Population and Human Health

Introduction

This chapter describes the methodology followed and the potential impacts identified for the population and human health assessment of the A75 Springholm and Crocketford Improvements (hereafter referred to as “the proposed scheme”). This assessment has been undertaken with reference to the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) LA 112 - Population and human health (revision 1) (hereafter referred to as “DMRB LA 112”) and other relevant standards and guidance set out within this chapter.

Legislative and Policy Framework

The sub-sections provide a summary of the legislation and policies that are relevant to this population and human health assessment.

Legislation

The following legislation is relevant to this population and human health assessment:

EIA Directive 2014/52/EU

The EIA Directive 2014/52/EU mandates that environmental impact assessments (EIAs) for major projects in the EU must evaluate their significant effects on population and human health. The assessment must be thorough, transparent, and involve public consultation.

After Brexit, Directive 2014/52/EU no longer directly applies in Scotland. However, its provisions have been retained in UK law through the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. This means that the requirements of Directive 2014/52/EU continue to be implemented in Scotland through domestic legislation.

Environmental Protection Act 1990

This Act ensures that environmental pollutants, which can arise from increased traffic and construction activities, are identified and mitigated. By regulating emissions and waste, the Act helps protect public health from adverse effects such as air and water pollution. Additionally, it addresses statutory nuisances, which include noise and vibration, further safeguarding community health.

The Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017

The Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 require that any new road construction project undergoes an environmental impact assessment (EIA) if it significantly affects the environment. This includes evaluating impacts on population and human health, such as air quality, noise, and socio-economic conditions.

National Policy

The following national policy is relevant to this population and human health assessment:

National Planning Framework 4

The National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) sets out a national spatial strategy for Scotland, emphasising sustainable development and the creation of healthier, more inclusive communities. It promotes sustainable mobility by encouraging the development of infrastructure that supports walking, cycling, and public transport. Additionally, it focuses on health risks associated with traffic, noise, and air pollution, while enhancing access to public services and recreational spaces.

Scottish Planning Policy

The current Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) was published in June 2014, it directs the form and content of development plans and is a material consideration in the assessment of planning applications. SPP sets out the core values and vision of planning set against the same four planning outcomes as NPF4 (above). The outcomes are consistent across the NPF4 and SPP and focus on creating a place which is sustainable, low carbon, natural, resilient and more connected. SPP sets out two principal policies; ‘sustainability’ and ‘placemaking’ and then outlines various subject policies.

National Transport Strategy 2

The National Transport Strategy 2 (NTS2) focuses on reducing inequalities, taking climate action, delivering inclusive economic growth, and improving health and wellbeing through active travel and reduced pollution.

Scotland's Cities: Delivering for Scotland

Scotland's Cities: Delivering for Scotland identified connecting cities with strong, reliable and resilient transport infrastructure as a key characteristic to support growth. Published alongside this was the Scottish Government’s Infrastructure Investment Plan, providing an overview of plans for infrastructure investment over the coming decades. To complement the Agenda for Cities, the investment plan contains a commitment to complete the dual carriageway network between all Scotland’s cities by 2030.

Promoting Health in All Policies and Intersectoral Action Capacities

Health in All Policies (HiAP) is an approach by the WHO that integrates health considerations into policymaking across all sectors. It aims to improve population health and equity by systematically considering health impacts and fostering intersectoral collaboration such as with the transport sector.

Scotland's Public Health Priorities

In 2018, Scottish Government and Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (COSLA) developed six Scotland's public health priorities that aim to improve the health of the population. The priorities are intended to be a foundation for the whole system, for public services, third sector, community organisations and others, to work better together to improve Scotland’s health, and to empower people and communities.

A Population Health Framework (PHF) is currently being developed by the Scottish Government and COSLA, in collaboration with key system wide partners, including Public Health Scotland and Scotland’s Directors of Public Health. The PHF is due to be released imminently and could replace the existing public health priorities. The release of the framework will be monitored and once it becomes available will be considered in the population and human health assessment moving forwards.

Scotland's National Performance Framework

Alongside the public health priorities, the Scotland's National Performance Framework underpins the policy approach to health and wellbeing. The Scottish Government has committed to a period of reform of National Performance Framework to support the development and implementation of a more strategic and impactful framework for Scotland highlighted in the National Performance Framework - Open Government action plan 2021 to 2025: commitment 5 – participation milestone progress . In the meantime, the current 11 National Outcomes are still in operation as is the duty (Community Empowerment Act) on public bodies ‘to have regard’ to them.

A Long-Term Vision for Active Travel in Scotland 2030

Transport Scotland’s Vision for Active Travel in Scotland sets out an approach to Scotland’s communities which are shaped around people with walking or cycling as the most popular choice for shorter everyday journeys. Regarding infrastructure, The Transport Scotland vision seeks to ensure: ‘Comprehensive active travel networks are available for walking and cycling… Nationally, walking and cycling networks (comprising the National Cycle Network, Long Distance Routes (LDRs), regional routes, core paths and local cycle networks) link settlements, places of interest and public transport hubs’.

Local Policy and Plans

The following local plans and policies are relevant to this population and human health assessment:

SWestrans Regional Transport Strategy 2023 to 2042

The SWestrans Regional Transport Strategy 2023 to 2042 focuses on improving connectivity and infrastructure to enhance accessibility and mobility across the region, with an emphasis on active travel, public transport, sustainable mobility, and health and wellbeing.

