Ross & Cromarty East Local Plan Inquiry

THE COUNCIL

ROSS & CROMARTY EAST LOCAL PLAN INQUIRY

STATEMENT OF OBSERVATIONS by the DIRECTOR OF PLANNING and DEVELOPMENT

ISSUE 1: Roads, Traffic and Transport, notably in the

1. Introduction

1.1 The Highland Council (THC) has undertaken to hold a Public Local Inquiry to consider objections lodged by Ferintosh Community Council [CD30/78] and Knockbain Community Council [CD30/123] in respect of Chapter 3: Key Issues paragraphs 3.24 and 3.24 of the Deposit Draft of the above Local Plan on Roads, Traffic and Transport matters, with specific reference to the Black Isle area.

1.2 Objections lodged by AB Bryant [CD30/29], principally in respect of the need to assess the capacity of the High Streets of Avoch, and Rosemarkie, are to be dealt with on the basis of a further written submission, which is addressed in more detail in the statement for Issue 30.

1.3 Objections lodged by DJ Pocock [CD30/113] and the Black Isle Forum [CD30/91] on Chapter 3 Commuter Pressure and Key Issues on Roads, Traffic and Transport matters in the Black Isle area are either sustained on the basis of the original submissions lodged in respect of the Deposit Draft Local Plan or not withdrawn. The Council’s responses are contained in the 25 January 2005 Area Planning Committee report on Objections and Representations on the Deposit Draft Local Plan [CD27].

1.4 THC will call Alan Ogilvie, Principal Planner as the planning witness and Sam MacNaughton, Head of Transport and Infrastructure as the roads and transportation witness.

1.5 THC wishes to submit the productions listed below. References to productions are shown in the text as follows, [CD1]. Quotes from productions are shown as follows, “extract”.

[CD1] The Highland Structure Plan: Approved Plan: The Highland Council: March 2001 [CD2] Black Isle Local Plan: Adopted Plan: Highland Regional Council: September 1985 [CD8] Ross & Cromarty East Local Plan: Consultative Draft: The Highland Council: May 2002 [CD9] Ross & Cromarty East Local Plan: Deposit Draft: The Highland Council: October 2003 [CD10] Ross & Cromarty East Local Plan: Statement of Publicity, Consultation and representations: The Highland Council: October 2003

Director of Planning and Development 1 Issue 1 – June/July 2005 Ross & Cromarty East Local Plan Inquiry

[CD11] Ross & Cromarty East Local Plan: Proposed Modifications to the Deposit Draft (Prior to Public Local Inquiry): The Highland Council: February 2005 [CD15] SPP3: Planning for Housing: Scottish Executive: February 2003 [CD18] NPPG17: Transport and Planning: Scottish Executive: May 2001 [CD25] Ross & Cromarty Area Planning Committee Item: Representations on the Consultative Draft Local Plan: The Highland Council: 15 September 2003 [CD27] Ross & Cromarty Area Planning Committee Item: Objections and Representations on the Deposit Draft Local Plan: The Highland Council: 25 January 2005 [CD30] Letters of objection and representation to the Deposit Draft Local Plan [THC1/1] Extracts from PAN57: Transport and Planning: Scottish Executive: April 1999 [THC1/2] Developing a Transport Vision for 2004 – 2031: Atkins on behalf of Inverness & Nairn Enterprise, Highlands and Islands Enterprise and The Highland Council: Final Report: September 2004

2. Background

National Planning Guidance/Advice

2.1 Scottish Planning Policy 3: Planning for Housing [CD15] sets out the Scottish Executive’s planning policies on housing. The following paragraphs are relevant: -

35 refers to the opportunities that the planning of new residential development offers for reducing travel demand in line with the Scottish Executive’s commitment to reduce the demand for travel and reliance on the private car through the effective integration of land use and transport.

36 advises that in planning for the expansion of existing settlements, “preference should be given to locations which can be well integrated with existing and proposed public transport, walking and cycling networks.”

2.2 National Planning Policy Guideline 17: Transport and Planning [CD18] sets out the Scottish Executive’s planning policies on the integration of transport and land use. The following paragraphs are relevant: -

2 refers to the relationship between Local Transport Strategies and development plans and the important role of each in implementing transport strategies and guiding development. More specifically it advises that “the Local Transport Strategy should flow from and in turn be incorporated into the relevant development plans.”

