Irvine Valley Report

Irvine Valley Path Network Route Assessment Priorities, Standards and Proposals


Contents Page Page 1.0 Introduction 2 2.0 Policy Context and Overview 2

3.0 The Irvine Valley Landscape Character 2 4.0 Individual Route Assessment Overview 4 5.0 Analysis and Strategic Proposals 12 6.0 Existing Levels of Use of Network 12 7.0 Setting Priorities 14 8.0 Setting Standards 14 9.0 Identifying Strategies and Uses of Network 16

Page 10.0 Proposed Network Routes 17 11.0 Key Priority Projects 20 12.0 Proposals Budget Costing Criteria 22 13.0 Small Scale / Early Action Projects 24 14.0 Consultations 26 15.0 Signage & Interpretation 28 16.0 Funding Strategies 30 17.0 Potential Funding Sources 36 18.0 Conclusions 42

THIS PROJECT IS BEING PART-FINANCED BY THE SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT AND THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY AYRSHIRE LEADER 2007-2013 PROGRAMME


1

2

1.0 Introduction Introduction Ironside Farrar were commissioned by Irvine Valley Regeneration Partnership in conjunction with East Ayrshire Council in June 2011 to carry out a path network feasibility study for the Irvine Valley. The purpose of the study was to provide a strategic framework for path development throughout The Irvine Valley. The study in-cluded the preparation of a trail planning brief for identified routes throughout the area, consultations with key stakeholders and land-owners, a feasibility report. This report is to be utilised to assist the preparation of future funding applications. Background The aims of The Irvine Valley Regeneration Partnership are to: • encourage projects through public and private investment

which will improve the quality of life for current and future gen-erations

• improve social and recreational facilities • promote tourism and our historical heritage • regenerate the built environment • safeguard the rural environment This project evolved from the increasing success of The Irvine Val-ley walking and outdoor festivals, where points were raised regard-ing extension of some walks and rationalisation of walks to allow circular walks and walks of varying length. Lack of existing tourist infrastructure was also raised. Following this there was a community initiative to look at the poten-tial improvement of the path network by The Irvine Valley Regen-eration Partnership. This was highlighted by the consultation proc-ess to inform the East Ayrshire Core Path Plan. The East Ayrshire Core Path Plan was the product of an award winning consultation process developed jointly with North Ayrshire Council. All the interest groups and community councils in the area were sent a toolkit to help to identify the shortfall in access provision in their areas and the wider area. The long distance route forum also pointed out there was a gap in the provision of long distance strate-gic routes in the proposed study area, all of which illustrated a need for an improvement of the path network.

Study Area The Irvine Valley covers an area of 88 square miles stretching from the outskirts of Kilmarnock in the west and to the border with South Lanarkshire in the east. To the north is the Whitelee Wind Farm, Europe’s largest wind farm with a recently developed access net-work and to the south is the River Ayr Valley (see Path Network Plan). Aim of the Study The overall aim of the study is to outline the works required to im-prove The Irvine Valley Network which will be used to attract in-vestment. This would result in a network of paths, many accessible to all, that would provide recreation and health benefits for local communities and improve the attractiveness of the area to visitors, thus promoting regeneration.

2.0 Policy Context and Overview As part of the study, the following information was supplied by East Ayrshire Council which forms the basis of the policy context for the network in the context of East Ayrshire and adjacent Local Authori-ties where applicable (South lanarkshire Council and East Ren-frewshire Council. These documents included the following: • East Ayrshire Council Local Transport Strategy • East Ayrshire Cycle Network Study, 1998 • East Ayrshire Access Strategy • East Ayrshire Core Path Plan • Copies of South Lanarkshire and East Renfrewshire Core Path

Plans. • Whitelee Access Action Plan • Galston to Strathaven Route Feasibility Study In addition the following documents are amongst those have been considered: • Outdoor Access Strategies A guide to Good practice (SNH)

2004 • Managing Access (SNH) 2005 • Land Reform Act Scotland 2003

• Cycle by Design (Transport Scotland) 2010 • Countryside for All – standards (BT / Fieldfare Trust) 1997 • National Cycle Network Guidelines (Sustrans) • East Ayrshire Council Local Plan Of the routes surveyed, 19 were included within the East Ayrshire Core path plan for the Irvine Valley and are referenced by the prefix IV. 8 additional routes were surveyed, and for the purpose of this report have been prefixed with the initials AD. The majority of these routes are outwith the Core Path network, though there are some exceptions such as The River Ayr Way. The use of Good Practice and Technical Access guidelines has been considered fundamental to ensure that any proposals to im-provements to the network can be benchmarked against current best practice advice.

3.0 The Irvine Valley Landscape Character

The study is centred around the The Irvine Valley which runs east west from the north east of Loudoun Hill, through the small towns and associated settlements of Darvel, Newmilns, Galston and Hurl-ford towards Kilmarnock. It is this section, between Loudoun Hill and Hurlford which is generally referred to as the The Irvine Valley. The course of the river then flows towards Irvine. The river falls from circa 180m above sea level at Loudoun Hill to 29m above sea level at Hurlford. The towns nestle in the valley floor having devel-oped very much as early industrial towns associated with textiles and lace where water from the river powered the industry. Running parallel and generally to the north of the river is the A71 trunk road a long established route linking Edinburgh and Kilmarnock. The valley has a relatively narrow valley floor, widening towards Galston and Hurlford, as the landscape flattens out. Beyond the valley floor land rises relatively steeply to both the north and south. This gives the valley a sense of enclosure from the wider land-scape. There is a more defined low ridge line to the south, particu-larly between Darvel and Galston where the land rises to 321m. To the north beyond the extent of the immediate valley, approximately 1.5m from the river, the landscape quickly changes to a more open


3

Path Network Plan

4

route and a number of historic buildings can be appreciated. Build-ings within the Main Street are of a range of ages, with many dating to the 18th and 19th century. These older properties tend to be ter-raced, two storey, and stone build. Some properties are exposed red sandstone when many others have been whitewashed, with traditional black margins. As the A71 travels eastwards towards Galston and Hurlford there becomes more edge of settlement intrusions within the road corri-dor such as sports grounds, petrol stations, roundabout and pedes-trian bridge at Galston. The industrial heritage of Newmilns and Galston is largely hidden from the A71 corridor, relating predominantly to the southern bank of the river. This includes large mill and textile buildings within Greenholm, Newmilns.

4.0 Individual Route Assessment Overview During Autumn 2011, Ironside Farrar surveyed approximately 200km of routes within the Study Area. All routes were surveyed on site, predominantly by foot or by bicycle depending on character of route. A photographic record was taken and the survey was also informed by desk studies. This information has been collated into a separate document. The routes surveyed, and referred to in this report are as follows:

Survey Information Collated included the following: Land Owners – where known. Note was also made if the route formed part of an adopted road. General Landscape Description – The landscape of the route was considered and described in terms of character and quality. Path Surface Description – the surface and width of paths were described – to obtain an understanding of quality of paths and suit-ability for different user groups.

Path Corridor – a description of the width and character of the overall corridor of the path – this was included to try and ascertain whether there may be scope, for example to improve width of path. Path Entrances – A description of where the main entrances to the paths are, and the character of these entrances – including any barriers to use.

character with marginal farmland, open moorland, conifer planta-tions and the dramatic presence of the Whitelees Windfarm. The windfarm is currently expanding to the south, further influencing the landscape character of the area to the north of The Irvine Valley. To the south of the valley, marginal grazing gives way to predomi-nantly heather clad rolling moorland, The highest hill is Wedder Hill which is 434m above sea level. The dominant and most distinctive landscape feature is the steep, craggy and conical, volcanic plug of Loudoun Hill approximately 4km to the east of Darvel. This forms a well recognised landmark and acts as a punctuation to the valley. The impact of human settlement on the landscape of the valley is long established, with the 100m Long Cairn being the longest chambered Cairn in Scotland and circa 5000 years old. The cairn has however been disturbed in the past. The influence of landed wealth within the valley makes a significant impact upon the land-scape, with castles and estates. The valley has substantial areas of mature woodland associated with these estates and in particular with Loudoun Castle to the north and Lanfine Estate to the south. Both of these are listed within the Registar of Gardens and De-signed Landscapes. Lanfine Estate, in particular provides a very distinctive backdrop to the southern slopes of the valley down to the river, with considerable aboricultural interest, including a mix-ture af native and exotic species. There are two transport corridors than run through the valley, the A71 and the former railway line, Darvel Branch of the Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmarnock and Ayr Railway. There is considerable evi-dence of the former railway line, in terms of embankments and cut-tings. Most distinctive of all is the red sandstone, 26 arch B listed viaduct at Newmilns, directly adjacent to the river. A section of the line between Galston and Hurlford has been converted into a cycle route. The A71 runs through Darvel and Newmilns and is aligned to the north of Galston. Whilst often running close to the river, few river views are afforded by this road. The route through both Darvel and Newmilns passes through the Main Street of both towns. In both towns the historic development of the towns is evident from this

Ref. Name Distance Surface / Character

IV1 Hurlford to Galston (The Chris Hoy Cycle-way)

3 km 3m wide blacktop traffic free.

IV2 Galston to Mauchline / Catrine

3.9 km Public road

IV3 West

Galston to Newmilns (Strath Path)

3.5km Narrow whin path with farm track section

IV3 Mid

Newmilns to Darvel

3 km Public roads, mainly minor with short blacktop path section c 2m width.

IV3 East

Darvel (Ranoldcoup Bridge) to Priestland

1.5 km Minor road, private roads, gener-ally blacktop, unsurfaced farm track to central section.

IV4 Burn Anne Walk Burnhouse Bridge Galston

1.2 km Narrow whin path with steps

IV5 Irvine Valley Southern Link Route from the southern point of IV 4 to Monk Road Belt.

5 km Minor road

IV6 Big Wood (West of Newmilns).

1.2 km Aggregate surfaced path of vary-ing width (min 0.3m). Short sec-tion Top section adjacent to Woodhead Farm, no discernible path and difficult to access.

IV 7 Newmilns Primary School Link

0.3 km 2m blacktop path

IV 8 River Irvine Cycle Route Crookedholm to Newmilns

9.6 km Predominantly minor road with section of rough track 2m wide. Area through Loudoun Castle Estate presently inaccessible.

IV 9 Kilmarnock to Whitelee Forest

19.4 km Predominantly minor road, with forestry track to northern portion.


5

6

Car Parking – A note of whether there is any parking associated with the route and if so where it is located. Connectivity to Existing Settlements – An analysis as to how well a path connects to existing settlements, whether it forms a link between settlements , and how strong and direct that connection is. Connectivity to Wider Network – An analysis as to how well the route connects up to other surveyed routes and some other associ-ated links within the wider footpath network. In some instances ref-erence may be made to other initiatives such as the River Ayr Way. Compatibility with Adjacent Network – An analysis as to how similar in quality the routes are with those that they connect with.

Location of Key Views – An analysis of the sections of the route with the highest visual qualities and which could form destinations or stopping points in terms of route development. Condition of Path Corridor – A note of any signs of neglect, fly tipping, invasive species etc that may require to be addressed. Gradient Profile – An assessment of the gradients of the paths Key known Historical Archaeological or Ecological Interest – A note of points of interest that may form the basis of interpretation. Physical Barriers to Use – An assessment of elements that may restrict the use of the route for some user groups. It could include elements such as surface quality, presence of traffic, restrictive gates or barriers etc. Existing Maintenance / Maintenance Requirements and Works Required to Minimise Maintenance – An assessment of existing maintenance evident to the path and associated immediate corri-dor. If there were works which could be readily undertaken which may have the impact of reducing future maintenance requirements then these were noted.