Dumfries and Galloway Active Travel Strategy 2022 to 2032

Dumfries and Galloway Active Travel Strategy 2022 to 2032 aims to promote walking, cycling, and other forms of sustainable transport. It recognises the link between transport and health, aiming to create environments that support physical activity and reduce health risks.

South of Scotland Indicative Regional Spatial Strategy

The South of Scotland Indicative Regional Spatial Strategy (IRSS) outlines development priorities and includes considerations for transport infrastructure and its effects on community wellbeing.

Dumfries and Galloway Local Development Plan 2

The Dumfries and Galloway Local Development Plan 2 (LDP2) outlines how land and property would be used and where development would take place. It includes policies to ensure that new developments are accessible and meet the needs of all residents.

Dumfries and Galloway Council Plan 2023-28

Dumfries and Galloway Council Plan 2023-28 outlines the vision and strategic outcomes for the region, including creating connected, healthy, and sustainable communities. It emphasizes the importance of quality public services and aims to ensure all citizens prosper.

Assessment Methodology

Introduction

This chapter examines potential population and human health issues related to each of the six improvement strategies, recognising that road transport schemes have the potential to significantly impact the local environment and communities in their vicinity. This Environmental Appraisal Report (EAR) will be conducted in accordance with the DMRB LA 112.

DMRB LA 112 is the standard approach used for road infrastructure schemes across the UK and Ireland for the assessment of environmental impacts. The guidance provides a framework for assessing the impact on land use and accessibility and has been used to determine the sensitivity and magnitude of impact for residential, community, commercial, WCH (Walking, Cycling, and Horse-riding), and agricultural receptors, as well as health impacts from construction and operation phases of the proposed scheme.

As is typical at DMRB Stage 1, there is limited design and baseline information available, it is not possible to undertake a full assessment in alignment with DMRB LA 112 (for example using sensitivity and magnitude criteria). Therefore, a qualitative assessment using professional judgement has been undertaken with cognisance of DMRB LA 112. As further information becomes available at DMRB Stage 2 and 3, DMRB LA 112 guidance will be fully utilised.

Data Sources

A desktop review has been undertaken to establish the baseline and inform the assessment of significant effects. This has been informed drawing on the following key information sources:

Receptor Sensitivity – Land Use and Accessibility

When considering the sensitivity of land use receptors, cognisance has been given to the DMRB LA 112 criteria outlined in the sub-section below. However, at this early stage in development of corridors for improvement strategies, sensitivity has not yet been assigned to individual receptors. This will be undertaken at DMRB Stage 2 once route options are defined and a more comprehensive baseline is developed.

When considering the sensitivity criteria for private property and housing, a higher sensitivity value can be allocated where private property or housing provision is integral to the character and function of the community with little/no provision for substitution (for example private property in small rural villages). Additionally, for development land and businesses, a higher sensitivity score can be allocated where a business is the main source of employment for a community with little/no provision for substitution.

It should be noted that while the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 laid the groundwork for disability rights in the UK, the Equality Act 2010 is the most recent and relevant legislation that provides comprehensive protections against disability discrimination.

Receptor Sensitivity Criteria (reproduced from Table 3.11 of DMRB LA 112)

Very High Sensitivity

Private property and housing:

  • Existing housing and land allocated for housing (for example strategic housing sites) covering greater than 5ha and/or greater than 150 houses.

Community land and assets where there is a combination of the following:

  • Complete severance between communities and their land/assets, with little/no accessibility provision.
  • Alternatives are only available outside the local planning authority area.
  • The level of use is very frequent (daily).
  • The land and assets are used by the majority (greater than or equal to 50%) of the community.

Development land and businesses:

  • Existing employment sites (excluding agriculture) and land allocated for employment (for example strategic employment sites) covering greater than 5 hectares.

Agricultural land holdings:

  • Areas of land in which the enterprise is wholly reliant on the spatial relationship of land to key agricultural infrastructure.
  • Access between land and key agricultural infrastructure is required on a frequent basis (daily).

WCH:

  • National trails and routes likely to be used for both commuting and recreation that record frequent (daily) use. Such routes connect communities with employment land uses and other services with a direct and convenient WCH route. Little/no potential for substitution.
  • Routes regularly used by vulnerable travellers such as the elderly, school children and people with disabilities, who could be disproportionately affected by small changes in the baseline due to potentially different needs.
  • Rights of way for WCH crossing roads at grade with greater than 16,000 vehicles per day.
High Sensitivity

Private property and housing:

  • Existing housing and land allocated for housing (for example strategic housing sites) covering greater than 1-5 hectares and/or greater than 30-150 houses.

Community land and assets where there is a combination of the following:

  • There is substantial severance between community and assets, with limited accessibility provision.
  • Alternative facilities are only available in the wider local planning authority area.
  • The level of use is frequent (weekly).
  • The land and assets are used by the majority (greater than or equal to 50%) of the community.

Development land and businesses:

  • Existing employment sites (excluding agriculture) and land allocated for employment (for example strategic employment sites) covering greater than 1 - 5 hectares.

Agricultural land holdings:

  • Areas of land in which the enterprise is dependent on the spatial relationship of land to key agricultural infrastructure.
  • Access between land and key agricultural infrastructure is required on a frequent basis (weekly).

WCH:

  • Regional trails and routes (for example promoted circular walks) likely to be used for recreation and to a lesser extent commuting, which record frequent (daily) use. Limited potential for substitution; and/or
  • Rights of way for WCH crossing roads at grade with greater than 8,000 - 16,000 vehicles per day.
Medium Sensitivity

Private property and housing:

  • Existing housing and land allocated for housing (for example strategic housing sites) covering less than 1 hectares and/or less than 30 houses.

Community land and assets where there is a combination of the following:

  • There is severance between communities and their land/assets but with existing accessibility provision.
  • Limited alternative facilities are available at a local level within adjacent communities.
  • The level of use is reasonably frequent (monthly).
  • The land and assets are used by the majority (greater than or equal to 50%) of the community.

Development land and businesses:

  • Existing employment sites (excluding agriculture) and land allocated for employment (for example strategic employment sites) covering less than 1 hectares.

Agricultural land holdings:

  • Areas of land in which the enterprise is partially dependent on the spatial relationship of land to key agricultural infrastructure; and
  • Access between land and key agricultural infrastructure is required on a reasonably frequent basis (monthly).

WCH:

  • Public rights of way and other routes close to communities which are used for recreational purposes (for example dog walking), but for which alternative routes can be taken. These routes are likely to link to a wider network of routes to provide options for longer, recreational journeys, and/or
  • Rights of way for WCH crossing roads at grade with greater than 4000 – 8000 vehicles per day.
Low Sensitivity

Community land and assets where there is a combination of the following:

  • Limited existing severance between community and assets, with existing full Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) DDA 1995 compliant accessibility provision.
  • Alternative facilities are available at a local level within the wider community.
  • The level of use is infrequent (monthly or less frequent).
  • The land and assets are used by the minority (greater than or equal to 50%) of the community.

Development land and businesses:

  • Proposed development on unallocated sites providing employment with planning permission/in the planning process.

Agricultural land holdings:

  • Areas of land which the enterprise is not dependent on the spatial relationship of land to key agricultural infrastructure.
  • Access between land and key agricultural infrastructure is required on an infrequent basis (monthly or less frequent).

WCH:

  • Routes which have fallen into disuse through past severance, or which are scarcely used because they do not currently offer a meaningful route for either utility or recreational purposes, and/or
  • Rights of way for WCH crossing roads at grade with less than 4000 vehicles per day.
Negligible Sensitivity

Community land and assets where there is a combination of the following:

  • No or limited severance or accessibility issues.
  • Alternative facilities are available within the same community.
  • The level of use is very infrequent (a few occasions yearly).
  • The land and assets are used by the minority (greater than or equal to 50%) of the community.

Agricultural land holdings:

  • Areas of land which are infrequently used on a non-commercial basis.

Magnitude of Impact – Land Use and Accessibility

When considering the magnitude of impact, cognisance has been given to the DMRB LA 112 criteria outlined in the sub-section below . However, at this early stage in the development of improvement strategies and design, the magnitude of impact is not yet known.

In general, direct acquisition of a property would be categorised with a major magnitude. A moderate magnitude would be assigned where there would be changes to access or the acquisition of land, but the overall changes would not compromise the overall ability to use a property. A minor magnitude would be assigned where there would be a minor loss of land.

Magnitude of Impact Criteria (reproduced from Table 3.12 of DMRB LA 112)

Major Impact

Private property and housing, community land and assets, development land and businesses and agricultural land holdings:

  • Loss of resource and/or quality and integrity of resource; severe damage to key characteristics, features or elements. For example, direct acquisition and demolition of buildings and direct development of land to accommodate highway assets; and/or
  • Introduction (adverse) or removal (beneficial) of complete severance with no/full accessibility provision.

WCH:

  • Greater than 500m increase (adverse)/decrease (beneficial) in WCH journey length.
Moderate Impact

Private property and housing, community land and assets, development land and businesses and agricultural land holdings:

  • Partial loss of/damage to key characteristics, features or elements, for example partial removal or substantial amendment to access or acquisition of land compromising viability of property, businesses, community assets or agricultural holdings; and/or
  • Introduction (adverse) or removal (beneficial) of severe severance with limited/moderate accessibility provision.

WCH:

  • Greater than 250m - 500m increase (adverse) or decrease (beneficial) in WCH journey length.
Minor Impact

Private property and housing, community land and assets, development land and businesses and agricultural land holdings:

  • A discernible change in attributes, quality or vulnerability; minor loss of, or alteration to, one (maybe more) key characteristics, features or elements, for example amendment to access or acquisition of land resulting in changes to operating conditions that do not compromise overall viability of property, businesses, community assets or agricultural holdings; and/or
  • Introduction (adverse) or removal (beneficial) of severance with adequate accessibility provision.

WCH:

  • Greater than 50m - 250m increase (adverse) or decrease (beneficial) in WCH journey length.
Negligible Impact

Private property and housing, community land and assets, development land and businesses and agricultural land holdings:

  • Very minor loss or detrimental alteration to one or more characteristics, features or elements. For example acquisition of non-operational land or buildings not directly affecting the viability of property, businesses, community assets or agricultural holdings; and/or
  • Very minor introduction (adverse) or removal (beneficial) of severance with ample accessibility provision.

WCH:

  • Less than 50m increase (adverse) or decrease (beneficial) in WCH journey length.
No Change

No loss or alteration of characteristics, features, elements or accessibility; no observable impact in either direction.

Significance of Effect – Land Use and Accessibility

DMRB LA 112 outlines significance as an effect that should be derived by combining the assigned value (sensitivity) of receptors with the magnitude of change arising from a project, in accordance with DMRB LA 104 - Environmental assessment and monitoring (revision 1) (hereafter referred to as “DMRB LA 104”).

Table 12-1 outlines a matrix that will be used to determine the significance of effects. As sensitivity has not yet been assigned to receptors, and it is not yet possible to determine the magnitude of impact, an assessment of significance in accordance with the significance matrix has not been undertaken at DMRB Stage 1. This will be undertaken at DMRB Stage 2 during route option development.

Table 12-1: Significance Matrix

Sensitivity

Negligible Magnitude

Minor Magnitude

Moderate Magnitude

Major Magnitude

Low

Negligible

Negligible / slight

Slight / Moderate

Moderate

Medium

Negligible/Slight

Slight

Moderate

Moderate/Major

High

Slight

Slight / Moderate

Moderate / Major

Major

At DMRB Stage 2, the significance of effect would be determined for each element of the land and accessibility subtopic (for example private property and housing, development land and businesses) affected by the proposed scheme. Alongside the significance of the effect, the assessment would report on the nature and scale of the effect on the land use and accessibility elements as either; beneficial, neutral or adverse.

Human Health

Health effects are influenced by a wide range of environmental, social and economic factors that can impact both positively and negatively on health and wellbeing (known as health determinants). This broader understanding of health is defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) which states that ‘ health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity’ . When considering the health effects of major infrastructure projects, this broader definition of health is applied, which encompasses both physical and mental wellbeing.

Direct effects on health can occur from sources of environmental pollution such as noise (for example, sleep disturbance and associated health effects), and traffic (for example, driver stress caused by disruption from construction vehicle movements). Indirect effects could relate to disruption to communities arising from increased traffic, that may result in reduced community interaction (direct effect), which may have an adverse effect on well-being (indirect effect). Similarly, a change in levels of happiness or change in levels of stress (indirect effect) could result from singular or multiple direct and prolonged environmental effects, perceived or real.

In accordance with DMRB LA 112, the human health assessment reports on:

  • Environmental conditions relevant to human health:
  • Air quality
  • Noise
  • Sources of pollution (for example light, odour, contamination)
  • Landscape amenity
  • Severance/accessibility and the ability of communities to access community land, assets and employment:
  • Reduced or increased access to open green space/recreational facilities.
  • Reduced or increased opportunities for WCH.
  • Reduced or increased opportunities for accessing healthcare facilities.

A health profile of communities in the study area is established to determine the sensitivity of the local community/population to changes in health determinants. The sensitivity of a community/population is reported as: low, medium or high; though it is noted that this rating may be subject to change at subsequent stages as more granular baseline data is gathered.

The human health assessment is informed by the outputs of the assessments undertaken for the environmental factors that have potential to cause a change to health and wellbeing determinants: namely air quality, noise, landscape and visual, geology, water, and population. At DMRB Stage 1, limited information is available from these related assessments, therefore a necessarily high level assessment is provided. Further detail will be provided in subsequent DMRB stages, once the impacts and mitigation measures from other assessments is available. A high level, qualitative assessment has been undertaken for the purposes of DMRB Stage 1 with the limited information available.

At DMRB Stage 2, once community/population sensitivity and changes to health determinants likely to occur as a result of a project are established, a qualitative assessment of human health will be undertaken, with evidence provided to support conclusions. The likely health outcome(s) will be identified in line with the categories set out below.

Human Health Outcome Categories (reproduced from Table 3.32 of DMRB LA 112)

Positive Health Outcome

A beneficial health impact is identified.

Neutral Health Outcome

No discernible health impact is identified.

Negative Health Outcome

An adverse health impact is identified.

Uncertain Health Outcome

Where uncertainty exists as to the overall health impact.

Assumptions and Limitations

The population and human health assessment will consider health effects and data at a population level, rather than health data and effects relating to individuals. The aggregated data and statistics that will be used to support the assessment cannot be used to make inferences about the health of individuals within the communities assessed. Gathering demographic data in the study area can be limited by the administrative boundaries by which population statistics are gathered, therefore in some instances presents a broader overview for context rather than a baseline for the population that could feasibly be impacted. At this stage in the assessment, a high level baseline context has been provided, with more granular population health data to be collected at DMRB Stage 2 (where available).

Health data does not capture other factors that contribute to disease and ill-health: social and economic conditions, cultural and historical trauma and behavioural risk factors (for example smoking, alcohol use, nutrition). These are known determinants of increased risk of illness and injury and pose another limitation on the ability to compare health outcomes measured before and after environmental changes.

Data for this EAR (for example list of receptors) has been compiled using desktop review and so its accuracy has not yet been verified. Site walkovers may be required at subsequent stages to verify the presence and nature of community receptors.

A comprehensive list of assumptions and limitations can be developed once detailed baseline data has been collected at DMRB Stage 2.

Study Area

Population

The study area for the population element of the assessment comprises the six improvement strategies plus a 500m buffer. This size of study area captures all six of the improvement strategies and the main communities within a distance most likely to be affected by the proposed scheme. The study area will be revised as the improvement strategies, design and construction methods are developed in more detail.

Human Health

For the human health element of the assessment, DMRB LA 112 states that the study area ‘shall be defined based on the following: 1) the extent and characteristics of a project, and 2) the communities/wards directly and indirectly affected by the project’. The study area is unique to each project and is based on the sensitivity of affected communities and the nature/extent of the project resulting in changes to health determinants’ .

The study area for human health therefore encompasses the study areas of the other environmental assessments that influence the health determinants; for air quality, noise, landscape and visual, geology, water, and population. For the initial assessment of impacts at DMRB Stage 1, a 2km study area has been applied for human health. The study area for health will be amended accordingly at subsequent stages of DMRB assessment as anticipated environmental impacts emerge.

The study areas for population and human health are shown on Figure 12-1.

Baseline Conditions

Land Use and Accessibility

The desktop review for land use and accessibility uses data from Ordnance Survey Maps, AddressBase Plus and the Dumfries and Galloway Council website.

The study area encompasses several towns, villages, properties and clusters of properties located near the existing A75, shown in Table 12-2. The key receptors are residential, community, commercial, and Walking Cycling Horse riding (WCH) assets such as Public Rights of Way, Regional and National Trails, as presented in the following sub-sections.

Development land for housing and commercial premises has been investigated. One plot of proposed housing development SPR.H1 Land off Ewart Place (40 units allocated up to 2029) intersects with Improvement Strategy 3 and is in close proximity to Improvement Strategies 4 and 5.

Agricultural Land Holdings and Soil Land Capability of Agriculture (LCA) baseline data is presented in the Geology, Soils and Groundwater chapter of this EAR.

Table 12-2: Residential Receptors
Towns and Villages within the 500m Buffer Improvement Strategy Adjacent to Settlement

Castle Douglas

1, 6

Haugh of Urr

6

Calrebrand

1

Old Bridge of Urr

1

Kirkpatrick Durham

1, 2

Springholm

1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Crocketford

1, 2, 3, 4

Brae

1, 2

Shawhead

1

Lochfoot

6

Community Receptors

The following community receptors have been identified within 500m of the proposed scheme:

Educational Facilities

Hardgate Primary School, Springholm Primary School and Longrutton Primary School

Places of Worship

Urr Parish Church

Green / Bluespaces

Springholm Park, George V Recreation Ground, Auchenreoch Loch and Milton Loch.

Village Halls

Crocketford Village Hall and Springholm Memorial Hall

Post Office

Haugh of Urr Post Office

Commercial Receptors

The following commercial receptors have been identified within 500m of the proposed scheme:

Hotels

Field Cottage, Laurie Arms, Chipperkyle Bed and Breakfast, The Inn on the Loch, Galloway Arms Hotel, East Brae Cottage B and B, Barnbackle Cottage and Nunland Country Holidays.

Caravan and Camping Sites

Mollance Farm Caravan Park, Brandedleys Touring Caravan Camping Site and Holiday Lodges.

Restaurants and Licensed Establishments

Ernespie Farm

Shops

Springholm Shop, Crocketford Shop, Brass Tacks, W Johnstone and Sons Ltd and Fireplaces Direct.

Walking Cycling Horse Riding Assets

The following Walking Cycling Horse Riding (WCH) assets have been identified within 500m of the proposed scheme:

  • Core path URR/603/1: Located at the east of Springholm Primary School, Core Path URR/603/1 is approximately 3600m long and connects Springholm to Milton Loch. This path branches off from the existing A75, providing a route to reach Milton Loch, while also providing farm access.
  • Core path IRON/72/1, 3: Core Path IRON/72/1 is located to the west of Brae and runs from Shawhead towards Bettyknowes Burn. There is an option to take a north-west turn approximately 130m before the path reaches the Glenhead Burn, which leads to IRON/72/3.
  • Core path LOCK/160/3: Core path LOCK/160/3 branches off the old military road. It then splits into two separate paths after approximately 886m, with each route providing access to different farms. At this junction, the path commencing west serves as access to farms, with the alternative eastern path leading towards Lochrutton for approximately 1637m.
  • Core path URR/601/2: Runs for approximately 2730m and bypasses several farms before linking up with the old military road (NCN7), which provides access to Milton.
  • Core path URR/150/7,1,2,6: Riverside walk heading east from Haugh of Urr alongside Spottes Burn and adjacent to B794 for approximately 350m. Path crosses B794 and continues along Spottes Burn for a further 450m before branching off on either side of the burn.
  • Undesignated local path 1: Situated between the existing A75 and the Larglea Burn, undesignated local path 1 is used by cyclists and pedestrians runs parallel to the adjacent carriageway for approximately 1460m.
  • Undesignated local path 2: Undesignated local path 2, which runs from the Lochfoot junction, is approximately 270 meters in length and is located on the eastbound side of the carriageway.
  • Undesignated local path 3: Undesignated local path 3, which runs from the Terregles junction, is approximately 150 meters in length and is located on the westbound side of the carriageway.
  • National Cycle Network, Route 7: National Cycle Network cycle path that runs from Castle Douglas to Dumfries.

Development land for housing and commercial premises has been investigated. One plot of proposed housing development SPR.H1 Land off Ewart Place (40 units allocated up to 2029) intersects with Improvement Strategy 3 and is in close proximity to Improvement Strategies 4 and 5.

Agricultural Land Holdings and Soil Land Capability of Agriculture (LCA) baseline data is presented in the Geology, Soils and Groundwater chapter of this EAR.

Human Health

The age profile of the population in the Dumfries and Galloway Council area is presented in comparison to Scotland in Table 12-3. As shown, Dumfries and Galloway has a more elderly population than Scotland overall, with a higher percentage of people aged over 65 years, and a lower percentage of the population under five years old.

Table 12-3: Age Group Composition in Scotland and Dumfries and Galloway (Mid-Year Population Estimate) (Scotland's Public Health Observatory)
Age Group Scotland (%) Dumfries and Galloway (%)

Under 1 year

0.8

0.7

0-15 years

16.3

15.0

16-39 years

30.0

23.0

40-64 years

33.4

34.4

65-74 years

11.0

14.4

75+ years

9.3

13.2

Health profile data for the Dumfries and Galloway Council area is presented in comparison to Scotland in Table 12-4, Table 12-5 and Table 12-6.

