6 OPTION GENERATION, SIFTING AND DEVELOPMENT

Introduction

6.1. The purpose of option generation, sifting and development is to derive a range of options which should satisfy the transport planning objectives and alleviate the problems or address the opportunities identified. It is important that the option generation, and the sifting and development that follows, should be carried out in a logical, transparent and therefore auditable manner.

6.2. Our consultations highlighted that Kerrera's accessibility has been a long running local issue. As such, the most 'obvious' options, in terms of changes to existing provision, were fairly well established at the outset. The Kerrera residents in particular had well-established views on what action was required, which were revealed through our consultations with them.

6.3. Nevertheless, a systematic approach was adopted to ensure all prospective options were given due consideration. Options have been derived from multiple sources:

The engineering review work.
Ideas/outputs from the community and stakeholder consultation process.
Ideas/proposals which have a history and which remain viable.
Ideas suggested by the client group for the study.
Ideas derived from our own experience of options that could satisfy the objectives.

6.4. This Chapter describes the option generation, sifting and development process. It then sets out our approach to bundling what is a wide range of individual options into meaningful packages for the purposes of the option assessment (shown at Chapter 7).

Option Generation and Sifting

6.5. The options that have been identified seek to address both the gaps identified through employing the Ferries Review methodology (see Chapter 5) and other gaps identified by our other research in the study. These include the: tidal nature of the present vehicle service; inaccessibility of the north end of the island to the present vehicle service; and the disparities in charging.

6.6. Table 6.1, over, presents our initial list of options.

6.7. It is surmised that none of these individual options in isolation will satisfy either the transport planning objectives or provide a good contribution to the established local and national policy directives.

**Table 6.1: Initial List of Individual Options**
Theme 1: Options based on the existing vehicle ferry route	Theme 2: Options based on a new vehicle ferry route	Theme 3: Other options
Longer operating day	Ferry service from north of Kerrera direct into Oban	North-south road
Non-tidal operation	Longer operating day	Upgrade existing road in south of Kerrera
Larger ferry with increased carrying capacity (people and freight)	Non-tidal operation	Creation of landing stages
Scheduled freight runs to the north of Kerrera	Larger ferry with increased carrying capacity (people and freight)	Clearly defined and consistent tariffs, timetables and carrying policies
Improved physical accessibility at slips	d

6.8. We have addressed this by packaging together various individual options from Table 6.1 in complimentary packages. The purpose of packaging the options is to reinforce, extend and compliment the impact of individual measures.

6.9. This was done by, first, assessing each individual option's potential contribution to achieving the transport planning objectives. The analysis is presented at Tables 6.2-6.4, below and over.

**Table 6.2: Options Based on Existing Vehicle Ferry Route: Fit With Transport Planning Objectives**
√ some fit √√ good fit √√√ strong fit / neutral x slight conflict xx conflict xxx strong conflict	Develop community and economic links within and between Kerrera and the mainland	Allow all residents to benefit from improved access to mainland-based services and facilities	Improve the quality and accessibility of the complete journey from home to destination	Secure for all users affordable and assured means of access to support economic activity and quality of life
Ferry service from middle of Kerrera to Gallanach	√√	√	X	√
Longer operating day	√√	√	√	√
Non-tidal operation	√√	√	√	√√
Larger ferry with increased carrying capacity	√	/	√√	√
Scheduled freight runs to the north of Kerrera	√	/	/	√√
Improved physical accessibility at slips	√	√√	√√√	√

**Table 6.3: Options Based on New Vehicle Ferry Route at North of Kerrera: Fit With Transport Planning Objectives**
√ some fit √√ good fit √√√ strong fit / neutral x slight conflict xx conflict xxx strong conflict	Develop community and economic links within and between Kerrera and the mainland	Allow all residents to benefit from improved access to mainland-based services and facilities	Improve the quality and accessibility of the complete journey from home to destination	Secure for all users affordable and assured means of access to support economic activity and quality of life
Ferry service from north of Kerrera direct into Oban	√√	√	X	√
With long operating day	√√	√	√	√
With non-tidal operation	√√	√	√	√√
With larger ferry	√	/	√√	√

**Table 6.4: Other Options: Fit With Transport Planning Objectives**
√ some fit √√ good fit √√√ strong fit / neutral x slight conflict xx conflict xxx strong conflict	Develop community and economic links within and between Kerrera and the mainland	Allow all residents to benefit from improved access to mainland-based services and facilities	Improve the quality and accessibility of the complete journey from home to destination	Secure for all users affordable and assured means of access to support economic activity and quality of life
North-south road	√√√	√√	√√√	√√
Upgrade existing road in south of Kerrera	√√√	√√	√√√	√√
Creation of landing stages	√	√	√√	/
Clearly defined and consistent tariffs, timetables and carrying policies	√	√√	√	√√√

6.10. A further assessment was undertaken. This looked at the complementarity of each of the individual options to one other. In effect, this assesses the extent to which the individual options when combined together might be expected to deliver more than the sum of their individual contributions. It is presented at Table 6.5, over.

