Page 1 of 7

Contents Page - Issue 22 - Transport

1. Schedule 4

2. Representations

Network Rail (CLDP063c, CLDP063d)
Muckhart Community Council (CLDP174m, CLDP174n)
Alloa Community Council (CLDP163d)
sportscotland (CLDP083c)
Mr & Mrs Tasker (CLDP037)
Scottish Government (CLDP070b)

3. Supporting Documents

CD001 Scottish Planning Policy (February 2010) (Paragraphs 176 &
150) [attached]
CD047 Clackmannanshire Council Open Space Strategy -
Consultation Draft (November 2013)
CD049d Clackmannanshire Council Core Paths Plan (September
2010)
CD063 Clackmannanshire Council Local Transport Strategy 2009 -
2014
SD37 sportscotland (CLDP083c) - Covering Letter


























Page 2 of 7
Issue 22 Transport
Development Plan
reference:
Paragraph 5.53 (Page 46)
Paragraph 5.54 (Page 46)
Policy SC11 - Transport Networks
(Page 51)
Policy SC12 - Development
Proposals - Access and Transport
Requirements (Page 51)
Opportunity T10 - Clackmannan
Rail Halt (Page 131)
Reporter:
Body or person(s) submitting a representation raising the issue
(including reference number):

Network Rail (CLDP063c, CLDP063d)
Muckhart Community Council (CLDP174m, CLDP174n)
Alloa Community Council (CLDP163d)
sportscotland (CLDP083c)
Mr & Mrs Tasker (CLDP037)
Scottish Government (CLDP070b)

Provision of the development
plan to which the issue relates:

Planning Authoritys summary of the representation(s):

Network Rail (CLDP063c) acknowledge Clackmannanshire Council's
aspiration for rail halts at Clackmannan and Cambus and the recognition by
the Local Development Plan (LDP) that Transport Scotland have no current
plans for such facilities.

The LDP also states that the potential to extend passenger and freight links
from Alloa to Rosyth will be explored with neighbouring authorities and key
stakeholders. As one of the key stakeholders, Network Rail would welcome
any further discussions in terms of the above aspirations and aims at the
appropriate stages.

However, it must also be noted that paragraph 176 of Scottish Planning Policy
(CD001) is clear that new stations must be very carefully considered and
states that "making best use of current rail services and stations to achieve
optimum utilisation of the existing rail network should be considered before
new services or stations are considered. The case for a new station will be
considered where the needs of local communities, workers or visitors are
sufficient to generate a high level of demand, and it will be served by feeder
rather than existing inter-urban services".

Muckhart Community Council (CLDP174m) welcome the moves to
encourage active transport, particularly the plan to extend the Devon Way to
Rumbling Bridge.

Network Rail (CLDP063d) supports Policy SC11 and in particular the
Page 3 of 7
recognition that development proposals that are likely to create or exacerbate
deficiencies in the network and facilities will be expected to provide
contributions or overcome deficiencies.

Policy SC11 also supports new freight operations adjacent to the rail line. As
one of the key stakeholders, Network Rail would welcome any further
discussions with the above aspirations and aims at the appropriate stages.

Policy SC11 should also acknowledge that there are a number of level
crossings on the railway within the Clackmannanshire Council area. The
safety, reliability and efficiency of the rail infrastructure is of paramount
importance to Network Rail and we cannot agree to any proposals which
jeopardise these requirements. We are committed to reducing the risk at level
crossings where reasonably practicable and will seek to close and/or divert
crossings or enhance their safety through the provision of improved safety
features or equipment. We will work with local councils to take a holistic
approach to reducing level crossing risk and will encourage planning
authorities to co-operate in securing level crossing closures or improvements
in connection with new developments. Only in exceptional circumstances will
we permit new crossings to be introduced onto the network.

Muckhart Community Council (CLDP174n) believes that these Policies are
too limited in their scope and will not lead to the development of a low carbon
economy.

Alloa Community Council (CLDP163d) feel that as part of the development
plan, paths and walks should be encouraged. This would also include making
better use of the sea/river front. Alloa was a port in the past. In the past there
has been talk of using hydrofoil boats to commute to Leith/Edinburgh and this
should be considered, or at the least the option left open.

sportscotland (CLDP083c) requests an amendment to the fourth bullet of
Policy SC12 in order to ensure that the policy accords with the provisions of
SPP paragraph 150 (CD001) which states that planning authorities should
consider access issues and should protect core and other important routes
and access rights when preparing development plans and making decisions
on planning applications.