7 refers to the role of land use planning in achieving the Government's broad policy objectives for integrated transport and land use planning in respect of reducing the need to travel, supporting provision of high quality public transport access to development and supporting the management of motorised travel and contributing to sustainable transport objectives.

21 outlines the framework for the key policy tool of delivering better integration of transport and land use planning including a location policy to guide development to places

Director of Planning and Development 2 Issue 1 – June/July 2005 Ross & Cromarty East Local Plan Inquiry

that support sustainable mode share and the introduction of broader Transport Assessments, Green Transport Plans and planning agreements to promote sustainable transport solutions.

23 expands upon the need to set out sufficient detail in development plans and Local Transport Strategies to provide a transparent basis for negotiation with developers and uses of planning agreements to help deliver more sustainable transport solutions. This is cross- referenced to PAN 57 Paragraphs 11-13.

26 states that “Planning authorities should ensure that their settlement strategy is consistent with the aim of reducing travel demand and puts greater reliance on means of transport other than the private car.”

28 repeats para. 36 of SPP3 in respect of the expansion of existing settlements and built-up areas for housing.

55 states that “local authority support for bus services, passenger rail services or proposals for associated facilities should be consistent with the location policies in development plans. ……………... Where enhancement to public transport services or infrastructure is desirable to serve new development, but would not be provided commercially, a contribution from the developer towards an agreed level of service through the planning authority may be appropriate.”

2.3 In Planning Advice Note 57: Transport and Planning [THC1/1] complements NPPG17. The following paragraphs are relevant: -

2 - 10 cover the transport assessments, placing the onus upon developers /applicants to address the impact of their proposals and to suggest ways of mitigating potential detrimental effects.

11 & 12 advise that development plans should outline the transport priorities referred to in the Local Transport Strategy, together with the likely nature and scope of developer contributions, including schemes for new investment, traffic management and partnerships for improved transport services. It will be for Local Transport Strategies to include details of proposed costs and likely phasing of projects.

Highland Structure Plan

2.4 The Highland Structure Plan [CD1] was approved in March 2001. Section 1.3 contains the following relevant strategic issues recognised by THC as priorities in terms of planning for the future development of Highland: -

• “Transport pressures - Growth in road traffic has been particularly marked in the Inner Firth area and the increase in car ownership is generally expected to continue in the next two decades in line with national estimates. The problems of public health, road safety, congestion, and atmospheric pollution will increase, but an informed response to these must reflect the rural nature of much of Highland. There is, therefore, likely to be a continued need for improvements to the existing road network.

Director of Planning and Development 3 Issue 1 – June/July 2005 Ross & Cromarty East Local Plan Inquiry

• Integrated transport - Good passenger and freight transport is essential for business and for permitting access to services. A strategic approach needs to encourage better integration between different modes of transport and to improve critical links.”

2.5 In the Transport and Communications section (2.16) the following extracts are relevant: -

Para. 2.16.1 - ….. “A modern efficient communications network is important for the economic prosperity of Highland and to meet communities' social needs. At the same time this should be achieved without having an adverse impact on the environment, either at a local level, through noise and air pollution and congestion, or at a national level through increased energy consumption. The policy framework for transport reflects a number of sustainability objectives and links with other policy sections of the Structure Plan are vital. In order to achieve the Plan's objectives an integrated approach to transport issues is required, addressing both the transport modes themselves and the distribution, location and delivery of employment, housing and other services. …………These transport policies also form the basis of The Council's Transportation Strategy and Local Transport Plans. Although the past two decades or so have witnessed major improvements to road links, much further investment in these and other modes of transport is still required to implement the Structure Plan policies.

2.16.2 - Integrated transport and modal shift – Government policy, as set down in the NPPG 17 Transport and Planning, seeks to discourage private car usage and road haulage when alternative modes of transport are possible, such as public transport, cycling or walking. The Structure Plan's approach to modal shift reflects the differing circumstances and needs of different parts of Highland. It recognises that whilst national policy is relevant for major urban and conurbation areas, where congestion and pollution are occurring and where reasonable public transport alternatives exist, for a vast rural area such as Highland, car ownership will remain a necessity and road transport will continue to be the key mode for many communities, businesses and visitors. There are nonetheless opportunities within Highland to embrace this modal shift within and around settlements and for tourism and recreational travel and recreational travel and freight.

This is followed by Policy TC1 on Modal shift.