Table 12-4: General Health for Dumfries and Galloway and Scotland (Table UV302, Scotland's Census)
General Health (Self-reported) Scotland (%) Dumfries and Galloway (%)

Very Good

48.0

43.9

Good

30.9

32.3

Fair

14.2

16.4

Bad

5.3

5.8

Very Bad

1.6

1.8
Table 12-5: Health Conditions for Dumfries and Galloway and Scotland (Table UV304, Scotland's Census)
Health Condition Scotland (%) Dumfries and Galloway (%)

Deaf or partially hearing impaired

7.1

9.2

Blind or partially vision impaired

2.5

3.0

Full/partial loss of voice or difficulty speaking

0.3

0.3

Has one or more of learning disability, learning difficulty or developmental disorder

5.2

4.6

Physical disability

9.7

11.6

Mental health condition

11.3

10.2

Long-term illness, disease or condition

21.4

23.7
Table 12-6: Key Health Indicators for Dumfries and Galloway and Scotland (Scotland's Public Health Observatory)
Data Measure Year Scotland Dumfries and Galloway

Life expectancy (male)

Years

2021 to 2023 (3 year aggregate)

76.8

77.8

Life expectancy (female)

Years

2021 to 2023 (3 year aggregate)

80.8

81.6

Children in low-income families

Percentage

2016 August snapshot

16.7

15.8

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patient hospitalisations

Age-sex standardised rate per 100,000

2021/22 to 2023/24 financial years; 3-year aggregates

210.1

198.2

Population prescribed drugs for anxiety or depression

Percentage

2023/24 financial year

22.4

20.9

Asthma patient hospitalisations

Age-sex standardised rate per 100,000

2021/22 to 2023/24 financial years; 3-year aggregates

76.2

71.1

Lung cancer deaths

Age-sex standardised rate per 100,000

2020 to 2022 calendar years; 3-year aggregates

86.0

78.5

Key insights from the health profile data are as follows:

  • A lower percentage of people in Dumfries and Galloway report having ‘Very Good’ health than Scotland overall, and a greater percentage report ‘Good’ or ‘Fair’ health.
  • A higher percentage of people in Dumfries and Galloway report having a physical disability, long-term illness or medical condition than Scotland overall.
  • The population of Dumfries and Galloway generally reports better health outcomes across the range of key health indicators presented in Table 12-6 than Scotland overall.

Within the study area, there are no Statistical Data Zones in the bottom 20% (most deprived) on the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD).

With consideration of the demographic profile, health data and SIMD score, the sensitivity of the community in the study area is assigned as High. Despite the low levels of deprivation and better health outcomes across some indicators, this rating accounts for the high proportion of elderly people in the area, as well as the higher-than-average proportion of people with physical disabilities, long-term illnesses and medical conditions. This is a preliminary sensitivity rating and will be reviewed and updated at subsequent stages, if required, as additional, more granular baseline data is gathered.

Medical facilities within the human health study area for which communities require access are as follows:

  • Castle Douglas Hospital
  • Garden Hill Primary Care Centre (GP)
  • Boots Pharmacy
  • Castle Chemist
  • While outside of the initial 2km study area for health, it is noted that Dumfries and Galloway Royal infirmary is within 5km of the improvement strategies, located in Dumfries to the north-east of study area.

Potential Impacts

Construction Phase

Land Use and Accessibility

The following sub-sections present the potential construction phase impacts across the different improvement strategies for land use and accessibility.

Improvement Strategy 1

The construction of a new section of carriageway within this improvement strategy may disrupt access to agricultural land, residential receptors and community greenspaces such as George V playing field. Some receptors, such as agricultural farmland, may experience temporary impacts from the land-take required to construct the proposed scheme.

Improvement Strategy 2

Crocketford and Brae are the closest towns to Improvement Strategy 2, and these areas may experience disruptions due to access issues or temporary land acquisition. These settlements include commercial, community, and residential properties. Merton is one of the residential properties that may be impacted. Merton provides access to Brae's private road, and if construction affects this property, it would likely disrupt access to community land.

Improvement Strategy 3

Construction may affect residential, community, and commercial properties in Springholm and Crocketford, including Springholm Primary School and Crocketford Village Hall. Construction may overlap with these properties, leading to access issues and potential temporary land acquisition. This improvement strategy is the shortest of the six and utilises the existing A75 infrastructure, which means it is likely to require the less land for construction purposes than the other improvement strategies.

Improvement Strategy 4

There is minimal overlap between Improvement Strategy 4 and existing properties in comparison to other improvement strategies. However, construction works and traffic could disrupt access to green and bluespace, such as the Inn on the Loch and the Inn itself (Loch Motel).

Improvement Strategy 5

The construction phase may affect receptors, for example, access to agricultural land and assets may be disrupted by construction activities and traffic. However, construction works and traffic could disrupt access to green and bluespace, such as the Inn on the Loch and the Inn itself (Loch Motel).

Improvement Strategy 6

The construction of a new carriageway may affect residential properties along the B794 in Haugh of Urr. Some properties may experience temporary loss of land or property due to the land required for construction. Additionally, the route closely follows the Old Military Road, which has several residential properties along it. Consequently, this improvement strategy would have varying significant impacts on numerous residential receptors. National Cycle Route 7 may be affected but this could be managed through appropriate diversions and therefore depends on management plans/mitigation in place.

