& BUTE COUNCIL STRATEGIC POLICY COMMITTEE

TRANSPORTATION & PROPERTY 8 NOVEMBER 2001

FIXED LINKS TO ARGYLL & BUTE ISLANDS

1. SUMMARY

The purpose of this report is to advise Members of the findings of the feasibility studies into fixed links to Argyll & Bute Islands undertaken on behalf of the Council by Scott Wilson () Ltd, which involved the consideration of the feasibility of providing fixed links between:

Bute and Colintraive and Seil and

A copy of the full report is available for reference in the Member’s Lounge.

2. RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that

(a) prior to a decision being taken copies of the relevant sections of the study be made available to Local Elected Members and to the local Community Councils for their consideration and comment.

(b) copies be made available also at relevant local Council offices/Post Offices for inspection by the public and be accessible through the Council’s Website.

3. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

Conclusions

The future survival and development of each of the communities considered in this study are reliant on their links with the mainland and one another. The brief of the study was to develop alignments for fixed links which could eventually replace the existing ferries. In the case of Coll and Tiree, the option of a dedicated ferry service was also to be considered.

Local businesses and residents were contacted while researching the various link options, to record their views on the existing ferry services and their thoughts on the effects that any fixed links would have. This created a high level of public awareness of the study within the

F:\moderngov\data\published\Intranet\C00000188\M00000526\AI00001115\FixedLinks0.doc 1 of 4 05 March 2002 communities concerned, and prompted correspondence with businesses, community councils and local residents.

Bute to Colintraive (cost of preferred option £12 M)

Of the 8 options considered for this link, 3 of those possible in engineering terms were selected for further consideration. Options 3a and 3b would provide a high or low level crossing respectively using the Burnt islands to reduce the spans required to cross the Kyles. Option 6 would cross the Kyles at their narrowest point, resulting in a less imposing structure.

The whole of the Kyles and the surrounding area have been designated a National Scenic Area. Although this designation would not prevent construction of a fixed link, any scheme would have a severe impact on the landscape quality of the area.

The North end of Bute has been designated a SSSI and options 3a and 3b would pass through the edge of this area. Although it is possible that this may not rule them out, as they only clip the eastern edge of the designated area, there is likely to be considerable resistance to these options. There are a number of archaeological remains which would be affected by each option, particularly the fort on Eilean Buidhe and the cairn at Colintraive.

None of the environmental designations in this area are likely to be “showstoppers”, if an appropriate level of consideration is given to the aesthetics of the crossing, ensuring it does not detract from the surrounding landscape and consideration is given to the SSSI. However it is unlikely that local, or national, public opinion will favour the provision of a fixed link within an area known for it’s landscape value and remoteness.

Public opinion from the Colintraive & Glendaruel communities is strongly against the provision of a link. The loss of employment in Colintraive village and the effect on the school were the main concerns, although fears of the environmental impact and effect on tourism were also expressed.

Local businesses did not predict any major impact on services. There was an equal number of businesses that thought a fixed link would benefit their operations, as there was of those who thought that they would be adversely affected. There did not seem to be a strong desire for companies currently using the Wemyss Bay crossing to change their route, as any time savings and reliability issues would be lost in increased travel time and fuel costs.

Generally those responding to both the business and community surveys thought that improved ferry services at both Colintraive and would provide the same benefits as a fixed link, without the impact a bridge would impose.

Should public opinion change in future towards the provision of a link, option 6 would be the preferred with an estimated construction cost of £12M. This is possibly the most obvious location for a crossing, as it is the shortest bridging point, and would have less of a visual impact. It would also mean that vehicles using the crossing would continue to pass through Colintraive. This may not provide the trade currently made from those waiting for the ferry, but would be more acceptable to some than bypassing the village altogether.

Luing to Seil (cost of preferred option £9.5 M)

A total of 6 alignment options were considered for this link, each of which would be possible in engineering terms. Three of those were selected for further consideration. Options 2 and 3 use the high cliffs on Seil to achieve the required clearance over the sound. Option 4 approaches

F:\moderngov\data\published\Intranet\C00000188\M00000526\AI00001115\FixedLinks0.doc 2 of 4 05 March 2002 the North Cuan village and uses the flat land in front of the cliffs to ramp up and achieve the required clearance.