Proposal TC3 indicates the intention of THC to prepare an Integrated Local Transport Strategy, with particular emphasis on the Inner area, and a partnership approach to implement a range of measures proposals including improved bus and rail services, new rail halts, park-and-ride, cycling and walking networks; pedestrianisation and traffic-calming measures. There is an expectation that developers fund transport infrastructure and services demonstrated as being required in Transport Assessments to achieve an acceptable modal split.

Recommendation TC4 seeks early improvement certain Trunk Roads including the A9 Ardullie (Cromarty Bridge) -Tore crawler lanes on the Black Isle.

2.16.11 refers to the major contribution public transport can make to the improvement of accessibility and “in meeting objectives relating to energy efficiency and safeguarding the

Director of Planning and Development 4 Issue 1 – June/July 2005 Ross & Cromarty East Local Plan Inquiry

environment.” Emphasis is also placed on the importance of integration of public transport services and the road network and the location of nodes and routes in relation to housing, employment centres and other services. Also recognised is that “some routes may require substantial public subsidy to make vital services available”. Policy TC11 on public transport follows on from this paragraph.

Then at 2.16.13 reference is made to the commuter rail service introduced between and Inverness. While 2.16.14 refers to the welcome upsurge in the volume of freight goods taken by rail rather than road with potential for and encouragement of a further modal shift to rail as supported in Policy TC1. These paragraphs are followed by Recommendation TC12 on passenger rail improvements, to railway authorities in respect of “the maintenance of existing infrastructure and priority improvements to the rail network”, notably the “commuter rail service between Nairn/Culloden, Tain and Inverness, with additional halts” and a “rail/bus interchange at Inverness”. The commuter rail service has been extended to Tain and includes a stop at the now re-opened Beauly station. A detailed engineering feasibility study is also under way for re-opening a halt at Conon Bridge.

Adopted Local Plan

2.6 The Black Isle Local Plan [CD2] was adopted in September 1985. At paragraph 1.3 this refers to the significant population gain through completion of new trunk roads, notably the Kessock Bridge, which radically transformed the accessibility of the Black Isle. “Loss of employment in traditional land use activities has been more than counterbalanced by people seeking the combination of an attractive environment within reasonable commuting distance of adjoining employment and service centres.”

2.7 Paragraph 2.18 highlights the improvements carried out to roads, further planned improvements and the need to continue to assess the need for improvements to local or non-strategic roads as resources permit. From 1984 to 1990 the roads authorities undertook substantial improvements to the roads indicated. Thereafter, capital funding available for significant road improvements was substantially reduced.

Consultative Draft Plan

2.8 The Consultative Draft [CD8] of the East Local Plan was published in May 2002. Chapter 3 at Section 15 outlined the key issues in respect of Infrastructure commencing with Transport. This highlighted the fact that road transport will continue to be the key mode for most communities, particularly in locations where there are few, if any, alternatives. Reference was made to past growth being attributed in part to upgrading of the A9 and A835 main arterial routes and their heavy use by traffic, particularly the A9 across the Black Isle and Easter Ross. The need to continue efforts to shift people and freight to other transport modes including by rail for those commuting to Inverness was also emphasised.

2.9 In Chapter 4 in this and subsequent drafts of the Plan“the Strategy takes forward the vision and seven strategic themes of the Structure Plan in relation to addressing the issues for Ross & Cromarty East.” This includes the following: -

Director of Planning and Development 5 Issue 1 – June/July 2005 Ross & Cromarty East Local Plan Inquiry

Taking an integrated approach to improving accessibility to goods, services and markets by • supporting measures that will encourage greater use of the Far North and Kyle of Lochalsh Rail Lines and the Port by passengers and freight • supporting further improvements to the strategic road network linking the area with the rest of the UK • identifying multi-modal transport nodes (e.g. Invergordon) to encourage a shift from road to rail, including freight and increased rail commuting to Inverness • ensuring that new housing, business and leisure designations are located close to public transport networks and that opportunities for walking and cycling are created when planning new developments • restricting development in the open countryside where there are commuting pressures, notably in the hinterland around Inverness, Muir of Ord, Dingwall, Alness, Invergordon and Tain.

Consolidating the settlement hierarchy by • countering the pull of Inverness through supporting local centres and spreading development across the settlements of Ross and Cromarty East • directing development to existing settlements where capacity exists and/or where additional development would help attract further facilities.