Mr & Mrs Tasker (CLDP037) Object to Proposal T10, Clackmannan Rail Halt.
It would spoil the view so trees would need to be planted around the car park
to screen it. Parking in the streets near the rail halt would need to be reserved
for residents to avoid parking conflicts with users of the station.

Scottish Government (CLDP070b) Whilst it is recognised that there are no
firm proposals for this station in the plan, it should be recognised that the
Scottish Ministers have no current plans for a station at this location. As such,
any reference to the station should remain aspirational and no funding
commitment should be assumed. The Scottish Government does not require
land to be retained in the Plan for the provision of this, or other stations.

Page 4 of 7
The responsibility to demonstrate the need for a new station will continue to lie
with the relevant promoter, for example, Local Authorities, Regional Transport
Partnerships or developers.

Any proposal for a station would have to be shown to be an appropriate
transport solution, through the completion of a properly complete STAG
appraisal, which would need to consider any station in the context of
alternative solutions that may be developed to address recognised transport
issues.

It would also have to be shown to be a viable financial and technical solution,
requiring the consideration of such factors as the capital costs of building a
station and any associated infrastructure, the ongoing costs that may be
associated with operating subsidies, the potential need for additional rolling
stock and the impacts of stations on wider rail timetabling.

In terms of this particular proposal, it must also be recognised that this may
have the potential to impact on the operation of level crossings that currently
exist in the Council area. It is important that Clackmannanshire Council
recognise this and discuss any proposals with the appropriate agency,
whether associated with a new rail station or not. Network Rail should be
contacted for their information and comment, before the Local Development
Plan is adopted.

Modifications sought by those submitting representations:

Network Rail (CLDP063c) request recognition of Scottish Planning Policy
(CD001) in relation to making best use of existing rail network and stations. It
is also worth stating within the text of the LDP that significant investment has
already taken place within the area in advance of the electrification of the
railway line between Stirling and Alloa which is scheduled to take place by
2018. This will lead to faster, more reliable trains which will also be quieter
and cleaner.

Muckhart Community Council (CLDP174m) note that Paragraph 5.54 deals
with improvements mainly in the west of Clackmannanshire and would
welcome similar developments in the East Ochils. There is a need to improve
the quality of the Core Path Network (CD049d) in the Muckhart area and to
create a Cycle Path between the Pool and the Yetts of Muckhart and between
Muckhart and Dollar along the A91.

Network Rail (CLDP063d) request the inclusion of a policy statement on level
crossings and consider that LDP site assessments must take cognisance of
the impact of development proposals on level crossings. Transport
assessment and developer contributions policy and supplementary guidance
must ensure infrastructure risks are identified and mitigation secured.

Muckhart Community Council (CLDP174n) feel there are a number of
major issues not covered in this section such as the provision for alternative
fuels for low or zero carbon vehicles such as electric cars and hydrogen
Page 5 of 7
vehicles. Thought needs to be given to the provision of charging points for
electric vehicles and fuelling stations for hydrogen vehicles, etc.
Alloa Community Council (CLDP163d) state that paths and walks should be
encouraged. This would also include making better use of the sea/river front.
Alloa was a port in the past. In the past there has been talk of using hydrofoil
boats to commute to Leith/Edinburgh and this should be considered, or at the
least the option left open.

sportscotland (CLDP083c) requests that the fourth bullet of Policy SC12 is
amended as follows:
where the development may adversely affect or result in the permanent
loss of an existing Core Path, Right of Way, or any other important route or
access right.

Mr & Mrs Tasker (CLDP037) State that they "wish to lodge our rejection to
the plans to build a platform...", and it is therefore considered that they object
to Opportunity T10 and would wish to see it removed from the Local
Development Plan.

Scottish Government (CLDP070b) Rail station proposal at Clackmannan -
any reference to the station should remain aspirational and no funding
commitment should be assumed. It should be recognised that the Scottish
Ministers have no current plans for a station at this location.

Summary of responses (including reasons) by Planning Authority:

Network Rail's (CLDP063c) request for recognition of Scottish Planning
Policy (CD001) in relation to making best use of existing rail network and
stations is not favoured as it is a repetition of national policy and would add to
the length of the LDP. Similarly, stating within the text of the LDP that
significant investment has already taken place within the area in advance of
the electrification of the railway line between Stirling and Alloa would simply
be stating what has already happened. There may be merit in mentioning that
the commencement of electrified services on the route is scheduled for 2018,
meaning faster, more reliable, quieter and cleaner trains, although this is not
really a development plan issues unless there are further infrastructure
implications. No changes are therefore sought to the LDP.