Option 4 would possibly be a more imposing structure, because of the embankment and approach ramps required to achieve a suitable clearance. Option 2 would require the demolition of Sunny Brae, which would mean the loss of a business on Luing. A number of residents have questioned the viability of the caravan park and this should be investigated before a decision is made on the favoured alignment. Option 3 crosses the sound on the line of the existing overhead electricity cables. A link at this location would provide an opportunity to remove the pylons and take the cables through the bridge superstructure.

The Firth of Lorne has been identified as a possible Special area of Conservation, which would prohibit the construction of bridge piers within . This designation would also limit the options for producing electricity by means of wave turbines. There would be resistance to placing them within the sound, due to the environmental implications both during construction and throughout their life, and the restrictions they would place on boats navigating the Sound.

The residents of Luing and Seil have been debating the issue of a fixed link for some time and have even considered possible locations. From the surveys conducted in the past, the majority of residents are in favour of a link. Views expressed during this study also suggest that there is a desire for a link, although there is a significant level of objection to a bridge crossing. The majority of objections to a fixed link come from those living close to the suggested bridge sites.

Any structure across the Sound would have a high visual impact on both the North and South Cuan communities, and would mean building close to a number of existing properties. Both options 2 & 3 have an estimated construction cost of approximately £9M. Option 3 is slightly more expensive at £9.5M, due to the longer structure required. As there is little to choose between the 3 preferred alignments, local residents should be consulted further as to their preferred option.

It is also worth noting that some residents have suggested that an improved ferry service and more suitable ferry, would go a long way towards solving existing access problems.

Coll to Tiree (cost of ferry option £6 M)

There are a total of 7 separate environmental designations which apply to the islands of Coll, and Tiree, each of which could be considered a “showstopper” to the development of a fixed link. The waters around the islands also support a number of marine mammals protected by international conventions. It is unlikely that the benefits of a fixed link to the islands of Coll and Tiree would be sufficient to enable any such development within these wildlife habitats.

There was generally a low level of response to the study from both the Coll and Tiree communities, which may be because residents do not feel that a fixed link is a viable option, given the remoteness and sea conditions of and around the islands. Businesses on Tiree were generally in favour of a link, as they thought that they could attract additional business from Coll. For this reason, businesses on Coll are against a link. Both businesses and residents on Tiree would only favour a fixed link, if their community continued to be served by the ferry. If Coll were to become the only link with the mainland, their views on the provision of a link are likely to change. There was a general feeling that Coll residents would benefit from the services available on Tiree and that a link would improve inter-island relations.

Interestingly, none of those in favour of a fixed link expressed concern on the environmental impact the construction would have. Again it is possible that, as little thought has been given in the past to a link, the environmental impact has not been considered either. It is obvious that

F:\moderngov\data\published\Intranet\C00000188\M00000526\AI00001115\FixedLinks0.doc 3 of 4 05 March 2002 external opinion on this matter would be much greater, and considerable resistance to a link would be made.

Little opinion was expressed about the provision of an inter-island ferry route. Any improvement in links between the islands is likely develop inter-island relations, although these would depend on the level of service provided. Again, businesses and residents on Tiree are unlikely to favour this proposal if it meant a reduction in the frequency of their link to the mainland ferry service.

The environmental designations on each of the islands and the restrictions to development that they impose would prevent any fixed link scheme being accepted. It is also unlikely that any extension to the road network on Coll, to reduce the ferry sailing time between the islands would be justified. The only viable option is therefore to provide a dedicated inter-island ferry service from the existing ferry terminals. The estimated cost for this scheme is therefore limited to the cost of a suitable ferry, which could be in the region of £5M - £6M.

4. IMPLICATIONS

4.1 Policy - None

4.2 Financial – Would require grant assistance under the European Transitional Arrangements together with matching funding from the Council’s Transportation Capital Programme.

4.3 Personnel - None

4.4 Equal Opportunities - None

4.5 Legal – Would include land acquisition and planning approval.

For further information please contact A Gow, Director of Transportation & Property (01546 604657).

F:\moderngov\data\published\Intranet\C00000188\M00000526\AI00001115\FixedLinks0.doc 4 of 4 05 March 2002