2.10 The main land use objective or Spatial Element of the Strategy was established and continues to be to direct the majority of development to the main communities along the Muir of Ord - Conon Bridge – Dingwall - – Alness - Invergordon - Tain Development Corridor, based on accessibility to the rail and major road network. Development within the Main Settlements of the Rural Development and Hinterland areas is also a key Spatial Element of the Strategy.

2.11 The representations made and the changes agreed by THC in response are detailed in CD 25. Relevant comments made are summarised as follows: -

DJ Pocock [CD25/34] expressed concerns that the proposals will generate substantial additional road traffic with consequent pollution and disturbance. The future priority to reducing car-based journeys and improve transport links does not appear to be reflected in the proposals for Fortrose and Rosemarkie. If additional housing on the Black Isle is necessary, and largely for people commuting to Inverness, then it should be built nearer Inverness and the A9 to reduce journey times and emissions. If there is no alternative to building substantial numbers of new houses in Fortrose and Rosemarkie, then a pre- requisite for development should be the construction of a bypass to the north of these villages and Avoch.

Mrs C. Walker [CD25/216] expressed concerns about the impact of some 500 houses proposed between Avoch, Rosemarkie and Fortrose as well as the 80 houses currently being built in Munlochy. The B9161is showing signs of subsidence near Bogallan and is insufficient to cope with the current volume of traffic. This and the impact of excessive traffic speed upon residents at Bogallan should be considered before allowing more development across the Black Isle. A number of improvements were suggested together

Director of Planning and Development 6 Issue 1 – June/July 2005 Ross & Cromarty East Local Plan Inquiry

with the alternative of re-routing traffic along the A832 to Tore and an improved bus service through the Black Isle.

Fortrose & Rosemarkie CC [CD25/221] expressed concerns about: Avoch, Fortrose and Rosemarkie becoming extended commuting bases; the exacerbation of existing traffic problems by the development proposals in the Draft Plan; remedial action possibly being too little and too late; and the uncertainty over upgrading the A832 between Fortrose and Avoch.

The Scottish Executive [CD25/259] expressed concerns about the impact of development proposals on the trunk road network. The plan did not address traffic growth issues and the expansion of communities in the Black Isle as dormitories of Inverness run counter to locational policies in NPPG 17 and PAN 57 and will generate unsustainable private car travel demand. As such, housing development in these communities should be restricted or consideration given to releasing housing land in proportion to the take-up of economic development land. It is also suggested that major developers, particularly of housing, should be required to support rail services positively, either by providing/upgrading stations and parking or by subsidising services. Additional text was requested basically requiring developers to mitigate the impact of private car travel demand of the development on a trunk road with infrastructure improvements being the last resort and with no net detriment to flow and safety.

The Black Isle Partnership [CD25/106] pointed out the absence of a specific commitment to address the inadequate and poorly maintained road infrastructure and measures to reduce car use.

Scottish Natural Heritage [CD25/59] were pleased to note the recognition of more opportunities for commuting for rail travellers and the aspiration to shift freight to rail but were concerned about insufficient emphasis given to the movement of freight by rail to enable the road system to accommodate local people and tourists better rather than heavy freight traffic.

Susan Blease & Kirk Tudhope [CD25/73] expressed concern that provision is only made on the Black Isle for developers to construct roads and drainage to service new areas of housing but not for improvements to existing infrastructure, including main roads. The potential for contributions to improvement of such existing infrastructure will be limited, given that many are already urgently required to meet existing need. They called for allocation of additional housing land on the Black Isle on the scale proposed to be limited and redirected to areas in which the Council can guarantee provision of infrastructure until such time as necessary existing infrastructure improvements can be guaranteed.

Knockbain CC [CD25/92] requested account to be taken of the effects of the extra traffic passing through other communities as part of the cost benefit analysis.

2.12 THC’s response and reasoning in respect of each of these comments is set out in CD10 and CD25. Changes were agreed to the relevant section of Chapter 3 refer to the Council's overall Integrated Local Transport Strategy and address some of the issues raised. This involved dividing the section into three paragraphs including the following: -

Director of Planning and Development 7 Issue 1 – June/July 2005 Ross & Cromarty East Local Plan Inquiry

• "The Council's Integrated Local Transport Strategy recognises that concerted efforts must be made to shift people and freight to other transport modes and to mitigate traffic impact from development using developer contributions, where appropriate [TC1 & TC3]." • "Prospects for reducing car use relating to development s in the Black Isle relate mainly to improving bus services." • “Enhancing accessibility and developing the existing path resource around and linking communities will be a priority based on identified community need.” The inclusion of reference to more specific measures was also agreed for relevant settlement statements and other major land allocations elsewhere in the Plan. In addition, housing requirement figures were reduced to account for revised 2001Census based population and household projections.

