Corran Path - FAQs

Answers to some common questions about the Lochgilphead Front Green to Crinan Canal active travel route.

Consultation

Will there be other opportunities to have my say?

If there is support for the preferred option a future funding application will be made to Sustrans to allow the design to be developed further. If this funding application is successful further consultation events on the designs will take place.

Who will pay for it?

At the moment, money has been secured to undertake the work to identify a preferred solution. The Council will need to apply for funds to finalise the design and then, again, for the money to construct the scheme. Sustrans remain the most likely source of funding. While they might pay for the design fees, it’s likely that the Council would need to find 30% of the construction fees. To secure Sustrans funding, there are a number of criteria that must be fulfilled, and they favour schemes which focus on encouraging people to walk and cycle for everyday trips (i.e. less emphasis on tourism or leisure trips). 

Route Across Corran Grazings    

The cost of an embankment or structure across the Corran Grazings seems too high.     

The estimated cost of an embankment or structure is a function of the material used and the height and width required to attract funding through the Sustrans Places for Everyone programme; see comment above ‘who will pay for it’ and issues below ‘height of structure’ and ‘width of structure’; see below. 

Some of the feedback from the last round of consultation was that the width and height of any route made it to expensive and we have reduced the width to the acceptable minimum to try to bring costs down.

Would a timber boardwalk be cheaper?

Yes, but timber has a relatively short design life and the cost of maintaining it is significant making it unfeasible as an option. For this reason, a Fibre Reinforced Polymer (FRP) boardwalk is preferred and is the highest upfront cost.

The height of any bridge / boardwalk / causeway seems high

The height of the boardwalk is a balance between keeping it high enough so that it is passable during most tides including normal high tides, but not overly high such that it becomes excessively expensive to build.  It is currently considered that the boardwalk should be 3.0m Above Ordnance Datum (sea level) which is an estimated compromise based on details from SEPA’s flood maps which indicate that very high tides (1 in 10 years) would inundate the Corran Grazings area, but that the area is otherwise above the mean high water springs level.  Frequent inundation of the boardwalk could make the surface slippery with added maintenance burden on A&BC.

The width of any bridge / boardwalk / causeway seems high

The width of any bridge / boardwalk / causeway is based on guidance for segregating pedestrians and cyclist contained within the national design guidance, Cycling by Design, plus the width to accommodate parapets (which are required on safety grounds). We asked the funding manager, Sustrans, to accept a narrower route and changed the design parameters to bring costs down.

Are the ground conditions with the Grazings fully understood?

A Review of Existing Desktop Ground Investigation Surveys and Pre-existing Available Ground Information Borehole Data has been undertaken. The site appears to be readily developable for the proposed purpose, however, a number of potential constraints, which are not insurmountable, have been identified.  These are primarily low strength and compressible ground, potential flooding, a Scheduled Monument, possible Made Ground and underlying utilities.

Can the Japanese Knotweed in the Grazings be removed?

Due to the widespread and established coverage of Japanese knotweed within the site, as well as snowberry and potentially other Invasive Non-Native Species (INNS), a formal INNS eradication programme will be required.

What will the ecological impact be of creating a route through Corran Grazings?

A Preliminary Ecological Appraisal was undertaken in October 2022. The majority of habitats recorded on the site were not considered to be Important Ecological Features, however, some of the habitats recorded were of Local or Council level importance, and potentially included Groundwater Dependent Terrestrial Ecosystem. The site also immediately abuts a Local Nature Conservation Site. Recommendations have been made regarding the removal and management of Invasive Non-Native Species Actions required in order to avoid contravention of the legislation relating to breeding birds have been outlined, as well as suggestions for biodiversity mitigation or enhancement measures which could be incorporated into the proposals.

Front Green

What will happen to the trees along the front if the path is located here?

Depending on the route that is selected, some of the more mature trees may need to be removed from the front of Loch Gilp and these can be replaced by new trees. These trees have already been subject to a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal and have not been found to have specific ecological significance. Less mature trees can be relocated.

What measures will be included to ensure that cyclists share the space with pedestrians respectfully?

Any design is required to meet the standards set out in the national design guidance, Cycling by Design. We are proposing a shared path because the new link connects the Front Green and Canal which are both shared.  At a later stage of design, we can think about including signage to remind both pedestrians and cyclists that the space is for everyone.

What will happen to the parking area near the current bridge?        

The parking area will be retained, with some resurfacing and potentially reconfigured. Options for orientation / information boards, seating and improved public space to make the area more attractive will be explored further if the project progresses on to the next design stages.

The signs which indicate where the speed limits change should be relocated 

A full review of speed limits on the Trunk Road network is currently being undertaken by Transport Scotland.

Route along the road via the roundabout    

Does the junction have to be a roundabout?

Options to have a junction with traffic lights or have a priority arrangement (no traffic lights) have been explored. A roundabout is the preferred option to minimise the impact on traffic flow, accommodate large vehicles and provide safe access to the Corran B&B.

Will large vehicles still be able to get through the junction?

Yes, data has been collected to understand all types of vehicles which use the junction and assessment have been undertaken to ensure there is enough space for large vehicles to pass through the junction. On occasion, if abnormal loads, such as those transporting parts for wind turbines, need to pass through the junction it is likely to be closed to traffic (overnight) with a police escort.

Even if the footway at the roundabout is widened, it still won’t be safe

The design proposals will be subject to a Road Safety Audit by an independent, qualified team. 

The existing footbridge is too narrow 

It is acknowledged that the existing footbridge is relatively narrow, but all parties have agreed that it could still form part of route with the potential for it to be upgraded, and widened, at a later date. 

Can the existing road bridge be upgraded?

The existing road bridge is operated and maintained by Transport Scotland; they have no plans to upgrade the existing bridge although this option was considered as part of the appraisal process.

Crossing the A83   

What type of crossing can be provided on the A83

A toucan crossing is proposed. With this arrangement pedestrians and cyclists can request a “green man and green cycle” and traffic will be stopped. As noted, elsewhere, the locations where speed limits change might be altered.

Historic ramp

The historic ramp does not provide a direct route     

Reinstating the historic ramp will create a route which keeps pedestrians and cyclists away from cars and other vehicles and allows us to provide a safer crossing of the A83. This will be attractive, particularly to vulnerable road users, but the existing ramp will still be available to people walking and cycling.

Preferred Option

The identified preferred route does not reflect what the local community want

We know some of the local community had a preference for a route through the Corran Grazings but the appraisal showed it did not offer the best value for money. Extensive engagement was undertaken, with different options presented, and it was made clear that the preferred option would be based on a number of considerations, one of which was the views of the local community. The main overarching feedback from the community was that a safe active travel connection was required between Lochgilphead and the Crinan Canal and the preferred option achieves this while offering the greatest value for money (see below).

I don’t understand how the preferred option has been selected

Much work has been undertaken to inform the decision on the preferred route and there are many factors to consider. One main deciding factor was to use the Department for Transports’ Active Mode Appraisal Tool (AMAT) which considers all the benefits and costs of each option to identify the scheme which presents the greatest value for money. 

Does this mean there won’t be a route through the Corran Grazings?

The preferred option that has been identified for an active travel route between the Lochgilphead Front Green and the Crinan Canal does not mean that a route through the Corran Grazings or a path network within the Corran Grazings will not become a reality. However, the criteria for the existing main sources of funding for active travel schemes mean that there is a high probability that such a proposal would not be eligible for this funding and alternative forms of funding would likely be required to be identified for a route through the Corran Grazings, unless the current funding criteria changes.

Did you find what you were looking for?

Why wasn't this information helpful

Limit to 250 characters.