Muckhart Community Council (CLDP174m) raise concerns over the quality
of the Core Path Network in the Muckhart area, however the Council's
Consultation Draft Open Space Strategy (November 2013) (CD047)
(paragraph 7.6.6, page 60) notes that "Muckhart has good access to Core
Paths, with 1 path classified as Good and the remaining classified as Fair.
The cycle path routes are limited and there is scope for improvement to the
cycle infrastructure.". This is reflected in the LDP through Proposals T28 and
T29 for cycle friendly infrastructure in an around Muckhart. The Open Space
Strategy (paragraph 6.18.5, page 45) also notes that "In respect of distribution
of Core Paths, the SNH Report: 'National Overview of Core Path Plans and
Path Provision' from 2011 notes that Clackmannanshire is the only authority
to achieve 100% coverage of a core path within every Datazone in its area..."
Page 6 of 7
and that (paragraph 6.18.6, page 45) "Clackmannanshire has a Core Path
network that is over twice the length of core paths per person compared to the
national average, and good distribution of Core Paths relative to the area's
whole population.". No changes are therefore sought to the LDP.

It is considered that Network Rail's (CLDP063d) concerns over level
crossings and their request for policy to reflect this are adequately covered,
not under Policy SC11, but under Policy SC12 (page 51) where "...Proposals
for development will only be supported where they are...capable of being
safely and conveniently accessed." Any objections on the grounds of impact
on level crossings could be considered under this Policy. In preparing the
Proposed LDP, reference was made to the Local Transport Strategy (CD063)
to ensure the two documents were complimentary. There is nothing in the
Local Transport Strategy (CD063) about level crossings, therefore the LDP
has not considered them as a separate piece of transport infrastructure. No
changes are therefore sought to the LDP.

Muckhart Community Council's (CLDP174n) suggestion for the
consideration of alternative fuel infrastructure was debated during the
preparation of the LDP, however it was agreed that it had limited land use
planning impact and that it would be addressed through commercial provision
and by the Council who have already installed 5 double charging points in car
parks in Alloa. No changes are therefore sought to the LDP.

Agree with Alloa Community Council (CLDP163d) that paths and walks
should be encouraged and believe that the LDP and Core Paths Plan
(CD049d) contribute positively to this. Proposal M02, The Shore, Alloa does
identify the opportunity to create recreational access to the River Forth,
providing there is no adverse impact on the nature protection area (Firth of
Forth SPA). Such access could also service commercial uses, if suitable.
Much of the rest of the area adjacent to the River Forth lies next to the area of
special protection mentioned above, or within an industrial area, and there are
therefore limited opportunities for development focussing on the Forth.
Proposals will however be likely to be supported provided they accord with
policy and do not have an unacceptable impact on the Firth of Forth SPA. No
changes are therefore sought to the LDP.

It is considered that sportscotland's (CLDP083c) requested addition to the
fourth bullet of Policy SC12 is too loosely worded and open to interpretation to
be included in Policy. It is likely that any existing routes could be claimed to be
important by one party, particularly those seeking to use that part of the policy
to try to stop development which may be acceptable in all other respects. If
there is an "access right", that is likely to be covered under other areas such
as Rights of Way or legal agreements. Again, this could be interpreted as an
assumed access right or historical access right and so is open to scrutiny and
interpretation. No changes are therefore sought to the LDP.

Mr & Mrs Tasker (CLDP037) The principle of a rail halt at Clackmannan has
already been established through the Clackmannanshire Adopted Local Plan
(December 2004) (CD030). No further certainty in the opportunity can be
Page 7 of 7
given until further work is done, but it is considered good Planning to highlight
the possibility of a rail halt at this location as an aspiration of the Council.
Detailed concerns will be addressed at the detailed design/planning
application stage should the opportunity proceed. No changes are therefore
sought to the LDP.

Scottish Government (CLDP070b) It was considered that by identifying this
as an opportunity rather than a proposal, and stating in the text that the
opportunity involved safeguarding the land, rather than delivering the rail halt,
that the aspirational nature of the opportunity was made clear. Should further
clarity be required through additional wording, the Reporter may be minded to
request the addition of further detail.

Reporters conclusions:

Reporters recommendations: