
other statements which are of relevance:
General Policy 72: Passenger Transport

3.5.2
The Council will encourage the maintenance and enhancement of passenger
transport facilities. The Council will continue to support the passenger transport
network and will give priority to supporting services in rural areas or which meet
education, employment, shopping and entertainment/recreational needs, subject to
the availability of resources.
The only Local Plan reference to transport at Eastriggs is in relation to the station, “it is
proposed that an area to the west of Eastriggs should be protected from development in
order to facilitate the potential creation of a new railway station at Eastriggs”.
3.6
Single Outcome Agreement
3.6.1
The Scottish Government, Dumfries and Galloway Council and Community Planning
Partners have agreed the following objectives for Dumfries and Galloway:

an innovative and sustainable rural economy
a region where people live more active and healthy lives
a place where people feel better connected, secure and at home
people are better prepared for a changing world
the region’s natural and cultural assets are enhanced in a sustainable and
environmentally friendly way
3.7
Community Plan
3.7.1
The Dumfries & Galloway Community Plan is based on three themes of action:

Inclusive Communities
enabling people to have the means and motivation to make a greater
contribution to the social, economic, environmental and cultural life of our
region
improving the opportunities for individuals to use services, facilities and
employment
making the most of the opportunity for active citizenship
Safe and Healthy Communities
protecting the rights of individuals to live in confidence and without fear for
their own or others’ safety
narrowing the health divide and encouraging healthy lifestyles
integrating measures encouraging and sustaining healthier lifestyles into our
policies, activities and programmes
making sure that all our policies, activities and programmes take account of
the links between health and associated environmental, social and economic
issues to encourage and sustain healthier lifestyles
Enterprising and Learning Communities
working in partnership to improve networks, including investment in new
technologies to support a better quality of life
13
Draft STAG Report
-
-
diversifying the local economy by creating new business opportunities,
attracting inward investment and growing and developing new and local
companies
encouraging people to take part in learning throughout their lives with an
emphasis on the quality and availability of lifelong learning
3.8
STAG Requirements
3.8.1
While the STAG guidance does not set specific objectives noting that these will
necessarily be unique to each project it does provide five criteria to act as a framework to
ensure that all impacts are considered. These are:

environment
safety
economy
integration
accessibility and social inclusion
3.9
Environment
3.9.1
The first of the five STAG criteria is environment. The existing objectives which are
considered most relevant to environmental considerations are listed below:

3.9.2
NTS: Protect our environment and improve health by building and investing in
public transport and other types of efficient and sustainable transport which
minimise emissions and consumption of resources and energy.

RTS: Support the national transport target of road traffic stabilisation.

RTS: Support vibrant places that provide employment, healthcare, educational and
other services that people need and want, so that their quality of life is maximised.

RTS: Pursue certain transport schemes in the context of local and national
economic development, while at the same time recognising wider context of
economic, social and environmental imperatives.

Dumfries & Galloway Council / SWestrans: Improve public transport provision
for local communities.
The background to this project is largely focussed on the opportunities which may be
offered by station reinstatements and on the problems encountered by residents in the
study areas who do not have regular access to a car. Public transport improvements are
often a key aspect in the overall reduction of the impact of the transport system on the
environment but it is noted that, in and of themselves, increases in public transport
provision do not necessarily result in overall environmental gains, particularly in hard-toserve rural areas. However, the availability of public transport generally is a key feature of
less environmentally damaging transport systems overall. The following objective has
been set.

3.10
Safety
3.10.1
Safety is the second of the STAG criteria and the following pre-existing objectives are
relevant.

NTS: Improve safety of journeys by reducing accidents and enhancing the
personal safety of pedestrians, drivers, passengers and staff.
SOA: a place where people feel better connected, secure and at home
RTS: improve transport links within Dumfries and Galloway and provide fast, safe
and reliable journey opportunities to significant markets, including the national
14
Draft STAG Report
Ireland
3.10.2
The largest single source of transport related safety issues in Dumfries & Galloway
appears to be a high level of road traffic accidents on the all-purpose single carriageway
sections of the trunk roads which this project can address only indirectly. However, the
key feature of any safety related improvement is that people should both be and feel
safer and the following safety related objective has been set:

3.11
Economy
3.11.1
The third of the STAG criteria is economy and a good number of the pre-existing
objectives are relevant to this.

3.11.2
NTS: Promote economic growth by building, enhancing, managing and maintaining
transport services, infrastructure and networks to maximise their efficiency.
RTS: Contribute to improve economic growth and social inclusion in the region
whilst minimising the environmental impacts of transport.
RTS: Add value to the broader Scottish economy and underpin increased
sustainable national economic growth.
RTS: Assist in getting visitors/tourists to the region from other parts of Scotland,
England, Ireland and beyond.
RTS: Making it possible for more people to do business in and from Dumfries and
Galloway by providing sustainable connections to key business centres in the
Central Belt and other locations such as Ayrshire and Cumbria.
RTS: Reduce the constraint of peripherality, both between the region’s main
settlements and its outlaying areas, and between the region and its external
markets.
Dumfries & Galloway Council / SWestrans: Open up the area for inward tourism
and economic development.
SOA: An innovative and sustainable rural economy
Community Plan: diversifying the local economy by creating new business
opportunities, attracting inward investment and growing and developing new and
local companies
The potential for increased economic growth, opportunity and diversity is a key feature in
this study both in terms of the ability of tourists, commuters and other visitors to access
the study area and in terms of the ability of commuters to access major employment
centres like Dumfries and Carlisle. It is suggested that the following objective captures
the essence of this idea and of the list of objectives above:

3.12
Integration
3.12.1
Integration is the fourth of the STAG criteria and the pre-existing objectives relevant to it
are listed below.
15
Draft STAG Report

3.12.2
NTS: Improve integration by making journey planning and ticketing easier and
working to ensure smooth connection between different forms of transport.

RTS: Capitalise on improvements to critical long distance corridors to create new
transport services, nodes and development opportunities for Dumfries and
Galloway.

Dumfries & Galloway Council / SWestrans: Improve linkages to the Central Belt
and England.
In the context of this study the key integration considerations are the ability of inbound
and outbound travellers to access longer distance travel and a range of destinations. For
public transport users in particular the choice of destinations is currently limited by the
need to reach major interchange points and / or to consider journeys involving multiple
modes and the necessary additional cost, information acquisition and inconvenience
characteristic of such trips. For residents of the study area any long distance trip will
currently involve, at the very least, car then bus / train or bus then bus / train travel.
Dumfries & Galloway’s geographic location limits the options somewhat but it is felt that
the major issue for local residents trying to access longer distance services is the poor
level of service offered by linkages within Dumfries & Galloway itself. The following
objective has been selected in order to address this:

Eastriggs.
3.13
Accessibility and social inclusion
3.13.1
The fifth, and final, STAG criterion is accessibility and social inclusion and the preexisting objectives relevant to this aspect are stated below:

NTS: Promote social inclusion by connecting remote and disadvantaged
communities and increasing the accessibility of the transport network.
RTS: Improve transport links within Dumfries and Galloway and provide fast, safe
and reliable journey opportunities to significant markets, including the national
Ireland.
RTS: Contribute to improve economic growth and social inclusion in the region
whilst minimising the environmental impacts of transport.
RTS: Assist in getting visitors/tourists to the region from other parts of Scotland,
England, Ireland and beyond.
RTS: Reduce the constraint of peripherality, both between the region’s main
settlements and its outlaying areas, and between the region and its external
markets.
Dumfries & Galloway Council / SWestrans: Improve public transport provision
for local communities.
Dumfries & Galloway Council / SWestrans: Enhance access to services in
nearby settlements (particularly Dumfries).
Dumfries & Galloway Council / SWestrans: Improve linkages to the Central Belt
and England.
Dumfries & Galloway Council / SWestrans: Reduce deprivation resulting from
poor accessibility.
Community Plan: improving the opportunities for individuals to use services,
facilities and employment
16
Draft STAG Report
3.13.2
Accessibility and social inclusion is a key aspect of this study. The study area is
geographically remote. Limited access to services imposed by geographic remoteness, or
by other complications, is a major factor in reduced liveability of communities and has a
serious impact on their vitality, viability, community cohesion and long term ability to
thrive. The following objective seeks to address this:

local population.
3.14
Maximising opportunities
3.14.1
A final important consideration, probably the most important consideration in this study,
stems from the fact that there are passenger rail services running through the study area
to which local residents do not have ready access. As the STAG process is intended both
to address problems in the transport system and to take advantage of potential
opportunities a final objective has been set to allow the potential of the study options to
maximise transport opportunities to be assessed:

3.15
SMART study objectives
3.15.1
To avoid applying undue weight to any one of the STAG criteria and to limit the overall
number of objectives only one objective has been outlined for each criterion with one
additional objective covering the potential to maximise transport opportunities. The six
objectives are:

3.15.2

Eastriggs.

local population.

These objectives are SMART in that they are specific, potentially measurable, attainable,
relevant and can be timebound.
17
Draft STAG Report
4
Option generation, sifting and development
4.1
Preliminary options
4.1.1
If taken at face value it might be envisaged that the options generated by this study and
intended to address the issues identified and meet the objectives proposed would include
a range of possibilities from local development schemes, road options, bus based options
and rail based options.
4.1.2
In practice as this study builds on a considerable number of pre-existing studies many of
these options are being addressed independently or have already been rejected.
4.1.3
Firstly, let us consider the options for local development. Industrial and business
operations can be encouraged to set up new or expanded plants in certain areas through
a range of measures available to local and national government. These new opportunities
can help to strengthen local economies, increase economic diversity and address social
problems.
4.1.4
In this case any such development would be likely to be seriously impacted by the
transport shortfalls identified as part of this study and which the objectives are intended to
address. In the absence of transport improvements it is unlikely that significant
development can be encouraged in the areas of interest. However, it is hoped that
development of some kind will follow on from transport improvements without the need
for specific intervention and so it is felt that options directly relating to local development
are not appropriate here.
4.1.5
Road based options, while certainly able to achieve many of the desired outcomes run
contrary to the desire to work towards road traffic stabilisation, do not increase the
options for integration and do not significantly increase the options for travel or directly
benefit public transport users. In particular they do little to address the needs of those
who do not have regular access to a car. In addition to this as the majority of the routes in
question lie on the trunk road network it is outwith the remit of the local and regional
authorities to implement improvements. Such improvements must ultimately be taken
forward by the trunk roads authorities.
4.1.6
A number of road based options are being promoted indirectly as part of the RTS
including committed schemes on the A75 and A77 and improvements on the A75
between Gretna and Stranraer, including a southern bypass of Dumfries. Committed
schemes on the A76 narrowly failed to be included in the RTSs priority list but, as these
schemes are committed they should proceed in any case. It is not considered helpful, at
this stage, to introduce alternative road based schemes (which have already been
rejected during the production of the RTS) in competition with the proposals for new
stations (which were not).
4.1.7
A Bus Action Plan accompanies the RTS. It notes that the service through Eastriggs does
run on a commercial footing, at least on weekdays. As this service is run commercially
and such provision is able to respond readily to changes in demand it is unlikely that
there is scope for substantial bus service improvements without considerable subsidy.
The Bus Action Plan does outline a range of proposals likely to improve the general level
of bus service provision including the development of community based and demand
responsive transport as well as general infrastructure and vehicle improvements and an
assessment of fares policy.
18
Draft STAG Report
4.1.8
Although bus service improvements over and above the measures incorporated in the
Bus Action Plan are likely to be unrealistic we have included an option incorporating
improved bus services for the sake of completeness.
4.2
Options for Stage 1 appraisal
4.2.1
The RTS examined, found desirable, but rejected as un-deliverable the reinstatement of
the direct Dumfries to Stranraer rail line. The Region Wide Rail Station Strategy
commissioned to progress the RTSs station related priority measure further ruled out the
possibility of reinstating stations at Beattock and Dunragit in the foreseeable future. This
study notes that when considering the lines which are still in existence the only remaining
closed station locations which could serve populations of any size are those around
Thornhill and at Eastriggs. There are also no new population centres which could be
served from the existing lines.
4.2.2
For the reasons outlined above it is not appropriate in this study to be considering
options, with the exception of a bus based option, which are either being taken forward
elsewhere or which have already been rejected. As a consequence of this the options
which are appropriate for consideration here are as follows:

Option 1 - enhanced bus services
1a – timetable enhancements – increase existing service frequency to every
30 minutes from Eastriggs to Dumfries
1b – increased range of destinations
1b(i) – enhance service to local interchange points
1b(ii) – enhance long distance services to Edinburgh and Glasgow
Option 2 – reinstate Eastriggs Station
Option 3 – Preferred choice from Option 1 together with Option 2
4.3
Do minimum
4.3.1
The Do Minimum needs to provide a baseline for appraisal in each of the future
assessment years. This should reflect the situation existing in those years if only those
schemes currently committed are implemented.
4.3.2
In the case of Eastriggs there are no committed schemes of any size and there are no
substantial changes in population size or transport patterns anticipated. In addition there
are no transport models suitable for use in this area as the resolution of the Transport
Model for Scotland in this area is insufficient to assess schemes of this kind.
4.3.3
It is, therefore, considered safest to assume that the Do Minimum case will be better
represented by the current situation than by any extrapolation from this. As a
consequence it is assumed that Do Minimum bus and rail services are as current and that
there will not be significant changes in the total proportion of the population travelling or
substantial mode shift.
4.4
Reference case
4.4.1
Given the likelihood that the impacts of the transport schemes proposed will be highly
localised, it is suggested that there is not a requirement for a separate reference case.
19
Draft STAG Report
5
Part 1 Appraisal
5.1
Introduction
5.1.1
This chapter covers the Part 1 appraisal stage and:

5.1.2
states the transport planning objectives for the study;
assesses the options against these objectives and against the STAG criteria and
established policy directives;

assesses the feasibility of the options;

estimates the affordability of the options;

assesses the public acceptability of the options; and,

selects or rejects options for the detailed Part 2 Appraisal.
Full appraisal summary tables can be found in Appendix 1.
5.2
Assessing the options against the transport planning
objectives
5.2.1
The objectives have been designed to encapsulate the transport problems and
opportunities in the Eastriggs area. Consequently the performance of the options against
the study objectives is a measure of their ability to address the local problems and
capitalise on the local opportunities. Here (Table 5.1) the options are scored against the
objectives using the standard seven point scale from -3 to +3 where -3 represents a
major disbenefit, +3 represents a major benefit and 0 indicates no effect.
Table 5.1:
option
1a
1b(i)
1b(ii)
2
3 (1a + 2)
1
2
study objectives
3
4
5
0
0
0
+1
0
0
0
0
+1
+1
+1
0
+1
+1
+1
+1
+1
+1
+1
+2
+1
+1
0
+2
+2
6
sum
+1
+1
+1
+2
+2
4
3
3
8
8
5.2.2
The three bus options score similarly. Scores against the first two objectives are uniformly
neutral. This is because any small environmental gains achieved though mode shift have
to be offset against the environmental costs of running bus services throughout the day
when there are few passengers. There are unlikely to be significant safety gains as buses
run on the road network where that the majority of safety issues in Dumfries & Galloway
are found and it is difficult to ensure that people feel safe at remote bus stops, particularly
late at night. Option 1b(i) – enhance service to local interchange points scores less well
against Objective 3 because it is felt that tourists and businesses are likely to be deterred
by the requirement to interchange before reaching the improved element of the network.
5.2.3
Option 1b(ii) scores less well against Objective 5. This is because there are currently no
services to Edinburgh or Glasgow. A conceivable level of improvement might be three
services a day to both destinations. While this would increase the options for local
residents as travel times would still be long and frequencies low it would not greatly
improve the range of employment, education and healthcare opportunities which local
residents could access.
20
Draft STAG Report
5.2.4
The station reinstatement option scores better against the environment and safety
objectives. Passenger services run along these lines in any case and so the
environmental benefits of mode shift must be offset against the extra environmental cost
of the extra stops alone rather than the cost of running extra services. Travelling by train
in Dumfries & Galloway is safer than using other modes and there are well established
procedures for increasing the feeling of safety and security at rural stations. In addition
the majority of those waiting alone at the stations are likely to being doing so in the
mornings before beginning an outbound trip and there are generally fewer safety /
security issues in the early mornings than in the late evenings.
5.2.5
The station reinstatement option also scores better than the bus options against
Objectives 5 and 6 as it is considered that if will have a greater impact on the range of
options open to local residents for access to employment, education and healthcare and
it capitalises better on the opportunity presented by the currently operating passenger rail
services.
5.2.6
Option 3 is made up of Option 1a, the highest scoring option from this group, and Option
2. However, this combined option gets the same score as Option 2 alone. This is
because this combined option does not offer much in the way of improvement over the
station reinstatements alone given the faster travel times achievable on the rail network
and the bus based element of the scheme is subject to the same environmental issues as
described in Section 5.2.2.
5.3
Anticipated impacts on the STAG criteria
5.3.1
Using the standard seven point scale the anticipated impacts of the options on the STAG
criteria are shown in Table 5.2.
Table 5.2:
1a
1b(i)
1b(ii)
2
3 (1a + 2)
Anticipated impact of options on the STAG criteria
environment
safety
economy
integration
0
0
0
+1
0
0
0
0
+1
+1
+1
0
+1
+1
+1
+1
+1
+1
+1
+1
accessibility and
social inclusion
+1
+1
0
+1
+1
5.3.2
The anticipated impact of the options against the STAG criteria is quite similar to the
scores against the study objectives as these were set with the STAG criteria in mind.
Thus, all of the bus options have neutral scores for the environment and safety criteria
while the rail option is anticipated to have a small positive impact. Against the economy
criterion option 1b(i) is expected to have a largely neutral effect with the positive effect of
the service improvements offset by the need to interchange.
5.3.3
For the accessibility and social inclusion criterion all of the options score slightly positively
except 1b(ii) which scores less well for similar reasons to those outlined in Section 5.2.3
as conceivable increases in the number of long distance services are unlikely to be large
enough or offer enough travel time improvements to have a serious impact on the
number of options available. In general the rail options do not score more highly than the
bus options because, although they increase possibilities, fares tend to be high and so
those on low incomes may struggle to take full advantage of the improvements.
5.3.4
As was the case for the scores against the study objectives the rail options typically score
better against the criteria than the bus options. However, the assessment against the
21
Draft STAG Report
criteria here is not intended to differentiate between the options but more to confirm that
there are no likely disbenefits.
5.4
Impacts on policy directives
5.4.1
The Regional Transport Strategy (RTS) put in place six key transport policies, the first
five of which are supportive of the enhancement of bus services or opening of rail
stations:

5.4.2
Policy 1 – the Partnership will promote schemes which will not only benefit
Dumfries and Galloway but will add value to the broader Scottish economy and
underpin increased sustainable national economic growth, aligning to local and
national policy objectives.

Policy 2 – transport interventions promoted through the Regional Transport
Strategy will support the regional economy in relation to local jobs and also
facilitate sustainable connectivity internally as well as externally to key business
centres in the central belt and other locations such as Ayrshire and Cumbria.

Policy 3 – the Regional Transport Strategy seeks to improve quality of life by
promoting vibrant places which provide access for all to employment, healthcare,
education and other services.

Policy 4 – transport interventions incorporated in the Regional Transport Strategy
seek to address peripherality between the region’s main settlements and outlying
areas, and between the region and its external markets.

Policy 5 – the Partnership will adopt a balanced approach to competing needs,
recognising the role transport plays in sustaining local economies while at the
same time making use of alternative approaches in locations where different
transport policies focused on minimising car use are more appropriate and more
effective.
Policy 6 links the RTS to that of the wider National Transport Strategy and the high level
Government Objectives for transport.

5.4.3
Policy 6 – the Partnership will assist the Scottish Government in delivering on its
five high level national Objectives and the National Transport Strategy. A
presumption will be given in favour of transport improvements linked to the
strategic vision based on well defined economic, social and environmental
objectives.
The RTS is accompanied by a Bus Action Plan. There have been considerable
improvements and increases in patronage on Dumfries & Galloway’s bus network in
recent years but it is notable that significant service frequency or coverage increases will
require subsidy and the main focus of the Action Plan is therefore on consolidation and
improvements in quality of the existing system rather than large scale expansion.
Improvements to service frequency and network coverage generally are certainly not
incompatible with the aims of this document and there is direct support for long distance
services to Glasgow and Edinburgh.
5.4.4
In addition the RTS called for a “Region Wide Rail Station Strategy” which was completed
by Atkins Rail Ltd in 2007 and concluded that, of the various station reinstatement options
those at Eastriggs and Thornhill / Closeburn were most viable in the short to medium
term.
5.4.5
Finally the Dumfries & Galloway Structure Plan Policy S11 states that “the Council will
continue to co-ordinate, publicise, improve and financially support local public transport
services, in response to local needs and development of a sustainable transport strategy”
which is supportive of bus service improvements in general. Policy S12 supports station
reinstatements stating that “the Council will work with the rail industry and other partners
to improve and upgrade the rail network serving Dumfries and Galloway, by … promoting
22
Draft STAG Report
the improvement or construction of new stations at Eastriggs … and assessing the scope
for other new stations …”
5.4.6
Overall, it is clear that all of the study options are supported by established policy
directives. In the case of the bus based options this support is typically general in nature
but there is specific support for station reinstatement options.
5.5
Feasibility
5.5.1
There are two aspects to feasibility assessment, namely technical feasibility and
operational feasibility. Technical feasibility relates to the straightforwardness of
implementing the proposal. It also considers whether there are any novel / untried /
leading edge technologies involved and whether there are any notable risks involved.
Operational feasibility relates to the presence of factors which might adversely affect the
ability to operate the proposal over its projected life without major additional costs.
5.5.2
It is considered that all of the study options presented here are technically and
operationally feasible. The station reinstatements restore station facilities to locations
where they were previously supplied and so there can be little doubt that stations at these
locations can be delivered. Similarly the bus based options involve enhancements to
existing services and there are no novel or untried technologies involved.
5.5.3
While detailed analysis has not been carried out at this stage the known population levels
and current public transport usage levels make it unlikely that any of the options could
function operationally without subsidy from some source. However, this need for subsidy
is not unforeseen and so should not seriously adversely affect operational feasibility.
5.6
Affordability
5.6.1
The bus based options would have no infrastructure costs and while it might be
necessary to purchase extra vehicles it is likely that this cost would be borne by bus
operators. From the operational perspective however, all of the current bus services run
on a subsidised basis and any improvements to these would also require subsidy.
5.6.2
The rail based options would have substantial capital costs associated with station
construction but the passenger rail services run already and so the revenue costs of
running services should not significantly increase over the current situation. There will be
costs associated with station maintenance but these are likely to be modest.
5.6.3
In terms of capital costs the bus based options are the more affordable options. However,
over the longer term it is likely that the rail based options will require less revenue
funding. So long as a source of capital funding can be identified these options are likely to
be as affordable, if not more affordable than the bus based options. Option 3 which
combines bus and rail enhancements will have the highest total cost both in terms of
capital and revenue expenditure and it is unlikely that the additional cost will be justifiable
in view of the small additional benefits.
5.7
Public acceptability
5.7.1
Buses already run throughout the study area and the enhancements proposed are not of
a scale sufficient to have any measurable impact on the road network as a whole. There
might be some objection to increased council subsidy of the bus network but overall it is
unlikely that the suggested bus service enhancements would meet with public opposition.
However, they are also unlikely to generate much public support except amongst their
existing users.
23
Draft STAG Report
5.7.2
With regard to the rail options the proposals involve the reinstatement of stations on sites
previously occupied by them and, as such, seem unlikely to cause local controversy.
Indeed there is widespread community support for the reinstatement of a station. In
addition consultation was undertaken as part of the “Glasgow to Stranraer: GlasgowDumfries-Carlisle Rail Study” (Dumfries & Galloway internal report, November 2005) and
did not identify any major barriers to the reinstatements. This work also included a letter
drop survey of Eastriggs residents of whom 36% thought they would use a reinstated
station at least once a week and only 8% responded that they would never use it
suggesting that there is at least some level of active public support for the proposals.
5.7.3
In addition there was extensive consultation during the creation of the National and
Regional Transport Strategies and Structure and Local Plans all of which feeds into this
study.
5.8
Participation and Consultation
5.8.1
Due to the large volume of pre-existing work leading into this study the bulk of the
necessary consultation relates to the Part 2 appraisal.
5.8.2
However, specific consultation at Part 1 was undertaken with:
5.8.3

Dumfries & Galloway Council,

SWestrans,

Network Rail,

Transport Scotland, and,

SPT.
The main focus of this consultation work was to ensure that the proposals did not conflict
with any pre-existing plans or policies and to seek comment on such topics as the
general feasibility of the plans and any specific issues relating to rolling stock, train crew
resources and station maintenance.
5.8.4
All of those consulted were supportive in principle subject to the completion of further
analysis work, in particular the demonstration of a workable timetable.
5.8.5
Also at Stage 1, a Project Proposal Form was submitted to Network Rail enabling them to
formally consider the project and to indicate resources and costs associated with
providing advice on aspects of the project, including timetabling and the impact of other
committed or proposed works. The project has now been formally endorsed under this
process.
5.9
Options selected for further consideration
5.9.1
As a result of this assessment of options, the following option has been selected for
detailed appraisal:

5.9.2
Option 2 – reinstate Eastriggs Station Rationale for rejection of alternative options
The following options have been rejected from further consideration due to the low scores
they achieve for progress towards meeting the study objectives.

1a – timetable enhancements – increase existing service frequency to every 30
minutes from Eastriggs to Dumfries
1b(i) – enhance service to local interchange points
1b(ii) – enhance long distance services to Edinburgh and Glasgow
24
Draft STAG Report
5.9.3
Option 3 (1a + 2) has been rejected on the grounds of affordability. The small additional
benefits of this option are not sufficient to justify the substantial increase in operating
subsidy likely to be required.
25
Draft STAG Report
6
Part 2 Appraisal
6.1
Introduction
6.1.1
The Part 2 stage of this STAG appraisal considers the following:
6.1.2

transport planning objectives

STAG criteria

cost to government

risk and uncertainty
A full appraisal summary table can be found in Appendix 2.
6.2
Options
6.2.1
Only one option is brought forward from the Stage 1 appraisal as follows:

6.3
Expected patronage
6.3.1
As part of the 2007 “Region Wide Rail Station Strategy” Atkins calculated the number of
passengers expected daily at Eastriggs Station as 23 using the guidelines set out in the
Passenger Demand Forecasting Handbook. Atkins adopted catchment areas of 0 – 800m
and 800 – 2km and applied expected trip rates per 1000 population to the populations
within these catchment areas. Although not explicitly stated we take it that Atkins adopted
the former catchment area as the walking catchment i.e. the distance within which people
are assumed to be prepared to walk to the station. In addition Eastriggs was assumed by
Atkins to be a ‘free standing town’ with 40% of the station patronage being from beyond
2km of the station. We believe that these are reasonable assumptions.
6.3.2
CB has compared these numbers with the known boardings at comparable stations.
Figures based on boardings at Annan and Gretna Green suggest 24 passengers a day
may board at Eastriggs, very close to Atkins suggested value of 23.
6.3.3
Eastriggs is therefore expected to have a patronage of 8395 per year. This represents a
reasonably good level of patronage within a ScotRail Franchise context and would place
Eastriggs ranked 285th out of 344 stations in the ScotRail Franchise area, there being 60
other stations with lower patronage than is forecast.
Table 6.1:
Station Ranking in Scotland
Station
Alness
Garve
Rank (out of 344)
283
284
Patronage
9,822
9,690
Eastriggs
Plockton
Strathcarron
Arisaig
6.3.4
8,395
285
286
287
8,295
7,856
7,636
Atkins’ estimate is therefore considered robust and used for the analyses in this
appraisal.
26
Draft STAG Report
6.4
Feasibility
6.4.1
A key consideration in the appraisal of this option is whether or not it can be
accommodated into the existing rail timetable. As well as irregular passenger trains there
is an intensive freight service on this line and it is fitting the revised passenger service in
with this which is most difficult. RWA Rail have carried out a detailed study on behalf of
CB using RailSys (a tool accepted by Network Rail for the calculation of running times).
and have concluded that the new service can be accommodated subject to the following
assumptions:
operational assumptions

The current Rules of the Plan values for headways, margins, etc will remain as
now.
A half minute station dwell time at each location in view of the rolling stock which
currently operates the services.
the station will not be fitted for Driver Only Operation of trains.
no future infrastructure enhancement schemes (such as an improved Dumfries
turnback) will be provided.
rolling stock

The route will continue to be served by current rolling stock
All multiple units used can maintain the proposed running times.
infrastructure assumptions

Line speed values remain as at present.
Methods of signalling remain as at present.
The new stations will be capable of dealing with longest passenger train required to
call.
service assumptions

6.4.2
Calls at the new stations will be in addition to existing calls at adjacent locations
and not be as a replacement to balance overall journey times.

the RailSys generated running times catering for the calls are accepted and have
been rounded for train planning purposes.

the timetable impact outwith the Kilmarnock to Carlisle section is to be minimal.
The full report is provided at Appendix 3. While detailed modelling of performance has not
been undertaken it is considered that this timetable could be reliably and robustly
delivered with minimal impacts beyond the local network.
6.4.3
In light of the information supplied to Network Rail in support of a proposed rail station at
Eastriggs, the proposal has been endorsed by Network Rail’s (Scotland) Strategic
Planning Group. This means that, subject to appropriate Agreements being in place and
internal Investment Panel approval, Network Rail Scotland would be prepared to apply
resources to develop the proposals further.
6.5
Review of transport planning objectives
6.5.1
The objectives used for the Stage 1 appraisal were as follows:

balancing the demand for travel to/from the area.
27
Draft STAG Report

6.5.2
6.5.3

Eastriggs.

local population.

connectivity to / from the study area.
For Stage 2 it is necessary that these are revisited to ensure that they are fully SMART in
that they must be specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and timed. All of these
objectives are specific and although the effects described in each one will not necessarily
be easy to measure it is considered that there are indicators which can be used to shed
some light on all of them. All of the objectives are attainable, relevant and, in combination
with likely project timescales, are timed.
The options were assessed against these objectives at Stage 1 and the outcome of this
assessment against a seven point scale from -3 (major disbenefit) to +3 (major benefit) is
shown in Table 6.2.
Table 6.2:
Option
2
1
2
study objectives
3
4
5
+1
+1
+1
+1
+2
6
sum
+2
8
6.5.4
At Stage 2 these scores have been reviewed and found to be reasonable.
6.6
STAG criteria
Environment
6.6.2
6.6.3
6.6.4
In addition to an appraisal against the study’s planning objectives the Stage 2
assessment requires a full appraisal of the effect of the proposed schemes against the
five STAG criteria. The first of these criteria is the environment criterion and consideration
is required of the effects of the proposed schemes on:

noise and vibration

global air quality - carbon dioxide (CO2)

local air quality - particulates (PM10) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2)

water quality, drainage and flood defence

geology

biodiversity and habitats

landscape

visual amenity

agriculture and soils

cultural heritage
In this case the environmental impact of all of the options is small and so Strategic
Environmental Assessments and Environmental Impact Assessments are not required in
addition to the Stage 2 environmental appraisal whose sub-criteria are dealt with
individually below.
Noise and vibration: resulting from transport can have a serious impact on those living
close to transport infrastructure. A detailed noise and vibration assessment has been
undertaken on behalf of CB by Envirocentre. This report is included in full in Appendix 3
and summarised below.
28
Draft STAG Report
6.6.5
Noise: The preliminary assessment examines the impact on noise levels between the
current situation in which all trains (freight and passenger) pass the proposed site without
stopping and the proposed situation in which passenger trains stop at a railway station.
Therefore the only impact on the local noise environment is considered to be the noise
associated with passenger trains pulling away from the proposed platform.
6.6.6
Two locations (Site A and Site B) are being considered at Eastriggs. The railway line
runs through a cutting approximately 2.5metres below existing ground level at Site B.
Due to the increased noise level associated with trains pulling away from the station “onpower”, it is considered that predicted railway noise levels at both sites at Eastriggs will
satisfy the second and third bullets of the assessment criteria as follows:
6.6.7
The relevant noise level will be greater by at least 1.0dB(A) than the prevailing
railway system noise; and