Human Health

In relation to health impacts, it is possible that construction activities associated with each of the improvement strategies could result in:

  • Increased dust and/or noise levels and a reduction in landscape amenity, and potential associated increase in stress/anxiety levels for community members.
  • Disturbance of potentially contaminated land, which could impact on adjacent land users if it becomes mobile, via inhalation of contaminated dusts or asbestos, or migration of contaminants or gases within ground or surface waters.
  • Disruption to local journeys impacting on accessibility to community facilities, WCH routes and greenspace, which could have an impact on health outcomes.

However, construction good practice and mitigation measures are expected to greatly reduce these potential impacts. It is noted that until more detailed designs and construction methods are developed, and the outputs of the other relevant assessments are available, it is not possible to provide an in-depth assessment of health impacts for each improvement strategy.

Operation Phase

Land Use and Accessibility

The following sub-sections present the potential operational phase impacts across the different improvement strategies for land use and accessibility.

Improvement Strategy 1

Throughout the entire improvement strategy, several properties could be directly affected potentially leading to permanent disruptions in access and land use. This may result in long-term impacts on the properties, as land acquisition in and around it might be necessary for construction and operation. Large areas of agricultural land could potentially be affected.

Improvement Strategy 2

The majority of Improvement Strategy 2 would be situated to the north of the existing A75 and may result in the permanent loss of community receptors, agricultural land and residential land such as Woodpark Farm.

Improvement Strategy 3

Operation of the improvement strategy may affect residential, community, and commercial properties in Springholm and Crocketford, including Springholm Primary School and Crocketford Village Hall. This improvement strategy is the shortest of the six improvement strategies and utilises existing A75 infrastructure, which would reduce the amount of land take compared to other improvement strategies. However, there is potential for impacts on receptors that are located in proximity to the A75 (for example Springholm Primary School).

Improvement Strategy 4

Improvement Strategy 4 closely follows the existing A75 infrastructure and may directly impact residential receptors through potential requirement for permanent land take. Large areas of agricultural land may also be affected.

Improvement Strategy 5

Improvement Strategy 5 would likely require minimal acquisition of residential properties, however there may be impacts on agricultural land arising from land-take and changes to accessibility/severance.

Improvement Strategy 6

During the operational phase, Improvement Strategy 6 is likely to impact residential, commercial, and community receptors along its path through changes to accessibility and potential land take. Depending on detailed design and mitigation in place, access to certain areas, receptors, and agricultural land may be improved or reduced. An example of this is the National Cycle Network 7 that follows the Old Military Road, which could be improved by being incorporated into the design. However, if not considered as part of the design, access/quality of journey could become worse.

Human Health

In relation to health impacts, it is possible that the operation of the proposed scheme could result in the following:

  • There may be a change in air quality due to an increased or reduced presence of traffic. However, as noted in the Air Quality Chapter of this EAR, road traffic emissions are expected to reduce over time due to improvements in the vehicle fleet, it is therefore unlikely, given the low concentrations within Dumfries and Galloway, that there will be any exceedances of Air Quality Objectives at human receptors with the proposed scheme in place.
  • For landscape amenity, as reported in Landscape and Visual chapter of this EAR, each improvement strategy presents differing levels of potential impact to landscape and visual receptors. All improvement strategies would result in changes to the rural landscape character and views from residential properties, active travel routes, local roads and other locations within the surrounding landscape. The extent to which this could result in an effect on human health would be explored at future assessment stages.
  • As reported in the Geology, Soils and Groundwater chapter of this EAR, during operation, nearby land users could potentially be exposed to contamination if in-ground maintenance works occur in areas where contamination has been left in-situ or could be mobilised to controlled waters. There is also the potential for the proposed scheme to act as a preferential pathway between contamination and controlled waters. With mitigation measures in place, no significant effects on human health are expected.
  • In relation to potential noise impacts, it is reported in the Noise and Vibration Chapter of this EAR that with Improvement Strategies 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6, it is likely there would be significant beneficial effects from road traffic noise for receptors along the existing A75 alignment, and significant adverse effects from road traffic noise for receptors within proximity of these improvement strategies. Improvement Strategy 3 involves mostly online improvements. There is the potential for significant adverse effects from road traffic noise if the improvements result in increased traffic flows or speeds. However, it is noted that the risk of likely significant effects is considered to be the same for all improvement strategies, and that mitigation measures are likely to reduce or remove these.
  • Changes to land use and accessibility reported in the sub-section above could result in changes to human health outcomes, by changing access or introducing severance to community assets and open space. Improvement Strategy 3 would pass close to Springholm Primary School, which – in the absence of mitigation measures - could result in a negative health outcome for children at this school. Improvement Strategy 6 runs adjacent to the National Cycle Network 7 and there are opportunities to enhance this route, which could increase active travel uptake, and result in positive health outcomes.

Mitigation measures, which are yet to be developed, are expected to greatly reduce these potential impacts. It is noted that until more detailed designs are developed, and the outputs of the other relevant assessments are available, it is not possible to provide an in-depth assessment of health impacts for each improvement strategy.

Design, Mitigation and Enhancement Measures

Mitigation and enhancement measures developed in population and human health assessment are influenced by design measures (for example route selection to avoid land take from community assets), environmental mitigation measures (for example landscape and ecological planting) and good practice construction measures (for example construction traffic management plan). As such, any bespoke mitigation and enhancement measures for the population and human health assessment must be cognisant of these.

Due to the high level nature of the improvement strategies, no mitigation or enhancement measures are proposed at this stage.

Assessment of Likely Significant Effects

Construction Phase

Construction of the proposed scheme has the potential to significantly affect residential, commercial and community receptors within the study area and adjacent to all improvement strategies. Land requirements are not defined at DMRB Stage 1 due to the early stage of the scheme design and assessment process, and the construction footprint and methods are yet to be developed. The location and extent of land take is unknown at this time and therefore the likely significant effect on receptors is uncertain. Improvement strategies which make use of existing road infrastructure, in particular Improvement Strategy 3, may require the least land take. However, improvement strategies that expand upon an existing road have the potential to create significant accessibility and disruption effects due to likely construction and traffic management/diversions in place. Indirect impacts during the construction phase could also include disruption to commercial receptors and changes in accessibility/severance to community land and assets. Likely significant accessibility/severance effects are uncertain given the potential reduction in magnitude of impact through good practice construction measures and incorporation of crossings/access for local population.

A change to health outcomes (for example increase in stress and anxiety) in the construction phase would be determined by the level of construction activities and associated environmental effects (for example dust and noise and vibration impacts). As is typical for DMRB Stage 1, there is currently limited information regarding likely construction activities, therefore likely significant health effects cannot be assessed at this stage. Health impacts associated with access to receptors that facilitate positive health outcomes (healthcare facilities and open space for outdoor/physical activities) are also difficult to determine at this early stage without defined design and traffic management, and therefore significance has not been determined.

As is typical for DMRB Stage 1, it is not possible to undertake an assessment of significance on individual receptors and communities due to the limited information available on sensitivity and magnitude of impact. Significant effects also take into account mitigation measures which are influenced by construction good practice measures (for example construction management plans). These measures have not yet been developed; therefore, it is not possible to differentiate between likely significant effects for the improvement strategies.

Operation Phase

Operation of the proposed scheme has the potential to significantly affect residential, commercial and community receptors within the study area and adjacent to all improvement strategies through land take and changes to accessibility. All improvement strategies could result in the permanent acquisition of land from residential, commercial and community receptors and positive or negative changes to accessibility/severance arising from the presence of new road infrastructure and changes to existing accesses and journey times. As is typical at DMRB Stage 1, likely significant effects for receptors in relation to land take and accessibility are not possible to determine at this stage.

Depending on the improvement strategy, positive human health impacts during the operation phase could include improved health outcomes through a reduction in traffic (resulting in decreased air pollution and noise and vibration) in close proximity to sensitive receptors such as primary schools and private residences. In other areas, some communities may experience an increase in traffic due to displacement and could therefore experience a negative human health outcome. The Air Quality Chapter and Noise Vibration Chapter of this EAR indicate that magnitude of change is not known at this stage and therefore it is not possible to comment on the likelihood of significant health effects. Similarly, limited information is available on significant effects from the Landscape and Visual Chapter and Biodiversity Chapter of this EAR and the land use and accessibility assessment contained in this chapter. It is expected that DMRB Stage 2 will identify the changes to human health outcomes of significant operational effects of the developing route options.

As is typical at DMRB Stage 1, it is not possible to undertake an assessment of significance on individual receptors due to the limited information available on sensitivity and magnitude of impact. Significant effects also take into account mitigation measures which are influenced by route selection and design, mitigation measures proposed for other environmental topics, other forms of good practice committed to as part of the proposed scheme. These measures have not yet been developed; therefore it is not possible to differentiate between likely significant effects for the improvement strategies.

Proposed Scope of Future Assessment

At DMRB Stage 2, the impacts during construction and operation on residential, commercial and community property will be considered, in addition to the potential impact on health outcomes for communities affected by the developing route options.

The population and human health assessment for DMRB Stage 2 will involve the following:

  • Refine study area for developing route options and gather more detailed baseline data.
  • Assign sensitivity to receptors/communities.
  • Assess magnitude of impact on receptors/communities.
  • Consider the outputs of other relevant environmental assessments (for the human health aspect).
  • Develop preliminary mitigation/enhancement measures (for example improvements to National Cycle Network Route 7).
  • Assess significance of effect on receptors/communities for each developing route option.

Summary

The population and human health assessment focuses on land take, accessibility and health impacts on communities and receptors in the assessment study area. All improvement strategies potentially involve land take that could impact on residential, agricultural, commercial and community receptors and could result in likely significant effects. Improvement Strategy 3, which largely involves online improvements, could result in likely significant effects for receptors adjacent to the road, arising from construction activities and operational traffic, but could involve less total land take than the other improvement strategies. The improvement strategies that involve creation of offline road space (1, 2, 4, 5, and 6) may have fewer accessibility impacts for communities through construction and operation as the existing road infrastructure could be utilised; however, community severance could be an issue.

For human health, all improvement strategies have the potential to result in a change to health determinants related to air quality, noise, pollution, landscape amenity and severance/accessibility. Construction traffic and activities have the potential to increase dust and noise and vibration and result in temporary disruption in access to facilities relied upon for health (for example medical facilities). During operation, an increase in traffic could result in an increase in air and noise pollution, which could particularly impact on vulnerable populations (for example children and the elderly). Land take could result in permanent changes in access to community assets relied upon for physical activity and social cohesion (for example green/open space). Outputs of the relevant environmental assessments have been considered and at this stage, it is concluded that it is not possible to differentiate between improvement strategies in terms of likely significant effects on health outcomes.

It is noted that likely significant effects are dependent on design and mitigation that is yet to be determined.