Deposit Draft Local Plan

2.13 The Deposit Draft [CD9] of the Local Plan was published in November 2003. The Key Issues in respect of Transport are indicated in paragraphs 3.23 to 3.25 of Chapter 3. Objections were lodged on paragraphs 3.23 and 3.24 and other related matters by Ferintosh CC [CD30/78], Knockbain CC [CD30/123], AB Bryant [CD30/29] and DJ Pocock [CD30/113]. The Black Isle Forum made comments on a number of more specific traffic and transport matters [CD30/91]. THC’s response and reasoning in respect of each of these comments is set out in CD27.

Deposit Draft with Modifications (Proposed Changes)

2.14 Proposed Changes to the Deposit Draft [CD11] were approved in January 2005. While no changes are proposed to the relevant Key Issues paragraphs in Chapter 3, THC considers that the inclusion in Chapter 5 of an additional General Supporting Policy on Transport would set out the range of measures through which improvements would be sought under the Local Transport Strategy and as drawn together in the Inverness Transport Vision [THC1/2]. This policy, which is consistent with the approved Structure Plan and the Inverness Local Plan, is as follows: -

"GSP16: TRANSPORT In accordance with its Local Transport Strategy, the Council will pursue a major package of integrated transport measures for which it will seek to assemble funding from appropriate sources including in partnership with the relevant agencies and private sector. Specifically, the Council will continue to encourage the Scottish Executive to give priority to the allocation of resources for trunk and other major road improvements as well as for the continued development and integration of commuter rail halts and park-n-ride facilities. Developer contributions will be expected in respect of relevant transport objectives and proposals will demonstrate as necessary, through Green Transport Plans and in accordance with national planning guidance, commitment to increased accessibility to public and community transport, reductions in private car commuting, increased integration of transport facilities, and modal shift in freight haulage. Other measures, particularly in communities not on the rail network, will involve improving bus services and related infrastructure, traffic management/traffic calming, and the use /implementation of ‘Home Zones’ and ‘Safer Routes to School’ ".

Director of Planning and Development 8 Issue 1 – June/July 2005 Ross & Cromarty East Local Plan Inquiry

2.15 No objections were lodged on this proposed policy.

3. The Council’s Observations

The Objections

3.1 The objections on the Deposit Draft Local Plan are as follows: -

Ferintosh CC [CD30/78]

Paragraph 3.23 – We are concerned that there appears to be little obvious forward planning in relation to road issues within the plan. We feel there should be an assessment made on the potential impact of the increased traffic on roads and junctions, which will result as a consequence of the additional housing proposed in this plan. Any necessary upgrading of roads and junctions should then be carried out in advance of the housing developments. We also believe that the Council should look at transport issues as a whole for the plan area and consider how best to develop these in conjunction with the proposed developments to meet with a proper integrated transport policy.

Paragraph 3.24 – We are also very concerned at the A9/B9169 junction which is becoming increasingly difficult to carry out a right turn manoeuvre onto the A9 or crossing it, especially at rush hour, due to the sheer volume of traffic. The increase in housing in the village will put further pressure on the junction and increase the risk of accidents.

Knockbain CC [CD30/123]

Paragraph 3.23 – We are concerned that there are only two exits from the Black Isle, namely Tore and Munlochy. There is too much traffic going too fast.

Paragraph 3.24 – There needs to be an integrated plan for public transport with financial levies on new developments.

AB Bryant [CD30/29]

I wish to point out that the capacity of the road between Avoch and Munlochy, however important, is nonetheless irrelevant to the previous point I made. Already we face considerable jamming on the high streets of Rosemarkie, Fortrose and sometimes Avoch. There is no practical way to bypass these villages even were there the money to do it. It is therefore essential that a proper assessment is made of the capacity of the high streets in the 3 villages before any large development of new housing. The assessment must, of course, allow for traffic from extra housing in Cromarty too. Nothing can be done about the resultant problems once the houses are built, it will be too late. Public transport options may be attractive in theory, but it is doubtful if anyone believes it to be the answer!