The relevant noise level will be greater by at least 1.0dB(A) than the sum of the
total prevailing railway system noise over a 15 year period.
It is therefore predicted that the proposed railway station will have at least a MODERATE
impact on local noise levels at both sites. In order to determine whether the railway
station will have a Major impact, the number of properties that will experience noise levels
above 68dB will be considered at both sites.
6.6.8
The railway noise at Site A is predicted to be above 68dB(A) at source both with and
without the railway station. The impact is therefore considered to be of MAJOR
Significance. On comparison of the distances where the noise levels are greater than
68dB(A) it is noted that the noise generated by the activities at the proposed railway
station have a larger distance of influence. However, as a result of its rural location only
two houses are predicted to experience noise levels greater than 68dB(A) as they lie
within 27.5 meters of the railway line.
6.6.9
The railway noise at Site B is predicted to be below 68dB(A) at source both with and
without the railway station due to the presence of the shallow cutting. The impact is
therefore considered to be of MODERATE Significance.
6.6.10
Therefore, it is recommended that noise is taken forward as a design criterion for the final
siteing and design of the station platform and any buildings to ensure that any noise
impact is minimised. Incorporation of noise barriers would also reduce the impact on the
local noise environment.
6.6.11
Vibration: The principal source of vibration is associated with train movements. As trains
already travel along the existing line, no new types of vibration are to be introduced by
the proposed new station. Further, as the railway line is at capacity, no additional train
movements are forecast.
6.6.12
The impact of vibration generally increases with the speed of the moving train. As a
proportion of the existing trains are proposed to halt at the station, the average speed of
the trains at the station site will be less, thereby reducing the vibration impact.
6.6.13
Based on the above discussion, no detailed assessment of the vibration impact is
considered to be necessary.
6.6.14
Global air quality: and in particular carbon emissions, are an important issue and
transport schemes have a significant part to play in improving air quality and reducing
carbon emissions. Envirocentre has carried out a preliminary analysis of this issue on
behalf of CB and have concluded that, due to the very small number of trips involved
there will be no measurable impact on global air quality.
6.6.15
Local air quality: is an issue if it deteriorates to a level able to have impacts on human
health and on the health of the local flora. For the purposes of STAG assessment of the
29
Draft STAG Report
levels of PM10 and NO2 are considered sufficient as a proxy for total impacts on local air
quality. Detailed work on this issue has been undertaken by Envirocentre on behalf of
CB. The air quality report is included in full in Appendix 4 and summarised below.
6.6.16
On the basis of the best available estimate, it is anticipated that some 23 trips a day will
be generated at Eastriggs Station. The majority of these will transfer from car while the
bulk of the remainder will transfer from bus. As the buses in question will still run and the
changes in traffic flows over the wider area will be immeasurably small the only locations
likely to experience a measurable change in local air quality are the areas immediately
adjacent to the station access roads.
6.6.17
Envirocentre has established that the baseline levels of PM10 and NO2 air quality along
the approach to the Eastriggs Station sites fall well below UK National Air Quality
Objective levels. They have then assessed levels with and without the station for a 2009
base year and a 2024 future year using the standard DMRB model. This indicates that 2
properties at the western site and 9 at the eastern site can be expected to experience
worse air quality than would have been the case without the station but that the degree of
worsening is not enough to affect the overall trend for improving air quality at these
location: these properties still have future air qualities better than the existing, already
good, air qualities and well below objective levels.
6.6.18
Local air quality could be affected during the construction phase, particularly due to dust
emissions but this can be effectively limited by adopting best practice at a site level and
any impacts which do occur will be short term. Overall it is considered that the impact of
this option on local air quality issues will be negligible.
6.6.19
Water quality, drainage and flood defence: New developments can have a profound
impact on local patterns of drainage and can raise the risk of flooding if not carefully
designed and assessed. Detailed work on this issue has been undertaken by
Envirocentre on behalf of CB. Their findings are included in full in Appendix 5 and
summarised below.
6.6.20
The potential impacts on the surface water, groundwater and hydrogeology at each site
were assessed using the following methodology:

6.6.21
6.6.22
desk based review of available information, and design of the proposed works in
relation to any local watercourses;
consultation with stakeholders (Dumfries & Galloway Council and SEPA);
a walkover survey of the site, undertaken on the 20 January 2009;
evaluation of baseline conditions at the site;
assessment of site activities and their potential impacts on the water environment;
and identification of mitigation measures for these activities, if required.
Following development it is generally the case that areas of hardstanding are increased
and this can result in increased surface water runoff in wet weather. Though this does not
represent an overall change in the water balance of the site it can affect the following:

flow patterns for rain falling on the site;

the volume of water that is potentially exposed to pollution;

the volume of water requiring management and treatment prior to discharge; and,

the volume of water discharging into any existing sewers or watercourse nearby.
There can also be an increase in contaminated discharges deriving from:

spillage or leakage of oils and fuels stored on site;
spillage or leakage of oils and fuels from construction machinery or site vehicles;
spillage or leakage of oils and fuels from refuelling machinery on site; and
the use of concrete for hard-standing areas.
30
Draft STAG Report
6.6.23
Currently, although some flooding following heavy rain is known to occur in areas of
agricultural land around the sites there have been no incidents at the sites themselves.
There is no known drainage at the sites though it is likely that there is drainage within the
area of the railway track and it is assumed that this is maintained by Network Rail. A
combined sewer is believed to run close to the site at the original station but should be far
enough away from the site to have no impact on it.
6.6.24
There are no watercourses or private water abstraction points close to, or likely to be
affected by, the development but groundwater vulnerability in this area is high (4b
according to SEPA’s classification scheme.
6.6.25
Development of the site will increase the total area of hardstanding but will not
significantly alter the topography and so changes to current surface water drainage
patterns will not be dramatic. There will, however, be a requirement for site drainage, and
drainage within the track area may need upgrading either by:

6.6.26
upgrading the existing drainage infrastructure, including upsizing pipes and
manholes; or,

using sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) to attenuate additional flows before
they reach the existing drainage during heavy rainfall.
During the construction phase especially there is a risk of contaminated discharge but the
following measures are considered sufficient to reduce this risk to an acceptable level:

6.6.27
oil / fuel spills should be dealt with according to documented site emergency
procedures

drains and silt traps should be inspected regularly and cleaned out as necessary;

there should be a designated refuelling point in the site compound, within an

impermeable bunded area;

emergency spillage procedures should be put in place;

when transporting concrete measures should be in place to reduce the risk of
splashing, including an accident plan to be implemented in the event of spillage;

runoff from any stockpile areas should be diverted through a silt trap or buffer zone
prior to discharge to the existing sewers to reduce sediment loadings entering the
system;

any mobile refuelling vehicles should be fitted with drip trays and regularly
maintained;

oil and fuels should be stored on site in a designated bunded area (secondary

containment system) on an impermeable surface and isolated from surface water

drainage systems;

drip trays should be used while refuelling;

regular inspection and maintenance of vehicles, tanks and bunds should be
undertaken; and,

any oil / fuel tanks should be fully drained before they are taken out of use or
removed by suitably qualified technicians.
Following the construction phase the risks of ground and surface water contamination will
be greatly reduced and the only impacts which are considered to have a moderate cost /
negative impact in the longer term are post construction surface water run-off and rail
drainage both of which can be addressed using mitigation measures. Although
groundwater vulnerability is high it is not considered to be significantly at risk so long as
suitable mitigation measures are put in place.
6.6.28
Geology: There are no SSSIs or RIGS sites in the vicinity of the sites and so there will be
no impact on any geological structures which have been identified as being nationally or
regionally significant.
6.6.29
The proposed structures are not large and the areas of interest already support railway
lines and buildings in very close proximity to the sites of interest. As this is the case it can
31
Draft STAG Report
reasonably be assumed that the underlying geology is capable of bearing the necessary
load although a full ground survey would be needed to confirm this. Similarly, the small
scale and location of the proposed structures makes any impact on hydrogeology, future
exploitation of mineral reserves or resource availability extremely unlikely.
6.6.30
Overall geological impacts are considered to be negligible.
6.6.31
Biodiversity and habitat: If there are species or habitats at the development sites which
are of local or national significance then it is important to identify these at this stage so
that appropriate mitigation measures can be put in place. Detailed work on this issue has
been undertaken by Envirocentre on behalf of CB. Their findings are included in full in
Appendix 6 and summarised below.
6.6.32
The method adopted was the standard method for a Stage 1 habitat survey and
subsequent assessment of the value of the habitats and species encountered and is in
line with the standard approach and best practice guidelines developed, respectively, by
the Joint Nature Conservation Committee1 and the Institute of Ecology and Environmental
Management2.
6.6.33
The objectives of the field survey and subsequent reporting are to:

6.6.34
produce a map of habitats for the site and a buffer zone of 100m;
‘target note’ the nature of specific areas or features of ecological interest;
obtain initial records of species of flora and fauna occurring within those habitats;
evaluate the nature conservation value of the habitats on the site;
provide a provisional impact assessment for nature conservation (subject to the
need for any additional surveys); and to

provide recommendations for mitigation and further survey.
In order to meet these objectives the sites were walked and viewed from appropriate
vantage points to facilitate the mapping and identification of the habitats and plant
species present within their boundaries. The surveys were undertaken in mid January
2009 a sub-optimal time of year because many plant species are inconspicuous or
unidentifiable at the time of the survey. In addition, some animal and bird species that are
only active over the summer months will have vacated the site or become inactive and
difficult to detect (bats and insects, for example). A set of ‘target notes’ to locate and
describe specific areas or features of ecological interest was also produced.
6.6.35
Despite the seasonal shortcomings described above it is considered that sufficient
information was gathered to make a satisfactory assessment of the habitats and the
potential for their use by notable faunal species. The assessment of the value of the
habitats follows the standard Phase 1 habitat survey method with cognisance of relevant
local, national and international conservation legislation and initiatives.
6.6.36
Nomenclature for all plant species follows The New Flora of the British Isles3 and for
birds, the British List maintained by the British Ornithological Union4. The habitats are
described according to the standard nomenclature and descriptions developed by the
Joint Nature Conservation Committee for the purposes of Phase 1 habitat survey.
6.6.37
There are two proposed station sites for the reinstatement of Eastriggs station. One is at
the original station site and the other is just east of Central Road. As such both are
1
Joint Nature Conservation Committee 2003 Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey. Revised reprint.
Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management 2006 Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the
United Kingdom. Available online at http://www.ieem.org.uk/ecia/index.html.
3
Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management 2006 Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the
United Kingdom. Available online at http://www.ieem.org.uk/ecia/index.html.
Stace, C.A. 1991 New Flora of the British Isles. Cambridge University Press.
4
Available online at http://www.bou.org.uk/recbrlst1dna.html
2
32
Draft STAG Report
situated within a wider area that is used for either agricultural or urban purposes and all of
the habitats identified are therefore highly modified or created by human activity. These
habitats are shown in Table 6.3.
Table 6.3:
habitat code
A2.1
B4
B5
C3.1
J2.2
Eastriggs site - habitats
habitat name
Dense scrub
Improved grassland
Marshy grassland
Tall ruderal
Species-poor, intact hedgerow
6.6.38
There were no signs or sightings of any notable species and it is considered that the
habitats present are unlikely to support anything other than relatively common bird
species which may nest and feed in these habitats. Overall the site is assessed as having
limited wildlife interest.
6.6.39
Although the site is of limited wildlife interest it is not without value and the habitats at
either site will be permanently and significantly altered from the current situation. In
addition to the permanent transformation of this habitat, there will also be a period of
relatively continuous, increased disturbance during the construction phase due to the
noise, vibration and potentially, lighting associated with building work.
6.6.40
Operation of the site will extend the increased level of disturbance arising during the
construction phase into the longer-term through the increased level of road and
pedestrian traffic to and from the station and potentially by the installation of additional
lighting. This disturbance during the operational phase will be of a lower intensity and
more intermittent than that which will be experienced during the construction phase.
6.6.41
Given the low wildlife value of the habitat to be lost to the development or disturbed
during site construction and operation the significance of the impacts is expected to be
very low and related primarily the use of the area by common bird species.
6.6.42
Although the impacts arising from the development are expected to be low the following
mitigation measure will reduce them still further:

6.6.43
6.6.44
Clear the scrub habitat in the period of September to February to prevent the loss
of breeding birds or their young (a criminal offence) or hibernating bees.
At the eastern site this would not be necessary as no scrub would need to be cleared.
In addition to mitigation the following measures may be used to enhance the ecological
value of the station area:

6.6.45
Consider enhancement of the hedgerow habitat (especially if this is to be removed)
by supplementary planting of native tree species (especially holly, rowan or other
berry producing species);

Plant shrubs and or trees to screen the station;

Consider the installation of bird and/or bat boxes once the trees are sufficiently
mature for these to be placed 3 m or more above the ground (in order to prevent

interference); and

Include flowering herbaceous and or shrub species as a part of the station
landscaping to provide direct or indirect benefit for insects and potentially, bats and
birds.
With the mitigation and habitat enhancement measures proposed the overall impact of
this proposal is considered to be neutral to slightly positive.
33
Draft STAG Report
6.6.46
Landscape and visual amenity: The proposed sites for the Eastriggs Station
redevelopment are coincident with the original station or slightly to the east within the built
up area of Eastriggs and Lowthertown. This area has not been identified as being of
scenic interest and, as in the case of Option 2a(i) the anticipated visual impact of a small
point development will be very small. Much of the Solway Firth and associated tidal flats
is of national importance from a conservation and scenic perspective but there should be
no impact at all on these as the proposed development will be screened from these areas
by existing developments. Overall, it is not considered that the proposed development will
have an appreciable impact on the local landscape or visual amenity considerations.
6.6.47
Agriculture and soils: The proposed development is small and is associated with
existing roads and railways and so such considerations relating to the severance of
agricultural land are not relevant. The area of land being considered for development is
small and so issues relating to the loss of agricultural land are insignificant.
6.6.48
As the development is expected to incorporate a small area of car parking there is a
potential risk that pollution may run off. However, as the area is small and the land in
question is already adjacent to roads and railway lines the amount of any additional
impact is considered to be negligible and well within the capacity of standard drainage
arrangements. Similarly the impact of airborne deposition is expected to be negligible in
comparison to deposition from traffic on the existing road and railway line as traffic growth
will be very small and the proposals take advantage of existing train services.
6.6.49
During the construction phase the adoption of the measures needed to mitigate risks to
groundwater will also act to mitigate risks to agricultural land and soils and so the overall
impacts on agriculture and soils are considered to be negligible.
6.6.50
Cultural heritage: There are no scheduled ancient monuments or designated gardens /
designed landscapes in the vicinity of the proposed development sites. There is one
listed building in Eastriggs but it sufficiently far from both sites to be unaffected by them.
Parts of the Eastriggs explosives factory are listed in the National Monuments Record but
these are well away from the proposed station sites, to the southwest of the town and will
also be unaffected.
6.6.51
In terms of wider cultural heritage the railway line and previous station site is part of the
local cultural heritage and its reinstatement can be expected to have positive cultural
heritage impacts in terms of this fairly recent history. In terms of earlier history as the
proposals are largely for the development of sites which have been previously developed
or otherwise extensively disturbed any older cultural or archaeological information is likely
to have been destroyed by the earlier development.
6.6.52
Overall the impact of the proposal on cultural heritage issues is expected to be positive
but small.
Safety
6.6.53
There are two strands to the safety appraisal, accidents and security. The “accidents”
group covers all travel related accidents which, as stated in the STAG guidance “…can
impose a wide range of impacts on people and organisations including medical and
healthcare costs, losses in economic output, material damage, emergency services
costs, insurance and legal costs and, more controversially, an allowance for the pain,
grief and suffering incurred.” The “security” group covers risks to the personal security of
travellers, excluding those which are directly travel related, and the risks to their
property. In practice there is both an actual security question and a perceived security
question as both have impacts on the behaviour of travellers.
34
Draft STAG Report
6.6.54
Accidents: STAG requires quantification of accidents only in cases where a measurable
impact on them is anticipated. In this case the majority of transport safety concerns in
Dumfries & Galloway relate to road traffic accidents on the area’s rural roads. There are a
range of accident causing factors on such roads but these include such things as tight
bends, low visibility, poor road surfaces, a lack of street lighting, agricultural vehicles and
livestock and the tendency for those who know the road well to drive faster than would be
ideal. These factors increase the risks to all road users including pedestrians, cyclists,
private vehicle drivers and passengers and bus drivers and passengers.
6.6.55
The scheme proposed is expected to move a small number of trips from being long
distance trips on these roads, either by car or by bus, to being short distance trips to a
local station followed by longer trips by rail which is recognised as being very safe. This
reduction in total vehicle and bus passenger kilometres and shift from long trips on fast
roads to shorter trips on slower roads might be expected to contribute to a reduction in
accidents and accident severity. However, any reduction will be so small and spread over
such a wide area that it will be impossible to measure and impossible to attribute directly
to this scheme.
6.6.56
Conversely, accidents occur more commonly at junctions than on open sections of road.
This proposal should slightly increase the turning movements at the junction of either
Annan Road / the approach to the old station or Annan Road / Central Road as vehicles
turn off the main road to approach the station. It could be anticipated that this will lead to
an increase in the number of accidents at this location, though, given the lower speeds
typical in built up areas they are not likely to be severe. However, the size of the traffic
increase is expected to be extremely small and it is probable that there will be no
measurable effect.
6.6.57
Overall, it is considered that these two small opposing effects will largely cancel each
other out and that they will be immeasurably small in any case so that the overall impact
of this option on accidents can be treated as being negligible and does not require a full,
quantified assessment.
6.6.58
Security: There are two aspects to security. Firstly there is the actual security of users
and secondly there is the perceived level of security. The security sub-criterion calls for
the consideration of such site features as:
6.6.59

site perimeters, entrances and exits

formal surveillance provision

informal surveillance provision

landscaping

lighting and visibility

emergency call facilities
All of these aspects of a site can have an impact on the actual and perceived levels of
security.
6.6.60
It is anticipated that Eastriggs Station will attract a number of trips previously made by
bus or by car. Some of those transferring from car will leave their car in the station car
park. There are potentially issues relating to the personal security of those waiting at the
station and to the security of vehicles parked in the car park. Although rural stations are
sometimes perceived as having poor security levels, primarily due to their low levels of
usage, it is generally the case that security related incidents are rare. In addition there is
now considerable experience in the rail industry of making rural stations feel as safe and
secure as possible using security enhancing facilities such as CCTV and emergency
contact points.
6.6.61
Rural bus stops are also commonly perceived as having poor security levels and are
harder to supply with security enhancements due to their smaller scale. Therefore those
35
Draft STAG Report
transferring from bus are likely to experience some increase in their perceived security
levels although there will probably be no impact on actual security levels.
6.6.62
Users transferring from car are unlikely to feel that their personal security has increased
though they may well consider their vehicle to be more secure in its new parking location
than it was in the old one at their destination. In any case their demonstrated preference
suggests that any perceived security issues are acceptable.
6.6.63
Overall the impact on actual security is considered to be negligible. The impact on
perceived security is likely to be slightly positive but the magnitude of the change involved
is considered too small to require full assessment.
Economy
6.6.64
There are three strands to the economic appraisal:
6.6.65

transport economic efficiency (TEE)

wider economic benefits (WEBS)

economic activity and location impacts (EALI)
Ideally all of these, and particularly the TEE assessment would be informed by the output
from a multi-modal transport model. However, in this case no suitable model is available
as Dumfries & Galloway do not have their own model and the resolution of the Transport
Model for Scotland in this area is not sufficient to enable its use in this assessment. As
this is the case a spreadsheet based approach has been adopted for the TEE appraisal.
6.6.66
The TEE assessment has seven quantified elements three of which relate to user
benefits (travel time, user charges and vehicle operating costs) and four of which related
to private sector operator impacts (investment costs, operating and maintenance costs,
revenues and grant / subsidy payments). In addition there is a requirement for qualitative
assessment of quality / reliability benefits to users. Freight benefits are considered to be
negligible as the revised passenger trains have been fitted around the existing freight
trains and impacts of road traffic levels will be very small. They have therefore been
omitted from assessment. It has been assumed that the year of opening will be 2012 and
the appraisal period extends to 2071.
6.6.67
Travel time benefits: It is assumed that there are two strands to travel time benefits,
firstly the time saved by new rail users transferring from other modes (which are slower
on average) and secondly the travel time disbenefits incurred by existing rail users whose
journeys will take longer.
6.6.68
Expected patronages from the two stations were calculated as part of an earlier study by
Atkins. These values have been reviewed and are considered suitable for use. It has
been assumed that there will be no growth in passenger numbers over the assessment
period. Data on current travel mode collected as part of the “Glasgow to Stranraer,
Glasgow-Dumfries-Carlisle, Rail Study” has been used to estimate the proportions of
these trips transferring from various modes and / or generated. Census journey-to-work
data has been used to infer the major destinations and to estimate the length distribution
of the new trips.
6.6.69
For the key destinations car travel times have been taken from AA routeplanner, rail
travel times from the draft timetables prepared by RWA Rail (see Appendix 8) and bus
travel times from existing timetables in simple cases and from Traveline Scotland in more
complex cases. Journey time savings to each key destination have been calculated and
used in combination with the assumed original mode to calculate the average journey
time saving per kilometre across all modes. Using the established trip length distribution
this value has been used to calculate the travel time saved each year. This has been
36
Draft STAG Report
adjusted to a 2002 monetary value (using the values of time laid out in the STAG
Technical Database, Sections 9.5.13 and 9.5.13) which has then been discounted.
6.6.70
In order to assess the travel time disbenefits to existing users those boarding and
alighting at Dumfries have been considered. It has been assumed that these numbers will
be constant over the appraisal period and, in the absence of more detailed information, it
has been assumed that half of these total passengers leave / arrive via Eastriggs. The
actual travel time disbenefit depends on the particular train being considered but the
average disparity between the existing and proposed timetables at Dumfries is 02:28
while the vast majority of trains enter and leave the assessment area at their original
times. It is therefore assumed that the average delay to journeys to / from Dumfries is
01:14 each side of Dumfries Station. Through passengers are ignored as most trains
enter / leave the assessment area at their existing times and so these passengers do not
suffer systematic delays. There will be a proportion of passengers making journeys which
pass though Dumfries but do not pass right through the study area. The number of these
passengers is difficult to estimate from published data and the delays they suffer will vary
from the full delay (02:28) to no delay at all. Given these uncertainties these passengers
have been ignored.
6.6.71
User charges: The relevant user charges are considered to be rail fares, bus fares and
parking charges. All those transferring to rail incur rail fares while those transferring from
bus will save bus fares and those transferring from car are assumed to save parking
charges. Data on rail fares from the existing adjacent stations has been used to estimate
the relationship between distance and rail fare for peak and off-peak trips. Data on the
estimated frequency with which respondents would use the new stations collected as part
of the “Glasgow to Stranraer, Glasgow-Dumfries-Carlisle, Rail Study” has been used to
estimate the balance between peak and off-peak travellers on the basis that those who
say they will travel frequently are likely to travel at peak times and those who say that
they will travel less frequently at off peak times. This fare and peak split information was
used in combination with the assumed trip length distribution to estimate an overall
average rail fare (for return trips).
6.6.72
Daily parking charges for key destinations have been calculated and converted to
average charges for trips of different lengths. These have been combined with the
assumed trip length distribution to give an overall average parking charge.
6.6.73
There are nearly as many bus operators operating in the study area as there are bus
services and none publish their fares in any readily accessible format. It has therefore
been assumed that bus fares are equal to the rail fares multiplied by 0.75.
6.6.74
Together with the assumed original mode split (see Section 6.6.68) this data has been
used to estimate the annual increase in user charges which has then been adjusted to
2002 prices and discounted.
6.6.75
Vehicle operating costs: Users who shift away from cars will be expected to gain the
vehicle operating costs which they would otherwise have used to make the journey.
Using the assumed total number of travellers, original mode split, assumed trip distance
distribution and parameters specified in the STAG Technical Database (Sections 9.5.17
and 9.5.18) the amount saved annually has been calculated in 2002 prices and
discounted. Strictly speaking this discounting process should include an adjustment for
the change in fuel prices over time. However, as the total magnitude of this factor is small
it is felt that the extra accuracy afforded by this is not required. In addition, the distance
driven to the station has been assumed to be negligible in comparison to the original trip
and ignored.
6.6.76
Quality/reliability benefits: There is no established methodology for a quantitative
assessment of quality / reliability benefits and so these are assessed qualitatively.
37
Draft STAG Report
6.6.77
The total investment costs are based on those calculated by Atkins in their 2006
“Region Wide Rail Station Strategy”. However, these assumed (as there was a single line
at the time of the study) that a station at Eastriggs would require only one platform. To
correct for this the cost of platform construction has been doubled and the cost of a
footbridge (as estimated for Beattock) has been added. The revised figure covers the
cost of station infrastructure, parking and access construction. As the schemes use
existing trains no additional costs have been added for the purchase of additional rolling
stock. These costs have been adjusted to 2002 prices and discounted.
6.6.78
Operating and maintenance costs: Station operating costs have been estimated at
£21,000 (2009 prices) per station based on figures for a number of suburban stations in
London. Facilities which will clearly not be provided at the sites proposed here, such as
staffed ticket offices, have been omitted from this estimate.
6.6.79
These figures have not been adjusted for optimism bias because the stations they are
based on typically handle numbers of passengers two orders of magnitude greater than is
anticipated here. It is felt that this will increase this estimate anyway to a level where
extra adjustment should be unnecessary. In addition these operating costs are in line with
those proposed by the “Glasgow to Stranraer, Glasgow-Dumfries-Carlisle, Rail Study”
6.6.80
The extra cost of rail operation has been estimated on the basis of the additional fuel
likely to be consumed during an additional stop adjusted for the number of trains
expected to pass the station. It has been assumed that there will be no additional staff
costs.
6.6.81
These costs have been adjusted to 2002 prices and discounted.
6.6.82
Revenues: There are two parts to the revenue appraisal. Firstly there is the revenue
gained by the rail operators and secondly there is the revenue lost by local bus operators.
Total annual rail revenues have been calculated on the basis of the expected patronages
and calculated average return fares. Total annual lost bus revenues have been calculated
for the proportion of the patronage believed to switch from bus using a bus fare equal to
the rail fare multiplied by 0.75. These costs have been adjusted to 2002 prices and
discounted.
6.6.83
Grant/subsidy payments: As the income from fare revenues from the reinstatement of
either or both of these stations is not expected to be large it is not considered realistic to
hope that any of the cost of construction will be met by the rail operators. The estimated
value of grants to cover the cost of construction is therefore assumed to be equal to the
cost of construction.
6.6.84
Where the expected total fare revenue is less than the cost of operating the station the
amount of ongoing subsidy required has been taken as the cost of operation less the
expected fare revenue. Where fare revenue is sufficient to cover operating costs ongoing
subsidy has been assumed to be zero.
Result of appraisal for Eastriggs station
6.6.85
The cost of construction of Eastriggs Station has been taken as £1,663,350.68 (2002
prices) while the cost of operation is £31,945.51. Eastriggs is expected to have a
patronage of 23 per day (8395 per year). 71.0% of these passengers are assumed to
have shifted from cars, 21.5% from buses, 6.0% to be generated and 1.5% to have
shifted from rail via other stations. Key destinations are assumed to be Gretna, Carlisle,
Penrith, Annan, Dumfries and Glasgow giving an average rail trip distance of 15.8 km.

The average travel time saving from a shift to rail is 04:18 per trip while the
average disbenefit to existing rail passengers is taken as 01:14 per trip.
38
Draft STAG Report

6.6.86
The average return rail fare is calculated as £6.45 while the average return bus
fare is taken as £4.84.

Relevant parking charges range from £0.00 (Gretna, Annan, Dumfries) to £15.60
(Glasgow) with the average, taking into account the trip length distribution is
calculated as £0.88.

Vehicle operating cost savings gained by transferring car drivers are £0.77 on
average.
The output of the economic assessment can be found in Table 6.4. All figures are Net
Present Value in 2002 prices.
6.6.87
The overall user benefits are negative. There are two reasons for this. Firstly the small
expected patronage means that overall travel time disbenefit to existing passengers is
larger than the overall travel time benefit to new passengers. In addition the overall travel
time benefit and VOC benefit to users is outweighed by the user charge disbenefit as
average rail fares are larger than the corresponding bus fares and parking charges.
Because of the disbenefit to individual users these benefits cannot be made positive by
increasing the expected patronage.
6.6.88
Overall operator benefits are positive as the extra income from fares is more than enough
to cover the operating cost of the station.
6.6.89
Benefits from increased quality and reliability of provision are assessed qualitatively.
Trains are generally perceived as offering higher quality and more reliable public
transport provision than buses and the small number of passengers transferring from bus
to train would be expected to derive some benefit from this. However, in the light of the
low anticipated service frequency the magnitude of this benefit will also be small.
6.6.90
Overall, the total scheme benefits are -£0.51M with a TEE ratio of -0.42 indicating that for
every pound spent there will be an additional 42 pence worth of disbenefit.
6.6.91
If the forecast patronage is increased then the rail revenue gain gradually begins to
dominate over the other scheme disbenefits and for a patronage of 51 per day the overall
scheme benefits are positive. Given the existing patronage on the line it is highly unlikely
that this level of patronage is achievable and in order to achieve a TEE ratio above 1 133
passengers a day would be required. This is approaching the daily patronage at Annan, a
much larger settlement. It is virtually impossible that such a high level of use could be
achieved and that the conclusion that the overall direct economic benefit of this option is
negative is likely to be robust.
6.6.92
There is a case for assuming that, as the new users of the line express a demonstrated
preference for its use they must derive benefits on top of their travel time and VOC gains
which cannot be quantified, such as the ability to make a journey which they could not
previously make or the option of allowing another member of the household to use a car
which was previously required for commuting. There is therefore a case for assuming that
these extra benefits combined with the travel time and VOC benefits outweigh the
disbenefits of increased user charges and that the benefits / disbenefits of new users can
be ignored in favour of the balance between operator benefits and disbenefits to existing
users. On this basis a patronage of 31 is required to give overall positive benefits. While
this is not massively above the forecast patronage of 23 overstatement of scheme
benefits is a common pitfall of appraisal and it would be dangerous to suggest that
patronages above the forecast level are readily achievable.
6.6.93
Overall the conclusion that the strict economic benefit offered by the reinstatement of
Eastriggs Station is likely to be negative.
39
Draft STAG Report
Table 6.4:
Economic appraisal (all figures are NPV in 2002 prices)
category
scheme cost
travel time
benefits
user charge
benefits
VOC benefits
private operator
costs
Revenue
benefits
grants to private
operators
TOTAL
TEE ratio
subcategory
TOTAL
travel time benefits to new rail users
travel time benefits to existing rail users
output
-£1,238,183.22
£164,433.08
-£351,457.56
TOTAL
-£187,024.48
TOTAL
-£608,851.67
TOTAL
investment costs incurred by private operator
operating costs incurred by private operator
revenue gain to rail operator
revenue loss to bus operators
£168,578.95
-£1,179,180.59
-£589,083.40
£837,281.36
-£135,011.62
TOTAL
£702,269.74
grant to private operator to cover investment costs
grant to private operator to cover operating costs (total
operating cost - income from ticket sales)
£1,179,180.59
TOTAL
TOTAL
£-
£1,179180.59
-£514,110.86
-0.42
6.6.94
Modular design of the station has been suggested through our consultation with Network
Rail as a means of reducing the cost of the station design and construction. While
comparative costs are not available for this study, it has been estimated that capital costs
could be reduced by one third. This would result in a TEE ratio of -0.61.
6.6.95
It should be noted that cost-benefit analysis is not designed to cope with negative
benefits because if the benefits are negative, the project would not usually be
progressed. As a result, a bigger negative ratio means that the same disbenefits are
being achieved for less cost. The key factor in achieving an improved cost-benefit ratio is
to identify the positive benefits of the scheme rather than reduce cost.
6.6.96
Wider economic benefits (WEBS): Given that it is difficult to demonstrate that there will
be a good level of direct economic benefit as a result of the implementation of this
scheme the assessment of wider economic benefits is very important. A detailed
consideration of these has been undertaken on CB's behalf by Roger Tym and Partners
and their report is summarised below.
6.6.97
There are four strands to the assessment of wider economic benefits as follows:
6.6.98

WB1 - Agglomeration economies

WB2 - Increased competition as a result of better transport

WB3 - Increased output in imperfectly competitive markets

WB4 - Wider benefits arising from improved labour supply
The official view of the Department for Transport is that there is little evidence of the
relationship between transport and competition but that what is available suggests that
there are unlikely to be significant wider benefits due to increased competition. Though
Transport Scotland consider that geographic factors in some parts of Scotland may mean
that this is not always the case it is currently officially advised that WB2 should be treated
as neutral.
6.6.99
WB1 - Agglomeration economies - agglomeration economies describe the productivity
benefits that firms derive from being located close to other firms and relates to such
processes as knowledge sharing or access to suppliers and labour markets.
Improvements in the level of transport provision would be expected to have a positive
40
Draft STAG Report
impact on agglomeration economies by improving linkages between local firms and other
firms. Agglomeration economies result from increases in 'effective density', a measure of
firms' access to markets. The calculation of effective density is an uncertain process
requiring a range of assumptions relating to parameter values and a calculation of
changes in the generalised cost of travel to and from the study area.
6.6.100
In this case analyses suggest that in general the cost of travel to the area might be
expected to increase. However, those commuters and businesses which use the new
service must be achieving, at worst, no change in their individual travel costs and so it is
probably fair to assume that there is, at worst, no change in the generalised cost of travel.
This means that the only important factor in the calculation of the effective density is the
change in employment levels. In Eastriggs it is anticipated that these will increase and so
an assumption that there will be a small, positive change in effective density is likely to be
reasonable.
6.6.101
As positive changes in effective density are anticipated, agglomeration economies are
also expected to be positive. Using the APARC method with a value of £27,948.00 for the
GDP per worker in the zone and neglecting changes in the generalised cost of travel
suggests a value of £4,831.47 for the annual benefit to businesses (in 2002 prices).
Assuming that one third of this benefit is realised in each of the three years after opening
of the new station and discounting gives an NPV of £85,707.12.
6.6.102
WB2 - Increased competition as a result of better transport - in line with the current
guidance these are assumed to be negligible.
6.6.103
WB3 - Increased output in imperfectly competitive markets - improvements in transport
are expected to encourage firms to increase production. Current guidance suggests that
the most effective means of estimating this effect is to apply an uplift to business time
savings and reliability gains. As the number of business-related trips which will be made
using the new station is not known, it is assumed that these will account for 10% of the
trips and that the average time saving will be the same as that calculated for all users.
Although reliability gains might be anticipated, it is assumed that the infrequent nature of
the train service will render these negligible. An uplift value of 10% has been used (as is
recommended). As the values involved are small, changes in the value of time over time
have been discounted. Overall the anticipated benefit (in 2002 values) is £34.52 annually.
Assuming that one third of this benefit is realised in each of the three years after opening
of the new station and discounting gives an NPV of £612.33.
6.6.104
WB4 - wider benefits arising from improved labour supply - work by the Department for
Transport identifies three labour market effects which could have consequences for GDP
and which may contribute to welfare benefits through the tax take:

6.6.105
WB4a: more people choosing to work as a result of commuting time savings
(because one of the costs of working - commuting costs - has fallen)

WB4b: some people choosing to work longer hours (because they spend less time
commuting)

WB4c: relocation of jobs to more productive areas (because better transport makes
the area more attractive to firms and workers).
The data required to calculate this is extensive (and unlikely to be available in this case).
Transport Scotland currently does not offer detailed guidance. Employment growth in the
immediate Eastriggs area is anticipated and there would also be expected to be an
increase in the number of local people employed elsewhere. In order to provide a
preliminary figure, it has been assumed that benefits under WB4 are equal to the total
economic value of the increased local employment multiplied by 0.2. It must be noted that
there is no theoretical justification for this claim but on this basis annual benefits under
WB4 are found to be £24,992.74 (2002 prices). Assuming that one third of this benefit is
41
Draft STAG Report
realised in each of the three years after opening of the new station and discounting gives
an NPV of £443,354.43.
6.6.106
The overall impact is to increase the NPV to £15,563.02 with a TEE ratio of 0.01.
6.6.107
Economic activity and location impacts (EALI): As an analysis of the Wider Economic
Benefits has been undertaken, it is not essential that EALI is carried out at this stage.
Integration
6.6.108
There are three aspects to an examination of the effect of the various option on
integration. These are:

6.6.109
transport integration - the degree to which an option fits with other transport
infrastructure and services;

transport land-use integration - the fit between the option and established land-use
plans and land-use/transport planning guidance; and

policy integration - the appropriateness of the option in light of wider policies,
including those both central and local government.
Transport integration: appraisal covers several themes relating to the movement of
people and goods and the presentation of information. However, it is anticipated that
much of the quantifiable benefit which can calculated in relation to these is already
captured by the TEE analysis. As such STAG requires full assessment of transport
integration benefits only in cases where there is either an identifiable impact on transport
interchange resulting from an option or where it is definitely the case that some aspect of
this impact will not be captured by the TEE analysis.
6.6.110
In this case although the reinstatement of Eastriggs Station is anticipated to facilitate
around 81 additional direct public transport trips per year it is also expected to generate
up to 5960 journeys per year which were previously made entirely by car and of which a
proportion will now be made by car then rail and so have an additional interchange. The
perceived disbenefit of public transport to public transport transfers is often perceived as
higher than the disbenefit of car to public transport transfers where it is possible to stay in
the car until the last minute and so it is likely that these conflicting impacts will largely
cancel out. In addition the demonstrated preference of car to rail travellers indicates that
they are prepared to accept the need to interchange from car to rail.
6.6.111
Overall, it is not considered that full assessment of transport integration issues is required
as best practice in station design and information provision will be adopted minimising
and issues.
6.6.112
However, it is noted that the transport integration which results from having a railway line
run through an area with no station stops will be substantially improved by the
reintroduction of station stops.
6.6.113
Transport and land use integration appraisal seeks to confirm that there is no conflict
between the proposed use of the sites in question for transport purposes and local
planning aspirations or environmental designations and to examine the fit between the
proposals and local / national policy relating to transport and land use.
6.6.114
At Eastriggs the primary site (at the old station location) is not covered by any designation
and falls within the settlement boundary. The secondary site (east of Central Road) has
been declared unsuitable for further residential development due to drainage and access
issues which might also affect a possible station development.
42
Draft STAG Report
6.6.115
As well as being compatible with the local plan this proposal is also in line with Dumfries
& Galloway’s Structure Plan, SWestran’s Regional Transport Strategy and the National
Transport Strategy.
6.6.116
Overall local and national policy relating to transport and land use focuses on reducing
the need to travel and increasing the opportunities for sustainable travel while also noting
the importance of economic growth for all, thriving town centres, conservation issues and
the need for aspiration in rural planning.
6.6.117
In this case the proposed option will increase the opportunities for sustainable travel to /
from the study area. The site is very well located to encourage station users to access the
station on foot or by bicycle and this will discourage the use of motorised modes to reach
the it and overall the scheme is broadly in line with the government’s desire to encourage
sustainable travel and to reduce the need to travel.
6.6.118
The proposal can also be considered to have a potentially positive impact on the
economic growth and in and general health of Eastriggs town centre. The reintroduction
of the station, which cannot be justified in strictly economic terms, would be an example
of aspirational thinking in rural planning and there are no significant conservation or
environmental impacts.
6.6.119
Consultation with Dumfries & Galloway planning officials and with key stakeholders
suggests that there is considerable support for these proposals.
6.6.120
Policy integration: STAG calls for confirmation that the proposals are in line with wider
government policy as well as policy specifically relating to transport and land use. In
particular it calls for an examination of the fit of the proposals with disability, health, rural
affairs and social inclusion policies.
6.6.121
There is no reason why the proposal should conflict in any way with government policy
relating to disabled issues. It will incorporate best practice in the design of facilities for
disabled users and will increase access to a public transport mode commonly more
readily accessed by disabled people than buses. However, due to the small anticipated
patronages of the station it cannot be argued that the scheme will have a noteworthy
impact on the barriers to travel encountered by disabled people in general.
6.6.122
Similarly while there might be some increase in the number of people including a walk /
cycle to and from the proposed station in their regular routine it cannot be argued that the
impact of any of the scheme on health will be dramatic although it will increase the
options for access to specialist services not available in the local area.
6.6.123
Government policy on rural affairs sets out a vision in which rural communities strengthen
or remain strong through the retention of population and access to essential services.
The proposal should have a positive impact from this perspective, increasing the
opportunities for local development and decreasing the disadvantage to local residents of
living away from urban centres.
6.6.124
The proposals will potentially increase the options open to socially excluded groups
including those without access to a car. However, it cannot be denied that, due to the
high price of rail travel, these opportunities are unlikely to be freely open to those
members of excluded groups who are also on low incomes. Nevertheless it is not
envisaged that there will be any worsening of other provision meaning that these
individuals will gain the possibility of travelling by train while still retaining the cheaper
options open to them already. These issues will be dealt with in more detail by the
accessibility and social inclusion appraisal.
43
Draft STAG Report
Accessibility and Social Inclusion
6.6.125
The last of the STAG criteria is accessibility and social inclusion and allows an
assessment of the effect of schemes on community accessibility, comparative
accessibility and equality impact assessment.
6.6.126
Community accessibility covers:

6.6.127
public transport network coverage – coverage for all groups in society for a range
of trip purposes; and

local accessibility – the measurement of local opportunities to walk or cycle and
severance issues.
The reinstatement of Eastriggs Station will have a significant impact on the available
public transport network coverage for Eastriggs residents offering a significant boost in
the total number of services available in each direction and facilitating direct trips to a
number of extra destinations. It will also offer direct access to the rail network facilitating
long distance trips using this mode. This will increase the range of options open for
access to work, training, food shopping and healthcare facilities, particularly specialist
services.
6.6.128
The high price of rail travel means that rail based options may not be freely open to those
groups in the local population with low household incomes, though short trips to
destinations such as Annan are likely to be achievable. However, there will be no
worsening of provision for these groups as existing public transport network coverage is
expected to be unaffected and the new services will be available to these groups when
they judge them to be economic from their own personal point of view.
6.6.129
Notably, although the high price of rail travel may mean that benefits to low income
groups may not be immediately achieved it is likely that these groups will still gain some
benefit as for example:

6.6.130
the new coverage may allow them to reach previously unavailable employment
opportunities so that they gain more in increased income than they lose in
increased travel expenditure;

the new coverage may facilitate journeys which were previously impossible such
as early morning arrivals in Glasgow; and,

although the upfront cost of a train fare is more than that of a bus fare it is much
less than the cost of the purchase of a car and so may allow someone on a low
income who cannot afford a car to reach such commitments as college interviews
which can be of great value in the longer term.
According to the 2001 census 10.36% of all those resident in Eastriggs in employment or
studying travelled to their place of work or education by bus or train. Applying this rate
across the whole population suggests that there are probably some 174 people who
stand to gain from increased public transport service frequencies. Comparing this with the
lengths of journeys to work suggests that at most 8 of these 174 people regularly make
journeys long enough that they may potentially benefit from the newly introduced direct
trips. Given the rather low numbers of travellers expected to be affected a comprehensive
accessibility analysis has not been carried out at this stage.
6.6.131
Impacts on local accessibility will not be dramatic as the scheme will have no significant
impact on severance issues in the way that, for example, a new footbridge across a river
or railway line might. However, it might encourage some station users to include a walk or
cycle to the station in their daily routine. This would also be entirely possible in the
absence of the scheme but is clearly much more likely to occur in its presence.
6.6.132
Overall the impact of this option on community accessibility is likely to be slightly positive.
44
Draft STAG Report
6.6.133
Comparative accessibility deals with the issues relating to the distribution of impacts by
person group and by geographical area.
6.6.134
Comparative accessibility issues are likely to be of greatest importance where those who
stand to benefit are not the same as those who will bear the brunt of any impacts. In this
case, though it is probable that those on low incomes, may have more difficulty in
realising the benefits offered by the new options there is also no reason why they should
lose out as there is no expectation that existing public transport services will be affected
and the only likely local impacts would be expected to occur on the immediate approach
to the station.
6.6.135
There should be no difference in impact on the basis of age or gender in and of
themselves. Groups with mobility difficulties are likely to experience slight gains as the
new stations will incorporate modern provision for disabled users.
6.6.136
Those without access to cars who live in Eastriggs would be expected to gain from the
increased public transport provision. According to the 2001 census 27% of Eastriggs’s
households had no car or van, corresponding, very approximately to some 450 people
6.6.137
From a very localised geographical perspective those living on the approach to the
station stand to be most adversely affected by the station reinstatement. However, the
actual magnitude of this impact can be anticipated to be extremely small and those living
along this route also stand to gain most as they will be best placed to use the station.
6.6.138
From a larger scale geographic perspective the scheme will provide extra transport
options in an area which has rather low geographic accessibility according to the Scottish
Index of Multiple Deprivation and which also scores relatively poorly on a number of other
indicators.
6.6.139
From a very large geographic perspective the scheme can be expected to have no
impact at all beyond Eastriggs and its immediate surroundings.
6.6.140
Overall the scheme is considered to have slightly positive comparative accessibility
impacts.
6.6.141
Equality Impact Assessment covers formal requirements for schemes to be considered
with reference to formal legislation relating to discrimination on the grounds of race,
disability, gender or any other factor.
6.6.142
The proposal should in no way adversely affect efforts to ensure that no-one suffers from
discrimination on the basis of race, disability, gender, age, sexual orientation or religion.
While extensive formal Equality Impact Assessment work has not been undertaken it is
considered that there is sufficient information to understand the diverse needs /
experiences of these various groups in so far as they relate to these schemes.
6.6.143
Use of the new services will, in effect, be freely open to all with the means to pay and the
only group likely to have difficulty in accessing the benefits so offered are those whose
disability or age makes this physically difficult. This is not, however, due to deficiencies in
the scheme itself but is due to the difficulty of accessing any public or private transport
encountered by this group. In order to ensure that the potential to benefit is extended to
as large a section of this group as possible the station would be designed in line with
current best practice and will incorporate appropriate measures to facilitate disabled
access.
45
Draft STAG Report
6.7
Participation and consultation
6.7.1
As well as those organisations contacted during Part 1 appraisal work (Dumfries &
Galloway Council, SWestrans, Network Rail, Transport Scotland and SPT) the Part 2
appraisal has involved approaching:
6.7.2
6.7.3
6.7.4
6.7.5
6.7.6

local businesses,

local communities,

local councillors, and,

statutory bodies and related groups.
This work was intended to update each group on the project and to seek comments and
input. The outcome of consultation with each group is outlined below.
A postal survey of local businesses was carried out in February 2009 and established
that they are generally confident that their current and future pattern of business is stable
although current economic concerns were having an impact. Following the introduction of
a new station local businesses thought that the increase in accessibility of the workplace
would be the most significant benefit for employees and the majority of the respondents
reported that they expected the impact of a station to have positive impacts, from a
business perspective, on:

recruitment,

staff retention,

access to lower cost supplies,

access to currently inaccessible labour,

levels of output,

sales, and,

margins.
A minority of respondents also thought there would be positive impacts on:

efficiency

access for customers

numbers employed.
A meeting was held at Eastriggs Social Club on 12th March 2009 with representatives
from:

CB

Network Rail

Eastriggs Community Council

Dumfries & Galloway Council

Aztec Bicycle Club

DW Martin and co. Ltd.

SWestrans
The plans were described to the group along with the outcomes from the Part 1 appraisal.
There is huge, long-term, local enthusiasm for the station reinstatement which local
people see as a much needed opportunity to increase the options open to them and an
opportunity to increase the access to education for schoolchildren.
6.7.7
A number of statutory bodies have been consulted including:
6.7.8

SEPA, and,

GeoDiversity Dumfries and Galloway (GDG)

Scottish Enterprise
Direct communication with SEPA has been carried out on the subject of site hydrology
and raised no major issues. GDG were contacted to confirm that there are no Regionally
Important Geological and Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) at the development location
and Scottish Enterprise were contacted for comment. They have responded that:
46
Draft STAG Report
Scottish Enterprise (SE) in general recognises the benefit of improved transport
links to any community, particularly those that facilitate and support growth
business and inward investment opportunities. Enhanced commuting
opportunities and the opportunity for local communities to access employment in
other adjacent labour markets in a cost effective and environmentally beneficial
way are also important. Development of freight services is a priority for SE. SE
also recognises the specific needs of rural communities in accessing
employment opportunities and service
Eastriggs lies within the Gretna/Lockerbie/Annan regeneration area and SE, with
partners, is actively investigating opportunities to diversify the economy following
the closure of the Chapelcross power station. The Chapelcross site is most
effectively served by the existing Annan station. While improved transport links
could improve opportunities for commuting and greater choice for passengers,
the relatively small population of the village and its catchment area suggests that
the direct economic impact of improved transport links through either enhanced
bus services or rail services may not be significant.
In general, SE supports improving transport links to these communities as they
would provide better opportunities to access employment in larger settlements
nearby, the only proviso would be a concern that by reopening the rail stations
and introducing additional stops the overall service might be diminished through
longer journey times.
6.7.9
In addition a number of online data sources have been consulted in order to establish
current site data or check for the presence of designated sites and so on:

UK air quality archive (current PM10 and NO2 levels)
Registers of Scotland (SSSIs)
PASTMAP (access to listed building, scheduled ancient monument, national
monument and garden and designed landscape registers)
SNH (SSSIs, NNRs, NSAs, SACs, SPA, LNRs, National, Regional and Country
Parks, Local Landscape Designations)
47
Draft STAG Report
7
Cost to Government
7.1
Investment costs
7.1.1
The total investment costs are based on those calculated by Atkins in their 2006 “Region
Wide Rail Station Strategy”. However, these assumed (as there was a single line at the
time of the study) that a station at Eastriggs would require only one platform. To correct
for this the cost of platform construction has been doubled and the cost of a footbridge
(as estimated for Beattock) has been added. The revised figure covers the cost of station
infrastructure, parking and access construction. As the schemes use existing trains no
additional costs have been added for the purchase of additional rolling stock. These costs
have been adjusted to 2009 prices for quotation here. On this basis the investment cost
required to implement the scheme is estimated at £1,983,290.24 corresponding to a Net
Present Value in 2002 prices of £1,179,180.59.
7.1.2
Notably these costs are exclusive of land costs. The land market is currently extremely
volatile making it difficult to estimate a likely land cost.
7.2
Station operating costs
7.2.1
Station operating costs have been estimated at £21,000 (2009 prices) based on figures
for a number of suburban stations in London. Facilities which will clearly not be provided
at the sites proposed here, such as staffed ticket offices, have been omitted from this
estimate.
7.2.2
These figures have not been adjusted for optimism bias because the stations they are
based on typically handle numbers of passengers two orders of magnitude greater than is
anticipated here. It is felt that this will increase this estimate anyway to a level where
extra adjustment should be unnecessary. In addition these operating costs are in line with
those proposed by the “Glasgow to Stranraer, Glasgow-Dumfries-Carlisle, Rail Study”
7.2.3
The cost of additional station stops has been approximated on the basis of the extra fuel
which will be used. It has been assumed that there will be no significant effect on staffing
requirements. This gives additional operating costs of £17,090.11 and a total operating
cost of £38,090.11
7.2.4
Substantial changes in patronage are not anticipated in future and so it is not considered
necessary to consider changes in these costs over time and so this cost corresponds to a
Net Present Value in 2002 prices of £589,083.40.
7.3
Grant and subsidy payments
7.3.1
Given the expected levels of patronage it will not be realistic to expect Network Rail to
cover the expected cost of station construction and so it is expected that this money will
have to be supplied in full in the form of a grant.
7.3.2
It appears likely that additional operating costs will be met in full by fare revenues and so
ongoing subsidy should not be required.
7.3.3
Stations are leased by rail operators from Network Rail. Given that services through
these stations are not likely to generate a high level of revenue consideration should be
given to negotiating lease rates which are as competitive as possible in order to minimise
the costs to the rail operator.
48
Draft STAG Report
7.4
Revenues
7.4.1
Public sector revenue income is not anticipated.
7.5
Indirect taxation impacts
7.5.1
If it is assumed that fuel duty accounts for 70% of the cost of fuel and that all those
assumed to switch from car now leave their cars at home then the fuel tax loss to the UK
government is £7,630.22 a year. However, as any individual journey is likely to cost more
if made by rail than it would if made by car it is likely that the decision of an individual not
to use their car will commonly be due to the possibility of its being used, in this case, by
someone else. In these case fuel will still be used and the indirect taxation impact will be
lessened. It is assumed, for the sake of argument, that the indirect taxation loss is half
that which can be calculated directly giving an NPV in 2002 prices of £59,002.63.
49
Draft STAG Report
8
Risk and Uncertainty
8.1
Risk management
8.1.1
It is important at this stage to consider the risks of unexpected effects from the
implementation of the proposed schemes and a preliminary risk assessment has been
undertaken and is outlined below.
8.1.2
Though far from being a complete list, the following risks have been identified as those
most likely to be encountered at some stage in the future:
8.1.3
1.
future changes of policy direction reduce the support for rural public transport
2.
loss of operational subsidy in the longer term
3.
land purchase costs more than anticipated
4.
construction delays and over-runs increase construction costs
5.
issues relating to planning permission increase costs
6.
residual value risk (lower than expected value of final assets)
7.
operating or maintenance costs greater than anticipated
8.
inflation rates differ from assumed rates
9.
demand risks - patronages lower than anticipated
10. that the options are rendered obsolete by technological innovations
The Passenger Rail Forecasting Handbook guidelines which were used to estimate rail
patronages take no account of the level of service which will be offered. In this case the
level of service is low and, due to the long distances involved, fare prices are high. This
may well result in lower than expected levels of patronage. Patronages could also be
higher than anticipated but as extreme increases would be necessary before there was
any impact on station or train operation it is felt that this can be safely neglected.
8.2
Quantified Risk Assessment
8.2.1
A preliminary quantification of the risks is shown in Table 8.1.
50
Draft STAG Report
Table 8.1:
Risk
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Quantified risks
description
future changes of policy direction reduce
the support for rural public transport
loss of operational subsidy in the longer
term
land purchase costs more than
anticipated
construction delays and over-runs
increase construction costs
issues relating to planning permission
increase costs
residual value risk (lower than expected
value of final assets)
operating or maintenance costs greater
than anticipated
inflation rates differ from assumed rates
expected impact on cost if
risk occurs
lower
upper
chance of risk
occurring
over appraisal
period
£147,270.85
£294,541.70
5%
£7,363.54
£14,727.09
£-
£-
5%
£-
£-
£2,500.00
£5,000.00
25%
£625.00
£1,250.00
£117,918.06
£589,590.30
50%
£58,959.03
£294,795.15
£58,959.03
£235,836.12
5%
£2,947.95
£11,791.81
£58,959.03
£235,836.12
25%
£14,739.76
£58,959.03
£58,908.34
£294,541.70
25%
£14,727.09
£73,635.43
£1,472.71
£7,363.54
£8,372.81
£41,864.07
£837.28
£4,186.41
£5,890.83
£29,454.17
25%
demand risks - patronages lower than
9
anticipated £83,728.14
£418,640.68
10%
that the options are rendered obsolete by
10
technological innovations £83,728.14
£418,640.68
1%
* figures from http://www.statistics.gov.uk/articles/economic_trends/agricultural_land_prices.pdf
quantified risk
notes
lower
upper
impact = 0.25 to 0.5
x operating cost
0.5 to 1 x operating
subsidy
based on published
statistics*
0.1 to 0.5 x
construction cost
0.05 to 0.2 x
construction cost
0.05 to 0.2 x
construction cost
0.1 to 0.5 x
operating cost
0.01 to 0.05 x
operating cost
0.1 to 0.5 x
estimated revenue
0.1 to 0.5 x
estimated revenue
51
Draft STAG Report
8.2.2
Fully quantified risk assessment according to standard guidelines has not been
undertaken at this stage. However, following a preliminary analysis it is possible to
suggest that the chances of the scheme being delivered on the basis of the suggested
budget is currently estimated to in the region of 12% but that unidentified risks will reduce
this value. The maximum likely cost if all of the risks are realised is in the region of
£1,796,793.96, around a 39% increase on the anticipated cost. Based on experience
from previous schemes the likely cost is in the region of £1,343,224.03 to £1,618,793.58.
8.3
Optimism bias
8.3.1
Based on the analysis above appropriate value for optimism bias correction may be in the
region of 10 to 20%. These values are low for a project of this type. However, it is noted
that risk assessment in relation to this project is at a very preliminary stage and that the
station costs used to assess the scheme were already significantly adjusted for optimism
bias and so the amount of this additional projected correction perhaps should be lower
than is usually the case.
8.4
Sensitivity analysis
8.4.1
Sensitivity analysis has not been undertaken at this stage for two reasons. Firstly
because of the preliminary nature of the risk assessment undertaken and secondly
because it is felt that the marginal nature of the economic case for proceeding with the
project will mean that decisions regarding its progression at this stage will be made with
the consideration of wider issues rather than strict economic arguments.
8.4.2
One key sensitivity that could be undertaken is in relation to the capital cost of
construction. Discussion with Network Rail indicates that substantial cost reduction is
possible through modular design and construction of stations. Such consideration was
not available to previous studies nor are cost comparisons available at this time.
However, if the scheme costs were reduced by one third, the TEE ratio would be -0.61.
8.4.3
As stated previously, the key factor in improving this ratio would be to identify the positive
benefits of the scheme rather than reduce the cost.
52
Draft STAG Report
9
Option Summary Tables
9.1
Option summary tables (OSTs)
9.1.1
OSTs are required for all options which are still under consideration at the conclusion of
the Part 2 appraisal. In this case, the only option assessed at Part 2 is that relating to the
reinstatement of Eastriggs station and an OST for this is provided in Table 9.1.
53
Draft STAG Report
Table 9.1:
OST:
OST: Option 2a(i) – reinstate Eastriggs Station
Dumfries & Galloway STAG Appraisal Lot 2 and 3:
An assessment of options for the Eastriggs area
Option description: Reinstate Eastriggs Station close to its pre-existing location
on the Glasgow Southwestern Railway Line and stop the existing passenger
services at the reinstated station.
Capital Costs/grant (2002 Prices)
Annual Revenue Support (2002 Prices)
Present Value (PV) of Cost to Government
Monetary
only (£m)
Impacts (Monetary and Non-Monetary)
--Summary of
impact on
the five
STAG
criteria
--
-
0
Accessibility and Social Inclusion
Environment
Integration
Safety
Economy
+
X
++
negligible
£0
negligible
£0
-£0.5
X
X
X
NPV:
NPV:
Including Wider Economic Benefits
--Assessment
against
Transport
Planning
Objectives
TPO Target 1:
`TPO Target 2:
TPO Target 3:
TPO Target 4:
TPO Target 5:
TPO Target 6:
--
-
0
Monetary
impact ratio
(if relevant)
-----0.42
+++
X
+
X
X
X
X
++
-£0.5
£0.016
£1,139,457.02
£0.00
-£866,785.15
BCR:
BCR:
-0.42
0.01
+++
X
X
Contribution toward the Government Purpose: Although the economic case for proceeding with this proposal is weak it does contribute towards the
Government’s purpose in other ways as it increases public transport network coverage, increases the options open to various socially excluded groups
and has a positive impact on a rural area. It also increases transport integration by offering local access to a mode which cannot currently be accessed.
54
Draft STAG Report
STAG Criteria
Criterion:
Implementability Appraisal
Supporting Information
Accessibility &
Social Inclusion
Safety
PT network coverage will expand substantially in the Eastriggs area and there will be no
significant impact on barriers to walking and cycling. Groups with mobility difficulties are
likely to experience slight gains as will those without access to a car but those on low
incomes may struggle to take full advantage of the new opportunities.
A possible slight reduction in accidents associated with long trips is expected to be offset by
a possible slight rise in accidents associated with junction turning movements on the
approach to the station so that the overall effect on accident rates and severity can be
considered negligible. There might be slight increases in perceived security for those who
previously uses buses.
A straight economic appraisal is not supportive of the scheme as the higher price paid for
travel by users and the disbenefit to existing travellers mean that the overall measureable
benefits of the scheme are negative.
Economy
Integration
Environment
Criterion:
Technical
No significant technical
issues
Operational
Ongoing subsidy is likely
to be required but there
are no other significant
operational issues
Financial
Capital and revenue
funding will be required
but the amount is not
prohibitive.
There is demonstrated,
enthusiastic public support
Public
There is an increase in opportunities for direct journeys, particularly long distance rail
Acceptability
journeys. This scheme is fully compatible with National and Local policies.
This section identifies key impacts and tensions across the sub-criteria
Impacts on global air quality, local air quality, water quality, drainage, flood defence, geology, biodiversity, visual amenity, agriculture, soils
and landscape are all considered to be negligible. There is expected to be a minor positive benefit for cultural heritage as the pre-existing
station will be reinstated. Noise is assessed as having Moderate to Major impact depending on the site chosen. This is based on services
stopping at the station.
Transport Planning Objectives
Obj.
TPO 1:
TPO 2:
TPO 3:
Description of Objective
Minimise the environmental impact that transport has on the study
area while balancing the demand for travel to / from the area.
Improve the safety of travel and improve the sense of safety felt
by those who travel, especially vulnerable groups.
Improve the levels and attractiveness of public transport in
support of tourism and economic growth for Eastriggs.
Obj.
TPO 4:
TPO 5:
TPO 6:
Description of Objective
Improve journey times, reliability and punctuality for people travelling
to / from Eastriggs.
Increase the levels of accessibility to employment, education and
healthcare for the local population.
Capitalise on the potential opportunities for increasing travel options
and connectivity to/from the study area.
55
Draft STAG Report
10
Monitoring
10.1
Introduction
10.1.1
Monitoring refers to the process of gathering and interpreting information on the
performance of a project after its implementation. This process should be ongoing and
will usually take place in conjunction with other information gathering exercises being
undertaken by a local authority or other organisation implementing a project.
10.2
Proposed monitoring plan
10.2.1
It is suggested that a suitable monitoring plan for the proposal outlined here might consist
of a before and after study followed by further assessment at intervals of every two or
three years.
10.3
Key performance indicators
10.3.1
The following measures are suggested as suitable for assessing the effect of the
schemes on the objectives which are as follows:

10.3.2
balancing the demand for travel to/from the area.

Eastriggs.

local population.

connectivity to / from the study area.
Passenger rail services already run through the study area. Current proposals envisage
stopping these trains additionally and the overall environmental impact of this will be low.
Conversely it is anticipated that the majority of trips attracted to rail will shift from car as
existing bus services offer a reasonable level of service to only a few destinations. It is
therefore suggested that the number of rail journeys to / from the new stations will be a
reasonable proxy for measurement of the success of the schemes in meeting the first
objective. This data is collected routinely by rail operators.
10.3.3
Rail travel is very safe and so the number of rail journeys being made will also be an
indication of safer travel. Before and after surveys of public transport users perception of
safety and security will be able to confirm that there is an increased sense of safety
across all groups.
10.3.4
The levels of and attractiveness of public transport can be best assessed by considering
the frequency of services to particular destinations, say Carlisle, Dumfries, Kilmarnock
and Glasgow while attractiveness can be measured by considering the age and state of
repair of the available vehicles, bearing in mind that trains are generally considered to be
more attractive than buses.
10.3.5
The performances of the trains themselves are likely to offer the best indication of
improved journey times, reliability and punctuality. As timetabled the trains do offer faster
journey times than buses to almost all destinations and than cars to a range of key
56
Draft STAG Report
destinations. If they run according to the timetable then it can be assumed that these
benefits have been gained. Data on punctuality and so on is routinely collected by rail
operators.
10.3.6
The best measure of levels of accessibility is likely to be the number of destinations which
can be reached by public transport inside a known time period or by 09:00 and a suitable
measure of the degree to which travel opportunities have been taken up might be the
number of travel modes passing through the area to which local residents do not have
local access.
10.3.7
Overall this gives seven key performance indicators:
10.3.8

Number of rail journeys to / from the new station

Public transport users’ perceived safety levels

Service frequency to Carlisle, Dumfries, Kilmarnock, Glasgow

Age and state of repair of public transport vehicle stock

Train punctuality and reliability.