**Table 6.5: Option Complementarity**
√ some complementarity √√ complementary √√√ strong complementarity / neutral x slight conflict xx conflict xxx strong conflict	Non-tidal operation	Larger ferry	Freight runs	Access upgrade at piers	Existing route	North of Kerrera to Oban route	Road north-south	Upgrade existing road	Landing stages	Clear fares etc.
Longer operational hours	√√√	√	√√	√√	√	√	√√√	√√	/	√
Non-tidal operation		/	√√√	√√√	/	/	√√√	√√	/	√
Larger ferry with increased carrying capacity			√√	√	√	√	√√	√√	/	√
Scheduled freight runs to the north of Kerrera				√	√√√	/	√	√	/	√√
Improved physical accessibility at slips					√	√	√√	√√	/	√√
*Ferry service on existing route*						/	√√√	√√	/	√√
Ferry service from north of Kerrera direct into Oban							√√√	√√	/	√√
Road north to south								√√√	/	√√
Upgrade existing road									/	√√
Creation of landing stages										/
Consistent tariffs, timetables and carrying policies

Option Development

6.11. We have used the preceding analysis to define packages of options combining a number of the individual options. This includes a Do Minimum against which the other packages can be compared. The packages must be appraised against this Do Minimum option that includes the transport improvement commitments that have policy and funding approval. In this case the Do Minimum is the existing vehicle ferry service plus the changes to fares, timetable, etc. that were introduced in March 2013-including the continuing prohibition of visitor vehicles on the island.

6.12. We also developed four other option packages. These and the Do Minimum are described at Table 6.6.

**Table 6.6: Option Packages for Appraisal**
Reference	Basis	Description
Do Minimum	Existing vehicle ferry route	1. Longer operating day 2. Number of freight runs to the north of Kerrera 3. Clearly defined and consistent tariff, timetable and carryings policy
A	Existing vehicle ferry route, road investment	1. Longer operating day 2. Non tidal operation 3. Clearly defined and consistent tariff, timetable and carryings policy 4. Link road from north to middle of Kerrera 5. Upgraded south road
B	Existing vehicle ferry route, no road investment	1. Longer operating day 2. Non tidal operation 3. Clearly defined and consistent tariff, timetable and carryings policy
C	Direct vehicle ferry service to Oban, road investment	1. Use of a slipway at north of Kerrera 2. Non tidal operation 3. Clearly defined and consistent tariff, timetable and carryings policy 4. Link road from north to middle of Kerrera 5. Upgraded south road
D	Direct vehicle ferry service to Oban, no road investment	1. Use of a slipway at north of Kerrera 2. Non tidal operation 3. Clearly defined and consistent tariff, timetable and carryings policy

Note: For Options A-D the "longer operating day" is longer than that for the Do Minimum. It is around 14 hours-as per the Ferries Review methodology set out at Chapter 5, rather than around 11 hours under the Do Minimum

6.13. Option B is the same as Option A, except that it would see no link road created or upgrade of the road in the south of the island. Likewise, Option D is the same as Option C, except that it would see no link road created or upgrade of the road in the south of the island.

6.14. None of the options includes a larger vehicle ferry than that which presently operates. This is because Transport Scotland have advised that the vessel to be used would be at the discretion of the operators tendering for a publicly supported service. It was also seen by stakeholders (see Chapter 4) as a lower priority than provision of an all states of the tide service.

6.15. Second, none of the options includes landing stages. This reflects the relatively limited fit with transport planning objectives (shown at Table 6.4) and lack of complementarity with other options for enhancement (see Table 6.5).

6.16. This does not mean there is no merit in providing landing stages. Rather, this would best be secured by means other than Transport Scotland providing public support to secure improved access to Kerrera for the community as a whole.

Summary

6.17. A wide range of options have been identified. They have been assessed against the transport planning objectives. The results were used to develop packages of options that could provide a long term ferry service solution for Kerrera. The four options, along with the Do Minimum, are appraised at Chapter 7.