IV 10 Waterside to Whitelee Forest

12.2 km Predominantly minor roads, but include presently inacces-sible section beyond Horsehill Farm access track

IV 11 Craufurdland Water Route

2.4m Equal minor road, narrow woodland path and no dis-cernible route.

IV 12 Hareshaw HillHare-shaw Lodge to Craigendunton Reser-voir.

3.3 km Farm track

IV 13 Annick Valley connec-tion to the A77 Cycle Route Damhead Farm Access Road to Woodend Cottage

0.9 km Minor road

IV 14 A77 Cycle Route 11 km Dedicated cycle route adja-cent to A77

IV 15 Newmilns to Darvel Hill Road - Jocklan Bridge (north of Newmilns) to Jamieson Road, Darvel

5.9 km Minor road with section of narrow path and unsurfaced grassed path

IV 16 Darvel to Whitelee (The Weavers Trail)

9km Minor roads for c.6km. c.3km forestry / windfarm tracks

IV 17 Newmilns to Darvel through Lanfine Estate

4.6 km Minor road, blacktop estate roads, woodland path com-pacted aggregate 2m width

IV 18 The Long Cairn Walk Bransfield Farm to A71 (after Saughall Farm).

5 Km Minor Roads with unsurfaced farm track central section (waymarked)

IV 19 Darvel to Loudoun Hill 4.2 km Predominantly unsurfaced path with minor road section. Section adjacent to Darvel overgrown and inaccessible.

AD 20

Armsheugh Woodland, Hurlford

1.2km Narrow whin path.

AD 21 West

Little Sorn to Catrine and River Ayr Valley at Sorn.

9 km Minor roads

AD 21 East

River Ayr Way 16.1 km Whin path, typically 1.2m


AD 22 Craufurdland Water Route

3.5 km No formal path exists, gener-ally inaccessible.

AD 23 Dyke Farm to Newlands Cottages (Ranoldcoup Bridge Darvel via Hill Planta-tion.)

2.8 km Minor roads and narrow wood-land paths

AD 24

Muirkirk to Long Cairn Walk (Darvel)

19km Minor roads, approx 10km of forestry tracks and 5km open moorland with no clear path.

AD 25 Disused railway line Galston to Newmilns.

7km. Former railway line, almost all sections unsurfaced and inac-cessible.

AD 26 Disused railway line Loudoun Hill to Strath-aven

10km Former railway line, generally no clear path with sections inaccessible due to workings and forestry.

AD 27 Grougar Walk Crookedholm to Milton Road, Templetonburn

1 km Blacktop path minimum width 1.5m

AD 28 River Ayr Way to Long Cairn Walk (Darvel)

14 km 8.5 km forestry tracks / farm

access tracks 1km minor road

4.5 km no path through rough

grazing or open moorland.


7

8

Suitability for Different Users – An assessment of the route for different user groups was undertaken for existing route. A compari-son was then made with potential suitability following the undertak-ing of feasible improvements. Feasible improvements refers to a valued assessment which takes into consideration physical con-straints such as gradients and route corridor width together with a view on issues such as character and likely costs. Scoring for the route for each user group was considered as a whole. Therefore, in some instances, particularly for longer routes there may be sec-tions that would individually score higher or lower than the route as a whole. Suitability for different users is discussed in more detail below Potential for Project Work – An assessment of some of the possi-bilities for undertaking improvements to the route corridor. These include minor works such as vegetation clearance, signage, local-ised repair, access improvements, drainage etc to the whole scale improvement of all or section of route. Consideration has been given to whether the route has the potential capacity to be im-proved to a recognised design standard. Diagram illustrating proportion of surveyed routes with sections either inaccessible or no clearly defined path apparent.

Key Points • 200km of routes were surveyed. • An additional 13 km of routes were scoped to form improved

connections between surveyed routes • 28 routes were surveyed • Of these 28, 10 are fully off road, 3 are fully on road, 14 are

mixed on and off road, and one is a private access / forestry track. Of the 10 off road 3 do not presently exist as routes.

• 8 routes have sections with no discernible paths and are often inaccessible. It is calculated that this equates to 32.3km.

• In no instances do fully off road paths link to each other. • In 2 of the fully off road routes there is parking directly adja-

cent to an entrance. • Where paths are a mix of on and off road, the higher proportion

is of on road sections. • There are no off road routes that fully comply to Cycle by De-

sign Standards. • There are no fully off road routes, at present that offer a looped

path therefore impact upon present recreational potential. Minor Roads Minor roads play a fundamental role in the network at present and are essential in providing both linkages between almost all routes and as an essential element in 17 of the 28 surveyed routes. Whilst outwith the scope of the study to measure traffic volumes, it would appear likely that all minor roads indicated are likely to have vol-umes of less than 1000 vehicles per day. Within the Irvine Valley the minor road network generally connects farms and isolated small settlements with the larger settlements located within the val-ley floor. Understanding User Groups Definitions of Suitability of Terms Within the assessment of routes, the following criteria was been considered when assessing suitability of network for different po-tential user groups. Additionally, they were also utilised for the as-sessment of potential, viable improvements to the network associ-ated with individual routes. These were based on recognised stan-dards such as Countryside for All Standards Rural and Working Landscapes, Cycling by Design 2010 Standards, recent Country-

Diagram illustrating proportion of different surface types associated with the 200 km of routes surveyed.

Diagram illustrating the proportion of routes surveyed where the type of surface associated with the route varied substantially along its length. This would therefore have implications for suitability for different user groups.

Summary – Notes on the general quality and importance of the route.


9

10

side Access for All Least Restrictive Access Guidelines. In addition, organisations such as Sustrans and Scottish Natural Heritage have considered categories of users, in various studies and reports. Recreational / Local Access Walk • Meets or exceeds Countryside for All Standards Rural and

Working Landscapes. • Traffic free or virtually traffic free. • Minimum 1.2 m path width. • Provides connections between two points / locations. • High quality landscape. • No excessive gradients. Disability Access • Meets or exceeds Countryside for All Standards Rural and

Working Landscapes. • Traffic free or virtually traffic free. • Minimum 1.2 m path width. • Clear forward visibility. • No excessive gradients. Family Walk (Parent(s) with young children under 12 years old) • Meets or exceeds Countryside for All Standards Rural and

Working Landscapes. • Traffic free or virtually traffic free. • Minimum 1.2 m path width. • Provides a meaningful destination / include points of interest. • High quality landscape. Visitor Walk • Meets or exceeds Countryside for All Standards Rural and

Working Landscapes unless the overriding character and to-pography would make this inappropriate.

• Incorporates a Heritage or other attraction. • In proximity to Public Transport links. • Car parking available at or near to entrance points. • Signage and information. • High quality landscape.

Long Distance Walk • Meets or exceeds Countryside for All Standards Rural and

Working Landscapes. • Minimum 1.2 m path width. • Traffic free or virtually traffic free. • Meaningful route with obvious start and finish points. • Length exceeding single day achievable distance. • Connections to other similar routes. • High quality landscape / visual variety. Family Cycle • Conforms to Cycling by Design 2010 Standards with regard to

path width and surface. • Traffic free or virtually traffic free. • Unrestrictive access at entrances of an absolute minimum 1.2

m width. • Incorporate point of interest or landscape variety. • Fairly level gradients. Recreational / Local Access Cycle • Meets Cycling by Design 2010 Standards with regard to path

width and surface. • No excessive gradients. • Traffic free or virtually traffic free. • Provides connections between two locations. • Provides a destination. • High quality landscape. • Unrestrictive access. Off Road Cycle • Appropriate surfaces meet cycling By Design 2010 Standards

in terms of width. • Landscape value / variety. • Provides opportunities for loop routes or larger links of at least

10 km. • Car parking available.

Visitor Cycle • Meets Cycling by Design 2010 Standards with regard to path

width and surface. • Incorporates points of interest, defined destination or other at-

traction. • High quality landscape. • Car parking available. • Information and signage. • Provides route of at least 10 km. Equestrian Use • Width > 3m. • Soft or part aggregate surface. • Conforms to BHA recommendations. It is clear from these categories that the network, as it exists at pre-sent, with a heavy reliance on the minor road network, would per-haps make it relatively difficult to attract several categories of po-tential additional users, including:

• Visitor Walkers

• Family walkers

• Disabled users

• Family cyclists

• Visitor cyclists • Equestrian users. From an economic regeneration perspective, encouraging some of these user groups may be regarded as particularly important. An example may be family, or occasional cyclists. These users may be more likely to, for example, sustain bike hire initiatives, utilise local shops, restaurants and cafes and visit local attractions. However, the expectation from these users is likely to be for a consistent high quality product – Sustrans note that this would normally mean traf-fic free routes. The River Irvine corridor has considerable potential in terms of landscape quality, distances and destinations – includ-ing Loudoun Hill to be positively promoted for these potential users however what is required is sustained investment in improving the physical quality of the route. A similar argument may be made for visitor and family walkers, where a more consistent approach to route quality is likely to be


11

12

strategically important as it provides a direct connection to the Ayr Coastal Path, which in turn connects to the Southern Upland Way. By forming a connection across moorland to the immediate north of the River Ayr Way (IV 24 / IV 28) would allow the river Irvine to be directly connected to these routes and therefore form part of the long distance path network. From Darvel, following the Weavers Trail (IV 16) would provide a connection close to the fringes of the Greater Glasgow conurbation which could in turn link up towards the West Highland Way. This, could therefore be argued is poten-tially a link that could have considerable strategic importance. Addi-tionally, there remains the potential to extend routes from The Ir-vine Valley eastwards towards Strathaven, and westwards back towards Irvine. The section towards Irvine, includes several sec-tions that are already surfaced. This would therefore create the long term potential of a two river loop, utilising the Ayr Coastal Path, between Ayr and Irvine. More experience road cyclists are perhaps more likely to utilise The Irvine Valley, as part of a longer cycle trip. As such it is seen that the relatively recent A77 cycle route opens up The Irvine Valley for cyclists, particularly travelling from the Greater Glasgow conurba-tion. As such, a signed route from Fenwick towards the valley would be likely to encourage use. It is also important to promote a consistent surface for this user group – in this instance the minor road network would be most appropriate. There is a signed cycle route from Strathaven to East Kilbride which gives the opportunity of providing links to. Whilst there was some evidence of equestrian use within the over-all study area, most of the routes surveyed did not meet bridleway standards. There appeared to be little clear opportunity, in most instances to improve to these standards, particularly in areas where there may be other demands – for example within The Irvine Valley corridor.

5.0 Analysis and Strategic Proposals

Following Desk study, approval of scoping exercise and completion of individual path surveys, an initial assessment of the network has been undertaken. From this assessment a draft set of strategic pro-posals were produced for client comment and discussion. These proposals seek achieve the following: • Provide a strategic overview of the entire network – by detailed

consideration of purpose and potential useage of each route. • Form appropriate, feasible and consistent design standards for

each of routes to ensure that each element of the network can provide, as far as is reasonably possible, a high quality experi-ence.

• Sub-divide the 200km + of routes surveyed into different themed sections. This allows for routes to be developed in a more targeted manner, greater understanding of users and en-hanced opportunities for marketing and interpretation.

• Prioritise routes according to set of objective criteria. This en-ables investment to enhance the network to be targeted to en-sure best value is achieved and that spend within the network remains focused.