Destinations which can be reached inside 90 minutes

Destinations which can be reached by 09:00
After implementation the study area should have an improved score against all of these
indicators and this will be a measure of the degree of success.
57
Draft STAG Report
11
Evaluation
11.1
Introduction
11.1.1
Evaluation is a detailed one-off objective driven review of a project’s performance and
has two stages. The first of these is process evaluation which is carried out early in the
life of a project before its full effects are known and concentrates on whether input and
output objectives are being / have been met. Essentially this means to check that the
option has been delivered and is performing broadly as was anticipated. Outcome
evaluation is similar but is carried out some time after a project is implemented when
there has been time for usage patterns to settle and benefits to be realised.
11.2
Proposed evaluation plan
11.2.1
It is suggested that three months after opening would be a suitable timeframe for process
evaluation at which point it should be possible to establish whether the proposals have
been implemented and are performing as planned and for any small scale adjustments to
be made.
11.2.2
A suitable timeframe for outcome evaluation is likely to be three years after opening and
should establish, as per the STAG guidance:
11.2.3
11.2.4

the scope and purpose of the project;

the project rationale;

project aims and objectives;

project measures and indicators;

the base case for comparison; and,

scheme analysis and interpretation.
Overall outcome evaluation is intended to establish the extent of the identified outcomes,
the costs of achieving these and the overall value for money of the scheme.
The relatively long outcome evaluation horizon is intended to try and give such effects as
changes in employment patterns and patterns of economic activity time to adjust.
58
Draft STAG Report
12
Conclusions
12.1
Options Analysis
12.1.1
Alternative options to meet the transport planning objectives have been appraised and it
has been identified that the option to provide a train station to serve Eastriggs offers the
way forward. This conclusion has been reached because adding to existing bus services
produces fewer (marginal) benefits than the rail option. This is due to the fact that it would
be necessary to add new buses and pay for this cost as opposed to using existing rail
rolling stock.
12.1.2
Rail is of benefit in terms of user choice (people prefer to use rail over bus), safety,
reliability and access to the wider public transport network compared with bus
alternatives.
12.1.3
Significant progress has been made to engage with industry partners, including Transport
Scotland, First ScotRail and Network Rail. Indeed Network Rail in Scotland has endorsed
the Project Proposal and we are awaiting full endorsement and resource allocation
approval from their London office to review the technical aspects in more detail. There is
widespread community support for a train station.
12.1.4
There are no technical reasons why a suitable location for a train station cannot be found
and a stopping pattern could be developed, providing the financial support (revenue and
capital) can be found.
12.1.5
Noise is assessed as being a MAJOR impact based on the proposed services stopping at
site A, however, it is of MODERATE significance at site B due to the presence of the
shallow cutting. It is recommended that noise is taken forward as a design criterion for the
final siteing of the station.
12.2
Business Case
12.2.1
The economic case for a station such as Eastriggs is marginal at the very best, reflecting
its rural location and it is therefore important that factors other than economic benefits are
considered.
12.2.2
Based on the use of existing rail services i.e. stopping services that already operate on
the line at the new station, the transport benefits are poor. Our appraisal indicates that
Eastriggs will operate at a deficit and a subsidy will be required. The TEE ratios(Transport
Economic Efficiency) are negative as are the NPVs. It should be noted that adding new
services will only worsen the economic case.
12.2.3
Our research has found that the nature of the businesses in the area is unlikely to support
a train station on purely economic grounds e.g. in attracting jobs to the area. However,
benefits will accrue from accessibility to job markets elsewhere.
59
Draft STAG Report
Appendix 1
Part 1 ASTs
Part 1 ASTs for the six schemes appraised under Part 1 can be found on the following pages.
All costs are shown in 2002 prices.
Draft STAG Report
Proposal Details
Name and address of authority or organisation promoting the proposal:
(Also provide name of any subsidiary organisations also involved in
promoting the proposal)
SWestrans / Dumfries & Galloway Council, English Street, Dumfries, DG1 2HS
STAG assessment by: Colin Buchanan, 21 Blythswood Square, Glasgow, G2 4BL
Proposal Name:
Option 1a
Name of Planner:
Proposal Description:
timetable enhancements – increase
existing service frequency to every
30 minutes from Eastriggs to
Dumfries
Estimated Total Public Sector
Funding Requirement:
not applicable at this stage
Amount of Application:
Funding Sought From: (if applicable)
Alistair Speedie
capital cost = £0
annual revenue support = £59,430.23 estimated
Present Value of Cost to Govt = £1,095,908.78
Background Information
Geographic Context:
Eastriggs lies in Dumfries & Galloway. It has a population of around 1,500 and is a planned settlement 19 miles east of Dumfries
and some 3 miles east of Annan. Originally built to provide housing for employees of a substantial munitions factory it lies in an
otherwise largely rural area and now functions mainly as a dormitory location for jobs elsewhere.
Social Context:
According to the SIMD Eastriggs is somewhat deprived with poor scores for education and crime and very poor scores for
geographic access due to the lack of locally available services. Though bus services to Carlisle are reasonable there is still a lack of
access to key services, particularly for the users of non-car modes.
Economic Context:
Eastriggs has suffered some decline as activity at the munitions factory which it was built to serve has declined. These jobs have
largely not been replaced locally with most employed Eastriggs residents now commuting to jobs elsewhere.
Stage 1 AST: Option 1a
Draft STAG Report
Planning Objectives
Objective:
Minimise the environmental impact that
transport has on the study area while
balancing the demand for travel to/from the
area.
Improve the safety of travel and improve the
sense of safety felt by those who travel,
especially vulnerable groups.
Performance against planning objective:
0
Any small environmental gains achieved though mode shift have to be offset against the environmental costs of
running bus services throughout the day when there are few passengers.
0
Significant safety gains are not anticipated as buses run on the road network where that the majority of safety issues
in Dumfries & Galloway are found and it is difficult to ensure that people feel safe at remote bus stops, particularly late
at night.
Improve the levels and attractiveness of public
transport in support of tourism and economic +1
growth for Eastriggs.
Increased public transport provision is expected to result in slight increases in tourism and slight economic growth.
Improve journey times, reliability and
punctuality for people travelling to / from
Eastriggs.
Proposed enhancements are expected to result in slight improvements for travellers as the increased frequencies
reduce the waiting element of total journey times and missed or cancelled buses result in a half hour, rather than an
hour, delay.
+1
Increase the levels of accessibility to
+1
employment, education and healthcare for the
local population.
The proposed enhancements are expected to result in slight improvements in access to employment, education and
Capitalise on the potential opportunities for
increasing travel options and connectivity
to/from the study area.
The proposal takes advantage of the existing road network and bus services and offers some increase in travel
options and connectivity.
Rationale for Selection or Rejection of
Proposal:
+1
Due to the low score of this option against the study objectives it has been rejected from further consideration.
Technical:
There are no significant technical issues associated with the implementation of this proposal.
Draft STAG Report
Operational:
Financial:
Public acceptability:
The proposal will require ongoing subsidy but as this is foreseeable it is not a major barrier to operational feasibility.
The proposal has no capital costs.
Operating subsidy will be required and this cost is likely to need to be met by Dumfries & Galloway Council.
This proposal has not been made public but there are unlikely to be public acceptability issues.
STAG Criteria
Criterion
Assessment
Summary
Environment:
0
Any small decreases in emissions achieved through mode shift must be offset against the increased
emissions as buses run below capacity throughout the day. There are no significant air quality, water quality,
or noise related changes anticipated and distributional impacts are negligible.
Safety:
0
Significant safety gains are not anticipated as buses run on the road network where that the majority of safety
issues in Dumfries & Galloway are found and it is difficult to ensure that people feel safe at remote bus stops,
particularly late at night. However, there should be no decrease in levels of safety / security.
+1
Increased public transport provision is expected to result in slight increases in tourism and slight economic
growth. There is unlikely to be any measurable impact on traffic volumes or road congestion. Public transport
users will benefit from an increased service to Dumfries. The proposal will help existing businesses by
increasing the number of staff and customers which can reach them and may encourage new businesses to
set up.
Economy:
Integration:
+1
Accessibility and Social Inclusion:
+1
Increased bus service provision will somewhat increase the possibilities for integrated trips to a range of
destinations in and beyond Dumfries & Galloway.
The proposal is in line with wider government policy and national and local transport targets. The proposal
does not have explicit support from existing local policy but is not contrary to it.
There will be an increase in accessibility open to all sections of the community.
Draft STAG Report
Proposal Details
Proposal Name:
Option 1b(i)
Name of Planner:
increase range of bus destinations –
enhance service to local interchange
points
Alistair Speedie
capital cost = £0
Geographic Context:
Social Context:
Economic Context:
Stage 1 AST: Option 1b(i)
Draft STAG Report
Planning Objectives
Objective:
area.
0
running bus services throughout the day when there are few passengers
0
at night.
0
transport in support of tourism and economic
Eastriggs.
+1
Despite the increase in public transport provision it is anticipated that the need to interchange will discourage
increases in tourism and economic growth.
Proposed enhancements are expected to result in slight improvements for travellers as the increased frequencies of
buses to local interchange points reduce the waiting element of total journey times and missed or cancelled buses
result in shorter overall delays.
+1
local population.
The proposed enhancements are expected to result in slight improvements in access to employment, education and
Proposal:
+1
Draft STAG Report
Technical:
Operational:
Financial:
This proposal has not been made public but there unlikely to be public acceptability issues.
Draft STAG Report
STAG Criteria
Criterion
Assessment
Summary
Environment:
0
Safety:
0
0
Despite the increase in public transport provision it is anticipated that the need to interchange will discourage
increases in tourism and economic growth. There is unlikely to be any measurable impact on traffic volumes
or road congestion. Public transport users will benefit from an increased level of service to local interchange
points. The proposal will help existing businesses by slightly increasing the number of staff and customers
which can reach them but is unlikely to encourage new businesses.
Economy:
Integration:
+1
+1
The proposal is in line with wider government policy and national and local transport targets. The proposal
does not have explicit support from existing local policy but is not contrary to it.
There will be an increase in accessibility open to all sections of the community.
Draft STAG Report
Proposal Details
Proposal Name:
Option 1b(ii)
Name of Planner:
increase range of bus destinations –
enhance long distance services to
Edinburgh and Glasgow
Alistair Speedie
capital cost = £0
Geographic Context:
Social Context:
Economic Context:
Stage 1 AST: Option 1b(ii)
Draft STAG Report
Planning Objectives
Objective:
area.
0
0
at night.
Eastriggs.
+1
Proposed enhancements are expected to result in slight improvements for long distance travellers as they will not
need to interchange in order to travel to Edinburgh or Glasgow.
0
Realistic levels of service improvement would not be enough to address the long travel times and low frequency of
services and to result in significant accessibility increases for destinations not currently served.
+1
local population.
Proposal:
Draft STAG Report
Technical:
Operational:
Financial:
This proposal has not been made public but there unlikely to be public acceptability issues.
Draft STAG Report
STAG Criteria
Criterion
Assessment
Summary
Environment:
0
Safety:
0
+1
growth. There is unlikely to be any measurable impact on traffic volumes or road congestion. Public transport
users will benefit from an increased level of service to Glasgow and Edinburgh. The proposal will help existing
businesses by increasing the number of staff and customers which can reach them and may encourage new
businesses to set up.
Economy:
Integration:
+1
0
The proposal is in line with wider government policy and national and local transport targets. The proposal has
some explicit support in local policy documents.
Although there will be some increase in travel options any realistic level of service improvement will not be
enough to address the long travel times and low frequency of services and result in significant accessibility
increases for destinations not currently served. Socially excluded sections of the local communities often have
difficulty in accessing services at all and are not likely to benefit substantially from the possibility of accessing
services at a great distance from their homes.
Draft STAG Report
Proposal Details
Proposal Name:
Option 2
Name of Planner:
reinstate Eastriggs Station
Alistair Speedie
capital cost = £1,663,350.68
annual revenue support = £0.00 estimated
Geographic Context:
Social Context:
Economic Context:
Stage 1 AST: Option 2
Draft STAG Report
Planning Objectives
Objective:
balancing the demand for travel to / from the
area.
+1
The environmental benefits of mode shift are expected to slightly outweigh the environmental costs of additional stops
on the existing passenger services.
+1
Rail travel is safer than the alternatives and any poor perception of personal safety and security at small stations can
be addressed using established techniques.
Eastriggs.
Proposed enhancements are expected to result in improvements for travellers to / from the Eastriggs area.
+1
+2
local population.
The proposed enhancements are expected to result in improvements in access to employment, education and
healthcare for the local population of the Eastriggs area.
The proposal takes advantage of the existing passenger rail services and offers an increase in options for travel and
connectivity for those in the Eastriggs area.
Proposal:
+2
This option scores well against the objectives and STAG criteria and is feasible, affordable and publicly acceptable and is
being taken forward for further consideration.
Draft STAG Report
Technical:
Operational:
The proposal will probably require some ongoing subsidy but as this is foreseeable it is not a major barrier to operational
feasibility.
Financial:
The capital costs of this proposal are considerable and funding will have to be sought from Transport Scotland.
Elements of this proposal have been made public and there is demonstrated public support.
Draft STAG Report
STAG Criteria
Criterion
Assessment
Summary
Environment:
+1
The environmental benefits of mode shift are expected to slightly outweigh the environmental costs of
additional stops on the existing passenger services. There should be no significant air quality or water quality
related changes. Residents living near the station may suffer some increase in noise pollution but this should
be manageable.
Safety:
+1
Rail travel is safer than the alternatives and any poor perception of personal safety and security at small
stations can be addressed using established techniques.
+1
growth in the Eastriggs area. Though a small amount of mode shift is anticipated there is unlikely to be any
measurable impact on traffic volumes or road congestion. Public transport users in the Eastriggs area will
benefit from an increased level of service to a range of destinations. The proposal will help existing
businesses by increasing the number of staff and customers which can reach them and may encourage new
businesses to set up.
Economy:
Integration:
+1
+1
The new station will increase the options for integrated trips, especially long distance trips for those travelling
to / from the Eastriggs area.
The proposal is in line with wider government policy and national and local transport targets and has explicit
support in local policy documents.
There will be a notable increase in accessibility for residents in the Eastriggs area but socially excluded
sections of the population may not be able to take full advantage of the benefits due to high fare prices.
Draft STAG Report
Proposal Details
Proposal Name:
Option 3
Name of Planner:
Option 1a and Option 2 combined
Alistair Speedie
capital cost = £1,663,350.68
annual revenue support = £68,673.20
Geographic Context:
Social Context:
Economic Context:
Draft STAG Report
Planning Objectives
Objective:
area.
0
+1
Although the bus based part of this option is anticipated to have a neutral impact on this objective rail travel is safer
than the alternatives and any poor perception of personal safety and security at small stations can be addressed
using established techniques.
Improve the levels and attractiveness of public +1
Increased public transport provision is expected to result in increases in tourism and slight economic growth in the
Eastriggs area. Greater rail and bus network accessibility is expected to increase the attractiveness of the area as a
whole to non-car based tourists.
Eastriggs.
Proposed enhancements are expected to result in notable improvements for travellers to / from the Eastriggs area.
+2
+2
local population.
The proposal takes advantage of the existing road and bus networks and passenger rail services and offers an
increase in options for travel and connectivity for those in the Eastriggs area.
Proposal:
+2
This option scores well against the objectives and STAG criteria and is feasible and publicly acceptable. However, the high
level of operating subsidy means that it is unlikely to be affordable in the long term and there is little extra benefit to be
gained from the extra expenditure. Therefore this option is being rejected from further consideration.
Draft STAG Report
Technical:
Operational:
Financial:
Considerable operating subsidy will be required and this cost is likely to need to be met by Dumfries & Galloway Council.
Given the small additional benefits of this option it is unlikely that this level of operating subsidy can be justified.
Elements of the rail based parts of this proposal have been made public and there is demonstrated public support. The bus
based elements have not been made public but there are unlikely to be public acceptability issues.
Draft STAG Report
STAG Criteria
Criterion
Environment:
Safety:
Economy:
Assessment
Summary
0
Although the rail aspects of this proposal are anticipated to have a small positive benefit any small decreases
in emissions achieved through mode shift must be offset against the increased emissions as buses run below
capacity throughout the day. There are no significant air quality or water quality changes anticipated. Those
living near the stations may suffer some increase in noise pollution but this should be manageable.
+1
For the bus based element of this proposal significant safety gains are not anticipated as buses run on the
road network where that the majority of safety issues in Dumfries & Galloway are found and it is difficult to
ensure that people feel safe at remote bus stops, particularly late at night. With regard to the rail based
element rail travel is safer than the alternatives and any poor perception of personal safety and security at
small stations can be addressed using established techniques.
+1
growth in the Eastriggs area. Though a small amount of mode shift is anticipated there is unlikely to be any
measurable impact on traffic volumes or road congestion. Public transport users in Eastriggs will benefit from
an increased level of service to a range of destinations. The proposal will help existing businesses by
increasing the number of staff and customers which can reach them and may encourage new businesses to
set up.
The enhanced bus services and new station will increase the options for integrated trips, especially long
distance trips for those travelling to / from the Eastriggs area.
Integration:
+1
+1
The proposal is in line with wider government policy and national and local transport targets and the rail based
aspects of it have explicit support in local policy documents. There is no explicit support for the bus based
aspects but they are not contrary to expressed local policy.
There will be a notable increase in accessibility for residents in the Eastriggs area. The socially excluded
sections of the population may not be able to take full advantage of all of the benefits due to high fare prices
but they should be able to access the bus based improvements readily.
Draft STAG Report
Appendix 2
Part 2 ASTs
A Part 2 AST for the option assessed at Part 2 can be found on the following pages.
All costs are in 2002 prices.
Draft STAG Report
Proposal Details
Proposal Name:
Option 2
Name of Planner:
reinstate Eastriggs Station
Total Public Sector Funding Requirement
(2002 prices):
Alistair Speedie
capital cost = £1,663,350.68
annual revenue support = £0.00
Funding Sought From:
(if applicable)
Geographic Context:
Eastriggs lies in Dumfries & Galloway. It has a population of around 1,500 and is a planned settlement 19 miles east of Dumfries and
some 3 miles east of Annan. Originally built to provide housing for employees of a substantial munitions factory it lies in an otherwise
largely rural area and now functions mainly as a dormitory location for jobs elsewhere.
Social Context:
Economic Context:
Draft STAG Report
Planning Objectives
Objective:
+1
transport has on the study area while balancing
the demand for travel to / from the area.
The environmental benefits of mode shift are expected to slightly outweigh the environmental costs of additional
stops on the existing passenger services.
+1
Rail travel is safer than the alternatives and any poor perception of personal safety and security at small stations can
be addressed using established techniques.
+1
Improve journey times, reliability and punctuality
+1
for people travelling to / from Eastriggs.
Proposed enhancements are expected to result in improvements for travellers to / from the Eastriggs area.
local population.
+2
+2
The proposal takes advantage of the existing passenger rail services and offers an increase in options for travel and
connectivity for those in the Eastriggs area.
Rationale for Selection or Rejection of Proposal:
This option was taken forward from Part 1 to Part 2 because it scored well against the objectives and STAG criteria and is
feasible, affordable and publicly acceptable.
Draft STAG Report
Technical:
Operational:
The proposal will probably require some ongoing subsidy but as this is foreseeable it is not a major barrier to operational
feasibility.
Financial:
Elements of this proposal have been made public and there is demonstrated public support.
Draft STAG Report
Environment
Mitigation Options
Included: (Costs &
Benefits)
1. Standard measures to limit the detrimental impact of construction related dust.
2. Standard measures to limit the risks of groundwater contamination, particularly during the construction phase.
3. Standard enhancements to site drainage.
4. Standard measures to avoid disturbing wildlife during construction.
5. Small scale habitat enhancement to enrich the habitats surrounding the site and improve their wildlife value.
Sub-criterion
Qualitative Information
Noise and Vibration
Impact on local noise environment from trains pulling away form the
station. Station siteing and noise barriers can reduce the impact.
Vibration likely to be reduced due to stopping trains.
Global Air Quality – CO2
Global air quality impacts are considered to be negligible due to the
small number of trips involved
Local Air Quality – PM10
and NO2
Water Quality, Drainage
and Flood Defence
Geology
Biodiversity
Visual Amenity
Agriculture and Soils
Cultural Heritage
Landscape
Monetised summary
Monetary Impact Ratio
Although implementation of the scheme will worsen air quality close
to the station approach future PM10 and NO2 levels will still be lower
than current levels and well below target levels.
Surface water sources are not at risk. Groundwater sources could
be at risk of contamination without mitigation. Without appropriate
drainage water running off the new areas of hardstanding could
cause small scale flooding.
No significant impacts anticipated.
No designated sites affected.
No receptors significantly affected.
No significant effects anticipated.
No designated sites affected, minor benefit from a local history
perspective.
As railway line exists already impact on landscape will be negligible.
Significance of
Impact
Noise – major
Increase in people annoyed by noise
Vibration –minor
Decrease in people annoyed by vibration
benefit
Net change in CO2 emissions (tonnes) assumed to no benefit or impact:
be zero
PV1 = £0.00
All properties experiencing measurable levels of
change are expected to have decreased levels of no benefit or impact
PM10 and NO2 in future.
Groundwater is potentially at risk, particularly
during construction, but appropriate mitigation
no benefit or impact
measures are suggested to reduce this risk to an
acceptable level.
No designated sites or mineral reserves affected.
No designated sites or protected species affected. no benefit or impact
No receptors significantly affected.
0.5 Ha. Class 1/2/3 land affected at most.
Quantitative Information
minor benefit
£0.00
N/A
Draft STAG Report
Safety
Sub-criterion
Item
Accidents
Change in
Annual Personal
Injury Accidents
Although it is possible that there might be some very slight reduction in accidents associated with
long trips and slight rise in accidents associated with junction turning movements on the approach
the station these effects are considered to immeasurably small and acting to cancel each other out
so that the overall effect on accident rates can be taken to be zero.
negligible
Change in
Balance of
Severity
If anything it would be anticipated that high speed accidents will be replaced by lower speed
accidents but, again the numbers involved are too small to assess meaningfully.
negligible
Total Discounted
Savings
Security
PV2 = £0.00
No significant change in levels of actual security is anticipated. Those transferring from bus may
experience slight increases in perceived security and those transferring from car slight decreases
negligible
Monetised summary
£0.00
N/A
Draft STAG Report
Economy (Transport Economic Efficiency)
Subcriterion
User Benefits
Quantitative
Information
Item
Travel Time
Rail travel offers advantages over both bus and car travel. Travel times by PT between eastriggsl and
Glasgow would halve. Conversely minor delays to the rail timetable at Dumfries increase travel times for a
much larger number of travellers.
-£187,024.48
User Charges
Users gain from reduced bus fares and parking charges but lose out due to greater increases in rail fares.
-£608,851.67
£168,578.95
Vehicle Operating Costs
Private
Sector
Operator
Impacts
Quality / Reliability Benefits
Trains are perceived as offering higher quality and more reliable public transport provision than buses and
the small number of passengers transferring from bus to train will benefit slightly.
Investment Costs
Cost to rail authorities of station construction.
-£807,782.52
Operating & Maintenance
Costs
Train and station operating and maintenance costs.
-£589,083.40
Revenues
Fares gained by rail operator: £837,281.36. Fares lost by bus operator: £135,011.62
£702,269.74
Grant/Subsidy payments
Construction cost grant: £807,782.52. Ongoing subsidy cost: £0.00
£807,782.52
Monetised summary
PV10 = -£514,110.86
-0.42
Draft STAG Report
Economy (Wider Economic Benefits)
Sub-criterion
Item
Qualitative information
Quantitative information
Wider Economic
Benefits
Agglomeration economies
(WB1)
It is anticipated that employment levels will increase and there will be a small, positive
change in effective density and agglomeration economies.
£4,831.47 annual benefit to
businesses (2002 prices)
Assuming one third of the annual benefits is realised in each of the three years after opening NPV £85,707.12
the new station and discounting.
Increased output in
perfectly competitive
markets (WB3)
Assumption is 10% of trips are business-related.
£ 34.52 annually (2002
prices)
Reliability gains negligible due to infrequent nature of rail services.
NPV £612.33
Assuming one third of the benefit is realised in each of the three years after opening of the
new station and discounting.
Wider benefits arising from
improved labour supply
(WB4)
Anticipated employment growth in the Eastriggs area and in the number of local people
employed elsewhere. A preliminary assessment assumes total economic value of the
increased local population.
Assuming one third of the benefit is realised in each of the three years after opening of the
new station and discounting.
Monetised summary
£24,992 annually (2002
prices)
NPV £443,354.43
PV14 = £529,36673.88
0.01
Draft STAG Report
Economy (Economic Activity and Location Impacts)
Sub-criterion
Item
Economic
Activity and
Location
Impacts
Local Economic
Impacts
Assessment not required at this stage.
National
Economic
Impacts
Distributional
Impacts
Draft STAG Report
Integration
Sub-criterion
Transport
Interchanges
Item
Services &
Ticketing
A very small number of travellers will benefit from being able to make direct rail journeys with a single
ticket where they previously had to interchange and / or buy multiple tickets. Given the very, very
small numbers of journeys involved and uncertainty in the data it is considered that these impacts are
adequately captured by the TEE analysis.
Negligible number of journeys
affected, very minor benefit.
Infrastructure &
Information
No benefits of note are to be gained here excluding those already captured by the TEE analysis.
Negligible effects, no benefit
or impact.
Land-use
Transport
Integration
Plans are compatible with National and Local Planning Policy, the Local Plans, Dumfries &
Galloway’s Structure Plan, SWestran’s Regional Transport Strategy and the National Transport
Strategy.
Policy
Integration
Plans are compatible with disability, health, rural affairs and social inclusion policies.
Draft STAG Report
Accessibility & Social Inclusion
Sub-criterion
Community
Accessibility
Comparative
Accessibility
Item
Public Transport
Network Coverage
PT network coverage will virtually double with southbound
services with a frequency approaching that of the existing bus
service and northbound services with a better frequency. Direct
trips to a number of extra destinations will become possible.
PT catchments will not change. A very small number of
trips will become easier as access to some remote
destinations is facilitated. Bulk of effect relates to travel
time and is considered to be captured by TEE analysis.
Access to Other Local
Services
No significant impact on barriers to walking and cycling.
No impact on walking / cycling catchments though the
station itself may become an attractor.
Distribution/Spatial
Impacts by Social
Group
Groups with mobility difficulties are likely to experience slight gains
as the new stations will incorporate modern provision for disabled
users. Those without access to a car will also gain but those on
low incomes may struggle to take full advantage of the new
opportunities.
No measureable effects anticipated.
Distribution/Spatial
Impacts by Area
Those living on the approaches to the stations will be subject to
the greatest disbenefits but will also gain the greatest benefits.
No impact on sensitive areas.
Draft STAG Report
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)
Summary of SEA outcome where
appropriate
SEA is not required.
Draft STAG Report
Cost to Public Sector
Item
Qualitative information
Quantitative information
Public Sector Investment Costs
Investment will be through the private sector
PV15 = £0.00
Public Sector Operating &
Maintenance Costs
These will accrue to the private sector
PV16 = £0.00
Grant/Subsidy Payments
In 2009 prices, grant = £1,983,290.24, subsidy = £0.00
PV17 = - £1,179,180.59 - £0.00 = - £1,179,180.59
Revenues
revenue will accrue to the private sector
PV18 = £0.00
Taxation impacts
Annual loss in fuel tax revenue of £3815.11
PV19 = - £59,002.63
Draft STAG Report
Monetised Summary
Present Value of Transport Benefits
PVB = 0.00 + £0.00 - £514,110.86 = -£514,110.86
Present Value of Cost to Government
PVC = £0.00 + £0.00 - £1,179,180.59 + £0.00 - £59,002.63 = -£1,238,183.22
Net Present Value
NPV = -£514,110.86 - £1,238,183.22 = -£1,752,294.08
Benefit-Cost to Government Ratio
-0.42 ie. 42p of disbenefit for every £1 spent
Benefit-Cost to Government Ratio (including WEBs)
Ratio = 0.01
= (NPV - PVC + PV19)/[(PVC-PV19) x -1]
Benefit-Cost to Funding Agency Ratio
= (-£1,752,294.08 + £1,238,183.22 - £59,002.63)/[( -£1,238,183.22 + £59,002.63) x -1] = -0.48
ie. 48p of disbenefit for every £1 spent
Draft STAG Report
Appendix 3
Noise and Vibration Report
Dumfries & Galloway
Council
Noise Assessment:
Eastriggs
March 2009
EnviroCentre
Craighall Business Park
Eagle Street
Glasgow
G4 9XA
Project Manager
Emma Cormack
Director
David A Hay
t 0141 341 5040
f 0141 341 5045
w www.envirocentre.co.uk
e [email protected]
Offices
Glasgow
Report No 3663
Belfast
Stonehaven
Daresbury
Status : Final
Proposal No : 12748j
Copy No :
0
Rev. No :
00
© EnviroCentre Limited March 2009
Noise Assessment: Eastriggs
March 2009
Table of Contents
1.
Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1
1.1
Background..............................................................................................................................1
1.2
Noise Assessment Scope ..........................................................................................................1
1.3
Vibration ..................................................................................................................................1
1.4
Report Objectives.....................................................................................................................1
2.
Assessment Methodology .................................................................................... 2
2.1
Noise Assessment Methodology ................................................................................................2
2.2
Assessment Scenario................................................................................................................2
2.3
Noise Assessment Criteria.........................................................................................................2
3.
Railway Noise Assessment .................................................................................. 4
3.1
Site Location ............................................................................................................................4
3.2
Railway Segment......................................................................................................................4
3.3
Train Type ...............................................................................................................................4
3.4
Train Reference Noise Level......................................................................................................5
3.5
Correction to Rolling Noise........................................................................................................5
3.6
Propagation..............................................................................................................................5
3.7
Conversion of SEL to LAeq ..........................................................................................................6
4.
Results .................................................................................................................. 7
4.1
5.
Noise Assessment Results.........................................................................................................7
Conclusions........................................................................................................... 8
List of Tables
Table 2.1: Railway Noise Impact Significance ..............................................................................................3
Table 3.1: Railway Timetable Summary ......................................................................................................4
Table 3.2: Railway Vehicle Correction Factor ...............................................................................................5
Table 4.1: Noise Assessment Results ..........................................................................................................7
List of Drawings
Drawing 12748j/ec/005 – Eastriggs Site Location Plan
Appendices
Appendix 1
Drawings
k:\12748j - d&g stag\reports\working\noise\eastriggs noise assessment.doc
© EnviroCentre Limited
i
1.
March 2009
INTRODUCTION
EnviroCentre has been appointed by Colin Buchanan to undertake a noise assessment to
support a STAG appraisal for the proposed railway station at Eastriggs for Dumfries & Galloway
Council. This assessment looks at the potential impact on the local noise climate from the
proposed railway station at Eastriggs.
1.1
Background
SWestrans and Dumfries & Galloway Council have aspirations to improve the transport links
within the Dumfries and Galloway region by restoring rail service on the Glasgow and South
Western (G&SW) main line to two communities, Thornhill and Eastriggs.
Historically rail
stations were located at these settlements but were subsequently closed. Current national and
regional transport policies seek to improve connectivity and improve sustainability as well as
contribute to regional environmental and road traffic reduction targets. The reopening of both
stations is now being considered.
In order for the stations to be reopened a STAG appraisal for each is required to support the
proposals. The STAG process provides a clear and robust framework to identify potential
transport interventions and covers such issues as the Environment, Safety, Economy,
Integration and Accessibility and Social Inclusion.
1.2
Noise Assessment Scope
The preliminary assessment examines the impact on noise levels between the current situation
in which all trains (freight and passenger) pass the proposed site without stopping and the
proposed situation in which passenger trains stop at a railway station. Therefore the only
impact on the local noise environment is considered to be the noise associated with passenger
trains pulling away from the proposed platform.
1.3
Vibration
The principal source of vibration is associated with train movements. As trains already travel
along the existing line, no new types of vibration are to be introduced by the proposed new
station. Further, as the railway line is at capacity, no additional train movements are forecast.
The impact of vibration generally increases with the speed of the moving train. As a proportion
of the existing trains are proposed to halt at the station, the average speed of the trains at the
station site will be less, thereby reducing the vibration impact.
Based on the above discussion, no detailed assessment of the vibration impact is considered to
be necessary.
1.4
Report Objectives
This report details the preliminary noise assessment that was undertaken for the proposed
railway station at Eastriggs.
1
March 2009
2.
ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
2.1
Noise Assessment Methodology
The preliminary methodology for assessing the impact on the noise environment from the
incorporation of a new train station at Eastriggs has been undertaken in accordance with the
“Calculation of Railway Noise 1995” guidance document, published by the Department of
Transport.
The guidance document details the desk-based procedures to be followed for calculating noise
from moving railway vehicles as defined in the Noise Insulation (Railway and other guided
Transport Systems) Regulations 1995.
In accordance with the Railway Noise Insulation
Regulations this assessment methodology only considers noise from moving railway vehicles
and does not include noise from stationary railway (or other relevant) vehicles or non-railway
sources.
The noise generated by the railway has been calculated using the prediction methodology
which provides a total LAeq,18hr and LAeq, 6hr for the prevailing situation (current) without a railway
station and the relevant (predicted) situation with the railway station scenarios.
2.2
Assessment Scenario
The noise assessment has been designed to examine the difference between the current
situation without the proposed railway station and the proposed situation with the railway
station in operation. The following assumptions have therefore been made:Current Situation (Without the Railway Station)
•
All trains (freight and passenger) pass the proposed site at the maximum speed.
Proposed Situation (With Railway Station)
•
All freight trains pass the proposed site at the maximum speed;
•
The passenger trains stop at the proposed railway station; and
•
It is considered that the greatest noise impact will be generated from trains pulling
away from the railway station “on-power”.
2.3
Noise Assessment Criteria
The Railway Noise Insulation Regulations establishes three tests to assess the requirement for
noise insulation at sensitive receptors.
These three tests (set out below) provide an
assessment framework to quantify any impacts that may arise from traffic noise associated
with the proposed railway station.
•
•
The relevant noise level must be greater than 68 LAeq, 18hr or 63 LAeq, 6hr;
The relevant noise level must be greater by at least 1.0dB(A) than the prevailing
railway system noise (i.e. the total noise level from railway systems existing before the
works to construct or improve the system were begun); and
2
•
March 2009
The relevant noise level must be greater by at least 1.0dB(A) than the total prevailing
(i.e. without the proposal being implemented) railway system noise over a 15 year
period.
Predicted railway noise levels that fail to satisfy any one of the above three tests do not trigger
the requirement for noise insulation measures at sensitive receptors. However, the number of
tests where the noise level meets the stated criteria can be used to attribute noise impact
significance as set out in Table 2.1 below.
Table 2.1: Railway Noise Impact Significance
Category
Definition
Insignificant
Satisfies 0 out of 3 of the tests
Minor Significance
Moderate Significance
Major Significance
Due to the increased noise level associated with trains pulling away from the station “onpower” it is considered that predicted railway noise levels at both sites at Eastriggs will satisfy
the second and third bullets of the assessment criteria as follows:•
The relevant noise level will be greater by at least 1.0dB(A) thant the prevailing railway
system noise; and
•
The relevant noise level will be greater by at least 1.0dB(A) than the sum of the total
prevailing railway system noise over a 15 year period.
It is therefore predicted that the proposed railway station will have at least a MODERATE
impact on local noise levels at both sites. In order to determine whether the railway station will
have a Major impact the number of properties that will experience noise levels above 68dB will
be considered at both sites.
3
March 2009
3.
RAILWAY NOISE ASSESSMENT
3.1
Site Location
Two locations (Site A and Site B) are being considered at Eastriggs as shown in Drawing
12748j/ec/005, Appendix 1. The railway line runs through a cutting approximately 2.5metres
below existing ground level at Site B. The exact footprint of the proposed railway station has
not been finalised however it will comprise two platforms; one on either side of the existing
Glasgow and South Western (G&SW) main railway line.
3.2
Railway Segment
As stated in Section 2.2, it is considered that the greatest impact on the local noise
environment will be from trains pulling away from the proposed station. The section of the
railway track immediately after the proposed railway station has therefore been modelled in
order to assess the noise impact generated by this activity. For the purposes of the preliminary
assessment the following assumptions have been made:•
Passenger train south bound is “rolling” into the proposed station and the passenger
train north bound is “on-power” as it pulls away from the station at an average speed
of 20km/hr. All freight trains pass through this segment at full “rolling” speed.
3.3
Train Type
RWA provided a train timetable for a 24 hour period from which the type as well as number of
trains that passed the proposed station was abstracted. This information is provided below:-
Table 3.1: Railway Timetable Summary
Vehicle
Maximum
No of Cars
Type
Speed
/ Wagons
Night
Day
Night
Day
18 Wagons
0
2
3
9
20 Wagons
2
3
8
15
22 Wagons
4
9
0
0
2 car
1
13
0
12
Class 66
Diesel
96 km/h
Locomotive
Class 158
120km/h
South Bound
North Bound
Day time is assumed to be between 0600 hours and 2400 hours and night time between 2400
hours and 0600 hours.
RWA have indicated that the majority of wagons are for the transport of coal with the wagons
running south containing loads and the ones running north being empty. This assumption has
been applied to the noise model.
The train time table identifies only one passenger train passing Eastriggs during the night-time
period therefore it is considered that the impact on the local noise environment during the
night time period will be minimal therefore the noise model has been run for the day time
period only.
4
3.4
March 2009
Train Reference Noise Level
For each different type of train the Reference Single Vehicle Sound Exposure Level (SEL) is
calculated using the vehicle speed and following the method, detailed in the Calculation of
Railway Noise (CRN) 1995. Where a complete train comprises a mixture of vehicles then the
train is divided into two or more trains and a CRN vehicle source term correction is applied to
each train type.
This takes into account the different noise characteristics generated by
different types of vehicles. The Reference Single Vehicle SEL also takes into account when a
diesel locomotive is “on power” i.e. either accelerating or ascending a gradient. The correction
factor for each vehicle is detailed below:Table 3.2: Railway Vehicle Correction Factor
Vehicle Type
Correction Factor (dB(A))
Class 66 Diesel Locomotive (Rolling)
+13.0
HTA wagon loaded Hopper, 4 axel
+7.1
HTA wagon empty Hopper, 4 axel
+10.4
168 Turbostar DMU
+7.6
*As no Correction Factor for Class 158 is available in relevant guidance the correction factor for
a 168 Tubostar DMU has been used.
3.5
Correction to Rolling Noise
The noise from a moving train is affected by the speed of the train as well as the track type,
gradient, track curvature, the signalling system as well as the number of similar vehicles which
comprise each train.
For the purposes of the assessment the following assumptions have
been made in relation to the above factors.
Track type is assumed to be concrete sleepers and ballast therefore a correction factor
•
of -1.5dB has been applied to Site A. As Site B runs through a cutting no correction
factor for ballast has been applied;
The track runs level and straight therefore no correction factor has been applied for
•
gradient;
•
There is no signalling system in operation in the vicinity of the proposed site; and
•
The speed with out the railway station is assumed to be the maximum attainable or
permissible speed for the train type. The passenger train speed with the railway
station is assumed to be 20km/hr.
3.6
Propagation
Corrections are given to allow adjustments to be made to take account of the actual distance of
the reception point from the track, the nature of the ground between the track segment and
the reception point, the effects of atmospheric absorption, the angle of view of the segment at
the reception point as well as the influence of screening by barriers and topography etc. To
take account of propagation the following assumptions have been applied to the noise model.
•
The distance has been calculated to provide a 68dB(A) predicted noise level;
•
A correction factor for air absorption has been applied to all “rolling” trains. No
correction factor has been applied to the passenger train operating on “full power”
i.e. accelerating away from the proposed train station;
5
•
March 2009
No correction factor has been applied as it has been assumed that the ground is
tarmac / concrete;
•
A correction factor of -1.5 dB(A) has been applied for noise generated by aggregate
ballast to all “rolling” trains. No correction factor has been applied to the passenger
train operating on “full power” i.e. accelerating away from the proposed train station;
•
It is assumed that the angle of view will be perpendicular to the segment of track in
consideration; and
•
It has been assumed that no barriers are present at Site A. A correction factor of 15.7dB has been applied to Site B to take account of the railway cutting. No other
topographical feature has been applied to the model.
3.7
Conversion of SEL to LAeq
To take into account the period over which the noise level is determined and the total number
of trains of each type that operate in the appropriate time frame the calculated SEL values are
converted to LAeq. Each LAeq is then combined for each train/track segment that comprise the
total railway to provide a predicted noise level for day time and night time periods.
6
March 2009
4.
RESULTS
4.1
Noise Assessment Results
Table 4.1 below provides the noise assessment results for Site A and Site B.
Table 4.1: Noise Assessment Results
Modelled
LAeq, 18hr
Scenario
dB(A)
Distance (m) from track were LAeq, 18hr is
predicted to be 68 dB(A)
Current Scenario
Proposed Scenario
Site A
68
4.9
27.5
Site B
68
-
-
On comparison of the results against the assessment criteria in Section 2.3 the railway noise at
each site can be summarised as follows:Site A
The railway noise at Site A is predicted to be above 68dB(A) at source both with and without
the railway station.
The impact is therefore considered to be of MAJOR Significance. On
comparison of the distances where the noise levels are greater than 68dB(A) it is noted that
the noise generated by the activities at the proposed railway station have a larger distance of
influence.
However, as a result of its rural location only two houses (see Drawing
12748j/ec/005) are predicted to experience noise levels greater than 68dB(A) as they lie within
27.5 meters of the railway line.
Site B
The railway noise at Site B is predicted to be below 68dB(A) at source both with and without
the railway station due to the presence of the shallow cutting.
The impact is therefore
considered to be of MODERATE Significance.
7
5.
March 2009
CONCLUSIONS
It is recommended that noise is taken forward as a design criterion for the final siteing and
design of the station platform and buildings to ensure that any noise impact is minimised.
Incorporation of noise barriers would also reduce the impact on the local noise environment.
8
March 2009
DRAWINGS
Notes
Distance where noise levels are predicted
to be 68 dB (A) from the Proposed Station.
Proposed
Platform B
27.5m
Do not scale this drawing
Proposed
Platform A
Rev
Date
Amendment
Initials
Craighall Business
Park, Eagle Street,
Glasgow, G4 9XA
Tel: 0141 341 5040
Fax: 0141 341 5045
Client
Scottish Transport
Project
Dumfries & Galloway STAG
Title
Eastriggs Site Location Plan
Status
FINAL
Drawing No.
Revision
12748j/ec/005
File path: K:\12748j - D&G STAG\Drawings and Figures\Cad\Current
Scale
A3
N.T.S
Drawn
SD
Checked
SD
Date
01/04/2009
Approved
EC
Draft STAG Report
Appendix 4
Local Air Quality Report
Dumfries & Galloway
Council
ATMOSPHERICS
ASSESSMENT: EASTRIGGS
March 2009
EnviroCentre
Eagle Street
Glasgow
G4 9XA
Environmental Consultant
Fiona Marchbank
Project Manager
Emma Cormack
t 0141 341 5040
f 0141 341 5045
e [email protected]
Offices
Glasgow
Report No 3632
Belfast
Stonehaven
Daresbury
Status : FINAL
Project No : 12748j
Copy No :
0
Rev. No :
00
Atmospherics Assessment: Eastriggs
March 2009
Table of Contents
1.
Introduction ......................................................................................................... 2
1.1
Background .......................................................................................................................... 2
1.2
Assessment Scope ................................................................................................................ 2
1.3
Report Objectives ................................................................................................................. 2
2.
STAG Methodology............................................................................................... 2
2.1
DMRB Model......................................................................................................................... 2
2.2
STAG Air Quality Assessment................................................................................................. 2
3.
Air Quality Assessment Inputs ............................................................................ 2
3.1
Site Surrounds ...................................................................................................................... 2
3.2
Modelled Scenarios ............................................................................................................... 2
3.3
Assessed Road Links ............................................................................................................. 2
3.4
Properties within Each Distance Band..................................................................................... 2
3.5
Traffic Flow Data .................................................................................................................. 2
3.6
Baseline Conditions ............................................................................................................... 2
4.
Air Quality Assessment Outputs .......................................................................... 2
4.1
DMRB Model......................................................................................................................... 2
4.2
STAG Air Quality Assessment................................................................................................. 2
4.3
Conclusions .......................................................................................................................... 2
List of Tables
Table 3.1: Approximate Number of Properties within each Distance Band (proposed platform) ................... 2
Table 3.2: Approximate Number of Properties within each Distance Band (alternative platform) ................. 2
Table 3.3: Estimated maximum background concentrations ...................................................................... 2
Table 4.1: Modelled Pollution Concentrations for Annan Road ................................................................... 2
Table 4.2: PM10, STAG Appraisal for the Proposed Platform (Site A) ........................................................... 2
Table 4.3 PM10, STAG Appraisal for the Alternative Platform (Site B) .......................................................... 2
Table 4.4: NO2 STAG Appraisal for the Proposed Platform (Site A)............................................................. 2
Table 4.5: NO2 STAG Appraisal for the Alternative Platform (Site B)........................................................... 2
Appendices
Appendix 1
Drawings
Appendix 2
DMRB Inputs and Outputs
Appendix 3
LAQ Spreadsheet
Appendix 4
STAG Air Quality Worksheets
i
March 2009
List of Drawings
Drawing 12748j/ec/003 – Site Location Plan
Drawing 12748j/ec/004 – Distance Banding from proposed access road
(Site A and Site B)
ii
1.
March 2009
INTRODUCTION
EnviroCentre has been appointed by Colin Buchanan to undertake an atmospherics assessment
to support a Scottish Transport Appraisal Guidance (STAG) appraisal on the proposals to
construct a railway station at Eastriggs, Dumfries and Galloway. This assessment evaluates the
potential impact on atmospherics from two alternative options for the location of the station.
1.1
Background
SWestrans and Dumfries & Galloway Council have aspirations to improve the transport links
within the Dumfries and Galloway region, by restoring rail service on the Glasgow and South
Western (G&SW) main line to two communities, Thornhill and Eastriggs.
Historically rail
stations were located at these settlements but were subsequently closed. Current national and
regional transport policies seek to improve connectivity and improve sustainability as well as
contribute to regional environmental and road traffic reduction targets.
As a result, the
reopening of both stations is now being considered.
In order for the stations to be reopened a STAG appraisal for each is required to support the
proposals. The STAG process provides a clear and robust framework to identify potential
transport interventions and covers such issues as the Environment, Safety, Economy,
Integration and Accessibility and Social Inclusion.
1.2
Assessment Scope
The range of atmospheric impacts that the proposed development may have include:

Local air quality due to increased vehicle movements accessing the new station and
the starting / stopping of trains at the station;

Climate change; and

Dust emissions during the construction phase.
Due to the nature and scale of the proposed development, the impact on atmospherics is
predicted to be negligible. Of the potential impacts, the greatest impact is likely to arise from
the increase in vehicle movements accessing the station.
In order to verify the above
assumption, the level of impact associated with vehicle movements will be modeled following
the STAG methodology. If the impact from vehicle movements is concluded to be negligible,
the impact from train movements will also be inferred to be negligible without reference to
specific modeling outputs. A similar approach will be adopted for short term construction
impacts, which can effectively be controlled through the adoption of best practice on site.
The air quality assessment has been undertaken in accordance with the STAG methodology on
assessing the impacts on Local Air Quality at Part 2 Project Level. The methodology states
that:-
1
March 2009
“Options for modes other than road traffic will have implications for road
traffic on particular routes due to factors such as modal shift or the
generation of additional traffic to transport nodes.”
The STAG methodology goes on to state that an assessment of the change of PM10 and NO2 is
to be made for all affected routes using the method described in DMRB 11.3.1. The exposure
to properties within 200 meters of the affected road is to be assessed in relation to any impacts
in air quality from the modal shift for “do-minimum” (i.e. without the development) and “dosomething” scenarios.
1.3
Report Objectives
This report details the atmospherics assessment that was undertaken for the Eastriggs station.
It provides technical information that supports the completion of the STAG worksheets for air
quality assessment at STAG 2 Project Level.
2
2.
March 2009
STAG METHODOLOGY
The STAG methodology for assessing the impact on air quality from modal shifts, in this case
the development of a new train station at Eastriggs, is undertaken in two steps as summarised
below:•
The number of properties exposed to the change in pollutant concentrations is
quantified. A negative impact indicates an improvement in air quality due to the
proposed option and a positive impact indicates a decrease in air quality due to the
proposed option; and
•
Pollutant concentrations for the “do-minimum” and “do-something” scenarios are
calculated for properties within 200m of the affected route for both the year of
opening and a relevant future year; section 7 of the STAG Techinical Database states
this to be fifteen years after construction. This calculation is to take into account the
diminishing effects of pollution over distance.
2.1
DMRB Model
Pollutant concentrations for the appropriate assessment years for the routes affected, for the
“do-minimum” and “do-something” scenarios are calculated using the Local Air Quality (LAQ)
Excel Spreadsheets according to the Design Manual for Roads & Bridges (DMRB) 11.3.1 air
quality screening method.
The LAQ spreadsheets are completed with the following information:•
For each affected route, the properties are banded into distances from the affected
route as follows:o
Road centre to 50m from road centre;
o
50m – 100m from road centre;
o
100m – 150m from road centre; and
o
150m – 200m from road centre.
The number of properties within each band is entered into the LAQ spreadsheet.
Beyond 200m the contribution of vehicle emissions from the road centre to local
pollution levels is not considered significant;
•
The annual mean concentrations of NO2 and PM10 are calculated within each of these
bands, for all affected routes, using the DMRB model (version 1.03c, July 2007).
Concentrations are determined at 20m, 70m, 115m and 175m from the road centre to
represent the average concentrations within each band. The DMRB model is run for
the “do-something” scenarios. The pollutant concentrations are entered into the LAQ
spreadsheet;
•
The LAQ spreadsheet calculates the impact on air quality using the equation:
(Pollutant concentration at fixed location within a band) x (no of properties
within that band);
•
The results for each band are added together to give a total exposure for each
scenario. The spreadsheet will then calculate the overall impact by subtracting the
3
March 2009
“do-minimum” scenario value from the “do-something” value scenario for each
pollutant.
2.2
STAG Air Quality Assessment
The STAG air quality appraisal for the proposed railway station was undertaken by using the
data from the LAQ spreadsheet to complete the STAG air quality worksheets:
1) A2: Local Air Quality – Project PM10; and
2) A3: Local Air Quality – Project NO2.
The impacts on the local air quality by incorporation of the proposed railway station will be
evaluated through consideration of the following indicators:•
The change in the number of people / properties experiencing an increase /
decrease in PM10 concentrations (µg/m3);
•
The change in the number of people / properties experiencing an increase /
decrease in NO2 concentrations (µg/m3); and
•
The UK National Air Quality Objectives for PM10 and NO2 will be used to assess
the relative magnitude of emissions exposure for each distance band.
4
3.
March 2009
AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT INPUTS
The following section details the information and assumptions that the air quality assessment
for the proposed station at Eastriggs is based on.
Due to the uncertainty in relation to
calculation of the AADT (see Section 3.4 below) the assessment is considered to be very
conservative.
3.1
Site Surrounds
Both locations of the proposed railway station are situated on Annan Road (B721). Eastriggs
lies to the south-west of the proposed platform and Lowthertown lies approximately 435m to
the north-east of the proposed platform; Eastriggs is immediately south and Lowthertown lies
100m north of the alternative platform. See Drawing 12748j/ec/003, Appendix 1 for the site
locations.
Both of the potential sites will incorporate a site area on both sides of the existing Glasgow and
South Western (G&SW) main line railway. The exact footprint of the proposed development
has not been finalised however it will comprise two platforms; one on either side of the railway
line.
3.2
Modelled Scenarios
The air quality assessment modelled the following scenarios:-
3.3
•
2009 baseline;
•
2009 with development;
•
2024 baseline; and
•
2024 projected conditions, with development.
Assessed Road Links
For local impact assessments the roads included in the calculations should be all those
expected to make a significant contribution to pollution at the receptor location in question.
The air quality assessment will therefore examine the impact on air quality specifically from the
traffic accessing the stations via Annan Road. A digital scale ordnance survey (OS) map of the
area surrounding the proposed site was used to calculate the distance bands and distance from
road centre to centre of band as detailed in Section 2.1, using AutoCAD.
3.4
Properties within Each Distance Band
The distance bands, as detailed in Section 2.1, are shown in Drawing 12748j/ec/004, Appendix
1.
The approximate number of properties within each distance band from the proposed
platform and the alternative platform are listed in Table 3.1 and Table 3.2, respectively.
5
March 2009
Table 3.1: Approximate Number of Properties within each Distance Band
(proposed platform)
Distance Band
No of Properties
Centre of road to 50m
2
50m to 100m
1
100m to 150m
15
150m to 200m
26
Total no of properties
44
Table 3.2: Approximate Number of Properties within each Distance Band
(alternative platform)
Distance Band
3.5
No of Properties
Centre of road to 50m
13
50m to 100m
18
100m to 150m
79
150m to 200m
101
Total no of properties
211
Traffic Flow Data
Traffic flow data for Annan Road with and without development was unavailable at the time of
the assessment therefore the following assumptions were made based on information
contained in the Inception Report (dated January 2009) produced by Colin Buchanan.
The Inception Report provides a summary of background information for the proposed station
which includes the findings of a letter drop survey conducted in 2001. The findings of this
survey are detailed below:•
In 2001, the combined population of Eastriggs and nearby Lowtherntown was 2,000;
•
10% of respondents (assumed to be the entire population, i.e. 2,000) would use the
station to access work opportunities;
•
An additional 38% would use the station for shopping and 28% for leisure; and
•
80% of the potential Eastriggs station users indicated they would walk to the station; it
is therefore assumed the remaining 20% would use motorised travel to access the
station.
Using the above information the percentage of the population that would use the station for
work via motorised travel was calculated in order to provide traffic flow data for the “dosomething” scenario. The percentage of the population that would use the station for other
reasons were discounted due to the uncertainty of use (i.e. every other day, once per week
etc). It has been assumed that people commuting will be dropped off and picked up (vehicles
therefore making two return trips to the station each day). This is likely to be an overestimate,
but will take into account the uncertainty in use from the other types of station users.
The traffic flow for both proposed stations is calculated as follows:
10% of 2,000 residents using the station to access work = 200;
20% of 200 residents using motorised travel to access the station = 40; and finally
6
March 2009
40 multiplied by 4 single car trips taken each day to the station = 160.
Therefore the traffic flow has been calculated to be 160 trips per day; this figure has been
taken as the average annual daily traffic (AADT) for the “do-something” scenario for both sites.
Due to the lack of traffic flow data available, the current year (“do-minimum” scenario) is
assumed to be zero. It has been assumed that 100% of traffic will comprise LGV and the
maximum speed will be 48km/hr (30mph).
3.6
Baseline Conditions
Baseline conditions were assessed using the air quality data available from the UK Air Quality
Archive website (http://www.airquality.co.uk/archive/index.php).
The background pollutant
concentrations reported here have been taken from the Ordnance Survey (OS) kilometre grid
square 325500, 566500.
Table 3.3 provides the estimated maximum background concentrations used in this assessment
for the 2009 and 2024 baseline scenarios. The year 2024 has been assessed as it is fiften years
after 2009; this is in line with the STAG Technical Database. Forward projection of existing
background pollution concentrations to future background concentrations has been made using
methodologies outlined in LAQM.TG (03). These background concetrations are relevant to
both proposed station locations as they lie within the same OS kilometre grid square.
Table 3.3: Estimated maximum background concentrations
Pollutant
2009
2024
Objective*
3
10.64
10.19
18
NOx
3
µg/m
6.37
5.21
N/A
NO2
µg/m3
5.32
4.79
40
PM10
Units
µg/m
*UK National Air Quality Objectives
As can be seen from the above table the urban background concentrations for all pollutants
meet the required air quality objectives in both 2009 and 2024. The concentrations calculated
for 2024 have decreased on comparison with the 2009 concentrations indicating that air quality
of the Eastriggs area is projected to improve.
It is assumed that the current traffic contribution to air quality impacts is negligible due to the
rural location of the assessment area and low volume of traffic on Annan Road therefore the
pollutant concentrations for the “do-minimum” scenario is assumed to be as detailed in Table
3.3 above.
7
March 2009
4.
AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT OUTPUTS
4.1
DMRB Model
The DMRB model was run for 2009 and 2024 “do-something” scenario for both sites with the
results of the model runs provided in Table 4.1 below.
The same DMRB assessment is
appropriate for both proposed stations as they are located within the same OS kilometre grid
swaure and therefore the background concentrations at each site do not vary.
A copy of the DMRB input and output screens are provided in Appendix 2.
Table 4.1: Modelled Pollution Concentrations for Annan Road
Annual Mean Pollutant
Year
Distance
Concentrations at Receptor
(µg/m3)
NOx
NO2
PM10
6.37
5.32
10.64
2009
Up to 200m
“do-minimum”
(Background)
2009
20m
6.44
5.35
10.65
“do-something”
70m
6.39
5.33
10.64
115m
6.38
5.32
10.64
175m
6.37
5.32
10.64
2024
Up to 200m
5.25
4.60
10.32
“do-minimum”
(Background)
2024
20m
5.30
4.62
10.33
“do-something”
70m
5.27
4.61
10.32
115m
5.25
4.60
10.32
175m
5.25
4.60
10.32
The PM10 concentrations across the four distance
The outputs from the DMRB model indicate that there is a slight impact on air quality in the
vicinity of both sites on comparison of the 2009 “do-minimum” with the 2009 “do-something”
scenarios for all pollutants. For example, the NO2 annual mean in the 2009 “do-minimum”
scenario is expected to be 5.32 µg/m3; this is expected to increase to 5.35 µg/m3 in the 2009
“do-something” scenario which shows a marginal increase in NO2 concentrations as a result of
the development The same effect can be seen for 2024.
However. on comparison of the 2009 “do-minimum” scenario with the 2024 “do-something”
scenario, it is noted that the pollutant concentrations reduce which indicates that the overall
trend will be for an improvement in air quality. In addition, in all scenarios, the concentrations
meet the objectives of 40 µg/m3 and 18 µg/m3 for NO2 and PM10, respectively.
8
4.2
March 2009
STAG Air Quality Assessment
The results of the STAG air quality assessment are provided in the following sections:Project PM10
The outputs from the LAQ spreadsheet for PM10 are provided in Worksheet A2: Local Air
Quality – Project PM10, Appendix 4. Table 4.2 and Table 4.3 summarise the difference in
exposure for each distance band for the proposed platform and alternative platform
alternatively.
Table 4.2: PM10, STAG Appraisal for the Proposed Platform (Site A)
Distance
No. of
Bands
Properties
Difference in Exposure
No. of Properties
Opening
Future
Opening
Opening year
Future Year
Opening (“min”)
Year
Year
(“min”)
(2009)
(2009)
v. Future
(2009)
(2024)
v. Future
(“some”)
(“some”)
Better
Worse
Better
Worse
Better
Worse
0-50m
2
0.02
0.02
-0.62
0
2
0
2
2
0
50-100m
2
0.00
0.00
-0.64
0
0
0
0
2
0
100-150m
8
0.00
0.00
-2.56
0
0
0
0
8
0
150-200m
8
0.00
0.00
-2.56
0
0
0
0
8
0
0-200m
20
0
2
0
2
20
0
Table 4.3 PM10, STAG Appraisal for the Alternative Platform (Site B)
Distance
No. of
Bands
Properties
No. of Properties
Opening
Future
Opening
Opening year
Future Year
Opening (“min”)
Year
Year
(“min”)
(2009)
(2009)
v. Future
(2009)
(2024)
v. Future
(“some”)
(“some”)
Better
Worse
Better
Worse
Better
Worse
0-50m
9
0.09
0.09
-2.79
0
9
0
9
9
0
50-100m
29
0.00
0.00
-9.28
0
0
0
0
29
0
100-150m
44
0.00
0.00
-14.08
0
0
0
0
44
0
150-200m
111
0.00
0.00
-35.52
0
0
0
0
111
0
0-200m
193
0
9
0
9
193
0
On review of the impact on air quality from PM10 for the “do-minimum” and “do-something”
scenarios for both Site A and Site B for 2009 and 2024 the following points are noted:•
Two properties located within 50m of Site A are exposed to an increase in
PM10 concentrations as a result of the “do-something” scenario. For Site B,
nine properties are exposed to an increase in PM10 concentrations.
The
model predictions indicate that properties located between 50m to 200m from
both station locations experience an impact on air quality for this parameter;
•
Although the traffic to and from both proposed railway stations will result in a
slightly negative impact in PM10 concentrations in both 2009 and 2024
scenarios, the impact is considered to be negligible;
•
On comparison of the current situation without the railway station (2009
(min)) with the operational railway station in the future (2024 (some)), the
9
March 2009
assessment predicts that all properties will experience an improvement in
PM10 concentrations in 2024 for both potential station locations.
•
As a result of a smaller number of properties located within 200m of Site A,
traffic to this site is considered to have a lesser impact on air quality than
traffic will have to Site B.
Project NO2
The outputs from the LAQ spreadsheet for NO2 are provided in Worksheet A3: Local Air Quality
– Project NO2, Appendix 4. Table 4.4 and Table 4.5 summarise the difference in exposure for
each distance band for the proposed platform and alternative platform alternatively.
Table 4.4: NO2 STAG Appraisal for the Proposed Platform (Site A)
Distance
No. of
Bands
Properties
No. of Properties
Opening
Future
Opening
Opening year
Future Year
Opening (“min”)
Year
Year
(“min”)
(2009)
(2009)
v. Future
(2009)
(2024)
v. Future
(“some”)
(“some”)
Better
Worse
Better
Worse
Better
Worse
0-50m
2
0.06
0.04
-1.40
0
2
0
2
2
0
50-100m
2
0.02
0.02
-1.42
0
2
0
2
2
0
100-150m
8
0.00
0.00
-5.76
0
0
0
0
8
0
150-200m
8
0.00
0.00
-5.76
0
0
0
0
8
0
0-200m
20
0
4
0
4
20
0
Table 4.5: NO2 STAG Appraisal for the Alternative Platform (Site B)
Distance
No. of
Bands
Properties
No. of Properties
Opening
Future
Opening
Opening year
Future Year
Opening (“min”)
Year
Year
(“min”)
(2009)
(2009)
v. Future
(2009)
(2024)
v. Future
(“some”)
(“some”)
Better
Worse
Better
Worse
Better
Worse
0-50m
9
0.27
0.18
-6.3
0
9
0
9
9
0
50-100m
29
0.29
0.29
-20.59
0
29
0
29
29
0
100-150m
44
0.00
0.00
-31.68
0
0
0
0
44
0
150-200m
111
0.00
0.00
-79.92
0
0
0
0
111
0
0-200m
193
0
38
0
38
193
0
On review on the impact on air quality from NO2 for the “do-minimum” and “do-something”
scenarios for both 2009 and 2024 a similar trend is observed as seen for PM10 assessment as
detailed below:•
Four properties located within 100m to Site A are predicted to be exposed to
an increase in NO2 concentrations, whereas for Site B, thirty-eight properties
are exposed to an increase in NO2 concentrations.
Properties located
between 100m to 200m from both station locations are not predicted to
experience an impact on air quality for this parameter;
•
Although the traffic to and from both proposed railway stations will result in a
slightly negative impact in NO2 concentrations in both 2009 and 2024
scenarios, the impact is considered to be negligible;
10
•
March 2009
On comparison of the current situation without the railway station (2009
(min)) with the operational railway station in the future (2024 (some)), the
assessment predicts that all properties will experience an improvement in NO2
concentrations in 2024 for both potential station locations.
•
It is clear that as a result of the smaller volume of properties located within
200m of Site A, traffic to this site is likely to have a lesser impact on NO2
concentrations compared with traffic flowing to Site B.
4.3
Conclusions
In conclusion, it is considered that the proposed railway station locations at Eastriggs will have
a secondary / induced influence on local air quality as a result of the additional traffic generated
within the local vicinity of the site.
Air quality in the area is considered to be very good; both NO2 and PM10 concentrations are well
within their target values, with ongoing improvement predicted in future years. The increase in
traffic movement will have an impact on air quality, but in magnitude it will be insignificant and
the general trend of improving air quality will not be halted or reversed.
As the impact from additional traffic movements has been concluded to be negligible, which is
consistent with the predicted impact on atmospherics made at the screening stage, no further
assessment of other atmospheric impacts is considered necessary.
Local air quality during the construction phase (e.g. dust emissions) can be effectively
protected by means of adopting best practice at a site level. Any impacts that do occur will
only be short term.
11
March 2009
APPENDIX 1
DRAWINGS
March 2009
APPENDIX 2
DMRB INPUTS
AND OUTPUTS
March 2009
APPENDIX 3
LAQ SPREADSHEET
March 2009
APPENDIX 4
STAG
AIR QUALITY
WORKSHEETS
Draft STAG Report
Appendix 5
Water quality, drainage and flood defence report
Dumfries and Galloway
Council
STAG - Proposed Railway
Station at Eastriggs, Site A
and B
Hydrology
March 2009
EnviroCentre
Eagle Street
Glasgow
G4 9XA
Project Manager
Rajinder Kumar
Project Director
Claire Thomson
t 0141 341 5040
f 0141 341 5045
e [email protected]
Offices
Glasgow
Report No 3637
Belfast
Stonehaven
Daresbury
Project No: 12748J
Copy No:
01
Rev. No :
00
Status : Final
Colin Buchanan Associates for STAG
STAG - Proposed Railway Station at Eastriggs, Site A and B, Dumfries and Galloway
March 2009
Table of Contents
1.
Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1
1.1
Scope of Works..................................................................................................................... 1
1.2
Scope of Report.................................................................................................................... 1
2.
Methodology......................................................................................................... 1
3.
Key Guidance........................................................................................................ 2
4.
Information Sources ............................................................................................ 2
5.
Consultation ......................................................................................................... 3
5.1
Dumfries and Galloway Council.............................................................................................. 3
5.2
Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA)................................................................... 3
5.3
Drainage .............................................................................................................................. 3
6.
Baseline Conditions.............................................................................................. 4
6.1
Site Description..................................................................................................................... 4
6.2
Proposed Site ....................................................................................................................... 4
6.3
Surface Water Drainage ........................................................................................................ 4
6.4
Sewers ................................................................................................................................. 4
6.5
Private Water Abstractions..................................................................................................... 5
6.6
Groundwater Vulnerability ..................................................................................................... 5
7.
Potential Impacts................................................................................................. 6
7.1
Surface Water Run-off........................................................................................................... 6
7.2
Rail Drainage ........................................................................................................................ 6
7.3
Contaminated Discharges...................................................................................................... 7
8.
Assessment........................................................................................................... 8
8.1
Surface Water Run-off........................................................................................................... 8
8.2
Rail Drainage ........................................................................................................................ 8
8.3
Contaminated Discharges...................................................................................................... 8
9.
Residual Effects.................................................................................................. 10
10.
Summary and Conclusions................................................................................. 11
i:\15774x_dumfries & galloway stag appsl lot 2 & 3\3. project\3.1 reports\stag report eastriggs station a and b - hydrology.doc
i
March 2009
Appendices
Appendix A – Scottish Environmental Protection Agency, Letter dated 5 March 2009
Appendix B - Proposed Site Layout Plan
Appendix C - Site Photographic Record
Appendix D – STAG - Appraisal Summary Table, Worksheet A1 – Eastriggs Site A and B
ii
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Scope of Works
March 2009
An assessment of the potential impacts of the proposed development of the new Eastriggs
railway station, at either site A and B in Dumfries and Galloway, to the water environment has
been undertaken by EnviroCentre Ltd on behalf of Colin Buchanan for a STAG assessment for
Dumfries and Galloway Council.
1.2
Scope of Report
This report provides supporting information to the matrix assessment in respect of surface
water, groundwater and hydrogeology.
2.
METHODOLOGY
The following methodology has been used to assess the potential impacts of the development
to the water environment in terms of surface water, groundwater, and hydrogeology:
•
Desk based review of available information, and design of the proposed works in
relation to any local watercourses;
•
Consultation with stakeholders;
•
A walkover survey of the site, undertaken on the 20 January 2009;
•
Evaluation of baseline conditions at the site;
•
Assessment of site activities and their potential impacts on the water environment; and
•
Identification of mitigation measures for these activities, if required.
1
3.
March 2009
KEY GUIDANCE
A range of guidance is available highlighting good practice applicable to the proposed
Eastriggs Railway Station development (Sites A and B):
•
Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) – National Water Quality
Classification, published annually (for river quality, coastal waters, lochs and estuaries);
•
Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) – Policy 19 : Groundwater Protection
policy for Scotland (2003); and
•
4.
Scottish Government – Scottish Planning Policy (SPP7) – Planning and Flooding (2004).
INFORMATION SOURCES
A range of information sources are available, applicable to the proposed Eastriggs Railway
Station development:
•
Dumfries and Galloway Council – Biennial Flood Reports (1st to 6th editions);
•
Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) – Groundwater Vulnerability maps
and policy statements; and
•
Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) – Indicative Flood Maps.
2
5.
March 2009
CONSULTATION
As part of the assessment the following organisations have been consulted to ensure that any
issues related to the water environment that they may have are addressed within the
assessment, and to obtain any data they may hold in relation to the sites.
5.1
Dumfries and Galloway Council
Dumfries and Galloway Council have yet to provide comment in regards to any potential
impacts associated with the new railway station.
Dumfries and Galloway Council’s Biennial Flooding Reports have been reviewed. There are no
reports of flooding in the general area, but there are reports of flooding to agricultural land due
to the volume of rainfall, however not specifically at the site.
5.2
Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA)
Information and plans have been provided to SEPA. Their response, dated 5 March 2009 is
contained within Appendix A. They confirm they have no objections in regards to the proposed
development on flood risk grounds. SEPA would expect Dumfries and Galloway Council to deal
with flooding related issues as the Flood Prevention Authority.
As confirmed by SEPA, SEPA’s flood map indicates that the proposed site is not within the
indicative floodplain of the nearest river in the area.
The closest watercourse is the Dornock Burn located approximately 770 m to the east of the
site, which flows in a north to south direction eventually discharging in the Solway Firth. The
Solway Firth is located approximately 1.4 km to the south of the site.
SEPA records indicate classification of the Dornock Burn is a good (A2) water quality
watercourse. There are no likely impacts to any watercourses as these are located significantly
outwith the vicinity of both sites.
5.3
Drainage
There is no known drainage within the site as is a Greenfield site mainly used for agricultural
purposes. To date, it is not confirmed if there is any field drainage within the site area.
Scottish Water has still to be consulted in regards to any apparatus within the site area. From
local knowledge, a combined sewer surcharges within an area to the south of the site. To date,
no information has been obtained.
3
6.
BASELINE CONDITIONS
6.1
Site Description
March 2009
Both sites are located within the town Eastriggs, in Dumfries and Galloway. Site A is located
approximately 146 m to the north of the main B721 and is located adjacent to an existing stone
arch bridge over the existing railway line. Site B is located approximately 550 m to the east of
Site A and is also adjacent to the railway line. Access to Site B can be gained by a stone arch
bridge on Central Road, north of the B721. Site A and B are currently greenfield sites, which
consist of open fields used for agricultural purposes.
6.2
Proposed Site
It is proposed that a platform is constructed approximately 100 m in length along the railway
line to the south of the track. In addition, an area for 10-12 car parking spaces with an access
track to the new car park is anticipated. The Proposed Site Layout plan is contained within
Appendix B, however there is no information in regards to the layout at Site B.
6.3
Surface Water Drainage
As stated in section 5.3, there is no known surface water drainage within the site area. The Site
Photographic Record is contained within Appendix C.
It is likely that there is existing drainage within the railway tracks to collect any surface water
on the main railway line, however to date no information has been received.
6.4
Sewers
From local knowledge, Site A contains a combined sewer which runs in a north east to south
west direction, within a boggy wet grassland area, fenced off from livestock. It is reported that
in heavy rainfall this sewer surcharges and floods within this area.
It is unlikely that this combined sewer will have any impact on Site A as is located to the south,
away from the site and will have no impact to the proposed site layout. However, the Scottish
Water should be consulted in regards to this and the exact location and line of the sewer
requires being determined.
4
6.5
March 2009
Private Water Abstractions
The bedrock aquifer noted is the Dumfries Bedrock including extensive sand and gravel. It is
unlikely that there will be any impact to these private water abstractions, as any hydrological
features are located some distance away from the site.
6.6
Groundwater Vulnerability
The groundwater vulnerability map available from SEPA’s website indicates this area to be of
high groundwater vulnerability and is noted as 4b in accordance with SEPA’s classification
scheme.
5
7.
March 2009
POTENTIAL IMPACTS
This section describes the potential impacts of the new proposed railway station on the water
environment in and around the site during the construction and post construction of the
development.
7.1
Surface Water Run-off
During and post construction there will be an increase in surface water runoff in wet weather,
due to the introduction of hardstanding areas. This will increase the rate and volume of surface
water runoff entering into the existing railway drainage system, within the track. This increase
in surface water runoff, although it does not represent an overall change in the water balance
of the site, may affect the following:
7.2
•
Flow patterns for runoff from rain falling on the site;
•
Volume of water potentially exposed to pollution;
•
Volume of water requiring management and treatment prior to discharge; and
•
Volume of water discharging into the existing sewer.
Rail Drainage
The railway drainage is likely to be privately owned and maintained by Network Rail. There are
existing manhole covers along both sides of the railway track, located within the permeable
stone. It is likely there is a perforated pipe which collects any surface water on the track to
prevent flooding or ponding. An increase in hardstanding associated with the platform will
result in an increase in surface water volume. These drainage systems may overflow should
there be a lack of capacity and may result in flooding on the railway track.
6
7.3
March 2009
Contaminated Discharges
During the construction and operation of the site, there is also risk of accidental chemical
contamination arising from the following sources:
•
Spillage or leakage of oils and fuels stored on site;
•
Spillage or leakage of oils and fuels from construction machinery or site vehicles;
•
Spillage or leakage of oils and fuels from refuelling machinery on site; and
•
The use of concrete for hard-standing areas.
The principal risk on site is posed by refuelling activities during all phases of the development.
There will be a risk of pollution from site traffic through the accidental release of oils, fuels and
other contaminants from vehicles during the construction phase of the site area.
7
8.
March 2009
ASSESSMENT
In this section mitigation measures are proposed to address the significant potential impacts
identified in Section 7, in accordance with the Appraisal Summary Table, Worksheet A1, within
Appendix D.
8.1
Surface Water Run-off
The increased surface water run-off will put additional pressure on the drainage. Therefore it
may be a requirement to upgrade the existing drainage infrastructure, to prevent any flooding
or ponding on site. The following methods may be adopted:
•
Upgrading the existing drainage infrastructure, includes upsizing pipes and manholes;
and
•
Using sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) to attenuate additional flows during heavy
rainfall.
In addition, these associated hardstanding areas will change the current surface water runoff
drainage patterns on site, as the site is currently permeable. There is an increase in surface
water run-off and change in drainage patterns. These can be accommodated using sustainable
drainage systems and collected to prevent any flooding or ponding, outwith and within the
proposed development. There will be no major changes to the existing topography of the site.
8.2
Rail Drainage
As above it is likely that the existing drainage can be designed to accommodate surface water
run-off to the rail drainage. The methods described in Section 8.1 above can be adopted to
prevent any overflow, flooding and ponding on the railway track.
8.3
Contaminated Discharges
During construction site traffic will continue to operate through the site. There remains a small
risk of oils, fuels and other contaminants running off the site vehicles. Oil or fuel spills will be
dealt with according to documented site emergency procedures and mitigation measures
below, which constitute best practise guidelines:
•
The drains and silt traps will be inspected regularly and cleaned out as necessary;
•
Oils and fuels will be stored in a covered, bunded area on a low permeability base to
prevent infiltration;
•
There will be a designated refuelling point in the site compound, within an
impermeable bunded area;
•
Emergency spillage procedures will be put in place;
8
•
March 2009
When transporting any concrete, measures will be in place to reduce the risk of
splashing, including an accident plan to be implemented in the event of spillage;
•
Runoff from any stockpile areas will be diverted through a silt trap or buffer zone prior
to discharge to the existing sewers to reduce sediment loadings entering the system;
•
Any mobile refuelling vehicles will be fitted with drip trays and regularly maintained;
•
Oil and fuels will be stored on site in a designated bunded area (secondary
containment system) on an impermeable surface and isolated from surface water
drainage systems;
•
Drip trays will be used while refuelling;
•
Regular inspection and maintenance of vehicles, tanks and bunds will be undertaken;
and
•
Any oil /fuel tanks will be fully drained before they are taken out of use or removed by
suitably qualified technicians.
The risk of polluting the water environment from the operating equipment is limited. As part of
the standard operations procedures, monitoring and maintenance will be carried out to
minimise these risks to acceptably low levels of likelihood and severity.
9
9.
March 2009
RESIDUAL EFFECTS
STAG criteria’s residual impacts resulting of the mitigation of potential impacts are summarised
within the Appraisal Summary Table, Worksheet A1, within Appendix D.
STAG Criteria residual effects can be considered to be of no benefit or impact, moderate cost or
negative impact or major significance. Only these residual effects that are moderate cost
/major cost are considered to be significant. This assessment relies on professional judgement
rather than any scoring of the criteria.
The majority of the residual impacts of the proposed works are considered to be no benefit or
impact given the appropriate level of mitigation measures recommended and in some cases will