AB Bryant - Further Written Submission

I believe it is essential to address the question of the capacity of Black Isle roads between

Director of Planning and Development 9 Issue 1 – June/July 2005 Ross & Cromarty East Local Plan Inquiry

Fortrose and the A9, prior to further large scale housing being agreed for any of the villages of Munlochy, Avoch, Fortrose, Rosemarkie and Cromarty. My particular concern is for Fortrose High Street, the narrowest road involved, but my arguments apply equally to the other villages.

Because of topography, Fortrose can never have a bypass, even if it could be afforded. Thus Fortrose High Street, (within a conservation area) must carry all new traffic for Fortrose, Rosemarkie and beyond to Cromarty. It is so narrow that when, for example, a bus stops traffic in both directions is brought to a halt. Both pavements are so narrow that a pram or disabled scooter take up their full width so that pedestrians must walk in the road.

My concern was at first taken as a safety issue, but as there is very effective traffic calming at the moment though illegal parking in the street, we already experience a street at or beyond its safe capacity. I am no expert but simple maths suggest extra traffic from 300 new houses might generate 300 more vehicles per hour at peak times, remembering that most residents commute to Inverness, and the street also carries school traffic, which includes a number of double deck buses. At the very least, the likelihood that extra traffic will create gridlock is sufficient to demand a proper assessment.

It is essential that this problem be considered BEFORE more houses are built because once the problem has been created there can be no solution. Life in the High Street will become intolerable, frustrating and dangerous, businesses will close and so on.

The Planning Department's comment is that they cannot afford a proper assessment, there is no suitable methodology available and that it is up to the developer. The developer has an interest in 'proving' that the street can take the traffic, and it is naive to expect a proper balanced assessment from them, in any event development will be done by several companies, who cannot be expected to do assessments for developments in which they are not involved. Assessment as "individual sites are brought forward for consideration" would not answer the need. Individual houses or small groups, will not of course create a problem. What is needed is an assessment of the cumulative traffic generated by all proposed new housing. The total number of houses allowed in the plan can then and should be based on the known traffic capacity of the street, just as it should be on the capacity of all other public services. I have no objection to the assessment being done by the roads authority.

Therefore, if for any reason a proper independent assessment is not yet possible, then no large scale development should be allowed until it is, on the precautionary principle. To go ahead without proper calculation of the effect would be irresponsible, not least when there is plenty of opportunity for new housing to the west of these villages which would not create a problem of this nature.

The Planning Authority’s Response

3.3 THC as Planning Authority wishes to respond to the objections set out in paras. 3.4 to 4.3 below. These are contained in the Annex to the Committee report of 25 January 2005 [CD27] and expanded as necessary.

Director of Planning and Development 10 Issue 1 – June/July 2005 Ross & Cromarty East Local Plan Inquiry

Ferintosh CC

3.4 In respect of Chapter 3, para. 3.23, this matter has been discussed with Council and Scottish Executive (SE) roads engineers. The delay in making a right turn manoeuvre is not thought to be significant and affects a very small proportion of traffic generated by development in Culbokie. Some of the traffic comes from the west. The delay is largely caused by the volume of traffic on the A9, which tends by in large to originate from the Inverness and Easter Ross areas. The potential requirement for developers to contribute towards improved public transport could also help reduce the proportion of commuting by private car. The SE Trunk Road Network Management Division have agreed to look at traffic data for this junction and would wish to be consulted on future major applications in Culbokie. This is of course on the Cromarty Bridge-Tore section of the A9 that THC agrees should have crawler lanes, as per the Structure Plan recommendation to the SE [CD1]. THC and SE roads officials will discuss the scope for potential improvement measures at this junction.

3.5 In respect of Chapter 3, para. 3.24, there are technical difficulties in addressing this issue, particularly through modelling and finding the necessary resources to run a model. The Council’s land use based TRANUS model may offer scope to address these matters head on, but unfortunately this requires further calibration and resources to do so, notably to account for 2001 Census information (currently based on 1991 Census). This was originally set up to run with resources from all interests, including developers and other bodies, including the SEDD for Trunk Road related modelling. In the absence of such resources it cannot be run.

