Burntisland Ferry Ramp - "Just 10 minutes from Edinburgh!" or is Andy Wight-Boycott in for a very long wait!
In olden days ferries plied the Forth to make a profit for their owners. or travellers on foot or horse the Queensferry crossing was both quick and safe. For larger cargoes requiring protected harbours, the Granton/Burntisland route was the crossing of choice. Advances in technology, notably steam propulsion, made the ferries ever faster and safer. Fast and safe maybe but, once built, the bridges were faster and safer still. The railway bridge killed off the Burntisland/Granton "roll on, roll off (RORO)" railway ferry in 1890 and the road bridge killed off the remaining Queensferry and Burntisland/Granton car ferries in 1964.
Forty years on - are the bridges still fast and safe? Safe certainly, but not so fast. The road bridge is incapable of meeting present and projected demand.
The railway bridge has all the strength that its Victorian engineers could give; they could not tolerate a repeat of the 1879 Tay Bridge disaster. The road bridge too is strong - designed to last 160 years on presumed traffic levels. Unfortunately these levels will soon be exceeded by a factor of 3 - arguably the bridge will last only 50 years, in which case we will soon be on borrowed time - little wonder the bridge is always being inspected and repaired. Even so the number of commuter cars on the bridge rises inexorably.
Those charged with planning transport consider any initiative that "abstracts" cars from the road bridge. We are aware of plans for longer trains, improved signalling, reconfiguring Waverley station; and for the roads, park and ride, bus lanes and congestion charging. Despite these measures road journey times across the Forth are set to increase.
The direct route from Fife to Edinburgh invariably requires a sea crossing. Over the past 10 years there have been two studies to determine the feasibility of a Trans Forth Ferry service. The most recent by Halcrow Ltd, sponsored by Fife Council, City of Edinburgh Council, Forth Estuary Transport Authority and Forth Ports, concluded that there are two feasible routes: Kirkcaldy/Leith and Burntisland/Granton. Feasible, that is, with publicly funded infrastructure. The shorter and quicker route, Burntisland/Granton (4 nautical miles - 15 minutes), abstracts more cars from the bridge at a lower cost than the longer Kirkcaldy/Leith route ( 8 nautical miles - 25 minutes). However, the Kirkcaldy route stands a better chance of making a profit but it will take 20 years to do so. It is therefore "preferred" and the subject of the next study.
The first objective of the new study (£300k - funded by South East Scotland Transport Partnership and Edinburgh's Cities Growth Fund) is to : "determine the feasibility of the preferred route (Kirkcaldy/Leith). If there are insurmountable problems to consider the alternative ports (Burntisland and Granton) and justify an alternative route". The preamble identifies problems such as the construction of a pier at Kirkcaldy and the time consuming use of the Sea Lock at Leith's Ocean Terminal. Other problems are likely to include the cost in time and capital and the number of crossings lost to weather. The contract for the study has yet (Dec 05) to be awarded. Once awarded it will take 6 months to conduct.
So, if the study concludes that the proposed Kirkcaldy terminal is indeed an "insurmountable problem", Burntisland could (or should) be the Fife Terminal for a Trans Forth Ferry. Although Burntisland has the necessary harbour, its road connection to the rest of Fife is poor. Within the town likely routes include the High Street and Cromwell Road with its crossing to the Primary School. Fife's most recent "local plan for Burntisland" provides a dedicated route to the docks via the Haugh Road, the route was intended for Alcan's bauxite lorries - the route may have died with Alcan. Outwith the town, access is via the narrow coast roads or the switch-backed snake of the Cowdenbeath Road. Ferry commuters may well feel entitled to wider, straighter and possibly stronger roads.
In sum, a Trans Forth Ferry service based on the historic Burntisland/Granton route is feasible and could be available within a year; the preferred Kirkcaldy/Leith route would cost considerably more but in the long term has more chance of making a profit. This route requires a £300k study and a further six months to define cost and risk; only then will we know if the Kirkcaldy option is indeed feasible.
Finally the big unknown - does Burntisland need the ferry and what would it bring? Jobs and businesses or noise and congestion - discuss!
For those wanting more detail I have copies of the two principal Trans Forth Ferry studies (Napier University - 1999 and Halcrow - 2004) and the Scope of Work for the next study.
A question for those dependent on public transport - with a Burntisland/Granton ferry in place where is Burntisland's most accessible cinema?
The Ferry
The Halcrow study examined potential ferries in considerable detail. It seems likely that the chosen vessel(s) will be of a monohull or catamaran design capable of 35 kts in 98% of the likely sea states. It will carry 150 passengers (no vehicles) have a crew of 4, be 30 to 45 metres long and cost new £3-4 million. Trimarans, Hovercraft, Hydrofoils and SWARTHS were also considered.
In general terms Catamarans are cheaper to run than monohulls but are more restricted by weather. The chosen vessel must be tough enough to survive hitting floating debris at speed - discarded fridges have been reported in the Forth