improve the existing conditions. However, moderate cost or negative impact effects are
predicted due to the increase in hardstanding areas.
10
10.
March 2009
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The potential impacts of the proposed development are highest during the construction phase
of the project, when excavation and construction will result in an increased risk of pollution to
surface and ground water. These impacts are short term and can be minimised through the
adoption of the mitigation measures and good practise. Impact on the watercourses out with
the site are predicted to be of low significance as are indicated to be out with the 1 in 200 year
envelope and as such is at low risk of flooding. Therefore, in terms of flooding there are no
anticipated risk of flooding to site’s A and B at Eastriggs.
11
March 2009
Appendix A
Scottish Environmental Protection Agency
Letter dated 5 th March 2009
12
March 2009
13
March 2009
14
March 2009
15
March 2009
Appendix B
Site Location Plan
16
March 2009
17
March 2009
Appendix C
Site Photographic Record
18
March 2009
Plate 1
Plate 2
19
March 2009
Plate 3
Plate 4
20
March 2009
Plate 5
Plate 6
21
March 2009
Appendix D
STAG – Appraisal Summary Table Worksheet A1
Eastriggs Site A and B
22
Proposal Name
Existing & Future Water Issues:
Location1
Water Use2
March 2009
Worksheet W1: Water Quality, Drainage &
Flooding - Strategic / Project Level
Assessment Date:
22/01/09
STAG assessment – Eastriggs (Site A)
Pluvial flooding within site
Resource
Quality /
Status3
Objectives4
Scale it
Matters5
Potential
Impacts
Timescales:
When /
Duration
-
-
-
Ease of
Substitution6
Uncertainty7
Mitigation
Potential
-
-
Impact
Significanc
e
Assessme
nt8
Surface Waters9
None
-
Poor /
Good
SEPA
Post surface
water run-off
-
Poor
SEPA
Low
Medium
wet weather
Moderate
Sewers
-
Poor
SW
Low
Low
wet weather
Low
Rail drainage
Groundwater10
-
Fair
Rail / SEPA
Medium
High
wet weather
Moderate
Vulnerability
-
Good
SEPA
Medium
Low
wet weather
-
Aquifers
abstraction Good
Land Drainage / Flood Defence
SEPA
Low
Low
-
-
-
-
Low
Some
-
Low
Low
Low
Low
Medium
Low
None
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Flood Defence
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Flood Risk
Key Assumptions:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
No benefit
or impact
Moderate
cost or
negative
impact
No benefit
or impact
Moderate
cost or
negative
impact
No benefit
or impact
No benefit
or impact
No benefit
or impact
No benefit
or impact
No benefit
or impact
23
Proposal Name
Existing & Future Water Issues:
Location1
Water Use2
March 2009
Worksheet W1: Water Quality, Drainage &
Flooding - Strategic / Project Level
Assessment Date:
22/01/09
STAG assessment – Eastriggs (Site B)
No water issues witnessed on site.
Resource
Quality /
Status3
Objectives4
Scale it
Matters5
Potential
Impacts
Timescales:
When /
Duration
-
-
-
Ease of
Substitution6
Uncertainty7
Mitigation
Potential
-
-
Impact
Significance
Assessment8
Surface Waters9
None
-
Poor /
Bad
SEPA
Post surface
water run-off
-
Poor
SEPA
Low
Medium
Sewers
-
Poor
SW
Low
Low
Rail drainage
Groundwater10
-
Fair
Rail / SEPA
Medium
High
wet
weather
Vulnerability
-
Good
SEPA
Medium
Low
wet
weather
Aquifers
abstraction
Good
Land Drainage / Flood Defence
SEPA
Low
Low
wet
weather
-
-
Moderate
Low
Low
Some
-
Moderate
-
Low
Low
Low
Low
Medium
-
-
-
Low
none
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Flood Defence
Flood Risk/
Maps
Key Assumptions:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
No Benefit
or Impact
Moderate
cost or
negative
impact
No Benefit or
Impact
Moderate
cost or
negative
impact
No Benefit or
Impact
No Benefit or
Impact
No Benefit or
Impact
No Benefit or
Impact
No Benefit or
Impact
24
Draft STAG Report
Appendix 6
Biodiversity and habitat report
Dumfries & Galloway
Council
PHASE 1
HABITAT SURVEY:
EASTRIGGS
February 2009
EnviroCentre
Eagle Street
Glasgow
G4 9XA
Project Manager
Dr. Andy McMullen
Project Director
Steve Jackson
t 0141 341 5040
f 0141 341 5045
e [email protected]
Offices
Glasgow
Belfast
Report No: 3630
Stonehaven
Daresbury
Status: Final
Project No:
Copy No:
Rev. No:
12748J
1
00
© EnviroCentre Limited February 2009
Phase 1 habitat survey: Eastriggs
February 2009
Table of Contents
1.
Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1
1.1
Remit ................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2
Aim and objectives................................................................................................................ 1
1.3
Scope of the report ............................................................................................................... 1
1.4
Brief development description................................................................................................ 1
2.
Methodology......................................................................................................... 2
3.
Results .................................................................................................................. 3
3.1
Site description and habitats.................................................................................................. 3
3.2
Notable species..................................................................................................................... 3
4.
Site and habitat evaluation.................................................................................. 4
5.
Impact assessment .............................................................................................. 6
6.
Mitigation and enhancement............................................................................... 7
7.
Conclusions .......................................................................................................... 8
Appendices
Appendix A:
Phase 1 Habitat Map
Appendix B:
Target Notes
Appendix C:
Plant species list
12748J
i
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Remit
February 2009
This report describes and discusses the findings of a Phase 1 Habitat Survey undertaken at the
site of the proposed railway station at Eastriggs, in Dumfries and Galloway. This survey was
undertaken by EnviroCentre on behalf of Colin Buchanan for Dumfries & Galloway Council.
1.2
Aim and objectives
The aim of a Phase 1 Habitat Survey is to describe and/or map the habitats and species within
an area with the objective of determining the presence or absence of habitats, species and/or
other features of interest to nature conservation.
1.3
Scope of the report
This report details the method used to undertake the survey and this is followed by a
description of the site and the different habitats, species and other ecological features of
interest present there. The presence of specific species or groups of species (communities), of
conservation interest is then discussed after an assessment of the conservation value of each
habitat is undertaken.
Potential ecological impacts on and around the site are then highlighted in the final section and
a series of recommendations are made to mitigate the effects of these. The appendices include
‘Target Notes’ that locate and describe specific features on the site and a plant species list.
1.4
Brief development description
Two separate sites are currently proposed for the location of the Eastriggs station (see Figure
1). The more westerly of these (referred to as Site 1 within this report) is situated to the south
of the railway where it will be accessed from an unclassified, minor road to the west of the
Eastriggs conurbation. To the east, the alternative site (referred to as Site 2 within this report)
is situated on north side of the railway where it borders the northern perimeter of Eastriggs.
This latter site is accessed from the hamlet of Lowthertown by a minor road adjoining the A75.
12748J
1
2.
February 2009
METHODOLOGY
This section of the report describes the method used during the course of the survey and
subsequent assessment of the value of the habitats and species. The method adopted
accords to the standard approach and best practice guidelines respectively developed by
the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) 1 and the Institute of Ecology and
Environmental Management 2 .
The objectives of the field survey and subsequent reporting are to:
1. produce a map of habitats for the sites and a buffer zone of 100m around each;
2. ‘target note’ the nature of specific areas or features of ecological interest;
3. obtain initial records of species of flora and fauna occurring within those habitats;
4. evaluate the nature conservation value of the habitats on the site;
5. provide a provisional impact assessment for nature conservation (subject to the
need for any additional surveys); and to
6. provide recommendations for mitigation and further survey.
In order to meet these objectives the site was walked and viewed from appropriate
vantage points to facilitate the mapping and identification of the habitats and plant
species present within its boundaries. The survey was undertaken on the 18th of January,
2009 a sub-optimal time of year because many plant species are inconspicuous or
unidentifiable at the time of the survey. In addition, some animal and bird species that
are only active over the summer months will have vacated the site or become inactive and
difficult to detect (bats and insects, for example). A set of ‘Target Notes’ to locate and
describe specific areas or features of ecological interest was also produced and these are
included in Appendix B.
Despite the seasonal shortcomings described above it is considered that sufficient
information was gathered to make a satisfactory assessment of the habitats and the
potential for their use by notable faunal species. The assessment of the value of the
habitats follows the standard Phase 1 method1 with cognisance of relevant local, national
and international conservation legislation and initiatives.
Nomenclature for all plant species follows The New Flora of the British Isles 3 and for
birds,
the
British
List
maintained
by
the
British
Ornithological
Union
(http://www.bou.org.uk/recbrlst1dna.html). The habitats are described according to the
standard nomenclature and descriptions developed by the JNCC for the purposes of Phase
1 Habitat Survey1.
1
Joint Nature Conservation Committee 2003 Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey. Revised reprint.
Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management 2006 Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United
Kingdom. Available online at http://www.ieem.org.uk/ecia/index.html.
3
Stace, C.A. 1991 New Flora of the British Isles. Cambridge University Press.
2
12748J
2
February 2009
3.
RESULTS
3.1
Site description and habitats
The two sites proposed for the Eastriggs station are situated within a wider area that is used
for either agricultural or urban purposes. All of the habitats are therefore highly modified or
created by human activity and no semi-/natural habitat was recorded within the boundaries of
the two sites or the buffer zone. The habitats that were recorded are listed in Table 1 together
with their standard code.
Table 1: List of habitats and their standard codes recorded within the proposed railways
station sites and their environs.
Code
Habitat Name
A2.1
Dense scrub
B4
Improved grassland
B5
Marshy grassland
C3.1
Tall ruderal
J2.2
The area of scrub is very small (<1 ha) and it is adjacent to a dwelling where it will remain
unaffected by the development because it is situated within the buffer zone (rather than the
site itself) on the opposite side of the minor road leading to the entrance of Site 1. It is
composed of immature birches and hawthorn.
Improved grassland is the most widespread habitat within the sites’ boundaries, buffer zones
and environs and both sites of the proposed station are situated wholly within this type of
habitat. It is heavily grazed and this has resulted in the creation of a short, closely-cropped
sward of low species diversity in which Perennial Rye-grass is dominant although Common and
Creeping Bents, Daisy and Yorkshire Fog are all frequent to occasional associates. This low
diversity of species is added to only by the presence of Soft Rush to the north of Site 1 where a
stand of marshy grassland (Target Note 3) is situated within the buffer zone on the opposite
side of the railway track to the proposed station.
A stand of tall ruderal vegetation dominated by Rosebay Willow-herb with an occasional understorey of Ground Ivy is situated next to the bridge, adjacent to the entrance to Site 1, where it
is protected from grazing by livestock. This entrance to Site 1 will breach a species- poor but
relatively intact hedge of Hawthorn, with occasional Honeysuckle, that runs along the eastern
side of the unclassified road.
3.2
Notable species
No signs or sightings of notable species were made during the course of the survey and the
habitats present are unlikely to support anything other than relatively common bird species.
These birds may nest in the hedgerow, scrub and/or tall ruderal vegetation and utilise these
and the other habitats listed above for feeding according to their specific requirements.
12748J
3
4.
February 2009
SITE AND HABITAT EVALUATION
Despite the relatively rapid and superficial nature of a Phase 1 Habitat Survey it is possible to
categorise sites and or habitats on a three-point scale as follows:
1. Site of high conservation priority;
2. Site of lower conservation priority; and
3. Site of limited wildlife interest.
This evaluation is based on the data collected during the survey according to the principles and
criteria established in “A nature conservation review”4 , “Wildlife conservation evaluation”5 and
“Guidelines for the selection of biological SSSIs”6 . using the following characteristics of the
habitats:
•
Naturalness;
•
Diversity;
•
Rarity of species and/or habitats;
•
Size of site or its habitats; and the
•
Spatial relationships between the habitats (within and beyond the site).
The habitats within the boundaries of both sites and the buffer zone have been highly modified
by human activity.
In the case of the grassland areas, these have been improved by a
combination of re-seeding, fertilisation and a high level of grazing (and presumably by the
clearance of the original forest habitat as Neolithic agricultural techniques became established
in the area). The prominence of hawthorn within the hedgerow and absence of other woody
species indicates that it was deliberately planted as a stock-proof barrier, rather than created
from the original woodland habitat by supplementary planting. The scrub vegetation adjacent
to the dwelling is also of secondary origin, as evidenced by the immaturity of the growth and its
basis within pasture. Likewise, the tall ruderal vegetation is of secondary origin and it was
probably provided with an opportunity to establish during construction of the adjacent road
bridge and/or railway.
The intensive management of these habitats, or their deliberate creation, has resulted in a low
diversity of species that have been selected for their utility (as pasture or hedgerow) or selfselected for their ability to rapidly establish on disturbed sites, in the case of the tall ruderal
vegetation. This utility or the ruderal nature of the species recorded has resulted in their
widespread presence throughout the UK and beyond so that they, and the habitats that they
form, are very common and widespread and lacking in any distinction.
Their widespread nature means that they form an extensive matrix in which other, more
distinctive and valuable habitats (in terms of nature conservation) are situated.
Passage
between these more valuable habitats by species will therefore not be comprised the the
4
Ratcliffe, D.A. (ed.) 1977 A nature conservation review. Cambridge University Press.
Usher, M.B. (ed.) 1986 Wildlife conservation evaluation. Chapman & Hall, London.
6
Nature Conservancy Council 1989 Guidelines for the selection of SSSIs. NCC, Peterborough.
5
12748J
4
February 2009
development of either of the proposed station sites because alternative routes for passage are
readily available. The one minor exception to this will be the breach within the hedgerow to
create access for Site 1. However, this is unlikely to markedly affect its connectivity for species
such as bats or birds that utilise such linear features for feeding and/or navigation.
As a result of the unnatural, species-poor and widespread nature of the habitats to be impacted
by the two proposed stations it is concluded that their wildlife value and significance to nature
conservation is (extremely) limited. As a consequence of this low value, it is not recommended
that any further, more detailed surveys are undertaken.
12748J
5
5.
February 2009
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
The habitats to be affected by either of the two proposed alternatives will be permanently and
significantly altered from the current situation (these habitats are improved grassland, and
species-poor hedgerow, in the case of Site 1). In addition to the permanent transformation of
this habitat, there will also be a period of relatively continuous, increased disturbance (in
relation to the current passage of rail traffic) to adjoining areas during the construction phase,
in the short term through the effects of noise, vibration and potentially, lighting.
Operation of the site will extend the increased level of disturbance arising during the
construction phase into the long-term through the increased level of road and pedestrian traffic
to and from the station and by the installation of additional lighting. This disturbance during
the operational phase will be of a lower intensity and more intermittent than that which will be
experienced during the construction phase.
Given the low wildlife value of the habitat to be lost to the development or disturbed by its
construction and/or operation the significance of the impacts is expected to be very low and
related primarily to effects on the use of the area by common bird species.
12748J
6
6.
February 2009
MITIGATION AND ENHANCEMENT
As already discussed, the impacts arising from the development of either site are considered to
be low. The adoption of the following mitigation measures will reduce these impacts further.
•
Clear the hedgerow habitat during the period of September to February to prevent the
loss of breeding birds or their young (a criminal offence) or hibernating bees. This
measure is relevant to Site 1 only.
In addition to mitigation the following measures may be used to enhance the ecological value
of the station:
•
Consider enhancement of the hedgerow habitat (especially if this is to be removed) by
supplementary planting of native tree species (especially holly, rowan or other berryproducing species);
•
•
Plant shrubs and or trees to screen the station;
Consider the installation of bird and/or bat boxes once the trees are sufficiently mature
for these to be placed 3 m or more above the ground (in order to prevent
interference); and
•
Include flowering herbaceous and or shrub species as a part of the station landscaping
to provide direct or indirect benefit for insects and potentially, bats and birds.
12748J
7
7.
February 2009
CONCLUSIONS
•
The following habitats were recorded within the site boundaries and their environs:
o
Dense scrub
o
Improved grassland
o
Marshy grassland
o
Tall ruderal
o
•
The wildlife value of these habitats is limited.
•
The clearance of the hedgerow during the period September to February, in the case of
Site 1, will prevent the loss of breeding birds, and their young, and bumblebees.
•
Supplementary planting within or around the site of the station will benefit wildlife in the
area.
12748J
8
February 2009
APPENDIX A
Phase 1 Habitat Map
12748J
© EnviroCentre Ltd.
Notes
A2.2 Scattered Scrub.
A2.1 Dense Scrub
J2.1.2 Species- poor Intact hedge
J1.4
Bare Ground.
J3.6
Buildings
A1.3.1Semi Natural Broad leaved woodland
A3.1 Scattered Broad-leaved Trees
I
J2.2
Species-poor Defunct hedge
J2.4
Fence
B4
Improved Grassland
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Do not scale this drawing
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Rev
Date
Amendment
Initials
Craighall Business
Park, Eagle Street,
Glasgow, G4 9XA
Tel: 0141 341 5040
Fax: 0141 341 5045
Client
Scottish Transport
Project
Dumfries and Galloway STAG
Title
Phase 1 habitat Map
Eastriggs Station
Status
FINAL
Drawing No.
Revision
12748j-001
File path: K:\12748j - D&G STAG\Drawings and Figures\Cad\Current
Scale
A3
N.T.S
Drawn
SD
Checked
SD
Date
06/02/2009
Approved
SD
February 2009
APPENDIX B
TARGET NOTES
1.
Improved grassland comparable to that in the wider area but currently ungrazed and becoming
rank. Dominated by the following species: Common Bent, Creeping Bent, Perennial Rye-grass
and Yorkshire Fog.
2.
Heavily grazed, improved grassland comparable to that in the wider area. Dominated by the
following species: Daisy, Meadow Buttercup, Perennial Rye-grass and Yorkshire Fog.
3.
Poorly drained pasture classified as marshy grassland. Dominated by Soft Rush and Yorkshire
Fog.
4.
Tall ruderal vegetation adjacent to the bridge.
Dominated by Rosebay Willow-herb with
occasional Ground Ivy in the under-storey.
5.
Species-poor hedgerow dominated Hawthorn with occasional Honeysuckle.
6.
Improved grassland as described at ‘2.’ above.
7.
Area of scrub adjacent to the house in the buffer zone that will be unaffected directly by the
development. Dominated by Hawthorn and Birch with Ground Ivy an additional species within
the ubiquitous, pasture species.
12748J
February 2009
APPENDIX B
PLANT SPECIES LIST
12748J
Annual Meadow-grass
Common Bent
Common Mouse-ear
Creeping Bent
Daisy
Dandelion
Downy Birch
False Oat-grass
Hawthorn
Meadow Buttercup
Perennial Rye-grass
Procumbent Pearlwort
Smooth meadow-grass
Soft Rush
White Clover
Yorkshire Fog
Poa annua
Agrostis capillaris
Cerastium fontanum
Agrostis stolonifera
Bellis perennis
Taraxacum officinale agg.
Betula pubescens
Arrhenatherum elatius
Crataegus monogyna
Ranunculus acris
Lolium perenne
Sagina procumbens
Poa pratensis
Juncus effusus
Trifolium repens
Holcus lanatus
a moss
a moss
a moss
Brachythecium rutabulum
Eurynchium praelongum
Rhytidiadelphus squarrosus
Draft STAG Report
Appendix 7
Economy Report
Colin Buchanan & Partners
RAIL CONNECTIVITY - THORNHILL & EASTRIGGS.
STAG ASSESSMENT (ECONOMICS)
Final Report
April 2009
ROGER TYM & PARTNERS
19 Woodside Crescent
Glasgow
G3 7UL
t
f
e
(0141) 332 6464
(0141) 332 3304
[email protected]
w
www.tymconsult.com
This document is formatted for double-sided printing.
CONTENTS
1
INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................... 1
2
POLICY REVIEW ......................................................................................................... 5
3
SOCIO-ECONOMIC BASELINE ASSESSMENT........................................................ 11
4
STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS.......................................................................... 17
Thornhill ........................................................................................................................ 17
Eastriggs....................................................................................................................... 18
5
RESIDENTIAL EFFECTS........................................................................................... 20
Thornhill ........................................................................................................................ 20
Eastriggs....................................................................................................................... 25
6
BUSINESS SURVEY ................................................................................................. 28
Thornhill ........................................................................................................................ 28
Eastriggs....................................................................................................................... 33
7
CONCLUSIONS......................................................................................................... 38
Final Report
1
INTRODUCTION
1.1
This document reports on the wider economic implications of potential improvements
in railway station infrastructure on the Glasgow and South Western main line. It is
proposed that Thornill and Eastriggs should once again be able to access services on
this line through the development of new station facilities. In the past, both settlements
had a stop on the line.
1.2
As stated in the brief issued by Dumfries & Galloway Council , “The G&SW main line
between Kilmarnock and Carlisle via Gretna Green Junction is currently utilised by a
mixture of passenger and freight traffic. Passenger traffic consists of irregular services
between Glasgow Central and Carlisle (operated by First ScotRail), and between
Stranraer or Girvan and Newcastle (operated by Northern Rail). Between passenger
services, there is an intensive freight service, primarily consisting of power station coal
from Hunterston and other loading points on the southwest of Scotland, to power
stations in the East Midlands and Aire Valley, together with corresponding empty trains
in the northbound direction.”
1.3
While station facilities are proposed in both communities and trains would stop there, it
is assumed that existing service frequencies continue.
1.4
In examining the range of potential economic impacts in each instance, Roger Tym &
Partners has:

1.5
Prepared a socio-economic baseline using Nithsdale, Annandale and Eskdale and
Dumfries & Galloway data sets;
Carried out a business survey and related analysis;
Undertaken preliminary background research into strategic housing demand
issues; and
Consulted with Council and other stakeholders.
Our findings are presented in the following chapters:

Chapter 2 - Policy Review;
Chapter 3 – Socio- economic baseline;
Chapter 4 - Residential analysis;
Chapter 5 – Business Survey findings; and
Chapter 6 - Conclusions.
Roger Tym & Partners
April 2009
1
Final Report
April 2009
2
Final Report
April 2009
3
Final Report
2
POLICY REVIEW
2.1
This section examines the various policies which will be influenced or supported by the
proposed opening of the new railway station facilities in Thornhill and Eastriggs.
National Planning Framework
2.2
The Scottish Government’s Transport Policy supports economic growth, promoting
social inclusion and accessibility, ensuring that the development of transport is
sustainable and minimising the environmental impact of travel. This has been
accompanied by a major shift in the balance of public sector investment towards more
sustainable transport options while maintaining and enhancing the trunk road network
and supporting maintenance of the local road network.
2.3
The challenges in urban and inter-urban transport are to facilitate economic growth by
tackling congestion in the city regions, to complete the missing links in the transport
network, to encourage a switch to more sustainable modes of transport, and to provide
disadvantaged communities with better access to economic opportunities.
2.4
Co-ordinating investment in developments such as economic development, housing,
retailing and in rural areas with existing and programmed transport infrastructure is an
important policy objective set out in the National Planning Framework and reinforced in
planning guidance including SPP 2 Economic Development, SPP 3 Planning for
Housing, NPPG 4 Mineral Working ,and SPP 15 Planning for Rural Development.
2.5
Other relevant policies, programmes and initiatives include:

Regional Transport Partnerships (RTPs), which aim to implement the delivery of a
transport system which is able to sustain and enhance the region’s economy and
community, while minimising any impact;
The Transport Scotland Act (2005) require all RTPs to prepare a Regional
Transport Strategy (RTS) which can help ensure that the region’s transport
facilities encourage economic growth and regional prosperity in a sustainable
manner. In the process, it should help to improve access to centres of employment
and public services as well as improving the transport of goods, ultimately
improving the economic prosperity of the area;
The Rural Access and Land Reform Act 2003: This legislation promotes a
prosperous rural economy, with a stable or increasing population where rural
communities have reasonable access to good quality services. Major facilities will
continue to be concentrated in the larger settlements. Most additional housing,
employment, retail, leisure and other services should be located where there is
access from an existing road or footpath to a rail station or bus route, and there is
proximity to local services e.g. schools and shops ideally within walking or cycling
distance;
SPP3 Housing notes that the amount and location of housing that can be
developed in rural areas is determined by a number of factors. These include:
April 2009
5
Final Report

proximity to services e.g. schools, shops (ideally within walking or cycling
distance); ease of access (from an existing road and footpath and to a rail station
or bus route); drainage and sewerage capacity (e.g. from combined septic tanks or
potential link to public systems); and
SPP 15 ‘Planning for Rural Development’ is targeted at rural areas with a
population of 3,000 or less. It notes that local authorities should support a wide
range of economic activity in rural areas as well as emphasising the importance of
tourism. It notes that as most major services will continue to be located in larger
settlements, infrastructure is important, especially for those without access to a car.
2.6
The National Transport Strategy (NTS) responds to the Government’s five strategic
objectives and is supported by ‘Scotland’s Railways’ which sets the vision for rail in
Scotland over the next 20 years and beyond. It demonstrates that rail is an integral part
of the National Transport Strategy and highlights the role of appraisal in assessing the
scale of benefit that may be associated with emerging infrastructure proposals.
2.7
The NTS promotes the improved transportation of a wide range of products using
Scotland’s rail network and with effective integration and interchange to the road and
sea networks. Strategies need to address specific rural characteristics and in Dumfries
and Galloway for example this includes high levels of dependency on road transport
and the private car. Further to this it:

Emphasises the importance of the Strategic Transport Projects Review;
States that ‘new stations will be considered where the surrounding population,
workplace or visitor need is sufficient to generate a high level of demand and would
be expected to be serviced by feeder, rather than inter-urban services’(paragraph
7.9); and
Identifies the processes mechanisms through which improvements are expected to
be achieved; including:
à Adding new stations and freight terminals to the network; and
à ensuring that services are accessible for everyone.
South West of Scotland Transport Partnership (Regional Transport
Strategy) June 2008
2.8
The strategy highlights that currently ‘transport infrastructure is relatively poor as not all
settlements are served by the rail network’. .In Dumfries and Galloway all six of the
working stations are on the Glasgow South Western Line with the exception of
Lockerbie. It also highlights the need to develop a service to meet the needs of
Lockerbie and its surrounding area.
2.9
The RTS aims to use the rail network to promote commuting, increase accessibility to
employment and improve connectivity. Through the RTS, six policies have been
developed:
April 2009
6
Final Report

2.10
Policy 1: The promotion of schemes to add value to the broader Scottish economy
and help sustain national economic growth;
Policy 2:To support the regional economy in relation to local jobs and to facilitate
sustainable connectivity;
Policy 3:To improve quality of life and access to services;
Policy 4:To address the peripherality between the region’s main settlements and
outlying areas, as well as between the region and external markets;
Policy 5: To minimise car use and recognize the role of transport in sustaining the
local economy; and
Policy 6: To assist the Scottish Government in delivering it’s five high level
objectives.
There have been some developments since the RTS was submitted, predominantly
associated with bus and cycle travel. . In terms of rail, no strategies have been
implemented as yet although there is ongoing engagement and consultations in
respect of rail access to Prestwick Airport and rural access to local services on the
West Coast Main Line. The Dumfries South Travel Planning Group has also been
established.
Dumfries and Galloway’s Strategic Housing Investment Plan 2007/2008
2.11
According to the plan, 142 homes will be built in Annandale and Eskdale; 592 in
Nithsdale; 173 in the Stewartry; and 377 in Wigtownshire.
2.12
Currently there is the preparation of the 2009-2014 Local Housing Strategy to replace
Dumfries and Galloway’s Local Housing Strategy 2004-2009.
2.13
Thornhill is noted as a ‘pressured settlement’ and is a priority for additional affordable
housing, noted in Appendix1 of the SHIP.
Dumfries and Galloway Structure Plan
2.14
The current Structure Plan came into force in 1999 and covers a period of 10-15 years
The Plan identifies both Eastriggs and Thornhill as Local District Centres within the
hierarchy of settlements. Thornhill is also considered as a ‘shopping centre’ within the
region.
2.15
Under Strategic Statement 4 ‘Infrastructure Provision and Investment’ , Policy S12
considers rail services and identifies Councils commitment to improving and upgrading
rail services in South West Scotland by:

2.16
Promoting the improvement or construction of a new station at Eastriggs;
Assessing the scope for other new stations, including Thornhill; and
The further provision of locally orientated-rail services between Carlisle and
Central Scotland.
Other relevant policies include Policy D3 on Rural Housing Allocations (which is
discussed in more detail in Chapter 5).
April 2009
7
Final Report
Adopted Annandale and Eskdale Local Plan 2006
2.17
Eastriggs was a planned settlement intended to serve the munitions industry. The Plan
states its population is dependent on the wider economy.
2.18
Within Eastriggs , the Local Plan identifies a need for 35 extra housing units from
2001-2009 and some sites were identified. Further housing development in Lowerthorn
(by Eastriggs) is constrained due to drainage.
2.19
When considering further development in Eastriggs the planned origins of the
settlement should be taken into account.
2.20
General Policy 67 highlights an area to the west of Eastriggs which should be
protected from development in order to facilitate development of a new station. A
dynamic Loop between Eastriggs and Annan is proposed and land at Eastriggs is
protected for this proposal.
2.21
The Plan highlights a small site (c.1 hectare ) to be safeguarded for the railway station
and referenced as land Opportunity 14.
Adopted Nithsdale Local Plan 2006
2.22
Dumfries, Thornhill and Sanquhar are identified as the local district centres in Mid
Nithsdale. The plan allocated land for the development of some 90 houses in
Thornhill.
2.23
The Plan maintains Thornhill’s role as a local shopping centre and wherever possible
encourages new development to support this.
2.24
The Plan identifies the Station Yard site (Opp14 Station Yard) for minor industrial or
related activity.
2.25
General Policy 29 Retail Development in District and Local centres emphasises
Thornhill as a shopping centre and encourages development which improves this role,
which the introduction of a rail service might, if it enhances the development of the
local economy.
2.26
Policy MN7 ensures that the disused platform is protected from development to
facilitate the introduction of rail services for the settlement.
2.27
The existing policy framework supports the provision of rail halts in both Thornhill and
Eastriggs and this is reinforced by the strategic analysis and priorities of the Areas
Community Plans.
Area Community Plans
2.28
The current Community Plan for Dumfries & Galloway (2009 -12), together with the
local Nithsdale (2006-08) and Annandale & Eskdale (2006 -11) Area Community Plans
identify improvement of transport links and communications as key target actions. The
supporting SWOT analyses in both highlight low car ownership and dependence on
public transport as major weaknesses and the lack of connectivity to Scottish cities – so
April 2009
8
Final Report
improvements such as new railway stations may bring accessibility benefits across
Dumfries & Galloway.
2.29
The aim of Priority 3 - Inclusive Communities reflects the need to continually improve
rural transport services, particularly in Rural Service Priority Areas and involve local
people in the decision-making process. Targets are adopted for 2010 which reflect
this.
2.30
The importance of tourism to Dumfries & Galloway is also highlighted as an important
sector. However, 84% of UK visitors (by far the main tourist group) use private
transport. Increasingly, labour shortages are anticipated in the sector as it is reliant on
an ageing workforce. Transport improvements could therefore improve accessibility to
a wider labour pool.