• Identify key priority projects for detailed feasibility considera-tions and specific landowner consultation. They priority projects predominantly consider improvements to linkages within the network or tackling sub-standard sections of routes or connec-tions which may inhibit more general use.

• Identify small scale projects which may be undertaken as early action and may require less consultation to achieve. Some of these projects may be suitable for volunteer or intermediate Labour Market labour.

6.0 Existing Levels of Use of Network Whilst outwith the remit of the study to undertake a detailed survey of existing levels of use of the 200km of identified routes within the study, through on site observation, and informal consultation with users and landowners a general picture of existing use :

attractive to these users, with again, the River Irvine Corridor being the most predictable location within the wider study area to meet the other requirements of these user groups. The River corridor, with relatively short, level and direct distances between settle-ments, provides considerable opportunity for the development of sustainable transport links between the settlements and beyond towards Kilmarnock therefore being particularly applicable for Rec-reational / Local Access Cycling and Recreational / Local Access Walking and disabled use. It is considered that off-road cycling use within the overall study area is likely to be concentrated within the forestry tracks and wind-farm array paths to the north of the study area adjacent to Whitelee Windfarm, where off road cycling has been encouraged and there are existing facilities including bike hire. With the windfarm being currently expanded southwards, there appears to be very good connections from the study area towards the windfarm. It is impera-tive that close consideration is taken as to how these routes are developed, to ensure that access is improved from the south. Whilst it is important to afford the opportunity to provide links from the settlements towards the windfarm, it is also recognised that many off-road cyclists arrive at a location by car, rather than via a road cycle. It would therefore appear to be appropriate to provide small areas of car parking towards the end of the minor road net-work, if cycling within the windfarm is to be encouraged. The other potential location for off-road cycling would be within the forest tracks and farm tracks to the south east of Darvel. (IV 24 / IV 28) However these are presently relatively difficult to access, do not appear to form useful loops and do not have parking associated with them. Investment in large missing links across moorland could provide point to point off road cycle routes - but this may prove to be a relatively expensive and intrusive measure through sensitive habitats, requiring careful design and consideration. It is recognised that long distance walking routes are increasingly popular, and bring economic benefits to those communities associ-ated with them. In Scotland, there are generally considered to be fifteen long distance walks. Of these, perhaps the Southern Upland Way and the West Highland Way are the most recognised. The re-cent River Ayr Way, to the southern fringes of the study area is


13

14

Higher Levels of Use Description: Mainly close to communities, multiple users were noted during site survey and also reported during informal consul-tations; IV1 Cycles and walkers. Noted IV3 Particularly well used by walkers and cyclists IV4 Walkers IV6 Walkers IV7 School access IV14 Predominantly cyclists IV 17 Predominantly walkers but cyclists noted in some sections. IV18 Walkers AD20 Walkers and cyclists noted. AD21 River Ayr Way AD27 Walkers and cyclists noted Moderate to Low Levels of Use Description: Occasional users noted during site survey , or no use noted, but evidence of regular use – footprints, cycle tyre tracks, worn paths etc. In some instances use has been confirmed through informal consultation process. Minor roads are also in-cluded within this category. (Unless high level of use noted). IV2 Solitary cyclist noted IV5 IV8 Section at Loudoun Castle closed to pedestrians. IV9 Walkers noted close to windfarm , parking at end of public road. IV10 Some use of minor road section – no discernible access through Netherraith Farm section of route. IV11 IV12 IV13 Cyclists only noted. IV15 IV16 Walkers noted close to windfarm at northern section of mi nor road. IV19 Access from Darvel overgrown. Use from Priestland o wards identified.

Low or No Recorded Levels of Use Description: Routes problematic to navigate - due to overgrown vegetation, fencing, lack of discernible route. No users were noted during site visit. It is further noted that some sections of other routes also have sections which are problematic to navigate, but use was noted elsewhere. AD22 AD24 AD25 AD26

7.0 Setting Priorities

Analysis of the paths and routes identified within the study area has led to consideration as to how these may be prioritised for fur-ther development. The key drivers for prioritisation include the fol-lowing: Strong Connectivity to Existing Settlements: • Where routes are accessed directly or existing settlements then

this would be a good predictor for potential use. • If a route connects up two existing settlements then this would

provide a practical as well as a recreational use. • If the connections relate to any of the four towns within The Ir-

vine Valley then this may assist in regeneration. • If the above conditions prevail, and distances are appropriate

then there is likely to be demand for both walking and cycling. Landscape Value: • Paths of high landscape value are likely to be a good predictor

of potential use. • Paths that offer a variety of landscape experiences are likely to

encourage recreational use. • Paths where there are distinct, key views to appreciate, are

likely to encourage use. • Where landscape value is greatest, and landscape quality is

most distinctive this may be more likely to attract visitors from outwith the locality.

Compatibility and Connectivity with Network Where routes offer compatible conditions (for example traffic free) and form longer, meaningful connections, then routes are more likely to be utilised . Connections to other networks or visitor attrac-tions would also be predictors for use. Gradient Profile Relatively level routes will be more likely to attract some user groups. Steep climbs will offer an attraction to some user groups – particularly if related to high landscape value. Following this assessment has enabled priorities to be set for route types . These have been classified as: Highest Strongest association with all the above predictors - likely to attract both visitors and high level of commu nity use. High Strong association with the above predictors and formi ng important links to the Highest predictor routes. Mid Good association with some of the above predictors. May be likely to appeal to specific user groups. Low Generally less connected with other routes and centres of population. Less association with the above predict tors, nonetheless of benefit to some user groups and communities.

8.0 Setting Standards

As routes are appraised and assessed it is important to attempt to set appropriate design standards that are as far as is reasonably viable consistent throughout the length of any identified route. This ensures that routes have a set standard in terms of accessibility and a focused view in terms of potential users. This therefore would be of assistance in both marketing the network and being able to attract funding.


15

16

The categories of routes and associated standards are considered to be as follows: Cycle by Design 2010 • Shared cyclepath • Width minimum 3m • Surface blacktop • Traffic free Note – within the River Irvine Valley / Spine there are sections where there are minor roads and farm / estate access tracks which are virtually traffic free – such as Browns Road which are predomi-nantly used as a walking and cycling routes. For the purposes of defining routes, these have been included within this category rather than Minor Roads, below. Nonetheless there may be some issues relating to some users. Cycle by Design 2010 • Minor road • Less than 1000 vehicles per day • Surface blacktop • Assessment of vehicle speeds. Cycle by Design 2010 • Off-road forestry / windfarm • Width minimum 3m • Unbound surface – stones no bigger than 10mm. Countryside for All • Category – Rural and working landscapes • Width minimum 1.2m • Unbound surface – stones no bigger than 10mm. • Free of steps stiles and other impediments to access. No Standard Applicable Footpaths where level changes or character of landscape make above categories inappropriate. Nonetheless efforts should be made to improve accessibility by varying factors, such as path widths, removal of barriers etc, depending on location and feasibil-ity. Consideration of recent Countryside Access for All Least Re-strictive Access Guidelines should be considered.

9.0 Identifying Strategies and Uses of Network

Following analysis on the condition, use and topography of the ex-isting network, a series of proposals have been developed which seek to create a hierarchy and clear sense of purpose for the 160km of identified routes within the study. These are described as follows:

River Irvine Valley / Spine Description : Based upon the Irvine Valley Trail this route aims to form a high quality route from Kilmarnock to Loudoun Hill, linking together the four valley towns, Hurlford, Galston, Newmilns and Darvel. This route is the core element of the network. Aims to be genuinely multi-purposed and suitable for all abilities, for both cy-cling and walking. River Irvine Valley Spurs and Loops Description : Adding value and opportunity to the River Irvine Spine these routes form a series of recreational paths directly ac-cessible from the River Irvine Spine. These seek to make the most of the landscape and heritage value of the valley. In most in-stances they do not form strong to key elements of the wider net-work outwith the valley. Windfarm Connector Description : Based on the Weaver’s Trail this route connects rec-reational cycling and walking opportunities within Whitelee Wind-farm to the River Irvine Valley / Spine and the River Ayr Connec-tor. Main use is likely to be recreational cycling for accessing wind-farm with some opportunities for walking – including potential long distance links. River Ayr Way Connector Description : Predominantly off road walking routes through open moorland and forestry connecting River Ayr Way and Muirkirk with the River Irvine Valley / Spine. A77 Connector Description : The route follows the A77 cycle route and forms a connection to the River Irvine Valley Spine through the use of minor roads from Fenwick. Main user group anticipated to be road cyclists.

Strathaven Connector Description : Extension of the River Irvine Valley / Spine east-wards to Strathaven, as both a destination point and forms the con-nection to the on road East Kilbride to Strathaven Cycle Route. Windfarm Approaches Description : Routes accessing Whitelees windfarm from the south, with connections towards A77 connector. Combination of minor roads, forestry and windfarm tracks, main use likely to be off road recreational cycling and walking within off road sections. Secondary Cycle Routes Description : On road routes, previously identified within the core path Network. Waterside Paths Description : Footpaths within the Waterside area, at Crawford-landwater linking towards Dean Castle , Kilmarnock.


17

10.0 Proposed Network Routes River Irvine Valley / Spine Priority – Highest Preferred Design Standard – Cycling by Design

Description : Based upon the existing Irvine Valley Trail this route aims to form a high quality route from Kilmarnock to Loudoun Hill, linking together the four valley towns, Hurlford, Galston, Newmilns and Darvel. This route is the core element of the network. This route has the potential to draw visitors, both walkers and cyclists into the valley as well as providing a high quality sustainable trans-port link between the four communities and to Kilmarnock beyond. The spine can be viewed as having three distinct sections – Kilmar-nock to Hurlford, Hurlford to Darvel and Darvel to Loudoun Hill. Aims to be genuinely multi-purposed and suitable for all abilities, for both cycling and walking. It is recognised the particular impor-tance of the central section linking the four towns and therefore it is proposed that particular priority should be placed at improving this to as consistent and of a high a standard as is feasible. Particular issues relating to Galston to Darvel include the follow-ing: • The Strath path between Galston and Newmilns is very narrow

in sections (particularly adjacent to Greenways Kennels) and requires to be widened to improve accessibility and to make it cycleable. Surface improvements too would be desirable.

• There is a relatively long section within Newmilns which passes through an industrial area. Whilst some of these factory buildings are of heritage value then the route is not traffic free which might discourage some potential users. (There is a po-tential option which utilises former railway line and boundary of industrial units.)

• Routes through Galston, Hurlford and Newmilns require more definition.

• Consideration of removal of anti-motorcycle barriers. • Consideration of lighting of route, if consistently upgraded. Darvel to Loudoun Hill requires the following: • The comprehensive upgrading of former railway line. • Access to railway line across A71 at Priestland • The upgrading of farm tracks from Priestlands towards Darvel. Kilmarnock to Hurlford would be predominantly within the exist-ing minor road network. Route to centre of Kilmarnock is outwith the scope of present commission River Irvine Valley Spurs and Loops– Priority High Preferred Design Standard – varies - Cycling by Design, Ac-cess for all, not applicable

Description : Based upon much of the existing signed Irvine Valley routes the proposals aim to improve the quality of individual routes and their linkage to the River Irvine Valley / Spine. Depending on existing qualities of individual routes, aim is to cre-ate well designed appropriate recreational routes for both residents and visitors. Improvements to accessibility for all quality of routes would be desirable and appropriate.

Particular issues relating to include the following: • Consideration as to whether it is viable to link the big wood

path to the wider network – for example utilising disused bridge which connects towards the Strath path

• Consideration of improvements to narrow entrance to Burn Anne path.

• Consideration as to means of improving routes through Land-fine estate for recreational cycling.

Windfarm Connector – Priority High Preferred Design Standard - Cycling by Design,

Description : Based on the existing Weavers trail, the route follows steeply rising minor, single track roads to Whitelee Forest. The route then follows former forestry tracks to the extension area of Whitelee Windfarm. At that point there are connections to the vari-ous routes within Whitelee Windfarm. Linking to Windfarm ap-proaches. The minor road connections include links to Secondary cycle routes. The aim is to create a strong connection from Whitelee Windfarm to the Irvine Valley. It is considered that the main users would be recreational cyclists and also has the potential to be promoted as a long distance walking route, linking to River Irvine Valley / Spine and beyond. Particular issues relating to include the following: • Whitelee windfarm extension is currently being constructed and

as such routes will be subject to change during the restoration

18

works of the contract.. Therefore access is presently restricted with route gated (locked) and additional vehicular barrier.

• Opportunity to create parking at towards end of minor road to provide access to Windfarm and remaining sections of Whitelee Forest from the south.

• Stiff climbs – particularly directly out of Darvel would merit creation of rest points.

River Ayr Way Connector - Priority High Preferred Design Standard - Cycling by Design, alternatively not applicable

Description : The route connects The Irvine Valley at Darvel to Muirkirk and the River Ayr Way. This follows minor roads, forestry tracks and rough quad bike trails, presently used for shooting ac-cess. Some sections are presently within open moorland. The route offers panoramic views and access to high, open moorland land-scape. Depending on the detailing of the route the route may be suitable for long distance walkers and off road cyclists. As these routes are long and relatively distant from settlements, particularly the open moorland sections then increasing access opportunities beyond these potential user groups could be achieved by providing some parking opportunities towards the end of the existing minor road network – for example towards Aitkencleugh six kilometres south west of Muirkirk. The main potential aims are to provide connections between Muirkirk and River Ayr Way with The Irvine Valley and to allow ac-cess onto upland rolling moorland with a contrasting landscape quality to the majority of the road network

Particular issues relating to include the following: • Large sections of the route have no defined path and are diffi-

cult presently to transverse. It could therefore be potentially costly to create quality linkages.

• Some of the moorland sections follows vague tracks formed by quad bikes – who provide access for shooting.

• Detailed landowner consultation may be required. Strathaven Connector Preferred Design Standard - Cycling by Design—Priority Mid

Description : The route follows the line of the dismantled railway from south of Loudoun Hill to Strathaven. This would allow ap-proximately 14m of traffic free route, and extend The Irvine Valley spine eastwards towards Strathaven as a destination. There is also an on road designated cycle route between Strathaven and East Kilbride. The former railway line is set within the adjoining Avon Water valley with a scale and landscape character that con-trasts and complements that of the more wooded and enclosed The Irvine Valley. The aim is to strengthen the attraction of the River Irvine Spine by providing linkages into South Lanarkshire. connection to The Irvine Valley as a destination for cycling. It is considered unlikely that this route would be likely to attract other user groups in any significant numbers.

Particular issues relating to include the following: • Within a minor road network, consideration would be required

for consultation with East Ayrshire Council Roads Department. Depending on design requirements, statutory consents may be required.

• It should be noted that as this follows the minor road network throughout the entire length of the route then the connection already exists, and that any physical works to the route would therefore be to sign and formalise it.

A77 Connector – Priority Mid Preferred Design Standard - Cycling by Design,

Description : The route follows the existing A77 cycle route and then forms a new connection to the River Irvine Valley / Spine through the use of minor roads from Fenwick towards Hurlford. Ad-ditionally this would provide further opportunities to enter Whitelee Windfarm from the south west utilising Windfarm Access Routes. The aim is to create a strong a strong connection to The Irvine Valley as a destination for cycling. It is considered unlikely that this route would be likely to attract other user groups in any significant numbers. Particular issues relating to include the following: • Within a minor road network, consideration would be required

for consultation with East Ayrshire Council Roads Department. Depending on design requirements, statutory consents may be required.


19

• It should be noted that as this follows the minor road network throughout the entire length of the route then the connection already exists, and that any physical works to the route would therefore be to sign and formalise it.

Windfarm Approaches – Priority Mid Preferred Design Standard - Cycling by Design,

Description : The routes provide opportunities to link the minor road network within the east with Whitelee Windfarm and its exten-sion. These would also link with the proposed Windfarm Connec-tor. The routes predominantly consist of existing minor roads and windfarm access routes or proposed access routes. There is one section of a potential link route which is illustrated on O.S maps as a footpath leading to a forestry track at Laigh Hapton, towards the south east of Whitelee Forest.route. This would appear to be indis-tinct and would need upgrading if this link was to become part of the network. The minor road connections include links to Secon-dary cycle routes and towards the A77 cycle route. The aim is to provide additional access opportunities for recrea-tional cyclists and recreational walkers to access the landscape Associated with the windfarm. Particular issues relating to include the following: • Whitelee windfarm extension is currently being constructed and

as such routes will be subject to change during the restoration works of the contract.. Therefore access is presently restricted with route gated (locked) and additional vehicular barrier.

• Opportunity to create parking at towards end of minor road to provide access to Windfarm .

• Routes cross the A719 and tend to link the A77 with the Wind-farm, rather than having a strong connection with the River ir-vine Valley.

• Routes are remote from settlements. Secondary Cycle Routes - Priority Low Preferred Design Standard - Cycling by Design,

Description : Secondary cycle routes refer predominantly to on road routes, utilising the minor road network which are included within the Core path Network. The aim would therefore be to create signed on road routes. The network exists at present, with the exception of a section through Loudoun Castle grounds which is presently closed. This can how-ever be avoided by detouring to the immediate north. There are two main routes: • Minor roads to the north of The Irvine Valley East of Galston. • Minor roads leading from Galston towards Sorn and Catrine. The route to the north includes steep sections and whilst providing elevated views, does not form particularly direct connections be-tween settlements. The route towards Sorn and Catrine does not provide much oppor-tunity for looped routes. However improvements to Catrine Voes, including the building of a visitor centre could make this route at-tractive.

Waterside Paths- Priority Low Preferred Design Standard – Countryside for All,

Description : Pedestrian routes towards Waterside close to or along Crawfordlandwater . These provide countryside and riparian access and follow Core Paths. There are also linkages towards Dean Castle. The aim would be to create paths to Countryside for All Standards foir recreational walking. Issues associated with these routes include the following: • Linkages to the River Irvine Network are relatively poor. • Linkages to Dean Castle require use of the minor road network. • The routes are relatively remote from substantial settlements

and have relatively little opportunity for car parking.

20

Darvel to Loudoun Hill

Newmilns (Greenholm) – Brown’s Road To Strath Path Consideration of improvement to linkage between two sections of River Irvine Valley Spine. If possible the exploration of increasing traffic free options should be considered utilising former railway alignment and field boundaries to the immediate south of existing industrial units

Galston to Landoun Kirk Potential to create an improved route to minor road to north of river. The route follows existing path along southern bulk of river from Galston, existing underpass under A71, existing bridge over river and then upgrading of existing path / track to Loudoun Kirk. The route is navigate able at present, though narrow with sections un-finished. It would appear viable to upgrade majority to cycle by de-sign standards, although some sections (at bridge) would be nar-row (min.1.2m) but still potentially accessible to all.

11.0 Key Priority Projects After consideration of route priorities specific project options have been identified. These serve the purpose of forming stronger linkages between existing paths or widening or con-siderable surface improvements to existing routes. They do not include projects such as formation of gateways, localised minor surface improvements, seating, gates/stiles, signage (on or off road) or interpretation. Strath Path (Greenway Kennels) Widen Strath path to make it accessible to all, addressing narrow section adjacent to Greenway Kennels.

Strath Path (General) Widen Strath path throughout its entire length to improve to Cycle Scotland standards. Consider options of utilising sections of dis-mantled railway as an alternative to existing alignment.

Priestlands to IV19

Newmilns to Strath Path

Strath Path (Greenway Kennels)

Strath Path (General) Galston to Loudoun Kirk

Priestland to IV19 Construction of route connecting end of IV3 at Priestland with di smantled railway path towards Loudoun Hill. The proposals include the crossing of the A71 and the formalisation of existing desire line path up to railway embankment.

Darvel to Loudoun Hill Improvement of existing, predominantly unsurfaced path to Lou-doun Hill – upgrading to Cycle by Design standards.


21

Newmilns to Big Wood

Darvel to Priestland

River Ayr Way to Darvel

Galston– Strath Path to Chris Hoy Cycle Route

Muirkirk to Darvel

River Ayr Way to Darvel Potential creation of a route over moorland connecting the River Ayr Way with Darvel and the Irvine Valley Spine. The route would require the construction of a path from River Ayr Way to forestry track at Meath Hill on the B 743, a distance of 700m. Beyond the forestry track there would be the requirement for an additional 3.1 km of connecting route through open moorland. Narrow upland path construction.

Muirkirk to Darvel Potential creation of a route over moorland between Muirkirk and Darvel. The route follows minor road network towards former steading , Aikencleugh to forestry track to the north east of Burnt Hill. Route would involve burn crossings (in particular Polkebock Burn) and consists of 5km of predominantly open moorland. Circa 75% is presently navigable via rough quad bike tracks. Would re-quire construction of narrow path through moorland, localised drainage etc to become accessible. Potential to be upgraded in long term as off road cycle route.

Newmilns to Big Wood Potential link from River Irvine Spine to Big Wood – viability of pro-ject depends on gaining access to existing bridge at former nursery site.

Galston – Strath Path to Chris Hoy Cycle Route. Consideration of most appropriate route between two sections of route. Potential for off road section, following alignment of former railway to east of Chris Hoy route towards Glebe Road. Short, quiet on road section adjacent to landmark buildings – Barr Castle and St Sophia’s church.

Darvel to Priestland Improvement of path surfaces and associated infrastructure to eastern section of route to ensure compatibility with Cycle by D sign standards.

22

Hurlford to Chris Hoy Route

Hurlford to Chris Hoy Cycle Route to Crookedholm. Consideration of most appropriate route between two sections of route. Potential for substantial section of off road routes following existing paths towards the east of Hurlford.

12.0 Proposals Budget Costing Criteria Budget Costing Budget costs have been provided for the creation of routes to benchmarked standards. This allows a typical rate, per metre, to be calculated for each path type. Whilst some analysis and associ-ated cost adjustment of individual routes and has been under-taken , it is anticipated that there will be variance in costs for indi-vidual sections depending on factors which can not be fully identi-fied until detailed design is complete and full land owner agreement has been achieved. Shared Traffic Free Cycle Pedestrian Route General standard Cycle by Design 2010 • Width minimum 3m • Surface blacktop • 2m Grassed verge. • Seating at 300m centres. • Allowance for land owner accommodation works. • Entrance features • Barrier free • Signage / interpretation Minor Road General standard Cycle by Design 2010 • Allowance for junction improvements. • Signage and interpretation • Seating at 300m centres. Off Road Forestry / Windfarm Tracks General standard Cycle by Design 2010 • Width minimum 3m • Unbound surface – stones no bigger than 10mm. • Drainage improvements. • Barrier free access • Entrance features • Signage / interpretation • Allowance for land owner accomodation works.

Footpaths Close to Settlements General standard Countryside for All • Category – Rural and working landscapes • Width minimum 1.2m • Im min grass verge • Unbound surface – stones no bigger than 10mm. • Free of steps stiles and other impediments to access. • Signage / interpretation • Allowance for land owner accommodation works. Other Paths General standard Countryside for All • Least Restrictive Access Guidelines • Utilised where routes are generally waymarked, through up-

land countryside. • Width – 20% path construction to standards as Footpaths close

to settlements. • Informal rest points at 600m centres • Allowannce for drainage and burn / wetland crossing. • Signage / interpretation • Allowance for land owner accommodation works. Budget Costs. Budget costs for the proposed priority projects have been calcu-lated. These calculations have been based upon the following:

• Visual assessment and survey of proposed routes.

• The categorisation of routes, and sections of routes to specific design standards.

• An assessment of known specific issues within particular loca-tions that may have an impact on likely costs. This has been expressed as a budget percentage uplift.

• The costs have been calculated for budget purposes. To achieve more accurate costs will require detailed design, topog-raphical surveys, services investigation, site investigation, plan-ning applications, ecological surveys etc. Whilst requirements


23

will vary site to site, an allowance has been made for these costs within the budget, based on costs of other similar pro-jects.

• Costs have been calculated to achieve compliance with set standards. These costs relate to current construction industry rates and previous experience of similar projects.

• An allowance has been made for land owner accommodation works. This cost relates to potential works required to secure land owner agreement. These are likely to include issues such as fencing, boundary treatments, screening and potentially land purchase. It is noted that in most instances land is in private ownership and that detailed consultations will be required to achieve improvements.

• Costs are for capital works, and therefore maintenance and management costs are not included.

• Costs are exclusive of VAT. For more minor works, budget costs have been expressed as a range of figures, which relates to the quality of specification and the level of intervention. Budget costs for the identified priority routes, costed to the above criteria have been calculated as follows: It should be noted the following:

• The costs include accommodation work required, but exclude cost of land acquisition, if this is required.

• The costs exclude professional fees and associated surveys. An allowance of circa 15% is advised.

• The costs are based on the date of the report.

Name Description Length Budget Cost

Notes

Strath Path Greenways Kennels

Form new path around kennels to Cycle by Design Stan-dards

0.2 km £59,500 Length of route de-pendent on detailed consultation

Strath Path - General

Fully upgrade path to Cycle by Design Standards

2 km £595,000 Includes upgrade of farm track ( 0.9km) which could be un-dertaken as a sec-ond phase.

Newmilns Brown Road to Strath Path)

Form new path to Cycle by Design Stan-dards along line of former rail-way.

1.3km £386,750 Options to reduce length to east. Fur-ther option to extend further west with sub-sequent reduction in works associated with Strath path.

Galston to Loudoun Kirk

Fully upgrade path to Cycle by Design Standards

1.4 km £416,500 Improvement of river-side path and up-grade of track at Lou-doun Kirk (0.6 km) could be undertaken as a second phase.

Priestland to IV 19

Form path to IV 19 to Cycle by Design Stan-dards.

0.5 km £127,500 Requires considera-tion of crossing of A71 and significant level changes to meet former railway line. 0.2km of route utilises existing foot-way.

Darvel to Loudoun Hill

Upgrade unsur-faced path along length of former railway line to Cycle by Design Stan-dards. Create link to Loudoun Hill Car Park

4.5 km £1,338,750 Requires considera-tion of level changes where former railway bridges have been demolished.

24

13.0 Small Scale / Early Action Projects Strands of projects which could be undertaken to improve the qual-ity of the network include the following : Localised widening of existing surfaced paths or maintenance to prevent vegetation encroachment and ensuring minimum footpath width of 1.2m / general footpath repairs IV4 IV6 AD20 AD23 AD27 Note IV3 (Strath path) would also benefit from small scale projects – but is considered to be aspirational to a shared surface route. Repair or upgrading of dilapidated small bridges, boardwalks, steps and handrails – to improve accessibility and standard of paths. IV 4 AD20 Removal or replacement of barriers, stiles etc to improve accessi-bility of surfaced route. IV1 AD 23 AD27


Notes

Newmilns to Big Wood

Form a connec-tion to Big Wood, utilising a combination of upgrading exist-ing paths, and new section of path following field bound-ary.To Country-side for All stan-dards.

0.8 km £38,250 Detailed land owner consultation re-quired. 0.4 km re-quires new route through field and could be under-taken as first phase.

Darvel to Priestland

Form a connec-tion to Priest-land from Dar-vel, to Cycle by Design stan-dards by up-grading unsur-faced farm track.

0.5 km £148,750 Detailed land owner consultation re-quired.

Muirkirk to Darvel

Forms connec-tion between Muirkirk and Darvel through the creation of partially formed and waymarked path, connecting minor roads to Forestry and Farm tracks.

5.5 km path through open moor-land, 6.5 km forestry farm track.

£182,750 Route through moorland likely to require 3 burn crossings, depend-ing on final align-ment. Cycle option has not been costed.

River Ayr Way to Dar-vel

Forms connec-tion between River Ayr Way and Darvel through the creation of par-tially formed and waymarked path, connecting minor roads to Forestry and Farm tracks

6.3 km way-marked path through open moor-lands and fields. 5 km for-estry / farm track.

£173,400 Route requires new path to be formed from River Ayr Way and moorland sec-tion. Final align-ment and lengthde-pendent on detailed consultation. Cycle option has not been costed.


Notes

Galston (Strath Path) to Chris Hoy Cycle Route

Forms link to Chris Hoy Cycle route. Partially off road, to Cy-cle by Design Standards.

0.8km off-road. ).7 km on road.

£221,000 Section on residen-tial roads.

Chris Hoy Cycle Route to Crocked-holm

Forms link to Chris Hoy Cycle route from cen-tre of Hurlford. Partially off road, to Cycle by Design Stan-dards.

0.5 km off road upgrad-ing ex-isting paths. 0.6 km on road.

£161,500 Section on residen-

tial roads


25

IV3 note, IV4 kissing Gate, Localised improvements to drainage: AD23 AD20 IV6 Scrub removal to re-establish existing signed route. IV19 IV11 IV6 AD27 Environmental improvements to improve visual quality of en-trances: IV1 IV3 – Strath (at pitch) IV6 IV18 IV19 AD20 AD23 Environmental Improvements to improve corridor or provide visual screening. IV 3 Seating / Rest Areas – at maximum 300m spacing All routes. Concentration on established off road routes, IV1, IV3, IV4, IV6, IV11. IV17, IV18,IV19, AD20, AD23,AD27 Analysis of survey data gathered has identified key priority projects which may be of particular benefit in creating a more cohesive net-work of routes which would reflect the needs and aspirations of us-ers. The concentration of project work within these key priority pro-jects s likely to involve the following: • Widening / upgrading of routes and associated corridor to cre-

ate a more consistence character. • Creation of new links and routes where none exist at present. • Associated improvement works, signage and interpretation.

Description Budget Cost Range Paths – (Priority for action)

Localised repairs to paths and maintenance to prevent vegeta-tion encroachment

£30 - 50k IV 4, IV 5, AD 20, AD 23, AD 27

Repair / replacement dilapi-dated small bridges, board-walks, steps and handrails

£30 – 50 k IV 4, AD 20

Removal or replacement of barriers – to enhance accessi-bility.

£20 – 30K IV 1, AD 23, AD 27

Whilst these projects may provide the greatest long-term benefit to the River Irvine Network the issues associated with them in general terms include the following: • Path creation / upgrading of routes would require detailed land-

owner consultation for both construction and for any applicable management agreements.

• Signage and interpretation would generally benefit from a net-work wide approach. It may not therefore be appropriate to undertake comprehensive changes to signage and interpreta-tion to the network until there is a degree of certainty with re-gards to any long-term potential changes to the network that may be achieved by improving surfacing and connections.

It is therefore suggested that there are several strands of potential project work that could be developed in the short-term that would be particularly beneficial in improving both the quality and accessi-bility of the project but are less likely to require a detailed consulta-tion or design development as some of the identified key priority projects Budget costs for Small Scale / Early Action Projects have been cal-

culated as follows:

It should be noted the following:

• The costs exclude professional fees and associated surveys. An allowance of circa 15% is advised.

• The costs are based on the date of the report.

26

Description Budget Cost Range

Create small car park adjacent to Whitelee Windfarm

£30 - 50k

Provide Gateways at 9 loca-tions. Gateways to include sign-age boards, environmental im-provements associated with parking or entrance areas, seating.

£90 – 180 k

Provide Interpretation through-out all 28 routes within network.

£150 – 300 k

Provide signage to entire net-work

£100 – 200k

Budget Costs for Gateways and Interpretation / Signing throughout

the network are as follows:

It should be noted the following: • The costs exclude professional fees and associated surveys.

An allowance of circa 15% is advised. • The costs are based on the date of the report.

14.0 Consultations In the formation of the report, various consultations have taken place. These include the following:

• Detailed discussions with the project steering group – including Irvine Valley Regeneration Partnership and East Ayrshire Council

• Contact with key stakeholders

• Informal consultations with several landowners and tenants un-dertaken as part of site survey work.

Informal consultations with existing users of the network under-taken during site survey work. These consultations have informed the preparation of this report. It is recognised that this document will now provide a strategy which can be tested for more detailed public consultation, and provides the information required to undertake a more specific landowner

consultation which will be appropriate once developing specific ele-ments of the network. Informal consultation with members of the public has enabled a general understanding of use of the network. However, as this was undertaken, whilst undertaking more general survey work, then it is not applicable to try and over extrapolate information gathered in this manner. Nonetheless it provides a useful snapshot of how the network is used and the issues associated with it that was noted by users. Some of the information gathered included the following:

• All users of paths interviewed during survey work within the Ir-vine Valley Network were local to the Valley settlements. In most instances people had either walked or cycled directly from their homes. The main exceptions to these were Big Wood (IV6) and Armsheugh Woodland (AD20) where there are some parking facilities.

• Some walkers were utilising the northern sections of routes to-wards windfarms (IV 18, IV9) in these instances. These users accessed these areas by car, though there is very limited op-portunity for parking within the minor road network. Those inter-viewed were relatively local to the routes, and had travelled less than 15 km.

• There appeared to be a concentration of activity within Darvel and towards Galston, with the popular routes including Brown’s Road, Strath Path (Both IV3) and Lanfine Estate (IV 17)

• Majority of users were walkers, (often dog walkers) though cy-clists were also interviewed on (IV 1) Chris Hoy and tarred sec-tions of IV3. The cyclist utilising IV 1 was undertaking a time trial – suggesting that the route was relatively quiet.

• There was a general consensus that further improvements to the network would lead to increased use.

Landowner and tenant consultation gave an initial insight into some of the perceived issues relating to the network and also gave the opportunity to gain an understanding of which landowners were more enthusiastic about embracing potential improvements in ac-cess within their section of the network. These consultations also gave a further indication of use of their portion of the network. Amongst the information gathered was the following;


27

28

One of the key assets of The Irvine Valley is the particularly rich and diverse history including: • Battlefield at Loudoun Hill – Association with Wallace and

Bruce • Association with Alexander Fleming • Industrial Archaeology related with textile industry and sup-

porting infrastructure • Castles and Churches – Loudoun Castle, Cessnock Castle,

Loudoun Kirk, Barr Castle, Newmilns Keep, Newmilns Church, Old Town House

• Newmilns. • Association with Mary Queen of Scots • Association with Covenanters • Association with Robert Burns • Designed landscapes of Lanfine and Loudoun Castle • Long Cairn – longest burial chamber in Scotland. It should be noted that some of the routes within the project follow old lines of communication – such as the The Weavers Trail from Darvel to Eaglesham. To the north towards Whitelee Windfarm and Visitor Centre. Expansion of the network towards the south would add as key assets for signage and interpretation: • Catrine Voes – as a scheduled ancient monument (with pro-

posed visitor centre ) • The River Ayr Way • Muirkirk (SPA) Commentary Within the network there are a number of issues relating to sign-age and interpretation. These include: • Green Irvine Valley Paths Network (Scottish Rights of Way

Society) signs are informative, generally well located and fit well into the landscape. In some instances individual signs could benefit from refurbishment.

• Blue Irvine Valley Paths signage, mainly associated with signs on or from minor roads . Less information associated with sign – for example no distance. In some instances signage confus-ing and replicates Green Signage.

• Waymarkers are generally located in reasonable locations and are relatively clear. Through wear and tear some would require refurbishment or replacement.

Signage and Interpretation – Proposed: The proposals if accepted would widen the network of routes to both the north and south, and create routes with a more clearly de-fined purpose. It is understood that this may take some time to achieve. It is beyond the scope of the project to provide a full inter-pretation and signage strategy. However it is suggested that the following principles be considered: Green Fingerpost Signage Green rights of way signage appears to work well and has a de-fined purpose. These are commonly understood, durable and readily maintainable. It is suggested that green finger post signs should be utilised to define routes which are traffic free or virtually traffic free and are intended for pedestrian use. Blue Fingerpost Signage Blue signage, which should conform to the current edition of TSRGD, should be utilised for shared pedestrian and cycle use for both traffic free routes and routes within the minor road network. This signage should include names of destinations and distances. Milestones It is suggested that new milestones would be an appropriate means of providing interest and interpretation . These would be fully or predominantly within the minor road network. Appropriate locations for milestones would be : Weavers Trail from Darvel to Eaglesham. And from Galston to Catrine Voes. Network Entrance boards / Gateways. The following locations are identified where visitors may arrive at the network and may be appropriate for gateway and route infor-mation boards. In several instances these would be in similar loca-tions to existing map boards. • Loudoun Hill Car Park • Newmilns Car Park – East Strand • Darvel -Hastings Square • Galston – Wallace Street Car Park

• Some landowners were particularly positive about access im-provements. This included Craufurdland Estate – sections of IV 10 and AD 22.

• It was understood that former railway line and had been sold off in portions. (AD 25, AD 26).This would therefore mean that vari-ous land owner agreements would be required to improve ac-cess along entire length.

• Some land owners noted that whilst signage had been permit-ted across their land, that maintenance remained the responsi-bility of the land owners.

• There appeared to be recognition that the path adjacent to Greenway Kennels was not satisfactory and that potential re-alignment could be explored.

• Some routes where land owners or tenants were able to con-firm use by walkers included IV 19 and IV 18.

15.0 Signage & Interpretation Signage and Interpretation – Existing: The network over the years appears to have had several signing interventions, concentrated within the Irvine Valley including: • Irvine Valley Paths Network / Scottish Rights of Way Society

Green Signs • Blue pedestrian signs • Blue cycle signs (Chris Hoy Route) • Waymarkers (Both Irvine Valley and others) • Map board in various locations illustrating the Irvine Valley

Route. • Others - various • There is relatively little obvious physical interpretation within

the routes. However this is included within • leaflets / website information such as “Discover East Ayrshire”.

Perhaps the most striking piece of • interpretation is the “Spirit of Scotland” sculpture at Loudoun

Hill. Traditionally many of the Roads within • Ayrshire have milestones.


29

30

Secondary locations where entrance boards and gateways would be appropriate would be the following: • Hurlford _ Main Road at bridge • Weaver’s Trail – Entrance towards Windfarm • Locations outwith the Network, though forming connections to

it that it would be appropriate to consider route information boards would include :

• Dean Castle Country Park • Whitelee Windfarm Visitor Centre Branding - Irvine Valley and beyond Whilst there could be benefits of some rationalisation of signage and associated interpretation , The Irvine Valley has a defined identity with a clear history and strong landscape character of small historic settlements associated with textiles (inc. lace) linked by the river and associated wooded valley, with castles, historic estates and designed landscapes. Through improvements to en-hancing the continuity of the network this could reinforce previous work undertaken. It is therefore considered that whilst the propos-als considered through this report would extend the network of routes and form connections beyond the valley itself, that it re-mains pertinent to try and retain and enhance the public percep-tion and identity of the valley. As such it is suggested that the Ir-vine Valley logo be either retained in its existing form or subtly re-vised, and that that logo is utilised within signage and physical, on site interpretation as well as any associated publicity material.

16.0 Funding Strategies Delivery and Implementation Delivering the Irvine Valley Path Network Strategy is what will make a difference to the local community and is what makes the investment of resources in producing the Strategy worthwhile. This concluding section emphasises the key role of delivering the Network Strategy, translating broad aims, objectives and proposals into a resourced set of actions. Wide buy-in to the Strategy and agreeing the priority actions is the start of an important programme of delivery.

The next stage of the feasibility exercise is to source and ap-ply for funding to deliver the key aspects of the Strategy. Promoting the Strategy It is important that the multi-agency partnership – Irvine Valley Re-generation Partnership (IVRP) – that instigated this feasibility as-sessment now endorses the Strategy and continues to work closely with the local community, landowners and other agencies, notably funders, to deliver the strategic aspirations. The following mechanisms should be adopted by the IVRP to en-sure delivery of outputs on the ground: • Formalise the ‘Steering Group’ as a ‘Delivery Group’ which can

adopt the Strategy as the ‘blueprint’ for the Irvine Valley Path Network and its role in continuing the regeneration of the Irvine Valley.

• Providing direct management and leading the fundraising stage of the Strategy.

• Providing promotion, co-ordination and management of a con-sultation event that helps the local community learn about the plan and how they can become involved in its delivery.

• Providing a contact point and a ‘listening ear’ in all matters con-nected with the projects which make up the strategic vision.

An important element of the Strategy is to encourage a sense of local ownership through provision of a capacity-building approach, which develops the independence, skills and abilities of the various groups, including landowners, to take forward ideas through to frui-tion and eventually to attain partial or full independence as rele-vant. A key component of raising local awareness and creating a sense of ownership requires a demonstration of how the promotion of an enhanced network can realise wider community, economic, envi-ronmental, health and social benefits for the local community. It is recommended that a ‘launch’ event is organised to raise awareness of the Strategy and to gain views on its delivery and implementation.

Delivering the Strategy The Steering Group which oversaw the feasibility of the Path Net-work Strategy should now evolve into a Delivery Group. A review of the Strategy and emerging themes should be undertaken by the Steering/Delivery Group to ascertain which organisations, agencies and community representatives need to be involved in order to move to the funding phase. The Irvine Valley Regeneration Partnership is well positioned to lead the delivery phase, and has the necessary structures, track record and resources to lead the next stage of development. The IVRP should retain its overarching and strategic management role. As a company limited by guarantee the IVRP is an appropriate body to draw down grants from grant-making trusts as well as gen-erate income from fundraising activities. Securing formal charitable status would also assist the IVRP draw down from a wider pull of funds and improve the chances of funding success. Landowners play a vital role in the delivery of the Strategy and its constituent parts. They should be consulted as funding applications are developed. Securing their buy-in is critical in progressing the delivery phase of the Strategy. Voluntary sector involvement and not-for-profit sectors are a vital component in developing open space resources both in terms of in-kind support but also through their ability to attract investment, funding and training from a wider financial pool and therefore should be encouraged to play an active role on any new delivery body. Due to the current economic climate many funders are seek-ing to support training and employment outcomes, it is therefore recommended that the Strategy seeks to maximise training and education outcomes whilst delivering the physical projects. This should be carried out in partnership with other employability schemes in the area. The local community can provide an important resource by contrib-uting additional labour, providing public stewardship and assisting the achievement of wider community benefit and outreach. There-fore, a community event should be planned to present the Strategy and obtain feedback, buy-in and ultimately ownership. This will


31

32

help strengthen the funding case through presenting genuine com-munity involvement and ownership. A significant proportion of the Strategy will be dependent on secur-ing external support, and the next stage of the study is to target key funding allocations. An element of the actions can be delivered through refocusing local authority resources for management and maintenance, and making efficiency savings through improving management practices. This investment can be seen as match funding for the main fundraising activity. Support for delivering the outcomes of the Strategy should be pro-vided by East Ayrshire Council / Community Planning Partnership. Embedding the study outcomes in relevant policies and plans will assist in mainstreaming certain activities and core outcomes. Again, this will increase the chances of funding success by demon-strating the tight policy fit and avoidance of overlap. Agreeing the key funding targets and their associated require-ments will inform the partnerships and format of the funding applications. It is recommended that a shortlist of around five key funding opportunities is agreed in order that strong appli-cations are made within the 2012/13 financial year. Resources for Delivery The proposed projects which make up the Path Network Strategy have been prioritised to present a detailed assessment of the re-sources needed against those available to deliver the Strategy. It is useful that budget cost estimates of delivering the Plan’s objec-tives have been completed as this acts as the first stage in the funding element of the feasibility assessment. In light of public sector budget constraints the projects in this report have been prioritised and streamlined in order to present a deliver-able set of actions in the next phase of the study. Prioritised pro-jects have been selected according to (1) their ability to realise the overarching Strategy (2) their ability to attract external funding (3) those which have support from mainstream council capital expendi-ture and (4) projects which can be delivered in the short term or at lower costs, or both.

Staff time and skills are often underestimated. Sufficient human resource must be available or projects will run the risk of not being delivered on time or to the quality required. There will be a continu-ing role for the Steering Group / Delivery Group to lead the fund-raising phase. All applications will have to be signed off by the IVRP and it is therefore important that the partnership is actively engaged throughout the next stage of the study. Securing support for staff time to lead the delivery and implementation phase is criti-cal. This may be possible through local authority resources or through external funding, or both. There are a range of funding sources available to deliver the Irvine Valley Path Network Strategy, these include: • Traditional local authority funding – funded from the general

revenue budget and/or departmental budgets. This may in-clude the realignment of existing budgets to support new pro-posals to realise the vision. It is known that a number of the prioritised projects have been allocated mainstream support, this support should be identified as /match’ funding.

• Multi-agency public sector funding – e.g. delivery of cross-cutting targets may be eligible for funding from a range of gov-ernment departments and agencies and these may cover eco-nomic, environmental, health, regeneration and/or tourism out-comes. This is the main type of funding to deliver the Strategy, and includes key funding programmes including EU, SRDP, Lottery and Grant making Trusts.

• Planning and development opportunities – prior to the reces-sion these were a popular delivery route and included planning conditions, developer contributions and Section 75 agree-ments to fund environmental enhancements, notably windfall payments from renewable proposals in the area.

• In kind support – using local people to deliver local projects thereby engendering genuine ownership and encouraging fu-ture involvement, stewardship and support.

A summary of each funding type is presented below. Local Authority Resources The management and maintenance of existing paths is largely funded by East Ayrshire Council. As owners of key assets East Ayrshire Council play a vital lead role in facilitating the delivery

components of the action plan. East Ayrshire Council are legally responsible for aspects of open space areas in the Irvine Valley and are sufficiently resourced and experienced to lead on key pro-jects. It is known that there are capital allocations for path and road enhancement in the Irvine Valley. These projects should be prioritised as they can be presented as match funding com-mitments in securing external support. Management and maintenance must also continue to be the focus of lead part-ners, and ongoing maintenance of the new and enhanced paths should also be demonstrated as a key contribution by the local authority. Multi-agency Public Sector Funding The key component in delivering the Path Network Strategy is to develop opportunities for the joint funding of initiatives with other partner organisations and funding bodies. This is likely to be the key avenue for funding and financing the majority of projects identi-fied in the Strategy. There is a requirement for the Path Network Strategy to be formally recognised as the baseline of a detailed framework for supporting funding applications, providing the evidence that the project is a priority and is supported by local people. Funding partners will be more willing and able to fund individual elements of the Strategy if they are aware of the wider strategic benefits. The ability to dem-onstrate that the Network Strategy has been developed for and by the community and is viewed as the ‘blueprint’ will give funding bodies confidence that their funds are appropriately targeted to achieve a strategic goal. There is a wide range of national and local sources of funding or volunteer support available to help deliver the action plan. The funding can be for a range of activities and themes, including themes beyond the development of path development, i.e. helping to achieve health, education and community development objec-tives. In terms of the main path funding opportunities in the current financial year, the IVRP should consider the following as the main funding targets:


33

Multi Criterion Matrix

Project Economic / Regen-eration Impact

Environmental Impact Community Im-pact

Cost / ‘Fundability’ Timescale Existing Known Support

Technical Com-plexity

Benefits Dependent on other Improvements

TOTAL

High – 10

Medium – 5

Low – 0

High – 10

Medium – 5

Low - 0

High – 10

Medium – 5

Low - 0

Low – 10

Medium – 5

High – 0

Short – 10

Medium - 5

Long – 0

High – 10

Medium– 5

Low – 0

Low – 10

Medium – 5

High – 0

Low – 10

Medium – 5

High – 0

Max – 80

Strath Path Greenways Kennels H M H M M H L L 65

Strath Path – General H H H H L H L M 55

Newmilns Brown Road to Strath H H H M M H H M 55

Galston to Loudoun Kirk H H M M M H L L 65

Priestland to IV19 M M M L S L M H 40

Darvel to Loudoun Hill H H H H L H M M 50

Newmilns to Big Wood L M M L S H M L 55

Darvel to Priestland M L M L S L L H 40

Muirkirk to Darvel M H M L S H M L 65

River Ayr Way to Darvel M H L M M M M L 45

Galston to Chris Hoy Cycle Route L M M M M H L M 45

Chris Hoy Cycle Route to Crockedholm L L M M M M L M 35

Small Scale / Early Action Projects M M H L S H L L 70

Gateways and Interpretation H H M M M H L H 55

34

• Big Lottery Fund: Investing in Communities and Commu-nity Spaces Scotland

• Central Scotland Green Network: CSGN Development Fund

• Scottish Government: Climate Challenge Fund

• Scottish Rural Development Programme: Area Access Management

• SUSTRANS: Community Link Programme In addition to the above targets there a range of other Corpo-rate and Charitable Trusts which have existing programmes which should be approached as part of the fundraising stage. Planning and Development Planning agreements can fund the provision of paths within or ad-jacent to new residential and commercial developments. A com-mon delivery concept employed by local authorities, planning agreements or developer contributions (Section 75 Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act) relate mainly to the funding of certain areas or development sites. Although there may be a low level of developer interest at the mo-ment, it should be recognised that there is a role for Section 75 agreements in that they can secure both capital and revenue fund-ing to provide for the future maintenance of path projects. Importantly, the planning process can ensure there is formal recog-nition for public and private developers to contribute to strategic path projects. The Local Development Plan can help provide the framework for negotiating developer contributions to assist future funding and delivery of the Irvine Valley Path Network Strategy. The Delivery Group should explore potential of this for the Ir-vine Valley. The final Strategy should be ratified as a key pol-icy document and be seen as Supplementary Planning Guid-ance (SPG) and an important aspect of the Local Development Plan.

Support in Kind Involving the community in the design, implementation, monitoring and operating phases of delivering the Strategy can bring wider benefits, but should not be viewed as a cheap option. Artwork, logo design, and naming competitions/ projects with chil-dren and young people are all examples of good ways to stimulate creative thinking and generate interest and ownership. Art work-shops engage people in designing and constructing artworks to improve local environments. Community arts projects are particularly useful with young people to enable them to express their creativity, build confidence, develop skills, and cultivate a sense of identity and community pride. Contacting local businesses to obtain in-kind support, sponsorship or gift aid is an area which should also be built into the wider fund-ing strategy. Similarly, local fundraising events and activities is a potential source for assisting the delivery of community led pro-jects. Income generation must also be considered, this could include fundraising appeals, fees and charges and cost recovery measures such as advertising and sponsorship. Attracting external funding support is the next phase of the development. All applications must tie back to the overarching Strategy. The Strategy has been formed on a range of identi-fied projects, these have been further refined to present a streamlined and thematic approach which strengthens the rai-son d’être for the Irvine Valley Path Network Strategy. These are identified in the next section. Prioritising Projects & Establishing Key Themes Increasing scarce resources, linked to public sector budget con-straints and limited private finance as well as increasing level of competition, suggests there is a requirement to streamline the key projects. Streamlining the key projects enables the partners to al-locate investment in projects which offer the best rate of return.

To assist in this process the study team has developed a multi-criterion matrix to assist in the prioritisation of a programme which can support economic, social and environmental objectives. The return on investment in path projects is based on a range of criteria. The matrix (Figure 1) presents relative scoring across pro-jects according to the following criteria:

• Economic and regeneration impact, in terms of the link to train-ing, education and employment opportunities as well as sup-port for business formation/growth opportunities and real es-tate opportunities

• Environmental impact associated with the remediation of dere-lict and redundant land as well as the enhancement of existing open space

• Community impact, where communities are encouraged to support the development and usage of the path network

• Costs, linked to the ‘fundability’ of the project which is a key determinant if the project is capable of being delivered and sustained, these are based on the estimated budget costings.

• Timescale, the expected timing of the project in terms of its scale and scope.

• Existing known support, in terms of the policy and existing re-source support from key public partners which can be a key factor in ensuring a project becomes reality.

• Technical complexity which aims to consider how difficult it may be to deliver each path, in terms of likely negotiations with land owners, boundaries to cross, slopes to encounter etc.

• Benefits dependent on other improvements enables an as-sessment of the relationships between each project and their sequencing. There is little point in developing some areas of the network until good connecting routes are formed.

The matrix is presented to the left.


35

36

The multi criterion assessment provides a basis for the further pri-oritisation of the emerging proposals. This assessment highlights that a number of key projects should be targeted for investment in the short terms, including small scale and early action projects (70pts), Strath Path Greenways (65pts), Galston to Loudoun Kirk (65pts) and Muirkirk to Darvel (65pts) routes. Each project presents a range of economic, environmental and so-cial benefits. Collectively, the development of prioritised projects presents an opportunity to further the regeneration of the Irvine Valley. The scoring of projects has enabled the consultant team and client group to formulate key themes for the delivery phase of the Strategy, these have been set as follows:

- North/South – making connections - East/West – unlocking local regeneration - Small scale – fostering community capacity and ownership

Table on the key themes – such as features, lengths, costs, times, key funds/programmes The finalised Strategy and action plan must be endorsed by the IVRP, in doing so enabling a detailed fundraising plan to be estab-lished and acted upon. The key funding targets include East Ayr-shire Council, Big Lottery Fund, CSGN, Scottish Government, SRDP and SUSTRANs. Each key funder is expected to have new funding rounds in 2012/13. There are a range of other Charitable Trusts and one-off programmes which should also be targeted part of the fundraising stage.

17.0 Potential Funding Sources The project will seek to optimise the current source of funding for this sort of work as well as existing resources. There are a number of external funding opportunities, a number of which are summa-rised below. Each individual project requires a funding raising strategy and the following sources provide a starting point for external funding sup-port. Other methods of fundraising include approaches to local

businesses, community fundraising and opportunities afforded by commercial developments. Awards for All Awards for All has been operated as a joint scheme by the four lot-tery distributors: Sports Scotland, Scottish Arts Council, Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) and Big Lottery Fund. HLF will no longer play a role in Awards for All but instead will use its existing “Your Heri-tage” and “Young Roots” programmes to ensure the continuation of small community grants within the heritage sector. Barr East Ayrshire Landfill Communities Fund In East Ayrshire, Barr Environment operates a landfill site at Ska-res near Cumnock. The company have chosen to contribute to the Landfill Communities Fund with the purpose of providing funding for projects with environmental benefits which aim to improve the lives of people and communities. Big Lottery Fund – Growing Community Assets As part of Investing in Communities and lunched in July 2010, Growing Community Assets is about communities having more control and influence over their own future through ownership of physical assets. These are usually physical assets, such as land, buildings or equipment, but may also include other types of asset such as energy. Growing Community Assets will focus strongly on tackling need. Projects must aim to achieve all of these four outcomes: • Communities work together to own and develop local assets. • Communities are sustainable and improve their economic, en-

vironmental and social future through the ownership and devel-opment of local assets

• Communities develop skills and knowledge through the owner-ship and development of local assets.

• Communities overcome disadvantage and inequality through the ownership and development of local assets.

Carnegie Trust - Young People’s Grants Programme (UK) The Carnegie UK Trust Young People’s Grants Programme aims to support and promote young peoples participation in decision-making. Its focus is on involvement that is meaningful, benefits all

participants and leads to sustainable developments in young peo-ple’s participation. This programme focuses on developing skills for young people and therefore could only be targeted at the pro-jects which have a direct link to youth work. CashBack for communities fund The CashBack for Communities fund could help you increase youth work events and activities in your local area if it’s an area of multiple deprivation and the young people you work with are be-tween 10 and 19. This fund focuses on young people and therefore could only be targeted towards the projects which have a direct linkage to supporting the development of young people. Climate Challenge Fund The Climate Challenge Fund is all about supporting communities to tackle climate change by reducing their carbon emissions. The Cli-mate Challenge Fund has made available £37.7 million of funding to Scottish communities over the four financial years 2008-12 and is a grant scheme administered within the Sustainable Action Fund. Scottish communities have the opportunity to bid for those funds to make a real difference by reducing their carbon emissions. Applica-tions are open to communities already in receipt of funding, and the fund also encourages new communities to apply. Community Cash Awards Young people aged 14-25 can apply for awards between £250 and £5,000 to help tackle the dangers of drugs, crime and play a posi-tive role in their community. The Royal Bank of Scotland Commu-nity Cash Awards will see £1 million of grants being distributed by youth charity, The Prince’s Trust. The key focus is on youth work projects and therefore an identified local youth project would act as the lead beneficiary although support could be sourced from part-ner agencies. Council Budgets Existing Council Budgets and staff resource for related work. This includes woodland work provide and support by the existing Biodi-versity Woodland and Access staff. Neighbourhood Services have a number of staff working directly or indirectly on woodland, green-space and access projects. There are also a wide range of staff in other sections and departments of the Council who can assist in


37

38

the process of delivering the path network. This includes Area Community Regeneration Officers, Education staff, Active lifestyles Co–ordinators and Arts Development staff. More information on East Ayrshire Council funding and funding support: http://www.east-ayrshire.gov.uk/CouncilAndGovernment/CouncilAndGovernmentGrants/Funding.aspx East Ayrshire Council is responsible for a number of Trusts which were established following former gifts of monies from various indi-viduals for particular purposes. In gifting the monies to the Council, the individuals made specific conditions as to how it should be spent. As such, each Trust has a specific clientele, some of which is restricted. Examples of the Trusts are listed below: Miss Annie Smith Mair Trust This Trust provides assistance to individuals in need, who were born in, or currently reside in, Newmilns. Over 100 people have benefited from the Trust fund in recent years, through the provision of contributions to household essentials, minor home and/or gar-den maintenance works and adaptations, clothing, mobility and personal aids, short breaks and small donations for living ex-penses. Archibald Taylor Trust This Trust finances holidays during convalescence, for up to three weeks in each case, for individuals in need who were born in, or currently reside in, Kilmarnock. Applicants are recommended for this by their GP. The application process is straightforward, dis-creet and confidential and help can be given to complete the appli-cation form and make holiday arrangements. The Trust can also provide for beneficiaries to be accompanied by a companion/carer, and for modest sums of holiday related expenditure. The Miss Bessie C Roxburgh Trust The Miss Bessie C Roxburgh Trust makes modest contributions to projects benefiting residents of Darvel. CSV Action Earth Campaign Although small allocations these are straight forward applications

and could be led by community representatives. Two different grants are available to groups of volunteers who are carrying out local conservation/ environment projects or who are improving bio-diversity in Scotland: CSV Action Earth awards of £50 are also available to help projects to purchase plants, tools and materials and to cover volunteer ex-penses. This covers projects of all sizes and can cover community clear ups, litter picks and a range of other environmental projects. Esmee Fairbairn Foundation biodiversity grants The Esmee Fairbairn Foundation has announced that it has changed the funding criteria for its Biodiversity funding scheme. Grants will be available for projects that develop a greater knowl-edge and understanding of certain habitats and their associated species. The Foundation will consider applications from research organisations, practical conservation charities and voluntary nature societies. Applications can be submitted at any time. Funding to strengthen community capacity Three Scottish voluntary organisations will share £1.1million from the Big Lottery Fund Dynamic, Inclusive Communities Programme for projects aiming to strengthen communities. The Scottish Com-munity Development Centre will work with 50 community groups between 2009 and 2014 through its lottery-backed Achieving Com-munity Empowerment (ACE) programme, while the Scottish Com-munity Foundation will work with a small number of new community groups as part of its Our Community, Our Future programme. Fi-nally, Forward Scotland has been awarded funding of over £400,000 to deliver a community empowerment programme for sustainability. Contact the individual organisations to find out more about their programmes. The role of these programmes is to pro-vide capacity building, business planning and organisational sup-port. Go4 Volunteering The majority of voluntary organisations in Scotland depend on vol-unteers for the services they deliver, the activities they run and the huge range of work they carry out in their local communities. GO4Volunteering helps the management committees and staff of local grassroots organisations to build their skills around recruiting and supporting their volunteers.

Government funds for the third sector The Scottish Government's Third Sector Enterprise Fund was launched in December 2009 and joins the Social Entrepreneurs Fund and the Scottish Investment Fund as a trio of support for the sector. The Third Sector Enterprise Fund offers between £25,000 and £100,000 to organisations that want to build their capacity, ca-pability and financial sustainability. This fund is for capacity build-ing support and is for existing social enterprises and not for new social enterprises, therefore an appropriate lead applicant would require to identified. Links Foundation The Links Foundation funds a wide range of community-based pro-jects in the UK. All applications must show the positive impact a project could have on a community. There is no set amount, but average awards are around £20,000. Funding can be for new or existing projects and can help meet capital and revenue costs. Ap-plications are considered 3 times per year. Mark Leonard Trust Not-for-profit organisations and organisations with a charitable pur-pose can apply for funding from this trust which focuses on envi-ronmental education in the UK. In particular the Trust seeks to support projects that focus on finding practical ways of involving children and young adults. Applications to the Trust can be submit-ted at any time and would require the role of a local school to de-velop an area for educational purposes. Paths for All PFA funds projects aim to improve Scotland's health through the delivery of local health walk projects. PFA invests in projects which build local capacity, delivering a volunteer led solution to improving physical activity levels. PFA plays a crucial role in learning from projects all over Scotland and sharing these experiences in order to improve practice. The PFA Grant Fund has been made possible through funding from the Scottish Government. £200,000 is avail-able in 2011/12. Grant schemes currently include Community Health Walks, Walk at Work and Path Promotion.


39

40

Playground Partnerships £250 - £10,000 awarded to help schools to improve their school grounds and therefore could be targeted if a local school was to be interested. Public Art Fund The Public Art Fund, operated by the Scottish Arts Council, runs an open application scheme until 31 January 2009, with no deadlines. The scope of public art projects supported has been broadened to include temporary, permanent, cross-artform and multidisciplinary work. The Public Art Fund is aimed at attracting original proposals – from a broad range of organisations – to produce exciting and innovative public art across Scotland. Registered Social Landlords (funding application / in kind) As the regeneration partners, RSLs are likely to have access to resource, expertise and budget to allocate to key identified pro-jects. To maximise public sector leverage it is recommended that certain projects are progressed in partnership with RSLs, notably those located in or adjacent to housing areas. Achieving funding support from RSLS and statutory public agencies will increase the opportunities from drawing down sources from wider/ national pro-grammes and funding bodies. Ryklow Charitable Trust The Ryklow Trust supports organisations and individuals involved in activities that include environment and conservation. The Con-servation priority is for activities that positively impact on natural species, landscapes and environmental resources, i.e., could be a wildlife garden possible involve local school / afterschool club /nurseries Scottish Community Foundation The Scottish Community Foundation general grants programme makes grants to a broad cross section of constituted groups in-volved in social welfare and community development activities. Community Grants are one off sums of up to £5,000. The majority of the funding is directed at locally based work carried out, and of-ten initiated by, members of that local community. Therefore only applications from smaller organisations that have an income of less

than £250,000 per annum are considered. Groups can apply for either a Small Grant (up to £1,000) or a Main Grant (up to £5,000) from this programme. Express Grants are available to small community groups looking for funding of up to £2,000. The scheme has a straightforward ap-plication process, and a short turnaround time. Scottish Natural Heritage Grant Schemes Scottish Natural Heritage continues to be able to offer grant sup-port for a wide range of urban and rural projects that deliver out-comes linked to the SNH Corporate Strategy. If you are seeking a grant of less than £10,000, you can apply at any time. Applications for grants of £10,000 or more are assessed in two competitive funding rounds each year. Scottish Rural Development Programme 2007-2013 The SRDP is a programme of economic, environmental and social measures, worth some £1.5 billion, designed to develop rural Scot-land from 2007 to 2013. Individuals and groups may seek support to help deliver the Government's strategic objectives in rural Scot-land. The key theme for path development is Area Access Management, this option aims to encourage the improvement of access opportu-nities and the upkeep of access areas on land and inland water, through the creation and upgrading of paths and routes, provision of facilities and amenities, land management measures, and moni-toring of access use. SRDP also encompasses LEADER funding. LEADER is a bottom - up method of delivering support for rural development through im-plementing local development strategies. Support, awarded by Lo-cal Action Groups (LAGs), is aimed at local projects with a wide community benefit that show an element of originality or experi-mentation where possible, and complement other activities within the local development strategy. The "Woodlands In and Around Towns" and "Forestry for People" Challenge Funds are additional SRDP sources and operate across Scotland and aim to improve the condition of existing woodlands for the benefit of local people (see below).

Support for Woodland Projects Funding for local woodland projects is available through the Local Forestry Challenge Funds. Two funds are available: Woods In and Around Towns (WIAT), and Forestry for People. The WIAT Chal-lenge Fund aims to bring urban woodland into sustainable man-agement and improve recreation facilitates by carrying out an agreed programme of work. The Forestry for People Challenge Fund covers all Scotland, including the WIAT areas. It supports local involvement in woodland projects for health, learning and strengthening communities and therefore is directly associated with the community woodland proposals. Voluntary Action Fund The Voluntary Action Fund (VAF) is an independent grant-making trust, which invests in voluntary and community based organisa-tions across Scotland. The funding and support provided enables organisations to undertake projects that challenge inequalities and overcome barriers to being involved in community life. VAF re-ceives funding from the Scottish Government to support voluntary and community organisations in taking forward social change. The grant programmes are linked by the common threads of social in-clusion and support for organisations to become stronger. Each grant programme has its individual criteria and priorities as well as a direct link to government policy. This programme is targeted at the most excluded members and communities of society and there-fore should focus on groups which are amongst those hardest reach groups and therefore may be more linked to social rather than physical outcomes.


41

42

18.0 Conclusions Over a considerable period of time a path network has become es-tablished within the Irvine Valley. This has been developed with the support of the Irvine Valley Regeneration Partnership and East Ayrshire Council. Many of these routes are now Core Paths, as identified by East Ayrshire Council. The development of these routes has included: • Path construction • Cycleway construction • Environmental works and associated management. • The production of themed and linked routes, with associated

marketing. • Site signage. Whilst these interventions have had a positive impact, it was con-sidered that there may be opportunities to improve the network fur-ther with the aims of: • Encouraging access into the countryside associated with the

Irvine Valley • Improving access opportunities for those living within the Irvine

Valley and associated communities. • Improving the quality of visitor experience to promote use and

therefore Economic Regeneration within the Valley. • Consider how the Valley could be better connected to other

concentrations of public access and networks within the wider region such as the River Ayr Way and Whitelee Windfarm.

Following the site survey of in excess of 200 km of routes identified by the Client, together with the scoping out of approximately a fur-ther 30km of routes, a desk study and an initial consultation exer-cise a number of conclusions regarding the network were identi-fied. These included the following: • The Irvine Valley includes areas of high landscape quality

which would be likely to attract visitors. • There is considerable heritage interest within the valley, and

associated with the valley towns of Hurlford, Galston, New-milns and Darvel which are likely to be attractive to visitors.

• Of the attractions within the study area, it is arguable that Lou-doun Hill provides one of the clearest “destinations.”

• The recent access developments at Whitelee Windfarm to the north and River Ayr Way to the south have increased visitor numbers (walkers and cyclists) to areas within close proximity of the valley.

• The towns within the valley are spaced between 2.5 and 5 km apart from each other, making linkages viable and with the po-tential to be well used by both residents and visitors.

• The present network is perhaps over dependent on the existing minor road network, and includes” missing links”. Improving the quality of the routes is likely to improve marketability and use, particularly for visitors.

From this analysis a series of proposals have been identified, these include the following. • Improvements to The Irvine Valley corridor. This is regarded as

key to unlocking the potential of the network. For the purposes of this report, this proposed route has been described as the River Irvine Valley / Spine.

• The proposals have grouped other elements of the network into different themed routes, with these being decided by con-sideration of a combination of geographic areas, route charac-teristics and potential user groups. The report has then at-tempted to prioritise these themed routes.

• A series of key priority improvements to the network have been proposed and costed. This relate to addressing “missing links” and improving the quality of inconsistent sections of key ele-ments of the network. Costs are budget costs only.

• A series of more minor proposals have been included which addresses issues such as seating, entrance improvements and localised vegetation clearance.

• A initial signage and interpretation strategy has been consid-ered. This will require further development as the network itself develops over time.

From the above, it can be viewed that The Irvine Valley has consid-erable potential to be developed over time to provide excellent ac-cess opportunities for both residents and visitors, thus enhancing the quality of life for all who utilise the routes within the Valley and surrounding area.

Documents

Irvine Valley Report