Concern over plans to block off core path

A community group has heard claims a council proposal to close part of a core path south of Luncarty as part of the planned Cross Tay Link Road (CTLR) project contradicts local authority policies.

John Andrews of the Perth and Kinross Outdoor Access Forum told members of Luncarty, Redgorton and Moneydie Community Council he believes the proposal to stop up the LUNC/102 core path at Denmarkfield before its current crossing point over the A9 “flies in the face” of policies relating to public access.

He said the proposed closure will force path users approaching this point in future to walk north alongside the A9 and use a different crossing to get to the south side of Redgorton, then walk south again just to get to the same point they can reach now simply by crossing the A9 using the existing route.

Mr Andrews said he reckoned the detour would add an extra kilometre to people’s walk if they headed out that way once the CTLR is built and pointed out the extra distance would have to be walked alongside a very busy major road.

He went on to recommend the community council advise the public that PKC will have to publish an official order to stop up the core path sometime soon and that they have a right to raise objections to the proposal if they feel it might adversely affect them.

Mr Andrews said he would much prefer to see the council commit to creating a safer crossing over the A9 at Demarkfield so the existing core path could be kept open and pointed to a particular council policy which states development proposals that impact on core paths “will not be permitted”.

“In my judgement [the proposed closure] flies in the face of every single policy that deals with this,” he said. “I reckon people in Luncarty ought to know that this is being proposed.”

The community council previously raised concerns about the proposed closure in an objection to the local authority’s planning application to construct the CTLR.

The group said in their objection: “Our suggestion would be to construct a pedestrian footbridge at or near that location to facilitate safe crossing for pedestrians and cyclists alike.”

Mr Andrews also previously objected to the planning application being passed on behalf of Ramblers Scotland.

He said of the stopping up proposal: “Council officers have argued that because there is no formal pedestrian crossing at Denmarkfield, consequently no significant loss of facility will occur.

“In our view, it verges on sophistry to imply that the proposal therefore has no genuinely damaging impacts. It is a fact that [currently] two paths terminate on opposite sides of the A9. One would scarcely expect there to be a mapped core path route over two lanes of a dual carriageway trunk road, but this is where path users do ... cross the main road.

“The location is, moreover, relatively safe as there is a wide central strip, with good visibility in both directions, where one may wait until there is a sufficiently large gap in the flow of traffic.”

The council’s final report on its application to construct the CTLR acknowledged a number of core paths, rights of way and key routes would have to be stopped up and/or diverted in order for the project to proceed.

The document said specifically of the Denmarkfield stopping up proposal: “The crossing point [is] being redirected 500m further north, to [a] proposed ‘at grade’ pedestrian crossing. It is considered this proposal will provide a safer crossing arrangement for the limited number of persons using the existing crossing.

“A further crossing point is also to be provided 500m further south, at the new A9 overbridge, enabling a much safer way to cross the dual carriageway than exists at present.

“For all existing core paths, rights of way and key routes affected, these have been adequately considered and account is taken of the council’s duties under the Equalities Act 2010.”