The Annandale & Eskdale Community Plan highlights that there are railway
stations at Annan and Lockerbie, although realistically Carlisle remains the main
railhead for the area. Dialogue continues with the private rail companies to
increase the number of trains stopping at Lockerbie. The development of stations
at Eastriggs is contained within strategy targets.
The Nithsdale Community Plan highlights that a number of rail studies are
underway to identify opportunities for improvements to the Nith Valley railway
between Glasgow, Kilmarnock, Dumfries and Carlisle and that the re-opening of
the Nithsdale station is a possibility.
South of Scotland Competitiveness Strategy
2.31
The South of Scotland Competitiveness Strategy 2007 -13 identifies a series of
challenges to the area in positioning it to compete effectively with the rest of Europe
and the World in terms of trade, investment, and tourism. In moving towards this goal,
and in encouraging a dynamic and entrepreneurial attitude within communities and
local businesses, the need for public and private sector partners at the European,
national and local levels to come together to address key issues is clear. Areas of
action include: improving transport and communications; improving business
infrastructure; regeneration and place investments; business assistance; and
improving education attainment and skill levels..
2.32
In describing “Problems, Challenges and Opportunities” , the Strategy identifies
notable shortfalls in built physical infrastructure as a significant potential inhibitor to
development. In particular it highlights a need for better road and transport links to
improve access both to and from Dumfries & Galloway.
2.33
Priority 3 - “ Increase the level of skills and education in the workforce and wider
community and tackle skills shortages “ focuses on addressing labour force issues and
states: There is a particular need to address localised barriers to accessing the labour
market such as lack of childcare, rural transport deficiencies and the lack of relevant
training and educational courses. Other priorities supporting the railway stations are
April 2009
9
Final Report
identified as: Priority 4 - Maximise the benefits of connections to the city regions and
other economic centres and Priority 6 - Build a high quality sustainable place to live,
work and visit.
April 2009
10
Final Report
3
SOCIO-ECONOMIC BASELINE ASSESSMENT
3.1
This section profiles the socio-economic structure of Dumfries and Galloway,
comparing it with Scotland and Great Britain overall. In the context of this assessment
the Dumfries and Galloway area is defined as the local economy, as recent data at a
disaggregated sub-regional level are not available.
Population Structure
3.2
The population of Dumfries and Galloway in 2007 was 148,300, just over 2.8% of
Scotland’s total population1. The population has generally remained stable. Over the
last 10 years there is a slight population decline of 0.1% in the Dumfries and Galloway
from 1997 to 2007, which on par with Scotland’s slight population decline (-1%) and
significantly lower than Great Britain’s increase of 8%2. Population projections indicate
that Dumfries and Galloway’s population is to decline by 2.7% between 2006 and
20313.
3.3
The population in Mid Nithsdale, the immediate area surrounding Thornhill, is 3,257
while the population of the Chapelcross area which incorporates the settlement of
Eastriggs is 34,2544
3.4
Dumfries and Galloway has an older age profile than the Scottish average, and this is
projected to become more pronounced in years to come5. This is similar to many other
rural areas with a relatively low proportion of people of working age and a high
proportion of people over 65. The attractive environment has made the region popular
for people in retirement. This is likely to have implications for the future provision of
services and care for elderly.
3.5
In terms of its working age population, Dumfries and Galloway has a lower proportion
(58%) of the total population than the Scottish (63%) and Great British (62%)
averages6. This is due to its older age profile.
3.6
Dumfries and Galloway has the oldest and fastest ageing population in Scotland and
by 2024 will have over 30% of the population in the retirement age group.
Labour Market Analysis
3.7
Economic activity rates in Dumfries and Galloway are higher than average,as is the
incidence of self-employment . Rural areas often have a relatively high proportion of
self-employment due to there being relatively few large companies, together with a
1
NOMIS 2008
NOMIS 2008
3
GROS 2006-Based Population Projections for Scottish Areas
4
NOMIS 2008
5
GROS 2006-Based Population Projections for Scottish Areas
6
NOMIS 2008
2
April 2009
11
Final Report
high proportion of employment in agriculture, construction, hospitality and business
services7, which can be characterised by a high number of small businesses.
3.8
The proportion seeking Jobs Seekers Allowance (JSA) is the same as the Scottish
average (2.5%) and Great Britain (2.5%)8.
Table 3-1 Sector employment (%)
Type of Industry
Agriculture, Hunting and
Forestry
Fishing
Mining and Quarrying
Manufacturing
Electricity, Gas and
Water Supply
Construction
Wholesale, Retail Trade
and Repairs
Hotels and Restaurants
Transport, Storage
Communications
Financial
Real Estate, Renting and
Business Activities
Public Administration and
Defence, Social Security
Education
Health and Social Work
Other
Thornhill
4.62
Eastriggs
1.93
Scotland
2.14
0.00
0.33
11.22
0.33
0.24
1.09
26.6
4.84
0.30
1.24
13.23
1.00
8.91
18.65
8.95
19.11
7.48
14.39
5.94
6.93
6.53
6.29
5.74
6.70
2.31
10.23
1.21
5.93
4.64
11.17
4.29
6.53
6.99
5.78
16.67
3.80
2.30
5.08
3.39
7.30
12.37
5.31
Employment Profile
3.9
The area has higher levels of people employed in agriculture than Scotland’s average
(more than double) and a stronger wholesale and retail trade than the average for
Scotland. There are lower levels of employment in public administration than Scotland
and significantly higher levels of those employed in Health and Social Care.
3.10
Eastriggs demonstrates significant strength in respect to the manufacturing industry,
where 26.6% of the working age population derives their employment from. This is
double the Scottish average. There is also an indication that Wholesale, Retail trade
and Repairs industries here are significant and those employed within Electricity, Gas
and Water Supply are at least 5 times more than the average for Scotland or when
examining Thornhill.
8
Total JSA claimants June 2008, NOMIS
April 2009
12
Final Report
Table 3-2 Distance Travelled to Work
Eastriggs
Work from Home
< 2 km
2-5km
5-10km
10-20 km
20 km +
Offshore
Other
Total
No
27
99
120
204
175
121
2
62
810
Thornhill
%
3.3
12.2
14.8
25.0
22.0
15.0
0.2
8.0
No
36
200
44
9
48
196
0
58
591
%
6.1
33.9
7.5
1.5
8.1
33.2
0
9.8
3.11
The table above shows that 47% of workers from Eastriggs travel between 5 and 20km
for employment purposes. Around a quarter (27%) travel less than 5 km for work and a
third travel further than 20km.
3.12
In Thornhill, 41.4% of workers travel less than 5 km for work purposes. Thornhill is a
larger settlement than Eastriggs, with a main shopping street, several pubs and other
amenities. It is likely that more people find employment within the settlement itself and
therefore have to travel less distance for employment.
3.13
A further 33% do however travel 20 km or more from Thornhill for employment
purposes.
Table 3-3 Method of Travel to Work
Eastiggs %
Works from Home
3.3
Train/Underground
0.12
Bus/Coach
5.9
Car/Van/Taxi
65
Passenger in Car/Van
15
Motorcycle/Moped
1.2
Bicycle
1.9
On Foot
7.4
Other
0.5
Thornhill %
6.1
0.16
4.2
51.1
9.3
0.16
0.32
27.8
0.67
Total %
4.5
0.14
5.2
58.9
12.6
0.8
1.2
16.1
0.6
3.14
In Thornhill it was noted that 41.4% of workers travel less than 5km for employment
purposes. Table 3.3 shows that 51% of respondents in the last census travelled to
work by car, with a further 9% being a passenger in a private car/van or taxi which
totals around 60%.
3.15
There were similar levels of high private car usage in Eastriggs at 65%. This is
understandable due to the fact that a substantial proportion of resident workers
commute more than 5 km to work.
April 2009
13
Final Report
Table 3-4 Average Earnings
Gross Weekly Pay (£)
Gross Hourly Pay (£)
Dumfries &
Galloway
Scotland
UK
423.0
10.06
461.0
11.59
479.3
12.01
Source: ONS Annual Population Survey
3.16
Table 3.4 shows that average weekly and hourly earnings for full time workers are
substantially below that for Scotland or the UK as a whole. At £423 per week, earnings
are around 10% below the Scottish average.
3.17
Gross Value Added (GVA) measures the contribution to the economy of each
producer, sector or industry in the local economy. It can be examined in respect to
sectors or for example per worker or per head population. GVA helps assess the
importance of each sector to the overall Dumfries and Galloway economy. Figure 3.1
below shows that the role of construction has become more significant, with
construction GVA almost doubling in volume between 1998 and 2002, and increasing
from 8% to 12% of the total.
Figure 3—1 Change in GVA by sector 1998 - 2002
Source: ONS Annual Business Statistics
3.18
Table 3 -5 shows that in terms of GVA per head Dumfries and Galloway is increasing
annually at a slower rate in comparison to Scotland, as well as performing poorer than
Scotland in general.
April 2009
14
Final Report
Table 3-5 GVA per Head (£)
3.19
Dumfries
&
Galloway
Scotland
2004
12,896
16,607
2005
12,972
17,289
2006
13,706
18,246
Dumfries and Galloway is fairly dependent on Agriculture and 8% of all Scotland’s
farming land lies within the region. Dumfries and Galloway’s Chamber of Commerce
states that ‘at least 40%’ of the business base is directly related to land based
activities’
Table 3-6 Number of Employee Jobs in 2005 and 2006 (000’s)
All Industries
Agriculture, Forestry &
Fishing
Production and
Construction
Services
Dumfries & Galloway
2005
2006
57.8
58.1
3.5
3.8
2005
2,398.8
35.7
Scotland
2006
2,377.2
38.8
11.9
11.5
398.4
400.8
42.4
42.8
1,964.7
1,937.5
Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation
3.20
The Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) is the Scottish Government’s official
tool for identifying small area concentrations of deprivation across Scotland. The
SIMD provides a relative ranking of 6,505 small areas (data zones) across Scotland
from the most deprived (ranked 1) to the least deprived (ranked 6,505). The SIMD
20069 is based on 37 indicators in seven ‘domains’.
3.21
In terms of deprivation, Dumfries and Galloway has only one data zone which falls
within Scotland’s 20% most deprived areas. This is located in the northern edge of the
region and incorporates the village of Kirkonnel. This demonstrates that Dumfries and
Galloway has a relatively low level of deprivation compared to the rest of Scotland.
9
This is the most recent version. The Office of the Chief Statistician has confirmed that the next
planned update to the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation will take place in Autumn 2009
April 2009
15
Final Report
Summary
3.22
The economy of Dumfries and Galloway performs relatively well when compared to
Scotland, with fairly low unemployment rates, relatively high levels of educational
attainment and a reasonable share of employees in highly skilled and skilled positions.
However, the main issues for the area are an aging population with a relative lack of
local employment opportunities to retain young people of working age.
April 2009
16
Final Report
4
STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS
4.1
A series of key stakeholder consultations were undertaken to establish the perceived
potential impact of the proposed railway stations in economic development and
planning terms. The consultation process highlighted a number of key
characteristics and issues which development of a rail halt may influence.
Thornhill
4.2
Thornhill is identified as a dormitory town and acts as a market town, As such it has a
relatively low population, but a significant rural hinterland. Preliminary population
projections for Dumfries & Galloway indicate slight population decline and an increase
in household numbers. However, in Lower Nithsdale, a slight population increase is
projected.
4.3
Stakeholders identified potential sectoral economic benefits in several areas including:
small independent traders; tourism business and possibly bulky goods manufacturing
together with possibly encouraging new housing development. (The findings of the
Business Survey and the Housing Analysis explore this further)
4.4
In the present economic down turn, there has been a 20% fall in planning applications
in Dumfries and Galloway, particularly from volume house builders, retail vacancies
are high in Dumfries. However, Thornhill has seen little change due to the high
proportion of local and independent shops. Other then a local hatchery, there have
been no major business closures in the immediate area.
4.5
Stakeholders generally felt that a station would make Thornhill more attractive and it
would have spin-offs. However, service frequency appears to be a significant issue.
Continuation of the existing profile may limit impact on tourism and commuting
opportunities both for residents to access work elsewhere and for local businesses to
access a wider pool of labour.
4.6
Housing allocation figures are subject to review with a housing market assessment
being undertaken and results expected later this year. Sites in the settlement are
allocated in the local plan for housing and there is presumption in favour of
development. However, road access underneath the railway bridge remains a
constraint.
4.7
Water and sewage infrastructure is also capacity constrained and this needs to be
addressed before any new housing on any significant scale can come forward..
4.8
The station could potentially be of benefit in encouraging an increased profile for
attractions such as the Drumlanrig Estate. The Stevens View Partnership is
developing a 10 year masterplan for Queensberry and Drumlanrig Estate which
projects growth in visitor numbers from 50,000 to 100,000 by 2015. Some 97% of
visitors currently travel by car to the area; a particular focus would be to improve
access to Dumfries and Thornhill with Glasgow a priority market.
April 2009
17
Final Report
4.9
While growth is being targeted however, service frequency could prove an impediment
to the potential for a significant number of rail-borne visitors to be realised (which
would also be dependent on the provision of onward linking bus services).
4.10
There was also broad agreement that the opening of the railway station would help
reduce car usage on the A77.
4.11
Several of those consulted commented that there are stations at smaller settlements
than Thornhill and that the settlement has a stronger case for a stop. It was also felt
that the station could bring benefits to people on low incomes and less mobile groups
giving wider access to employment opportunities and access to other regional facilities.
Eastriggs
4.12
Eastriggs has a relatively low population, but has a significant rural hinterland. It is
essentially a dormitory settlement, with a limited range of shops and very limited
employment opportunities. The community is dependent on work opportunities in
Gretna, Annan, Dumfries and Carlisle.
4.13
The station could have some local benefits by allowing access to a wider travel to work
area (although this is dependent on service frequency and reliability). A new station
may help to raise Eastriggs’ profile, given recent major closures in the wider varea and
the threat of further job losses.
4.14
While Eastriggs is emerging as a popular residential location , the point was made that
there are already stations nearby which are accessible to Eastriggs residents - at
Annan and Gretna.
4.15
As part of the Local Plan Review (which is just starting) , developers are starting to
express interest in bringing forward housing development. As in Thornhill, housing
allocations are subject to review.
4.16
Development in Lowerthetown is constrained by water and sewage problems and
these issues may extend to the rest of Eastriggs.
4.17
Rail halt provision could afford linkage to implementation of the Chapelcross
Masterplan, where a station could provide opportunities to link to propose Business
Park development (although similar opportunities would be afforded by the existing halt
at Annan). In either case, this would only be effective were linking bus services to be
provided.
April 2009
18
Final Report
April 2009
19
Final Report
5
RESIDENTIAL EFFECTS
5.1
Improvements in transport accessibility, whether road or rail, can enhance an area’s
residential accessibility. Whether this can be translated into increased demand for
housing in the area is dependent on a number of factors including: relative
accessibility of housing allocations to the proposed station; the levels of service
proposed from and to the facilities ( if the service pattern and therefore flexibility is
limited, it is unlikely that any uplift in residential development activity can be
realistically attributed to the presence of the station); other factors influencing the
attractiveness of the settlement benefiting from the station (relationship to other main
settlements and employment opportunities, relationship to the strategic road network,
provision of schools and other services etc) and the extent to which any residential
allocations are constrained, whether from fragmented site ownership, inadequate
service infrastructure or other factors.
5.2
In both settlements, other factors such as the capacity of existing water and drainage
infrastructure, need to be addressed to enable residential expansion. The forthcoming
review of the Local Plan will also consider the future roles to be pursued in each
settlement and this may be affected by decisions regarding the future direction of
growth across the Council area e.g. the likelihood of any growth which may be
anticipated in Gretna having implications for development in Eastriggs etc.
5.3
The presence of infrastructure constraints and the current depressed market
conditions limit the usefulness of consultations with developers and estate agents
regarding the likely effect of railway station provision on the attractiveness of both
Thornhill and Eastriggs to developers. With this in mind, we have assessed what the
impact of a 10% to 20% increase in residential attractiveness (due to station provision
and the alleviation of development constraints) would be to provide an indication of
potential housing development effects. For these purposes, a 20% improvement is
considered to be the maximum achievement that could be realised.
5.4
We understand that Dumfries & Galloway Council is in the process of commissioning a
Housing Market Assessment to identify future needs across the Council area .It will be
several months before the findings will be made available.
5.5
Existing residential allocations in each settlement are examined in this context.
Thornhill
5.6
Thornhill falls with the Nithsdale area allocation. In Policy D2 Housing Development in
Large Centres 1998-2009.Over the period 1998 to 2004, the Structure Plan identifies a
need for 1,765 houses in Nithsdale with a further 1,175 for the period 2004 -2009
giving a total of 2,940 units.
5.7
Thornhill has a total of 90 units allocated 1998 -2009 split into:
April 2009
20
Final Report

5.8
The rural allocation for the wider Nithsdale District is more extensive with 540 units
allocated for the rural area over the Plan period:

5.9
Proposal PMN1: sites committed for New Housing:
à PMN1.1 Queensberry Beeches (9 units)
à PMN1.2 East Bank Street (3 units)
à PMN1.3 Former Abattoir, Coo Road (2 units)
à PMN1.4 Corstorphine Road (6 units)
Following the completion of 3 housing sites in Thornhill an additional site was
identified to meet Structure Plan Requirements:

5.11
325 units - 1998 – 2004
215 units - 2004 -2009
Identified development sites in Thornhill include:

5.10
55 units - 1998 -2004
35 units - 2004 -2009
Policy MN4: West of Hospital Brae (50 units allocated)
Policy MN4a: West of Hospital Brae (Reserved Housing Land) is reserved for
development if the site above cannot be delivered. A further site, East of Hospital Brae
was identified under Opportunity OPP19 for limited low density development.
Housing Supply and Completions
5.12
Dumfries & Galloway Council carried out a Housing Audit in 2008 which assists in
identifying the take up of residential allocations.
5.13
Table 5-1 shows that there is still substantial capacity - 65% - in the existing
allocations identified for development in Thornhill , and emerging problems over future
capacity sites to accommodate more than 5 units. The site West of Hospital Brae has
not been delivered.
Table 5-1 Thornhill Site Capacity Assessment
Established supply
Sites 5+ units
Local Plan Sites (MN 4)
Local Plan Sites (OPPO)
Sites less than 5+ units
Total Units
Effective Supply
Sites 5+ units
Local Plan Sites (MN 4)
(Assumption 50% effective)
Total Units
April 2009
Capacity
Remaining Capacity
50
50
2
19
8
50
2
19
121
79
Capacity
Remaining Capacity
50
50
8
50
10
10
110
68
21
Final Report
Established supply
Local Plan Sites reserved
housing land (MN4a)
Capacity
Remaining Capacity
75
75
Source: Dumfries & Galloway Housing Audit (2008)
5.14
The historic complete completions rate for Thornhill is relatively low, delivering 8 units
per annum over the last 10 years.
Table 5-2 Thornhill - Housing Completions (1998 – 2007)
1998
1999
2000
Completions
2
4
7
2003
2004
2005
Completions
28
6
4
5.15
2001
28
2006
2
2002
2
2007
(June)
0
Limited sewage infrastructure and treatment capacity has limited completions in
Thornhill with only a low level of development permitted on allocated sites. Any major
new development would also require a new road access from the A76 as the nature of
the roads in the town is constricted.
Trend Based Quantum of Future Development
5.16
An extrapolation of past trends indicates that over the next 20 years Thornhill may see
the delivery of 166 units.
April 2009
22
Final Report
Table 5-3 Thornhill - trend-based Housing Growth
Per annum Delivery
8
5 year Delivery
42
10 year Delivery
83
15 year Delivery
125
20 year Delivery
166
Potential Impact of New Railway Station
Impact on Housing Units Delivered
5.17
The following tables estimate the potential impact of the railway station on housing
completions. It also assumes that the constraints to water and sewage infrastructure
which have been previously identified are addressed. This is based on the following
assumptions:

5.18
A trend based projection from past delivery;
The additional factoring in of sewage infrastructure and treatment capacity
improvements as this has been an established constraint on development in
Dumfries & Galloway;
A sensitivity analysis comparing the effects of a 10% and a 20% improvement in
housing completions due to the combined impact of railway station provision and
water and sewage improvements.
The subtraction of the trend based projection housing numbers from the numbers
delivered by railway station and water and sewage improvements; and.
A continuation of existing service levels.
Table 5.4 sets out the likely impact of the station development with other essential
servicing. This indicates that over 20 years between 17 and 33 units could be
delivered.
Table 5-4 Projected impact on housing delivery
Uplift
Delivery Period
5 year increase
10 year increase
15 year increase
10%
4
8
13
20%
8
17
25
20 year increase
17
33
Impacts of Additional Housing Units
5.19
Assessment of the potential household income and Council Tax effects of additional
housing completions is based on the following assumptions:

Average household income in Dumfries & Galloway of £21, 966 per annum;
April 2009
23
Final Report

5.20
Council tax receipts are based on Band D levels of £1, 429 per annum.
This calculation is maximised in that it assumes that all household income is additional
to the area (in reality, many of the houses will be occupied by existing residents of the
area)
Table 5-6 Other Impacts of Additional Housing Units
Factor
Low
High
5 year HH income
£92,257
£184,514
10 year HH income
£182,318
£364,636
15 year HH income
£274,575
£549,150
20 year HH income
£364,636
£729,271
5 year Income
£6,002
£12,004
10 year Income
£11,861
£23,721
15 year Income
£17,863
£35,725
20 year Income
£23,721
£47,443
Income Impacts
Council Tax Receipts
5.21
Table 5-6 estimates the impacts of additional households in terms of potential
household spending and Council Tax receipts over a 5 year to 20 year period. It
indicates that additional housing development attributable to station development
would produce only low level impacts:

5.22
Potential household income
£364,636 - £729,271
£23,721 - £47,443 (Band D)
This calculation is maximised in that it assumes that all household income is additional
to the area (in reality, many of the houses will be occupied by existing residents of the
area)
Factor
Low
High
Income Impacts
5 year HH income
£92,257
£184,514
10 year HH income
£182,318
£364,636
15 year HH income
£274,575
£549,150
20 year HH income
£364,636
£729,271
5 year Income
£6,002
£12,004
10 year Income
£11,861
£23,721
15 year Income
£17,863
£35,725
April 2009
24
Final Report
20 year Income
£23,721
£47,443
Eastriggs
5.23
Eastriggs is within the Annandale & Eskdale area allocation. Between 1998 to 2004
the Structure Plan identifies a need for 970 houses in Annandale & Eskdale with a
further 640 for the period 2004 -2009, a total of 1,610 units.
5.24
Eastriggs has a total of 50 units allocated split into:

5.25
Under Dumfries & Galloway Structure Plan Policy D3, similar rural housing allocations
are provided for Annandale & Eskdale District and the Nithsdale area. The policy
therefore provides for a a total of 540 housing units, comprising:

5.26
30 units - 1998 -2004
20 units - 2004 -2009
325 units - 1998 – 2004
215 units - 2004 -2009
Development sites in Eastriggs/ Lowerthertown are:

Proposal PLA1: sites committed for New Housing:
PMN1.33: Stanfield Farm
Policy LA15: Breakwell Avenue (2 units allocated)
Policy LA16: Gillwood Road (5 units allocated)
Policy LA16: Limit on Further Housing Development in Lowertherton – the Council
will not permit any further housing development in the area.
5.27
There remains substantial capacity – some 58% - within existing allocations, with
potential emerging problems over the number of sites to accommodate more than 5
units in the future.
Table 5-7 Eastriggs/ Lowertherton Capacity Assessment
Established supply
Capacity
Remaining Capacity
Sites 5+ units
Local Plan Sites (LA 6)
43
5
5
21
5
5
Total Units
53
31
Effective Supply
Sites 5+ units
Total Units
Capacity
Remaining Capacity
43
3
21
3
46
24
April 2009
25
Final Report
5.28
The historic completions rate for Eastriggs/ Lowertherton is low, at 6 units per annum
over the last 10 years.
Table 5-8 Eastriggs/ Lowertherton - Housing Completions (1998-2007)
1998
New build completions
2000
2001
2002
3
7
8
3
2004
2005
2006
1
7
11
3
2003
New build completions
1999
6
2007 (June)
14
5.29
There are serious constraints on foul drainage and road access which limit the scope
for new development in Eastriggs/ Lowertherton – despite there being potential land to
bring forward for development.
Trend Based Quantum of Future Development
5.30
A trend based assessment of future housing development suggests that the area may
see the delivery of 126 units over the next 20 years.
Table 5-9 Eastriggs/ Lowertherton - trend based Housing Growth
Per annum Delivery
6
5 year Delivery
32
10 year Delivery
63
15 year Delivery
95
20 year Delivery
126
Potential Impact of New Railway Station
5.31
The tables below estimate the potential impact of the railway station on housing
completions combined with improvements to water and sewage infrastructure. It
adopts similar assumptions to those for Thornhill.
5.32
Table 5-10 estimates the potential impact of station development alongside other
essential servicing and suggests that over 20 years between 13 and 25 units could be
delivered.
Table 5-10 Projected impact on housing delivery
Uplift
Delivery Period
5 year increase
10 year increase
15 year increase
10%
3
6
10
20%
6
13
19
20 year increase
13
25
April 2009
26
Final Report
Impacts of Additional Housing Units
5.33
Table indicates the potential impact of additional households in terms of household
income and local council tax receipts over a 5 -20 year period. Over a 20 year period
additional housing development due to the station would produce low level impacts:

Potential Household income:
Council Tax Receipts:
£276,772 - £553,543
£18,005 - £36,011 (Band D)
Factor
Low
High
5 year HH income
£70,291
£140,582
10 year HH income
£138,386
£276,772
15 year HH income
£208,677
£417,354
20 year HH income
£276,772
£553,543
5 year Income
£4,573
£9,146
10 year Income
£9,003
£18,005
15 year Income
£13,576
£27,151
20 year Income
£18,005
£36,011
Income Impacts
Conclusion on Housing Effects
5.34
It is evident that the potential impact of the opening of new railway stations in either
settlement will have only a limited impact on the level of housing development
delivered. This assessment has examined potential increases in completion rates
which could be at the high end of potential improvement. Under these scenarios,
station provision could encourage an additional 13- 25 residential units in Eastriggs
and an additional 17 -33 houses in Thornhill.
5.35
It can be further stated that development of the stations by themselves is likely to have
a more limited impact as there are clear constraints with sewage, drainage and road
capacity – all of which would have to be tackled before development could go ahead
with or without a new railway station.
April 2009
27
Final Report
6
BUSINESS SURVEY
6.1
A postal business survey was carried out in February 2009 to obtain views from the
business community on the potential effects of railway station provision on their
business operation and performance.
6.2
A targeted sample of companies likely to be effected by the introduction of rail services
was developed based on geographical location. All of the companies within and
surrounding Thornhill and Eastriggs were identified in a staged approach which
included a drive over survey, internet searches, examination of the Valuation Roll and
reviews of tourist brochures.
6.3
Two businesses were questioned in person with the remainder being contacted
through a postal survey. This was also followed up with several telephone interviews.
Three attempts were made to contact each business to improve response rates. If it
was inconvenient, alternative times were arranged.
6.4
100 businesses were identified (50 in each community). The response rate in both
communities was 22%, 22% in Thornhill and 24% in Eastriggs which is regarded as a
reasonable level of response for this type of survey.
6.5
The list of businesses is attached at Appendix 1.
6.6
The findings of the survey for each community are summarised below.
Thornhill
6.7
Of the responding Thornhill businesses, 55% provided an indication of their annual
turnover.
Figure 6-1 Business turnover
6.8
As might be anticipated for a settlement of its size and location, most businesses are
small to medium sized, with annual turnovers of less than £100,000.
April 2009
28
Final Report
6.9
In employment terms, there is a similar ratio of full and part time workers among
responding businesses. From the Business Survey we identified 26 full time and 25
part time employees.
6.10
Three quarters of the employees in responding businesses in Thornhill live in the area.
Those from outside Thornhill generally came from surrounding villages in Nithsdale
such at Dalbeattie and Sanquhar. Over half (52%) came to work by car. 35% walked
to work, while the remainder used public transport.
6.11
Nearly two-thirds of Thornhill businesses considered current trading levels to be good,
with the balance indicating a fair performance . A similar proportion (64%) thought
that trends were stable, although some 18% reported increasing volumes of business.
Only one respondent felt their business was declining. Patterns of employment were
also examined and these echoed the business trends,
6.12
Businesses identified a range of factors which contributed to their analysis of trends in
employment and business performance. The current economic climate is the most
influential factor and fears of recessionary effects were mentioned by over a quarter
(27.8%) of responding businesses.
6.13
Many respondents felt that other external factors have influenced their businesses
22% highlighting problems with access to markets, and a further 17% identifying the
degree of competition in the area. Some 11% noted labour force accessibility as an
issue.
Figure 6-2 : Thornhill - factors influencing Business Trends
6.14
Those surveyed were also asked for their opinion on future performance and business
prospects. Among responding businesses, the outlook appears positive with 64% of
establishments envisaging a stable performance. Only 10% expected volumes of
business to decline in the future. Only limited employment change is envisaged, with
April 2009
29
Final Report
just over a third indicating possible staffing increases (the remainder anticipated that
staffing would remain constant).
6.15
The survey also sought information on the factors most likely to influence future
business performance and to rate each one according to the level of beneficial impact
they would expect that particular factor to have on their business. The table below
outlines these findings.
Table 6-1 Key factors influencing future business performance (% Businesses)
Scale of impact
Factor
Very
Beneficial
Moderately
beneficial
Slight
Beneficial
Impact
No
beneficial
Impact
Access to
Workforce
36
9
0
0
45
Access to
Suppliers
Access to
Markets
0
18
18
9
45
18
27
0
0
45
27
9
0
0
55
18
18
0
18
36
0
9
0
0
82
18
9
18
0
45
45
9
0
9
27
Degree of
market
competition
Transportation
Costs
Availability of
Land and
Property
Availability of
Capital
Economic
Conditions
6.16
Beneficial
45 %identified an improvement in economic conditions as the factor most likely to be
very beneficial to future business trends, while a further business stated it would be
‘beneficial’. Labour force access is a significant issue affecting over a third of
businesses, although it was not considered a major issue for 45% of responding
businesses.
Table 6-2 Comments on Strengths and Weaknesses of Current Location.
Strengths
Weaknesses
Village is very Attractive
No Train Station
Stable local market, picturesque village
Area not promoted at all and often
with a good selection of shops and
people happen on it by chance.
activities.
Some passing trade due to road, quite a Lose a lot of young people to
busy little village
employment and higher education
elsewhere
Unique Stock and customer relations
Property size limited
Nice place, with a good size population
Delivery of goods can be expensive
Central to Village and A76 road
Not good for people without a car,
public transport is weak.
April 2009
30
Final Report
Strengths
Rural, Attractive Location, Loyal
Customers
Lack of Competition
Low overheads (rents/rates etc)
Nice area, close to motorway and main
roads
6.17
Weaknesses
Lack of movement within the area
Low Business Population
Smaller labour pool
Trucks passing through town centre
constantly
Individual business perceptions of the strengths and weaknesses of each area were
provided and are shown in the table above. The comments on weaknesses varied with
each business, although several mentioned transport considerations, such as the lack
of movement, lack of a railway station, reliance on the private car and poor public
transport. Opinions on what was needed to improve Thornhill’s business environment
included:

Increased advertising
Greater marketing and ease of transport access
Expansion in residential and business opportunities
An increased business population
Improved accessibility to a skilled workforce
6.18
The survey also considered potential beneficial impacts for employees as a result of
re-opening the rail station at Thornhill . From a business perspective, increased
accessibility to the workplace was considered the most significant impact with 64% of
businesses acknowledging it. 18 % of businesses felt it might reduce the cost of delays
in getting to work, while 18% considered there would be a greater reliability in journey
times.
6.19
Some 82% of Thornhill businesses felt the rail station would be beneficial in improving
client accessibility or for business meetings. Any cost benefits for staff or potential
clients were perceived to be minor. The continuation of existing levels of service on
the GSW and the restricted flexibility associated with it is likely to limit practical
benefits.Figure 6-3 shows perceived impacts in other critical business areas – output,
sales, margins etc. A degree of beneficial impact is expected in each area, Only 1
business indicated that the provision of the rail halt would have no benefit. Nearly three
quarters of businesses were of the view that station provision would have a beneficial
impact on employment numbers, although no indication was provided of the
anticipated scale.
April 2009
31
Final Report
Figure 6-3 Impact on other business factors
6.20
Figure 6-3 shows perceived impacts in other critical business areas – output, sales,
margins etc. A degree of beneficial impact is expected in each area, Only 1 business
indicated that the provision of the rail halt would have no benefit. Nearly three quarters
of businesses were of the view that station provision would have a beneficial impact on
employment numbers, although no indication was provided of the anticipated scale.
The range of perceived business effects is presented below.
Table 6-3 Thornhill - Business perceptions of railway station impacts
Factor
Efficiency improvements
Easier recruitment
Improved staff retention
Improved access to labour force
Improved customer access
Access to lower cost supplies
Output
Sales
Margins
Employment
April 2009
% stating
benefi
cial
effects
64%
55%
45%
55%
55%
73%
91%
91%
91%
73%
32
Final Report
6.21
Businesses in Thornhill are generally positive over the potential effects of improved rail
connections to and from the village. However, and as stated previously, it is considered
that the station of itself is only likely to generate additional benefit if the level of service
is enhanced over and above existing levels.
Eastriggs
6.22
Three quarters of responding businesses in Eastriggs provided an indication of their
annual turnover. Some 50% of businesses have annual turnovers of less than
£100,000 and would be categorised as small to medium sized.. A quarter of
responding turn over between £100,000 and £500,000 annually.
6.23
Responding businesses employed 87 people, 61 on a full-time basis. Some 55% of
the workforce in responding businesses lived in Eastriggs, with the majority of the
remainder commuting from Annan and the surrounding villages. It is estimated that
half come to work by private transport, 15% use local bus services with the remaining
35% walking.
6.24
Less than half (45%) of the Eastriggs businesses thought that current trading levels
were good, although only 9% thought they were poor, the balance generally reporting
fair trading performance. While the majority consider business to be stable, over a
quarter ( 27%) stated that trade was actually increasing. 18% had seen a decline in
business performance.
6.25
This has been reflected in businesse employment profiles, with most reporting stable
staff complements. While some 18% had reported recent changes, this was balanced
equally between businesses reducing staffing levels and those increasing them.
Figure 6-4 : Eastriggs - factors influencing Business Trends
April 2009
33
Final Report
6.26
Businesses identified a range of factors which influence these trends and affect
employment trends and business performance. The current economic climate is clearly
the most influential factor and was mentioned by 55% of businesses.
6.27
Other factors influencing business performance included ;problems with access to
markets (27%), and a further 18% identifying access to suppliers as an issue.. Others
mentioned access to staff and workforce, and the degree of competition as influencing
their business although these factors were only considered by a small proportion of
businesses (9%)
6.28
Businesses were asked for their views on future performance and business prospects.
The outlook appears positive with 73% of establishments envisaging a stable
performance in the future. Only one business anticipated a decline in future business..
6.29
Expected future employment levels were also examined and views were consistent
with business prospects. All of the respondents expected employment to remain
stable. None envisaged any decline or increase in staff numbers in the foreseeable
future.
6.30
Businesses identified those factors they considered most likely to influence future
business performance and rated them according to the level of beneficial impact
anticipated. Table 5.4 below outlines these findings.
Table 6-4 Key factors influencing future business performance (% Businesses)
Scale of impact
Factor
Access to
Workforce
Access to
Suppliers
Access to
Markets
Degree of market
competition
Transportation
Costs
Availability of
Land and
Property
Availability of
Capital
Economic
Conditions
6.31
Very
Beneficial
Moderately
beneficial
Beneficial
Slight
Beneficial
Impact
No
beneficial
Impact
36
0
0
0
0
27
0
9
0
0
45
0
9
0
0
18
0
9
0
0
18
0
9
0
0
18
9
0
0
0
18
0
9
0
0
36
0
9
0
9
Access to labour workforce was identified by over a third (36%) of businesses as ‘very
beneficial’. Improved access to markets was identified by almost half (45%) of
April 2009
34
Final Report
businesses as being likely to influence their business positively, with a further 9%
considering it would be moderately beneficial.
6.32
Improved access to markets is clearly the most significant factor for responding
Eastriggs businesses.
Table 6-5 Comments on Strengths and Weaknesses of Current Location.
Strengths
Weaknesses
Cycling routes, tourist area. Can get to
On a Bypass now so located off the
Stranraer easily.
main tourist route
Good surrounding Road Network
Not enough housing
Bus Service through Eastriggs
Not many people and limited activity
Free Parking, a Shop close by
Lack of ideas for area growth
Close to M74 & M6
Not an established Shopping Centre
Housing nearby, so customer base
Miss passing trade due to Bypass
Lack of Competition
Frontage onto B721 (popular local road
for domestic needs and commuting
Centrally Located for Local Farmers
6.33
Some businesses gave indications of what they felt were strengths of their location;
several indicated the surrounding road networks and proximity to the nearby
motorways were a bonus. A bus service that passes through Eastriggs was also
mentioned.
6.34
Areas with high volumes of tourism such as Gretna and Stranraer are easily accessible
and a short distance away. While comments on weaknesses varied, a number of
comments were received regarding a loss of business and opportunities since the
bypass was built and a limited amount of passing trade.
6.35
Businesses were then asked what they felt could be done to improve the attractiveness
and competitiveness of Eastriggs as a business location. Potential improvements
mentioned included:

More effective marketing;
Improved advertising and promotion;
Improved signposting in and around the village;
More housing;
More shops;
Improved public transport and transport communications; and
Open a rail halt.
6.36
Businesses foresaw a modest scale of considering potential benefits to staff from rail
station opening. While over a quarter of businesses (27%) acknowledged there would
be increased accessibility, only 18% thought it would reduce the cost of delays in
getting to work or generate greater journey reliability.
6.37
The survey also considered the range of potential business benefits through greater
efficiency and accessibility in typical business and client trips. In this context, only 18%
felt that their business would not witness any benefit
April 2009
35
Final Report
6.38
Businesses were probed as to what level of impact they envisaged for their business in
respect of costs for staff travelling to meet clients and visiting other locations, as well
as the costs for clients/suppliers travelling to the business. Any beneficial impact is
perceived as minor, with some 35% of businesses envisaging no effect as a result of
the introduction of rail services.
6.39
Figure 6-5 shows perceived impacts in other key business areas – output, sales,
margins etc. While some beneficial impact is expected in each area, most anticipate
that employment impacts will be minimal. laOnly 1 business indicated that the
provision of the rail halt would have no benefit. Nearly three quarters of businesses
were of the view that station provision would have a beneficial impact on employment
numbers, although no indication was provided of the anticipated scale.
Figure 6-5 Impact on other business factors
6.40
The range of perceived business effects in Eastriggs is presented below.
Table 6-6 Eastriggs - Business perceptions of railway station impacts
Factor
Efficiency improvements
Easier recruitment
Improved staff retention
Improved access to labour
force
Improved customer access
Access to lower cost supplies
Output
April 2009
% stating
benef
icial
effect
s
36%
64%
55%
55%
36%
64%
55%
36
Final Report
Factor
Sales
Margins
Employment
% stating
benef
icial
effect
s
73%
73%
27%
Quantitative Assessment
6.41
Businesses in both communities clearly anticipate a range of positive benefits,
although the relative accessibility of Eastriggs to the strategic road network (which has
been the subject of recent improvement) influences the scale of perceived benefits.
6.42
With rail station improvements, the range and frequency of services are the key factors
which directly influence business performance. As noted earlier, no increase in existing
levels of service is envisaged on the line. However, indirect business benefits may be
realised through the enhanced profile which the opening of rail station facilities affords.
6.43
An estimate of potential employment and GVA impacts has been developed from the
survey findings. The estimate is based on the following assumptions, which optimise
the potential for employment growth attributable to the provision of the rail halt. The
estimate is a gross estimate in that it makes no provision for additionality and
displacement effects :

6.44
Dumfries & Galloway average GVA per employee of £27,94810
Thornhill
à A 5% increase in employment in responding businesses;
à A 1% increase in employment in remaining businesses
Eastriggs
On this basis, it is estimated that rail station provision could generate:

10
Thornhill
à an additional 12 jobs
à additional annual GVA of £328,000
Eastriggs
NOMIS, June 2007 figures
April 2009
37
Final Report
7
CONCLUSIONS
7.1
From the survey findings it can be concluded that the business community would
generally welcome that the proposed new stations. It was considered that the new rail
services and stations could help sustain business performance, reduce some costs,
improve margins and increase output. However, this is only expected by some of the
businesses and often to a limited extent, with only ‘slight beneficial impacts’ being
identified by many.
7.2
More pronounced benefits were anticipated in Thornhill, while businesses in Eastriggs
were less optimistic of the potential benefits.
7.3
With rail station improvements, the range and frequency of services are the key factors
which directly influence business performance. As noted earlier, no increase in existing
levels of service is envisaged on the line. However, indirect business benefits may be
realised through the enhanced profile which the opening of rail station facilities affords.
7.4
An estimate of potential employment and GVA impacts has been developed from the
survey findings. The estimate is based on the following assumptions, which optimise
the potential for employment growth attributable to the provision of the rail halt. The
estimate is a gross estimate in that it makes no provision for additionality and
displacement effects :

7.5
On this basis, it is estimated that rail station provision could generate:

7.6
Dumfries & Galloway average GVA per employee of £27,94811
Thornhill
Eastriggs
Thornhill
Eastriggs
The provision of rail halts in Thornhill and Eastriggs may also act to increase the
attractiveness of each settlement for housing and other development. While this will
also be influenced by provision of other supporting infrastructure and services, as well
as implementation of policy priorities, it appears evident that the potential impact of
11
NOMIS, June 2007 figures
April 2009
38
Final Report
new railway stations in either settlement will have only a limited impact on the level of
housing development delivered. This assessment has examined potential increases in
completion rates which could be at the high end of potential improvement. Under
these scenarios, and over the next 20 years, station provision could encourage an
additional 13- 25 residential units in Eastriggs and an additional 17 -33 houses in
Thornhill.
April 2009
39
Draft STAG Report
Appendix 8
Rail Operational Assessment Report
OPERATIONAL ASSESSMENT
OF THE PROPOSED
THORNHILL AND EASTRIGGS
STATIONS
A Report produced for
Duncan Birrell
Regional Director
Colin Buchanan and Partners Ltd
Document Control
File name
Version number
Version date
Author
Reviewed by
File location
RWA Rail Report - Operational Assessment of the proposed Thornhill and Eastriggs stations v 2_0 Draft.doc
2.0 Draft
05 February 2009
Godfrey Willis
Steve Brown
C:\Documents
and
Settings\Steve\My
Documents\Work\Colin
Buchanan\GSW
New
Stations\Documents\Outgoing\RWA Rail Report - Operational Assessment of the proposed Thornhill and Eastriggs
stations v 2_0 Draft.doc
Page 1 of 16
Suite 7, Loughborough Technology Centre , Loughborough University, Epinal Way, Loughborough, Leicestershire, LE11 3GE, UK
+44 (0)1509 210110 [email protected] http://www.rwa-rail.co.uk RWA Rail is a wholly-owned subsidiary of TRACSIS plc.
Document Control
Issue
1.0
2.0
Date
2nd February 2009
5th February 2009
Comments
First draft
Second draft incorporating reference
to sub-options and minor changes
Page 2 of 16
Executive Summary
Given the investigation described and the assumptions made it would appear that the effects
of the provision of new stations at Eastriggs and Thornhill on journey times of train services
will not have major impacts on the timetable as a whole and that, subject to proof by
modelling work relating to performance, could be reliably and robustly delivered on a daily
basis.
Connections at Carlisle with other services are generally maintained although the advertised
“minimum interchange time” in the Train Services Database of ten minutes is undercut on
some occasions. The current connectional allowance in the National Rail Timetable at
Carlisle is 8 minutes, in other words if a train leaves Carlisle in less than eight minutes after
the arrival of another there is not deemed to be a connection between the two. There are
examples today of West Coast Main Line trains giving less than eight minutes into G&SW
services (1102 arrival into 1107 departure, 1846 arrival into 1852 departure for example)
There is a small increase in such occasions in the proposed timetable.
The effect of deceleration, station dwell times of half a minute at each location and
acceleration is en extension of approximately six minutes to affected through train journeys
in each direction between Kilmarnock and Carlisle, and of two minutes in each direction for
trains solely between Dumfries and Carlisle. The extension is greater for some trains than for
others, depending on the extent to which the current paths are extended by the use of
“pathing” or extended dwell time allowances which can be re-claimed for use as station stop
time. These journey time extensions will require endorsement by stakeholders, most notably
Transport Scotland which has a stated objective of reducing journey times.
In the process of undertaking the initial timetable analysis, an apparent planning discrepancy
has been discovered in the current running times between Thornhill and Sanquhar, believed
to be caused by a Permanent Speed Restriction (PSR). As things stand, awaiting confirmation
from stakeholders, the additional running time (90 s in the Down direction, and 120 s in the
Up direction) has been incorporated into the planning assumptions.
Suitable data is not yet available in order to extend the study to include the proposed
December 2009 passenger timetable, which incorporates the half-hourly Kilmarnock service.
Given the potentially significant impacts of this timetable re-cast, this is a significant omission
which will need to be rectified once an appropriate level of detail becomes available.
The impact of opening only one, not both of the proposed new stations has been considered
in principle but not in detail. Either scenario would essentially be a less-modified version of
that which has been considered previously, i.e. the worst case (in terms or train planning) has
been considered.
Page 3 of 16
Table of Contents
Document Control ................................................................................................................ 2
Executive Summary................................................................................................................ 3
Table of Contents .................................................................................................................. 4
1
Background.................................................................................................................. 5
2
The G&SW Route ........................................................................................................ 6
3
Methodology ............................................................................................................... 7
4
Planning Assumptions .................................................................................................. 8
5
Revised Sectional Running Times ................................................................................. 9
6
7
8
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
Investigation and Main Report.................................................................................... 10
Effects on rolling stock diagrams ........................................................................... 11
Effects on train crew resources ............................................................................ 11
Effects on performance......................................................................................... 11
Sub-Options – Thornhill or Eastriggs stations in isolation ...................................... 12
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
Issues Arising ............................................................................................................. 13
Infrastructure........................................................................................................ 13
Journey time effects .............................................................................................. 13
Train Crew and resource diagrams....................................................................... 13
Other schemes planned or contemplated ............................................................. 13
Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 14
Appendix I: Revised Sectional Running Times ....................................................................... 15
Appendix II: Amended Passenger Timetables and Consequential Alterations ....................... 16
Page 4 of 16
1
Background
Dumfries and Galloway Council has aspirations to open new stations at both Thornhill and
Eastriggs. Thornhill is located roughly midway between the existing stations at Dumfries and
Sanquhar, and is the site of a former station. Eastriggs is located between Gretna and Annan
and is also close to the site of a former station.
Dumfries and Galloway Council’s Design Services, Combined Services undertook a study on
the Glasgow & South Western Line and Stranraer Line on behalf of the Council’s Strategic
Transportation, Planning and Environment team in November 2005. This sought to identify
how the accessibility and service to the public provided by the rail network in the area could
be improved.
The study considered a number of aspects including railway operations and timetabling,
patronage, service provision and infrastructure improvements. A key aspect of this study was
to assess the feasibility of a number of potential new stations in terms of their physical
implementability, likely demand, ability to be served without significant disruptions to existing
train services, and the resulting economic case for their construction. Thornhill and Eastriggs
were two of the potential new stations considered in this study.
This study recognised that journey times of trains which called at the new stations would be
lengthened by about three minutes in either direction. However, since this previous work
was localised in geographical scope, was limited to only part of the day; did not use Rules of
the Plan, nor had buy in from Network Rail or First ScotRail it was considered that little
could be reused. The recent doubling of the line between Annan and Gretna also gave a
different train planning concept.
Dumfries and Galloway Council has now asked Colin Buchanan to conduct a new study, the
purpose of which is to take forward the findings from the previous studies by carrying out a
STAG type appraisal of options for the two new stations. Colin Buchanan has subsequently
asked RWA Rail to provide analysis of the operational impacts of these stations.
Page 5 of 16
2
The G&SW Route
The G&SW main line between Kilmarnock and Carlisle via Gretna Jn is currently utilised by a
mixture of passenger and freight traffic. Passenger traffic consists of irregular services
between Glasgow Central and Carlisle (operated by First ScotRail), and between Stranraer
or Girvan and Newcastle (operated by First ScotRail to the north of Carlisle, and by
Northern Rail south and east thereof). Between passenger services, there is an intensive
freight service, primarily consisting of power station coal from Hunterston and other loading
points on the south west of Scotland, to power stations in the East Midlands and Aire Valley,
together with corresponding empty freight trains in the northbound direction.
The increase in utilisation of the G&SW main line has led to a number of completed and
proposed enhancement schemes in the area, including the following list extracted from the
current Route Plan:
•
•
•
•
Redoubling of Gretna to Annan and provision of additional signalling between Annan
and Mauchline (completed August 2008)
Glasgow/Kilmarnock Upgrade - Extension of Lugton Loop to south of Stewarton,
including 2nd platforms at Dunlop and Stewarton and platform extensions to the
existing platforms at Dunlop and Kilmaurs to permit a half-hourly service between
Glasgow Central and Kilmarnock (due for completion in 2009)
Dumfries improved turnback - improvements to provide a southbound turnback
move from the northbound platform
Linespeed enhancements at Sanquhar
The introduction of the half-hourly Kilmarnock service, in particular, will lead to a further
recast of the G&SW timetable.
Page 6 of 16
3
Methodology
Basic timetable and associated data has been collated for the December 2008 timetable.
Rolling stock diagrams have been requested from First ScotRail (SR), but at the time of
writing have not been made available. With the G&SW route being the only "domestic"
ScotRail service into and out of Carlisle, it is safe to assume that what comes in also goes
back. At the Glasgow Central end the unit may interwork and run to Stranraer, for example,
but it is considered unlikely to have such a short turnround that the proposed retimings will
have any effect.
The extra time required for the new station stops has been calculated using RailSys (a tool
accepted by Network Rail for the calculation of running times), based on line speed,
gradients and traction characteristics at the proposed station locations.
The impact of the additional station stop(s) on the timetable has then been evaluated and the
findings are reported in the remainder of this report.
Page 7 of 16
4
Planning Assumptions
The proposed new stations would be situated at railway mileage 110 miles 20 chains for
Eastriggs and 77 miles 50 chains for Thornhill at similar locations to the former stations. For
Eastriggs this would be approximately three miles from Annan and five miles from Gretna
Green the nearest points at which passenger trains currently call. In the case of Thornhill the
equivalent distances are twelve miles from Sanquhar and fourteen miles from Dumfries. Both
stations are planned to be located on sections of running line with no severe curves or steep
gradients in the immediate area. The locations in relation to running signals are not a material
factor for this timetable exercise.
The following operational assumptions have been made:
• The current Rules of the Plan values for headways, margins, etc will remain as now.
• A half minute station dwell time should be considered at each location in view of the
rolling stock which currently operates the services.
• That the station will not be fitted for Driver Only Operation of trains.
• That no future infrastructure enhancement schemes (such as an improved Dumfries
turnback) have been provided.
The following rolling stock assumptions have been made:
• The route will continue to be served by current rolling stock
• All multiple units used can maintain the proposed running times.
The following infrastructure assumptions have been made:
• Line speed values remain as at present.
• Methods of signalling remain as at present.
• The new stations will be capable of dealing with longest passenger train required to
call.
The following service assumptions have been made:
• That calls at the new stations will be in addition to existing calls at adjacent locations
and not be as a replacement to balance overall journey times.
• That the RailSys generated running times catering for the calls are accepted and have
been rounded for train planning purposes.
• That the timetable impact outwith the Kilmarnock to Carlisle section is to be minimal.
Page 8 of 16
5
Revised Sectional Running Times
Revised Sectional Running Times (SRTs), incorporating station stops at Thornhill and
Eastriggs have been calculated using RailSys and are shown in detail in Appendix I.
To summarise, journey times would be extended by approximately 120 s at each of the two
station sites, including 30 s station dwell time at each station.
In the process of undertaking the initial timetable analysis, an apparent planning discrepancy
in the current timetable has been uncovered. The current timetable shows the planned
journey time from Thornhill (pass) to Sanquhar (stop) to be 750 s, and 720 s vice versa.
Checking these running times using RailSys shows the actual running times to be in the order
of 830 s each way, the reason for the discrepancy would appear to be a speed restriction of
20 mph, from 66 miles 50 chains to 65 miles 77 chains, just to the south of Sanquhar. This is
shown in the current Sectional Appendix.
Since this is shown in the Sectional Appendix and hence appears to be a Permanent Speed
Restriction (PSR), Network Rail will need to be contacted to understand:
1)
2)
3)
Whether this has nominally been factored into existing running times (it would
seem not)
The reason for the PSR (the Route Plan identifies old mine workings)
Whether there is any prospect of it being removed (it is assumed that this
enhancement is that referred to in the Route Plan)
As things stand, the additional running time (90 s in the Down direction, and 120 s in the Up
direction) has been incorporated into the planning assumptions.
The effect of deceleration, station dwell times of half a minute at each location and
acceleration is en extension of approximately six minutes to affected through train journeys
in each direction between Kilmarnock and Carlisle, and of two minutes in each direction for
trains solely between Dumfries and Carlisle. The extension is greater for some trains than for
others, depending on the extent to which the current paths are extended by the use of
“pathing” or extended dwell time allowances which can be re-claimed for use as station stop
time. These journey time extensions will require endorsement by stakeholders, most notably
Transport Scotland which has a stated objective of reducing journey times.
Page 9 of 16
6
Investigation and Main Report
The list of services (taken from the December 2008 TT base) which would serve the
proposed new stations is shown in tabular form below together with the deduced stopping
times:
Table 1: Northbound Calling Times at New Stations
Eastriggs depart
05 55**
06 26
08 32
11 24
13 23
14 38
15 15
16 31**
18 18
19 08
21 23
23 08**
Thornhill depart
07 03
09 09
12 01
14 01
15 15
15 53
18 56
19 45
21 58
** to Dumfries only
Table 2: Southbound Calling Times at New Stations
Thornhill depart
08 34
10 00
11 33
12 44
13 35
14 38
17 19
19 00
21 34
23 36
** from Dumfries only
Eastriggs depart
06 51**
07 57**
09 11
10 37
12 09
13 20
14 12
15 15
17 26**
17 56
19 37
22 10
00 15
Page 10 of 16
The full timetable details, with comparisons to the existing service, are shown in Appendix II
and the area compiled covers Kilmarnock to Carlisle (inclusive) with every effort made to
retain the existing (Dec 2008) timetable beyond Kilmarnock to Glasgow Central or Stranraer
and beyond Carlisle towards Newcastle in both directions. In general this is possible by
making use of pathing or performance allowances in the current timings, or by shortening
extended dwell times (particularly at Carlisle but in some cases elsewhere). Only passenger
trains are shown in the Appendix – freight paths remain unaltered unless explicitly shown in
the list of consequential alterations.
The results cover a full twenty four service and using Mondays to Fridays as the example. It is
appreciated that passenger services in general run on an identical basis for five days each
week (often six) but freight is variable with some trains operating on certain days only.
Platform details at Carlisle and Kilmarnock have been included
6.1
Effects on rolling stock diagrams
The inclusion of the additional calls in the trains is believed not to have any effect on the
diagrammed working of multiple units as the “balances” at each end of a journey have been
maintained but the absence of any unit diagrams from First ScotRail to support this should be
noted.
6.2
Effects on train crew resources
In the event of the additional journey time in each direction being accepted and implemented
there will be two possible effects on train crew workings.
Firstly it is possible that the productive work content of diagrams will be extended by
approximately six minutes in each direction (i.e. the same diagram working a southbound and
returning northbound train both of which have additional calls) which may have an effect on
any local agreement with the depots working these trains. Secondly, and perhaps more likely,
any physical needs breaks (PNBs) within diagrams at Carlisle may be affected in that the
minimum time necessary for these will be compromised by varying reductions to cater for
the extended journey times.
First ScotRail have not been a party to the work undertaken or supplied information to assist
therewith. The effects are thus not yet known in detail. A response is required from First
ScotRail since details of Terms and Conditions for staff at key locations in terms of PNBs etc.
are required to inform the study.
6.3
Effects on performance
As noted above, a full performance assessment (using modelling) is outwith the scope of this
study. No major performance issues are anticipated, but it should be noted that the revised
timetable inevitably requires a reduction in turn-round time at Carlisle, Dumfries or
elsewhere, for certain services, and this may have a negative impact on punctuality as late
incoming workings are more likely to knock-on into late departures.
Page 11 of 16
6.4
Sub-Options – Thornhill or Eastriggs stations in isolation
The impact of opening only one, not both of the proposed new stations has been considered
in principle but not in detail. Either scenario would essentially be a less-modified version of
that which has been considered previously, i.e. the worst case (in terms or train planning) has
been considered.
The no-Eastriggs option would mean that there would be little or no effect at all on the
current Dumfries terminating services, since these would simply continue to run as now.
The no-Thornhill option would mean that all services would be affected but by less than in
the case that both stations are in operation.
In practice the whole timetable has fairly evidently not yet been optimised to account for the
Gretna-Annan re-doubling. This will likely be taken account of in the work on re-timetabling
the G&SW route that First ScotRail are known to be undertaking but to which we have not
yet had access.
Page 12 of 16
7
Issues Arising
The introduction of the additional calls into trains appears to be without serious issue but the
following should be noted to ensure a robust train plan:
7.1
Infrastructure
Although no specific train length has been assumed, but we would expect that stations will
have platforms that are long enough to accommodate the longest train currently used on the
route (believed to be a 2-car Class 156 or Class 158 but awaiting rolling stock diagrams from
First ScotRail to confirm), i.e. platforms will be no shorter than the operational length of
those at other stations.
7.2
Journey time effects
The additional running times in each direction should ideally be contained wherever possible
within the Carlisle to Kilmarnock or vice versa section of each trains journey. If this is not
possible the impact of extending the retimings beyond the area and thus reacting on other
trains on other lines has been considered. Appendix II shows where these consequential
impacts have proved necessary.
7.3
Train Crew and resource diagrams
The impact of additional journey times on diagrams has still to be calculated in any detail.
7.4
Other schemes planned or contemplated
Whilst the exercise has taken December 2008 as the base, it is noted that the data contains
several freight pathways which do not operate on a regular basis, and with the ongoing and
fluid development of freight trains via this route this must be taken into consideration in any
further evaluation.
Suitable data is not yet available in order to extend the study to include the proposed
December 2009 passenger timetable, which incorporates the half-hourly Kilmarnock service.
Given the potentially significant impacts of this timetable re-cast, this is a significant omission
which will need to be rectified once an appropriate level of detail becomes available.
It is noted that there is an aspiration stated in the Route Plan to simplify turn-rounds at
Dumfries by allowing southbound services to depart from the northbound platform in
passenger service. It is considered that this might be desirable in order to mitigate against any
performance risk.
Page 13 of 16
8
Conclusions
Given the investigation described and the assumptions made it would appear that the effects
of the provision of new stations at Eastriggs and Thornhill on journey times of train services
will not have major impacts on the timetable and subject to other modelling work relating to
performance could be reliably and robustly delivered on a daily basis.
Connections at Carlisle with other services are generally maintained although the advertised
“minimum interchange time” in the Train Services Database of ten minutes is undercut on
some occasions. The current connectional allowance in the National Rail Timetable at
Carlisle is 8 minutes, in other words if a train leaves Carlisle in less than eight minutes after
the arrival of another there is not deemed to be a connection between the two. There are
examples today of West Coast Main Line trains giving less than eight minutes into G&SW
services (1102 arrival into 1107 departure, 1846 arrival into 1852 departure for example)
There is a small increase in such occasions in the proposed timetable.
Page 14 of 16
Appendix I: Revised Sectional Running Times
All times are calculated using RailSys and are shown in seconds.
From
Gretna Green
Gretna Green
Eastriggs
Eastriggs
Gretna Green
Gretna Green
To
Eastriggs
Eastriggs
Annan
Annan
Annan
Annan
Start
Start
Start
Pass
Start
Start
Stop
Pass
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Holywood
Holywood
Dumfries
Dumfries
Thornhill
Thornhill
Thornhill
Thornhill
Thornhill
Thornhill
Dumfries
Dumfries
Thornhill
Thornhill
Thornhill
Thornhill
Sanquhar
Sanquhar
Sanquhar
Sanquhar
Kirkconnel
Kirkconnel
Sanquhar
Sanquhar
Pass
Pass
Start
Start
Start
Start
Pass
Pass
Start
Pass
Start
Start
Stop
Pass
Stop
Pass
Pass
Stop
Stop
Pass
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Kirkconnel
Kirkconnel
Sanquhar
Sanquhar
Sanquhar
Sanquhar
Thornhill
Thornhill
Thornhill
Thornhill
Sanquhar
Sanquhar
Thornhill
Thornhill
Thornhill
Thornhill
Thornhill
Thornhill
Holywood
Holywood
Dumfries
Dumfries
Dumfries
Dumfries
Start
Start
Pass
Start
Start
Pass
Start
Pass
Start
Pass
Start
Start
Stop
Pass
Stop
Stop
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Annan
Annan
Eastriggs
Eastriggs
Annan
Annan
Eastriggs
Eastriggs
Gretna Green
Gretna Green
Gretna Green
Gretna Green
Start
Start
Start
Pass
Start
Start
Stop
Pass
Stop
Stop
Stop
Stop
Non-Stop
Stop Eastriggs
DMUE 090
327
302
243
172
474
570
DMUS 075
326
301
240
172
473
566
Non-Stop
Stop Thornhill
610
590
841
821
886
898
837
825
1110
1049
1658
1739
592
571
825
804
885
897
830
818
1110
1043
1634
1722
Non-Stop
Stop Thornhill
1063
1043
833
853
833
813
596
556
794
755
1588
1647
1065
1045
835
855
835
815
596
556
795
755
1590
1650
Non-Stop
Stop Eastriggs
235
212
340
273
485
575
235
213
340
268
481
575
Current Timetable
540
810
750
720
810
1530
510
Page 15 of 16
Appendix II: Amended Passenger Timetables and Consequential
Alterations
Page 16 of 16
Draft STAG Report
Appendix 9
Full list of public consultation meeting invitees
A full list of the organisations invited to the public consultation meetings is shown below:

Scottish Government
Scottish Enterprise
Network Rail
First ScotRail
Transport Scotland
SPT
Rail Passengers Committee Scotland
Stagecoach West Scotland
Dumfries and Galloway Council
SEPA
Eastriggs Community Council
D W Martin and Co Ltd
Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary
British Transport Police
Cycle Touring Club
Aztec Bicycle Club
SUSTRANS
Buccleuch Estates