3.6 THC roads and transport colleagues are currently pursuing a micro simulation model for the Inverness area. A similar model might be appropriate for Ross and Cromarty East, possibly in Dingwall, where a traffic and transportation study was carried out in 2003, or where there are lots of assignment options over an area network. In addition, many of the land allocations can more easily be assessed via a simple junction analysis or generation data. The matter of THC finding resources for this work has still to be determined.

3.7 The Local Plan contains numerous references to THC’s transport objectives, which are referred to in the Local Transport Strategy and more concisely brought together in the Inverness Transport Vision [THC1/2]. These include matters relating to: improvements to the trunk road network particularly the A9 including on the edge of Inverness; upgrading of the A832 west of Achnasheen and between Avoch and Fortrose; infrastructure for bus services, cyclists and pedestrians; improved public transport networks and systems which seek to integrate commuter rail halts and park-n-ride facilities at Muir of Ord, Conon Bridge, Dingwall, Evanton, Alness, Invergordon, Milton of Kildary, Fearn and Tain; traffic management/traffic calming proposals within settlements; and ‘Safer Routes to School’. Individual settlement statements contain policies that seek traffic calming/ management measures and contributions to public transport from developments, notably in villages across the southern Black Isle. Furthermore, many of the major land allocations have been in successive Local Plans for the last 20 to 30 years and the development potential is not confined to land allocations for more than 4000 houses. There are major strategic (SPP2) industrial allocations in Easter Ross for which the development potential

Director of Planning and Development 11 Issue 1 – June/July 2005 Ross & Cromarty East Local Plan Inquiry

is unknown and the development of these could have a more profound impact upon the Trunk road network than housing.

3.8 In addition to developer contributions, the THC’s ability to deliver the whole package of measures will depend upon funding support from the Government, in line with its sustainable transport objectives. The need to deliver measures should also be emphasised in the Plan with the addition of a General Supporting Policy in Chapter 5. This would be consistent and tie in with the Inverness Local Plan approach. Accordingly, the proposed General Supporting Policy 16: Transport, as set out in paragraph 2.14 above should be included in the Plan.

Knockbain CC

3.9 In respect of Chapter 3, para. 3.23, it is not clear in what context reference is made to two exits from the Black Isle. There are several more exits on to the A9 between the Kessock and Cromarty Bridges. Measures to reduce traffic volume and speed are being tackled by the relevant authorities, but are not necessarily for this Local Plan to address.

3.10 In respect of Chapter 3, para. 3.24 the response is very similar to that made under paras 3.6 and 3.7 above. In 2000 THC published its local integrated transport strategy for Highland as a whole. This is gradually being rolled out and includes a requirement for developer contributions. However, THC’s ability to deliver the whole package of measures will also depend upon funding support from the Government, in line with its sustainable transport objectives. The proposed General Supporting Policy, GSP16 in Chapter 5 is seen as relevant in this regard.

AB Bryant (including response to Further Written Submission)

3.11 THC had given consideration to the use of an overall traffic simulation model, but current resources in this regard are prioritised for the Inverness A96 Corridor. However, if resources could be identified, this type of modelling would probably not be helpful outside Dingwall or possibly Muir of Ord, since it is only really of benefit when there are lots of assignment options over an area network. Many of the land allocations can more easily be assessed via a simple junction analysis or generation data, which will be required of developers as part of traffic impact or transport assessments when individual sites are brought forward for formal consideration.

3.12 Monitoring of traffic flows on the High Streets would be part of the process of an overall assessment of the potential for improvements in advance of preparing detailed proposals. A successful scheme for traffic calming and management in Fortrose, for example, is most likely to be based upon on a double track road width and additional off street parking being available. However, such measures must be looked at as part of a package of integrated transport measures, within the broader framework of THC's Local Transport Strategy, including perhaps encouraging greater use of bus services through better timetabling, possibly increased frequency and flexibility of services to and from Inverness and Dingwall, and park-n-ride facilities. These will need to be quantified as the basis for seeking developer contributions and is for the roads authority to examine with the affected local communities and developers. Developers of major sites will also be required to

Director of Planning and Development 12 Issue 1 – June/July 2005 Ross & Cromarty East Local Plan Inquiry

address these matters in a Transport Assessment. These matters are covered in the Statement from THC’s Head of Transport and Infrastructure.

3.13 Extension of a requirement upon developers in Cromarty to contribute to transport improvements in Rosemarkie, Fortrose and Avoch is more tenuous, particularly in view of the distance involved, the choice of routes available and the probability that most of the development on the large site in the centre of the town will be required to meet existing local needs for low cost housing.

3.14 Throughout the Draft Plan preparation and consultation process there has been correspondence with the Scottish Executive Development Department in connection with the potential impact upon the Trunk road network. The Executive asked for the Plan to give greater consideration to a modelling exercise to determine the impact of development on the A9 corridor inform the requirements for trunk road and public transport infrastructure improvements and examine the funding mechanisms including the potential for developer contributions. Although not intended as an objection, this matter received a response through the Committee report [CD27/99] along similar lines to many of the responses above.

3.15 The matter of traffic modelling met with some difficulties, as indicated in paras. 3.5 and 3.6 above in respect of THC’s land use based TRANUS model and other potential approaches. In addition, much of the traffic congestion on the A9 closer in to Inverness is generated from within the Inverness area, not Ross and Cromarty East. There are opportunities within Inverness that might deliver further Trunk Road and public transport improvements in the city, e.g. at the Raigmore Interchange or Longman Roundabout, where peak time traffic lights could address queuing problems.

3.16 The greatest proportion of traffic on the existing road network north of the Kessock Bridge is thought to be generated from the much larger settlements in the Muir of Ord to Tain (Development) Corridor. However, in line with the Government’s sustainable development and transport objectives, it is also in this corridor that the Local Plan Strategy allocates the greatest proportion of land to encourage economic development and associated housing linked to major business/industrial site development and increased use of the rail network for transport. In this corridor, land is allocated for almost 3700 additional dwellings compared with approximately 500 across the Black Isle from Munlochy to Cromarty [CD9].

3.18 The ongoing development of an integrated transport strategy for the Inner Moray Firth will aid the delivery of priority transport improvements. The document Developing a Transport Vision for Inverness 2004 - 2031 [THC1/2], proposals for more sustainable transport seek to address current problems and facilitate growth in the Inner Moray Firth area. This approach can also make existing public transport provision more viable or provide additional funding for improvements through developer contributions for bus services and infrastructure, traffic management/traffic calming proposals within settlements and 'Safer Routes to School'. In addition to developer contributions, THC’s ability to deliver the whole package of measures will also depend upon funding support from the Government, in line with its sustainable transport objectives.

Director of Planning and Development 13 Issue 1 – June/July 2005 Ross & Cromarty East Local Plan Inquiry

3.19 Mr. Sam MacNaughton, THC’s Head of Transport and Infrastructure, provides an overview of the Black Isle road network and comments on the capacity of the A832 road in his statement.

4. Conclusion

4.1 While this Local Plan has not had the benefit of a wider comprehensive traffic modelling exercise, which may not be appropriate for this Plan area in isolation, it does take account of Government and THC strategic transport objectives, together with transport priorities identified in the Local Transport Strategy and subsequently incorporated into the Transport Vision for Inverness [THC1/2]. These clarify that the ability to address existing problems and create the capacity to accommodate further development depends upon the implementation of a combination of a whole series of integrated transportation measures.

4.2 Within this broad context the Plan also contains a number of references to more specific local problems and contains policies to address these, mostly in the form of traffic calming /management measures and contributions to public transport, including from future developments in villages across the southern Black Isle. Accordingly, a significantly high proportion of land allocations are made in the key settlements already supporting a range of jobs, services and facilities or have reasonable access to such in larger communities through public transport as well as the private car. Furthermore, in line with national and Highland wide policies, the provisions of the Local Plan also place responsibility upon developers to assess both the wider and local impact of their proposals, as well as address local difficulties. As such, THC considers that it is appropriate for the Draft Plan to emphasise the need to deliver an integrated package of measures through the addition of General Supporting Policy (GSP) 16 to Chapter 5 in support of individual priorities identified across the Plan area. Some further changes may be necessary for the settlement Statements for Fortrose, Rosemarkie, Avoch and Muir of Ord relative to the need for more detailed assessments. These are indicated in the relevant Inquiry Statements of Observations addressing specific objections for these settlements.

4.3 Accordingly, The Council would ask that the Reporter support the provisions of the Deposit Draft Plan with the proposed Modification to include the new General Supporting Policy, GSP16: TRANSPORT as indicated in paragraph 2.14.

Director of Planning and Development 14 Issue 1 – June/July 2005