15 Pedestrians, Cyclists, Equestrians and Community Effects 15.1 Introduction 15.2 Approach and Methods 15.3 Baseline Conditions 15.4 Potential Impacts 15.6 Summary of Route Corridor Options Assessment 15.7 Scope of Stage 3 Assessment 15.8 References

15 Pedestrians, Cyclists, Equestrians and Community Effects

15.1 Introduction

15.1.1 This chapter presents the assessment of the Stage 2 route corridor options for the Forth Replacement Crossing in terms of potential impacts on local communities and the journeys made by pedestrians, cyclists and equestrians. For ease of reference the terms ‘pedestrians and others’ and ‘Non-Motorised Users’ (NMUs) are used to describe this group. Impacts on local vehicular journeys are also considered where relevant.

15.1.2 In accordance with DMRB (The Highways Agency et al., 1993), the assessment of impacts on pedestrians and others focuses on three main aspects:

• changes in journey lengths and times;
• changes in the amenity value of journeys; and
• changes in links between communities and their facilities.

15.1.3 Paths used by pedestrians and others are important because they can provide:

• access to local countryside and more remote areas on foot, bike or horse;
• opportunities for long-distance travelling;
• safe, non-motorised access to shops, work and school; and
• opportunities to integrate access and land management.

15.1.4 The use of paths can help to improve health, reduce social exclusion, and unlike other modes of transport generally has few associated costs (i.e. fuel, travel tickets etc). A good path network can also encourage visitors to enjoy the outdoors and to visit places of landscape, historical and wildlife interest, therefore encouraging financial expenditure which supports the local rural economy. Well planned paths can potentially assist landowners and farmers to successfully integrate recreational use with land management operations.

15.1.5 In accordance with SNH guidance on EIA (SNH, 2006), an assessment specifically considering the impacts of the route corridor options on outdoor access has been undertaken and is included in this section. This draws on the findings of this DMRB assessment of impacts on NMUs and community access.

15.1.6 Impacts during construction are considered in Chapter 17 (Disruption Due to Construction).

Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003

15.1.7 The Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 Part 1 came into effect in February 2005 and establishes statutory rights of responsible access on and over most land, including inland water. The legislation offers a general framework of responsible conduct for both those exercising rights of access and for landowners.

15.1.8 Local authorities are granted new powers and duties to uphold and facilitate responsible access rights. There is a duty on local authorities to prepare a plan for a path network and to keep a list of ‘Core Paths’ (paragraph 15.3.4). Sections 13 and 19 of the Act state: ‘It is the duty of the local authority to assert, protect and keep open and free from obstruction or encroachment any route, waterway or other means by which access rights may reasonably be exercised’; and ‘The local authority may do anything which they consider appropriate for the purposes of maintaining a Core Path and keeping a Core Path free from obstruction or encroachment’.

15.1.9 Section 10 of the Act states that it is the duty of SNH to draw up and issue a Scottish Outdoor Access Code which sets out guidance in relation to access rights and responsibilities. It is the duty of SNH and local authorities to publicise the Code and for SNH to promote understanding of it. The Scottish Outdoor Access Code was subsequently prepared by SNH and approved by the Scottish Parliament in July 2004.

15.2 Approach and Methods

15.2.1 The assessment of impacts on Pedestrians, Cyclists, Equestrians and Community effects has been undertaken taking into account guidance provided in DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 8 (The Highways Agency et al., 1993) and SNH’s Handbook on Environmental Impact Assessment (SNH, 2006).

Baseline Conditions

15.2.2 The study area for the assessment of impacts on NMUs extends beyond the general study area shown in Figure 5.1. This extension allowed inclusion of key community facilities accessed by paths which may be affected by the route corridor options. All baseline data are shown on Figures 15.1 to 15.5. Consideration of the wider area is particularly important in identifying potential community effects.

15.2.3 Baseline data have been collected through:

• Desk study including a review of Ordnance Survey Maps, Jacobs Arup GIS Database, relevant Local Plans and strategies, Core Path Plans, and a web based search to identify:

i. existing and proposed paths (recreational and functional), and rights of way used by pedestrians, cyclists, equestrians;

ii. key community facilities within and in close vicinity to the survey area, including doctors' surgeries, hospitals, schools, shops, post offices, churches, parks and sport centres;

iii. community catchment areas represented by non-denominational primary school catchments (denominational primary school catchments are unlikely to represent the whole of the local community and are therefore not considered relevant);

iv. outdoor access facilities as specified in Appendix 5, Table 2 of ‘A Handbook on Environmental Impact Assessment’ (SNH, 2006) – e.g. parks, National and Local Nature Reserves (NNRs and LNRs), local open spaces and reservoirs, and linear facilities e.g. paths, rights of way, cycleways; and

v. bus routes / stops in the survey area.

• Consultation responses from City of Edinburgh Council, Fife Council, SNH, the Ramblers Association, Scotways, and Sustrans. A number of other bodies have been consulted but have not responded to date.
• Site survey of key community facilities and paths used by pedestrians and others.

Counts

15.2.4 DMRB guidance advises the use of origin/destination surveys where ‘…travel patterns [of pedestrian and other users] are complex and a scheme could have a major impact’. These surveys could include the use of ‘counts’. Counts would be employed to provide information including numbers and types of user. For this assessment, the type of user has been determined from information provided in the local authority Core Path plans (adopted and draft) and site visits.

15.2.5 In Scotland, under the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003, ‘…it is the duty of the local authority to assert, protect and keep open and free from obstruction or encroachment any route, waterway or other means by which access rights may reasonably be exercised’ (paragraphs 15.1.7 to 15.1.9). It is therefore considered that regardless of levels of use and types of user, all routes should be maintained and/or improved where practicable.

15.2.6 In addition to the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003, National Planning Policy Guideline (NPPG) 11 Sport, Physical Recreation and Open Space and Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) 17, Planning for Transport all aim to increase travel by NMUs and improve access even where usage levels are low.

15.2.7 Therefore for the purposes of this assessment it is considered that the use of counts will add little value, because all paths will be considered as being of equal importance, regardless of user type or levels of usage.

Impact Assessment

15.2.8 As specified by DMRB, the Stage 2 assessment objective is to assess the changes to NMU journeys within the survey area, and access to community facilities.

15.2.9 For each route corridor option, the number of paths to be affected by the operation of the Forth Replacement Crossing was reported. Changes to journeys made by pedestrians and others were described qualitatively, i.e. where there will either be an increase, decrease, or no change to journey lengths. Further detail on the degree of these changes will be identified as part of Stage 3 assessment.

15.2.10 Any changes in the amenity value and safety of paths were also considered. An assessment of amenity value includes any potential changes in air quality, traffic flows, noise levels and views from the path. The effects were described qualitatively for each route corridor option i.e. where there will be an increase, decrease, or no change in amenity value. Further detail on the degree of these changes will be provided for the Stage 3 assessment.

15.2.11 For the purposes of the Stage 2 assessment, potential impacts were considered to be either significant or not. Where a route corridor option would result in a change in journey length and/or amenity value, the potential impact on the paths is considered to be significant. Significance criteria will be defined in the Stage 3 assessment for the purposes of identifying level of impact significance.

15.2.12 The assessment on communities assesses the degree of potential severance experienced by the community i.e. the degree to which communities are separated from facilities and services they use within their community. Non–denominational primary school catchment areas are illustrated on Figures 15.5a-b to show indicative boundaries of the areas served by the local facilities. Using the assessment of the paths identified above, the effect on current journey patterns (including pedestrians and others, bus routes and local vehicles) to community facilities within these catchment areas was assessed. For each of the route corridor options, any potential relief from existing severance was also identified.

15.2.13 The objective of the outdoor access impact assessment (Appendix 5, SNH 2006) is to determine any likely significant effects on outdoor access features and sites. Access (the ability to make use of a site or path) and accessibility (ease with which access can be taken) will be considered using the changes and significance on linear and area based facilities identified in the DMRB assessment as outlined above.

Mitigation

15.2.14 Where impacts on paths are identified as significant (refer to paragraph 15.2.11 for criteria), it is considered that mitigation will be necessary in order to reduce the impact. Mitigation would be likely to include new overbridges and underbridges to maintain the path link across the route corridor option and the creation of new lengths of pathway to link existing paths and maintain access.

15.2.15 Due to the preliminary nature of the route corridor options design, details of minor crossings/junctions and proposed structures are not currently available. The assessment includes identification of locations where crossing points would be required in order to reduce impacts on NMUs.

Disability Discrimination Act (1995)

15.2.16 Under the Disability Discrimination Act (1995), it is unlawful for service providers to treat disabled people less favourably than they would treat other people, for a reason related to their disability, when offering public services and facilities, thereby including paths and trails. With reference to this assessment therefore, any access structures which could potentially be used in mitigation to maintain existing paths e.g. overbridges and underpasses, need to take into account potential barriers to disabled people such as gradient, verge width, radius of bends and surfacing.

Limitations to Assessment

15.2.17 It should be noted that the rights of way baseline data provided by Scotways/SNH was compiled in 1995 and was digitised at a scale of 1:50,000, which is less accurate than the scales used in this assessment (1:10,000 and 1:25,000). Scotways relies on members of the public and organisations to provide any information on possible amendments to their database. Updates are therefore infrequent and do not necessarily include all rights of way which are sometimes only locally known. In some instances rights of way are identified which are no longer usable pathways e.g. restricted by security fences or routed through buildings. However as they have not been formally extinguished or diverted, Scotways has requested these are still included within the assessment (Scotways, pers. comm.). For the rights of way to be shown as accurately as possible on the larger scale maps used in this assessment, some of the digitised path lines have been re-positioned to match with the OS base mapping in consultation with Scotways and using, where available, descriptions of the rights of way. Due to the poor scale of the digital data and infrequent updates the accuracy of the location of rights of way cannot be guaranteed.

15.2.18 Fife Council provided its proposed Core Path network baseline data in a GIS shapefile, which has been used for the purposes of this assessment and is shown on Figures 15.1 and 15.2. The Edinburgh Core Path Plan Final Draft (2008) and the West Lothian Draft Core Path Plan (2008) were used to determine the locations of Edinburgh and West Lothian Council’s proposed Core Paths. During this assessment (in June 2008), City of Edinburgh Council adopted its Core Path Plan. As the other Core Path Plans are currently in draft and undergoing consultation, they may be subject to change.

15.2.19 Indicative community catchment areas have been identified using non-denominational primary school catchment area boundaries. These boundaries were provided by City of Edinburgh Council, West Lothian Council and Fife Council and digitised for the inclusion on figures by Jacobs Arup. It should be noted that the boundaries have been used as an indication of the likely ‘catchment areas’ i.e. areas which people will travel within local communities to access facilities. Catchment areas will be further refined at Stage 3 through consultation and site visits.

15.3 Baseline Conditions

Rights of Way

15.3.1 A public right of way is a defined route which has been used by the general public for at least 20 years and which links two public places (usually public roads). Rights of way have been recognised in Scots Law for centuries, i.e. common law. The time period of 20 years stems from the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 s3(3). Rights of way vary from long hill routes (often historical drove or kirk roads) to local routes used for walking the dog or as short cuts to shops, schools and other local amenities.

15.3.2 ScotWays maintains the National Catalogue of Rights of Way (CROW), in partnership with SNH. In addition, many local authorities also have their own records. Access along rights of way are protected by the Countryside (Scotland) Act 1967 requiring the local authority to ‘assert, protect and keep open and free from obstruction or encroachment any public rights of way’, though diversions can be considered if the proposed diversion is deemed suitable by the planning authority.

15.3.3 The 24 rights of way listed in Table 15.1 are located in part or fully within the survey area and are illustrated on Figures 15.1 to 15.4.

Core Path Network

15.3.4 The local authorities responsible for access within the survey area are Fife Council, City of Edinburgh Council, and West Lothian Council. The City of Edinburgh Council Core Path Plan was adopted in June 2008, however, all other plans are currently in draft and are therefore referred to as the ‘Proposed Core Path Network’. Local authorities have a duty to make the Core Paths Plan publicly available for inspection under the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 (paragraphs 15.1.7 to 15.1.9).

15.3.5 Core Paths may include the following: rights of way; footpaths; tracks; cycle tracks; paths which are, or may be, covered by path agreements or path orders under the Land Reform (Scotland) Act Sections 20 and 21; waterways; or other means by which persons may cross land. The Core Path Plan will have regard to the likely usage and desirability of paths, and a balance with landowner interests. The majority of Core Paths are existing well-established paths, and the Core Paths system represents a basic ‘backbone’ of key paths throughout the local authority boundaries.

15.3.6 The 23 proposed Core Paths located in part or fully within the survey area are listed in Table 15.1 and illustrated on Figures 15.1 to 15.4. Where applicable, Core Paths are identified by reference numbers as assigned by the local authorities: CEC - City of Edinburgh Council; and WL - West Lothian Council. Fife Council’s proposed Core Paths are not currently identified by reference numbers.

National Cycle Network

15.3.7 The National Cycle Network is a UK network of cycle routes, created by SUSTRANS. The routes are a combination of pedestrian routes, disused railways, minor roads, canal towpaths and traffic calmed routes; therefore, routes can also be designated as Core Paths or rights of way (Table 15.1). Sections of both National Cycle Routes (NCR) 1 and 76 fall within the survey area. The routes are described in Table 15.1 and shown on Figures 15.1 to 15.4.

Other Paths

15.3.8 Other local paths located within the survey area that are not designated rights of way, part of the Core Path network or cycleways are also listed in Table 15.1.

Table 15.1: Paths within Stage 2 Assessment Survey Area

Path Ref.	Type (including CROW or Core Path ref where applicable)	Users	Description	Community Link	Local Authority / Governing Body
A	NCR 1	Cyclists	Traffic-free shared use roadside path along the A90 from the Forth Road Bridge to Inverkeithing.	North Queensferry / Forth Road Bridge to Inverkeithing	Sustrans / Fife Council
A1	NCR 1	Cyclists	On road cycleway through Inverkeithing.	To / From Inverkeithing	Sustrans / Fife Council
A2	NCR 1	Cyclists	On road (B981 and Masterton Road) cycleway from Inverkeithing to Pitreavie.	Inverkeithing to Pitreavie, Dunfermline	Sustrans / Fife Council
B	Core Path	Pedestrians, Cyclists	Roadside path along the B981 linking North Queensferry to Rosyth and Forth Road Bridge.	North Queensferry to Forth Road Bridge and Rosyth	Fife Council
C	Core Path; Right of Way (FD89)	Pedestrians	Ferry Loch Route along track, from A90 to North Queensferry coastal path (F). Part of Ferry Loch Route Core Path, along path from A90 to Brock Street, North Queensferry.	n/a	Fife Council
D	Core Path	Pedestrians, Cyclists	Path through St. Margaret's Marsh.	n/a	Fife Council
E	NCR 76	Cyclists	On road cycleway from Rosyth Dock, linking with National Cycle Route 1.	n/a – Round the Forth route.	Sustrans / Fife Council
F	Core Path; Right of Way (FD183 and FD180)	Pedestrians, Cyclists	Coastal path linking North Queensferry to Hope St, Inverkeithing.	North Queensferry to Inverkeithing	Fife Council
G	Core Path; Right of Way (FD179)	Pedestrians, Cyclists	Caldwells Mill route along Hope Street linking the coastal path (F) with Inverkeithing.	North Queensferry to Inverkeithing	Fife Council
H	Right of Way (FD88)	Pedestrians	Track from Ferry Toll Place, running west to east, to the north of Castlandhill Woods, to meet the B980.	n/a	Fife Council
I	Core Path; Right of Way (FD87)	Pedestrians, Cyclists, Equestrians	Route through Castlandhill, from Ferry Toll Road to the B980.	n/a	Fife Council
J	Core Path	Pedestrians, Cyclists	Quiet access Castlandhill Link route along Dunfermline Wynd between Castleandhill (from I) and Inverkeithing.	Castleandhill to Inverkeithing	Fife Council
K	Core Path	Pedestrians, Cyclists, Equestrians	Quiet access Inverkeithing Reservoir Links Route from Dunfermline Wynd to Chapel Place.	Inverkeithing	Fife Council
L	Core Path	Pedestrians	Roadside path along urban Rosyth streets linking with Inverkeithing Reservoir Links Route (K).	Rosyth to Inverkeithing	Fife Council
M	Other path	Pedestrians, Cyclists	Traffic-free shared use roadside path along A921 linking NCR 1 with Rosyth.	Inverkeithing to Rosyth	Fife Council
N	Other path	Pedestrians, Cyclists	On road cycleway and roadside footway to Harley Street and traffic-free shared use path through Rosyth to Parkgate along the south side of recreation ground.	Inverkeithing to Rosyth	Fife Council
O	Core Path	Pedestrians (incl. vulnerable), Cyclists, Equestrians	Rosyth to Pitreavie link path from the Wilderness open space to Castle Brae and Carnegie Avenue, crossing the A823 on an overbridge.	Rosyth to Pitreavie, Dunfermline	Fife Council
P	Right of Way (FD163)	Pedestrians	Rural track from Masterton Road to the B916 linking path A2 with Q.	n/a	Fife Council
Q	Core Path	Pedestrians, Cyclists	Traffic-free shared use roadside path along B916 from Dunfermline to Fordell with links to Inverkeithing and Dalgety Bay.	Dunfermline to Fordell, Inverkeithing & Dalgety Bay	Fife Council
R	Core Path	Pedestrians (incl. vulnerable), Cyclists, Equestrians	Traffic-free shared use path from Fordell to Hillend.	Fordell to Hillend	Fife Council
S	Right of Way (FD168)	Pedestrians	Overgrown path running alongside a tributary to the Keithing Burn.	n/a	Fife Council
T	Core Path	Pedestrians (incl. vulnerable), Cyclists, Equestrians	Quiet access route along track from Calaisburn Cotts to M90, linking to North Duloch Loop (U) and Fordell Circuit.	n/a	Fife Council
U	Core Path; Right of Way (FD84)	Pedestrians (incl. vulnerable), Cyclists, Equestrians	North Duloch Loop off-road track from B916 to North Duloch.	n/a	Fife Council
V	Core Path; Right of Way (FD82 and FD83)	Pedestrians (incl. vulnerable), Cyclists, Equestrians	Traffic-free shared use path from Gipsy Lane, Dunfermline, north of Calais Muir Wood, to North Duloch, linking with the North Duloch Loop route (U).	n/a	Fife Council
W	Core Path	Pedestrians, Cyclists	Traffic-free shared use roadside path along Sandpiper Drive.	Dunfermline	Fife Council
XA	Core Path; NCR 1	Pedestrians (including vulnerable), Cyclists	Traffic free shared use roadside path crossing the Forth Road Bridge, part of NCR1.	Lothian to Fife and beyond	Fife Council / City of Edinburgh Council / Sustrans
X	Core Path (Part of CEC10); NCR 1	Pedestrians (incl. vulnerable), Cyclists	Part of Newbridge to South Queensferry and Kirkliston Core Path. Traffic free shared use roadside path along the A90 from the Forth Road Bridge, via subway to Ferrymuir Gait, part of NCR1.	Forth Road Bridge to South Queensferry	City of Edinburgh Council / Sustrans
X1	Core Path (Part of CEC10); NCR 1	Pedestrians (incl. vulnerable), Cyclists	Part of Newbridge to South Queensferry and Kirkliston Core Path. Off road path from Ferrymuir Gait to Viewforth Road with access to Queensferry High School, then roadside path along Roseberry Avenue, part of NCR1.	South Queensferry	City of Edinburgh Council / Sustrans
X2	Core Path (Part of CEC10); NCR 1	Pedestrians (including vulnerable), Cyclists	Part of Newbridge to South Queensferry and Kirkliston Core Path. On road cycleway and roadside footpath from South Queensferry to Wester Dalmeny, part of NCR1.	South Queensferry to Wester Dalmeny	City of Edinburgh Council / Sustrans
Y	Core Path (Part of CEC 6 and WL34); NCR 76	Pedestrians (incl. vulnerable), Cyclists, Equestrians	On road Firth of Forth route along Society Road and Hopetoun Road, forming part of the NCR76, from Hopetoun to South Queensferry, linking with the Newbridge to South Queensferry Core Path.	Hopetoun to South Queensferry	City of Edinburgh Council / West Lothian Council / Sustrans
Y1	Core Path (Part of CEC 6); NCR 76	Pedestrians (incl. vulnerable), Cyclists, Equestrians	On road Firth of Forth route through South Queensferry along Hopetoun Road and High Street to the coastline path under the Forth Rail Bridge.	South Queensferry	City of Edinburgh Council / Sustrans
Z	Core Path (Part of CEC10); Right of Way (LC118); NCR 76	Pedestrians (incl. vulnerable), Cyclists, Equestrians	Part of Newbridge to South Queensferry and Kirkliston Core Path. Off road path follows a disused railway line through South Queensferry to Dalmeny which forms part of NCR76 to Edinburgh.	South Queensferry to Wester Dalmeny	City of Edinburgh Council / Sustrans
Z1	Core Path (Part of CEC10); Right of Way (Part of LC114)	Pedestrians (incl. vulnerable), Cyclists, Equestrians	Part of Newbridge to South Queensferry and Kirkliston Core Path. Off road path follows a disused railway line from Dalmeny to Kirkliston.	Dalmeny to Kirkliston	City of Edinburgh Council
Z2	Core Path (Part of CEC10 and WL11)	Pedestrians (incl. vulnerable), Cyclists, Equestrians	Part of Newbridge to South Queensferry and Kirkliston and Winchburgh to Kirkliston Core Paths. Roadside path from the east of Kirkliston along B9080 to Winchburgh.	Kirkliston to Winchburgh	City of Edinburgh Council / West Lothian Council
AA	Right of Way (Part of LC114)	Pedestrians	Shared use rough track from Standingstane Road to Dolphington Cottages.	n/a	City of Edinburgh Council
AB	Right of Way (LC116)	Pedestrians	Rough track from Dolphington Cottages to Easter Dalmeny.	n/a	City of Edinburgh Council
AC	Core Path (Part of CEC 11); Right of Way (Part of LC130)	Pedestrians	Path alongside the River Almond.	n/a	City of Edinburgh Council
AD	Right of Way (LC117)	Pedestrians	Path via Scotstoun Avenue, South Queensferry, through Lovers Lane to Kirkliston Road.	South Queensferry	City of Edinburgh Council
AE	Right of Way (LW2)	Pedestrians	Path from Linn Mill to the north of Hedrig Hill Factory.	n/a	West Lothian Council
AF	Right of Way (LW8)	Pedestrians, Cyclists	Track from Icehouse Hill to Duddingston and Newton.	n/a	West Lothian Council
AG	Other Path	Cyclists, Equestrians	Minor road to the west of Westmuir Riding Centre.	n/a	City of Edinburgh Council
AH	Right of Way (LW16)	Pedestrians	Footpath from South Niddry Castle to Hawk Hill Wood.	n/a	West Lothian Council
AI	Right of Way (LW10)	Pedestrians, Cyclists, Equestrians	Path from Newton to Swineburn Woods and south linking to Core Path Z2.	n/a	West Lothian Council
AJ	Other Path	Pedestrians	Track through fields from Duntarvie to Myre.	n/a	West Lothian Council
AK	Core Path (Part of WL2b); Right of Way (LW18)	Pedestrians, Cyclists	Part of tow path alongside the Union Canal.	Philipstoun to Winchburgh to Edinburgh	West Lothian Council
AL	Right of Way (LW13)	Pedestrians	Footpath along Swineburn from Winchburgh Road to the Union Canal.	n/a	West Lothian Council
AM	Right of Way (LW10)	Pedestrians	Footpath linking Dalmeny train station to Core Path along Firth of Forth coastline (Y1).	South Queensferry	City of Edinburgh Council
AN	Core Path (Part of CEC 9); NCR 1	Pedestrians, Cyclists	Part of South Queensferry to Craigleith Core Path. On road route along the B924 from South Queensferry to Craigleith, Edinburgh. NCR 1 follows part of this route from Dalmeny to Craigleith, Edinburgh.	South Queensferry to Craigleith, Edinburgh. Dalmeny to Craigleith, Edinburgh.	City of Edinburgh Council
AO	Right of Way (LW12)	Pedestrians	Footpath linking Niddry Mains to Winchburgh Road.	n/a	West Lothian Council
AP	Right of Way (LW15)	Pedestrians	Footpath from Hawk Hill Wood to Ross’s Plantation.	n/a	West Lothian Council
AQ	Right of Way (LW14)	Pedestrians	Footpath from Hawk Hill Wood to Ross’s Plantation.	n/a	West Lothian Council

Community Facilities

15.3.9 Tables 15.2 and 15.3 list the key community facilities north and south of the Firth of Forth, respectively. Facilities listed include all that are accessed by the identified paths (Table 15.1), located within the study area. All identified community facilities and the indicative community catchment areas are shown on Figures 15.1 to 15.5. Facility types include doctors' surgeries, hospitals, schools, shops, post offices, churches, parks and leisure centres.

Local Communities – Northern Study Area

15.3.10 The indicative community catchment areas to the north of the Firth of Forth are shown on Figure 15.5a. The existing A90/M90 appears to define the boundaries of some of these catchment areas with most located areas either wholly east or west of the road. Only North Queensferry and Park Road primary school catchments have areas to the east and west of the M90.

Table 15.2: Community Facilities - Northern Study Area

Community Facility Type	Community
	Crossgates	Dalgety Bay	Dunfermline (East)	Halbeath	Hillend	Inverkeithing	North Queensferry	Rosyth
Church						√ √ √ √		√ √ √ √
Civic Centre						√
College				√
Community Centre			√ √ √ √			√ √	√	√
Community Leisure Centre	√		√ √ √	√				√
Doctors	√					√		√ √
Fire Station								√
Golf Course			√
Hospital			√	√
Leisure Park				√
Library	√		√			√		√
Police Station								√
Post Office	√		√	√	√			√ √
Public Park								√
Retail Park				√
School – Primary	√		√ √ √ √ √ √ √			√	√	√ √ √
School – Secondary			√			√
Train Station		√	√ √			√	√	√

Local Communities – Southern Study Area

15.3.11 The indicative community catchment areas to the south of the Firth of Forth are shown on Figure 15.5b.

Table 15.3: Community Facilities - Southern Study Area

Community Facility Type	Community
	Dalmeny	Dundas	Kirkliston	Newton	South Queensferry	Westmuir	Winchburgh
Church	√		√		√ √ √		√ √
Community Centre				√	√ √
Community Leisure Centre					√
Doctors			√		√		√
Golf Course		√
Fire Station					√
Library			√		√
Nursery			√
Post Office	√		√	√	√		√
Police Station					√
Public Park			√ √		√ √ √ √ √ √
Riding Centre						√
School – Primary	√		√		√ √		√
School – Secondary					√
Train Station	√

Public Transport

Public Bus Services

15.3.12 Within the survey area there are a number of services that provide access to the local shops and facilities within the main urban centres as well as to surrounding towns and villages. These include important links to key facilities such as Queen Margaret Hospital, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh Airport, Fife Leisure Park, higher education colleges, and park and ride facilities. A high proportion of these bus services travel across the Forth Road Bridge. A summary of the key public transport services within the survey area are listed in Table 15.4.

Table 15.4: Key Bus Services within the Study Area

Community Link	Bus No.	Route	Service Provider
Dalgety Bay – Edinburgh	53	Via Inverkeithing Square, Forth Road Bridge, Ferrytoll Park & Ride, Barton Queensferry Road.	Stagecoach
Dalgety Bay/ Dunfermline – Edinburgh	X50	Via Rosyth, Inverkeithing, Ferrytoll Park & Ride, Forth Road Bridge, Barnton Hotel, Telford College.	Stagecoach
Dunfermline – Dalgety Bay	80	Tesco (Duloch), Calais Muir Estate.	Stagecoach
Dunfermline – Edinburgh	55	Via Rosyth, Inverkeithing, Ferrytoll Park & Ride, Forth Road Bridge.	Stagecoach
	154	Via Duloch Park (Tesco), Rosyth, Inverkeithing, Forth Road Bridge.	Stagecoach
Dunfermline – Glenrothes	30	Via Dunfermline, Queen Margaret Hospital, Fife Leisure Park.	Stagecoach
Dunfermline – Inverkeithing	71	Via Rosyth, Ferrytoll Park & Ride.	Stagecoach
Dunfermline – Kirkcaldy	133	Via Halbeath, Fife Leisure Park, Crossgates.	Stagecoach
Dunfermline – Leven	7	Via Rosyth, Castleandhill Road, Inverkeithing.	Stagecoach
Dunfermline – Queen Margaret Hospital	D8	Via Duloch Park (Tesco).	Stagecoach
	15	Via Halbeath, Fife Leisure Park.	Stagecoach
Edinburgh – Dundee	n/a	Via Forth Road Bridge, Ferry Toll Park & Ride, Dunfermline (Lauder College).	City Link
Edinburgh – Falkirk	44N	Via Kirkliston, Winchburgh, Linlithgow, Bo’ness, Grangemouth.	First
Glasgow – Dunfermline	126	Fife Leisure Park, Dunfermline Fire Station.	Stagecoach
Inverkeithing – Dalgety Bay	83	Inverkeithing and Dalgety Bay rail stations.	Stagecoach
Inverkeithing – Edinburgh Airport	747	Ferrytoll Park & Ride, Forth Road Bridge.	Stagecoach
Kelty – Dalgety Bay	79/79A	Via Dunfermline, Rosyth, Inverkeithing.	Stagecoach
Kirkcaldy – Dunfermline	33	Via Hill of Beath School, Halbeath, Queen Margaret Hospital.	Stagecoach
Kirkcaldy – Edinburgh	159	Inverkeithing, Forth Road Bridge.	Stagecoach
South Queensferry – Bathgate	474	Via Newton, Linlithgow.	Davidson Buses
South Queensferry –Edinburgh	43	Via Dalmeny, Newton.	First
	X43	Via Dalmeny, Newton (Limited Stop).	First
	X4	Via Barnton, Newton (Limited Stop).	First
South Queensferry – Fauldhouse	6	Via Kirkliston, Winchburgh, Broxburn, Livingston.	First
South Queensferry – Gyle Shopping Centre	63	Via Newton, Kirkliston, Newbridge - Ratho.	Waverley Travel
Rosyth – Balingry	19	Via Dunfermline bus depot, Halbeath.	Stagecoach
St Andrews – Edinburgh	X58, X59 X60	Via Barnton Queensferry Road, Ferrytoll Park and Ride, Forth Road Bridge.	Stagecoach
St Andrews – Glasgow	X26/X27	Via Dunfermline, Halbeath (Carnegie College).	Stagecoach
Stirling – Edinburgh	38, 38A	Via Falkirk, Linlithgow, Winchburgh, Kirkliston.	First
Townhill – North Queensferry	D7	Via Duloch Park (Tesco), Calais Muir Estate, Fife Leisure Park, Hillend, Masterton Rd, Castle Brae, Rosyth, Inverkeithing (Rail Station), Ferry Toll, North Queensferry.	Stagecoach

Public Rail Services

15.3.13 Within the survey area there are a number of rail services connecting Edinburgh to Fife and beyond:

• The East Coast Main Line provides services between the North East of Scotland and London, via Edinburgh and Fife.
• The Strathclyde North East Line passes through the southern part of the survey area linking Edinburgh to Stirling.
• The Fife Circle Line links the Fife towns within the survey area (Dalmeny, North Queensferry, Rosyth and Inverkeithing) to Edinburgh.

15.3.14 The location of the railway stations within the survey area are shown on Figures 15.1 to 15.4.

Outdoor Access Facilities

15.3.15 The key outdoor access facilities located within the survey area and surrounding communities (Figures 15.1 to 15.4) are as follows:

• Area based facilities:

i. All public parks as identified in Tables 15.2 and 15.3.

ii. Inland waterbodies including Ferry Loch at North Queensferry and Humbie Reservoir.

iii. Woodlands including Calais Muir Wood, Fordell Firs, Fairy Kirk Wood, Castlandhill Wood, St Margaret’s Wood, East Shore Wood, Swineburn Wood, Muiriehall Wood, and Ross’s Plantation.

iv. St Margaret’s Marsh on the northern shore of Firth of Forth.

v. Other community land as identified in Chapter 6 (Land Use).

• Linear access facilities:

i. All rights of way as identified in Table 15.1.

ii. All Core Paths as identified in Table 15.1.

iii. National Cycle Routes 1 and 76 as identified in Table 15.1.

iv. All other paths as identified in Table 15.1.

v. River Almond.

vi. Union Canal.

15.4 Potential Impacts

15.4.1 Potential impacts of the route corridor options on pedestrians, cyclists, equestrians and communities are described in this section. It should be noted that potential impacts identified are prior to the implementation of mitigation. Impacts on paths and links to communities can be reduced through the provision of suitable mitigation measures as outlined in Section 15.5 (Potential Mitigation).

Proposed Replacement Bridge

15.4.2 As indicated in the baseline section (Table 15.1), path XA provides a traffic free link across the Forth Road Bridge for pedestrians and cyclists. Current proposals are for the proposed replacement bridge to be multi-modal and incorporate provisions for public transport and NMUs. Although the Forth Road Bridge would be closed to motorised vehicles, it is assumed that it would not be demolished and would remain available for use by NMUs. Therefore by incorporating suitable provision for NMUs, the proposed replacement bridge would offer an alternative and additional crossing and provide significant benefits for pedestrians and others.

15.4.3 The diversion of road traffic onto the proposed replacement bridge could potentially have an impact on links between settlements to the north and south of the Firth of Forth. However, all bus services across the Firth of Forth are anticipated to be maintained and therefore no significant new severance from any changes to transport links between communities is anticipated.

Northern Route Corridor Options

Impacts Common to Both Northern Route Corridor Options

Paths (Existing Crossing Points)

15.4.4 On the northern side of the Firth of Forth, the existing A90/M90 crosses NMU paths which are maintained through the provision of overbridges/underbridges. Some sections of North Corridor Option 1 and North Corridor Option 2 follow the existing alignment of the A90/M90 and would therefore cross the NMU paths in the same manner as the existing A90/M90. The two locations at which both northern route corridor options would cross NMU paths at existing crossing points are shown on Figures 15.1 and 15.2 and the paths identified in Table 15.5. It is assumed that the road improvements along these stretches would incorporate the existing crossing points and no permanent diversions would be necessary. In which case, impacts on journey length and amenity value of these paths are assessed as not being significant.

Table 15.5: Existing Crossing Points of NMU Paths Assumed to be Maintained by Both Northern Route Corridor Options

Path Ref.	Path Type	Existing Crossing	Change in Journey Length	Change in Amenity Value	Significant
E	NCR 76	The existing B981 underbridge will be maintained linking NCR 76 with NCR 1.	None	None	No
Q	Core Path	The existing B916 overbridge will be maintained.	None	None	No

Paths (New Conflicts)

15.4.5 Paths B and D would be affected by both northern route corridor options, although the two route corridor options would affect the NMU paths to differing degrees. The potential impacts on these paths are therefore described separately in Tables 15.7 and 15.8 below. These tables discuss all potential impacts of any new conflicts with NMU paths resulting from the northern route corridor options.

Community Severance (Relief from Existing Severance)

15.4.6 To the north of the Firth of Forth, communities are currently separated by the A90/M90 creating a north-south divide along the carriageway alignment. Rosyth and Dunfermline are located to the west, and Inverkeithing and North Queensferry to the east of the road. The northern route corridor options are proposed within a similar corridor to the existing A90/M90 (trending broadly north-south) and therefore it is unlikely that any relief from existing severance would result.

Community Severance (New Severance)

15.4.7 To the north of the Firth of Forth, neither of the route corridor options would directly sever any communities nor result in the loss of any community facilities. However, both route corridor options would impact on path linkages between settlements, and without mitigation, some new community severance may result where several paths which access community facilities are severed.

15.4.8 There are a number of bus services that cross existing junctions of the M90. Bus services 7, X50, 55, 71, 79, 79A, 154 and D7 provide public transport connections to community facilities between settlements located to the east and west of the M90 such as Rosyth, Inverkeithing and Dunfermline. However, vehicle access across the M90 is expected to be maintained by both route corridor options and therefore no significant new severance on bus links is anticipated in this area.

15.4.9 Both northern route corridor options would cross the railway line at the Inverkeithing Junction, although, it is anticipated that the new road would be routed over the line. None of the railway stations would be affected by either northern route corridor option since no new severance of the communities would result. Neither northern route corridor option would therefore directly affect the railway line or its services.

Outdoor Access

15.4.10 North of the Firth of Forth, the accessibility to public parks, woodlands and Ferry Loch is likely to be reduced without mitigation. Where pathways would be severed, pedestrians and others would have to choose alternative routes on existing paths to access facilities. For both northern route corridor options, access would still be possible to St Margaret’s Marsh and St Margaret’s Wood as the new road would be raised on viaduct over this area.

North Corridor Option 1

Paths (Existing Crossing Points)

15.4.11 In addition to the two existing crossing points identified in Table 15.5, North Corridor Option 1 would cross four further NMU paths in the same manner as the existing A90/M90, as shown on Figure 15.1 and identified in Table 15.6. It is assumed that the road improvements along these stretches would incorporate the existing crossing points and no permanent diversions would be necessary. In which case, impacts on journey length and amenity value of these paths are assessed as not being significant.

Table 15.6: Existing Crossing Points of NMU Paths Assumed to be Maintained by North Corridor Option 1

Path Ref.	Path Type	Existing Crossing	Change in Journey Length	Change in Amenity Value	Significant
A2	NCR 1	The existing Masterton Road overbridge will be maintained and allow for the new slip road of North Corridor Option 1 to the Masterton Junction to be routed beneath the cycle route.	None	None	No
J	Core Path	The existing Dunfermline Wynd overbridge will be maintained.	None	None	No
L	Core Path	The existing A921 underbridge will be maintained.	None	None	No
M	Footpath / Cycleway	The existing A921 underbridge will be maintained.	None	None	No

Paths (New Conflicts)

15.4.12 Table 15.7 details the potential impacts which would result on NMU paths from North Corridor Option 1. In the absence of mitigation significant impacts would potentially result on two Core Paths (B and D) and part of NCR 1. Two rights of way (H and I) are located in close vicinity to the west of North Corridor Option 1 and it is assumed access to these would be unaffected by the route corridor option.

Table 15.7: Potential Impacts of North Corridor Option 1 on NMU Paths

Path Ref.	Path Type	Potential Impact (unmitigated)	Change in Journey Length	Change in Amenity Value	Significant
A	NCR 1	Path may be impacted by the new slip road to North Corridor Option 1 and improvement works to the existing A90 link with the B981 to Inverkeithing. The cycle route will be maintained through the provision of a slip road to the B981.	None	None	No
A2	NCR 1	The on-road section of the National Cycle Route would be severed by the Masterton Junction slip road of North Corridor Option 1. Without mitigation, cyclists would probably divert via the A985 to the south. The amenity value would be lower due to the decreased safety resulting from being on a busier road route.	Increase	Decrease	Yes
B	Core Path	Path would be severed by North Corridor Option 1 and the slip road leading from the Forth Road Bridge to North Corridor Option 1. Without mitigation, NMUs would probably divert via Core Paths C and F. The amenity value of this alternative route is likely to be higher than the existing route due to improved air quality and increased safety as a result of being away from the A90.	Increase	Increase	Yes
D	Core Path	The eastern section of the recreational path, which currently links with path B, is crossed by North Corridor Option 1 on viaduct. It is assumed that this path can be retained underneath the viaduct structure. The amenity value would be lower due to the visual impact of the proposed replacement bridge.	None	Decrease	Yes
H	Right of Way	Path is located in close vicinity to the west of the proposed North Corridor Option 1. The amenity value is unlikely to be affected as the path is in close proximity to the A90/M90.	None	None	No
I	Right of Way / Core Path	Path is located in close vicinity to the west of the proposed North Corridor Option 1. The amenity value is unlikely to be affected as the path is in close proximity to the A90/M90.	None	None	No

Community Severance

15.4.13 For North Corridor Option 1, only one community link between Rosyth and North Queensferry would be severed. Without mitigation, NMUs would need to choose an alternative route and divert via existing paths to maintain access between these communities. The online alignment of North Corridor Option 1 will not create any new severance of community catchment areas as indicated on Figure 15.5a.

Outdoor Access

15.4.14 North Corridor Option 1 would potentially sever one Core Path and NCR1. Without mitigation this route corridor option could prevent some access to the outdoors, and significantly impact the continued use of NCR1.

North Corridor Option 2

Paths (Existing Crossing Points)

15.4.15 Existing crossing points which would be crossed by North Corridor Option 2 are discussed in paragraph 15.4.4 and identified in Table 15.5.

Paths (New Conflicts)

15.4.16 Table 15.8 details the potential impacts which would result on NMU paths from North Corridor Option 2 in the absence of mitigation. Significant impacts would potentially result on seven pathways, including the National Cycle Network Route 1 at two locations (A and A2), two rights of way (H and I) and four Core Paths (B, D, I and L).

Table 15.8: Potential Impacts of North Corridor Option 2 on NMU Paths

Path Ref.	Path Type	Potential Impact (unmitigated)	Change in Journey Length	Change in Amenity Value	Significant
A	NCR 1	Path would be severed by the new slip road leading to the existing A90 and B981 to Inverkeithing. Without mitigation, cyclists would probably divert via Core Paths B and F. The amenity value of this alternative route is likely to be higher than the existing route due to improved air quality and safety resulting from being away from the A90.	Increase	Increase	Yes
A2	NCR 1	The on-road section of the National Cycle Route would be severed by North Corridor Option 2. Without mitigation, cyclists would probably divert via the B981 to the north. The amenity value would be lower due to the decreased safety resulting from being on a busier road route.	Increase	Decrease	Yes
B	Core Path	Path would be severed by North Corridor Option 2. A greater length of path B would be affected by North Corridor Option 2 than by North Corridor Option 1. Without mitigation, NMUs would probably divert via Core Paths C and F. The amenity value of this alternative route is likely to be higher than the existing route due to improved air quality and safety resulting from being away from the A90.	Increase	Increase	Yes
D	Core Path	The eastern section of the recreational path, which currently links with path B, is crossed by North Corridor Option 2 on viaduct. It is assumed that this path can be retained underneath the viaduct structure, although the length of path which would be crossed is greater than for North Corridor Option 1. The amenity value would be lower due to the visual impact of the proposed replacement bridge.	None	Decrease	Yes
H	Right of Way	This recreational path would be severed by North Corridor Option 2. No alternative route would be possible. The amenity value would be lower due to the visual impact of the proposed replacement bridge and road infrastructure.	Decrease	Decrease	Yes
I	Right of Way / Core Path	Path would be severed by North Corridor Option 2. Without mitigation NMUs would probably divert via Ferry Toll Road to connect with the Core Path network to the east of the A90. The amenity value would be lower due to the visual impact of the proposed replacement bridge and road infrastructure.	Increase	Decrease	Yes
L	Core Path	Path would be severed by North Corridor Option 2. Without mitigation NMUs would probably divert via the B980 to the south to maintain links with the Core Path network. The amenity value would be lower due to the visual impact of the road infrastructure.	Increase	Decrease	Yes
M	Footpath / Cycleway	Path along the A985 would be severed by North Corridor Option 2. Without mitigation NMUs would probably divert north via the B981 or south via the B980. The amenity value would be lower due to the decreased safety resulting from the on-road sections of the proposed diversion route.	Increase	Decrease	Yes

Community Severance

15.4.17 North Corridor Option 2 would impact on access between communities by severing one link between Rosyth and North Queensferry, two links between Rosyth and Inverkeithing and one link between Inverkeithing and Dunfermline. Without mitigation, NMUs would need to choose alternative routes and divert via existing paths to maintain access between these communities. North Corridor Option 2 follows the boundaries between indicative community catchment areas and therefore no new severance is anticipated.

Outdoor Access

15.4.18 Impacts on access to outdoor facilities to the north of the Firth of Forth would be most significant for North Corridor Option 2, due to the potential severance of seven pathways, including NCR1 at two locations, two rights of way and three Core Paths. As a result of some of these severed pathways, it is likely that access would be restricted to public parks, woodlands (including Castlandhill Wood) and Ferry Loch without appropriate mitigation provision. A reduction in amenity of paths and sites is also likely for North Corridor Option 2.

Southern Route Corridor Options

Impacts Common to Both Southern Route Corridor Options

Paths (Existing Conflicts)

15.4.19 On the southern side of the Firth of Forth, the existing M8 and M9 spur crosses the Core Path Z2 at two locations, and access is maintained through the provision of two overbridges. Both southern route corridor options would cross the Core Path in the same manner as the existing M8 and M9 spur, as shown on Figures 15.3 and 15.4 and identified in Table 15.9. It is assumed that the road improvements along these stretches would incorporate the existing crossing points and no permanent diversions would be necessary. In which case, impacts on journey length and amenity value of this path are assessed as not being significant.

Table 15.9: Existing Crossing Points of NMU Paths Assumed to be Maintained by Both Southern Route Corridor Options

Path Ref.	Path Type	Existing Crossing	Change in Journey Length	Change in Amenity Value	Significant
Z2	Core Path	The existing M8 overbridge will be maintained.	None	None	No
Z2	Core Path	The existing M9 spur overbridge will be maintained.	None	None	No

Paths (New Conflicts)

15.4.20 On the southern side of the Firth of Forth, one Core Path (Y) and NCR 76 would be crossed by both southern route corridor options on viaduct. It is assumed that these paths can be retained beneath the new structure. However, the proximity of this Core Path to the route corridor options would likely reduce the amenity value. Similarly, the right of way (AE) which links to Core Path Y would likely experience a decrease in amenity value. Table 15.10 details potential impacts on paths Y and AE.

Table 15.10: Potential Impacts Common to Both Southern Route Corridor Options

Path Ref.	Path Type	Potential Impact (unmitigated)	Change in Journey Length	Change in Amenity Value	Significant
Y	Core Path / NCR 76	Path assumed to be retained by both route corridor options below the new road viaduct. Potential changes in scenery, accessibility and safety.	None	Decrease	Yes
AE	Right of Way	Path is located in close vicinity to the west of the southern route corridor options. Proximity of the road is likely to lead to a decrease in amenity.	None	Decrease	Yes

Community Severance (Relief from Existing Severance)

15.4.21 To the south of the Firth of Forth, both route corridor options would divert vehicular traffic away from South Queensferry to its western periphery, reducing traffic volumes along this section of the A90 and removing vehicular traffic from the Forth Road Bridge. This would provide significant benefits for pedestrians and cyclists using NCR1 and the proposed Core Path network in the South Queensferry area. Some relief from existing severance in the community of South Queensferry may result from lower traffic volumes.

Community Severance (New Severance)

15.4.22 To the south of the Firth of Forth, neither of the route corridor options would directly sever the heart of any communities nor result in the loss of any community facilities. It should however be noted that both South Corridor Options 1 and 2 would create a divide between houses located at Linn Mill, on the western margin of South Queensferry, and the core of South Queensferry where the majority of its community facilities are located. Linkages between Linn Mill to the west of the route corridor options and South Queensferry to the east of the route corridor options would be maintained along paths AE and Y (beneath the proposed viaduct) and therefore the severance impact is considered to be negligible.

15.4.23 Both South Corridor Options 1 and 2 would impact on the Core Path (Z2) link between Winchburgh and Kirkliston, which follows a minor road (B9080). Without mitigation, changes in journey length along this path would lead to adverse impacts on pedestrians and others accessing these areas, and some new community severance may result for these communities. Bus services 6, 38, 38A, 44N, 63 also provide important public transport links along the B9080. However, this path (Z2) is already crossed twice by the M8 and provision for NMUs is provided by two overbridges. Assuming the Forth Replacement Crossing design maintains the B9080 as a transport link and new junctions of the route corridor options would not require at-grade crossings, no significant new severance is anticipated.

15.4.24 The A904 is also crossed by both route corridor options to the south of the Firth of Forth. Although this does not directly conflict with any paths, this road provides a key public transport link for the village of Newton and surrounding communities. Bus services X4, 43, X43, 63 and 474 travel along this route providing connections to locations such as South Queensferry, Edinburgh, Linlithgow, and the Gyle Shopping Centre. It is assumed that the provision of an overbridge at this location (as specified in all design route corridor options) would prevent any changes in access along the A904 therefore no significant new severance is anticipated at this location.

15.4.25 As shown in Figure 15.5b, the school catchment area for Echline would be severed by South Corridor Options 1 and 2. However, it is likely that most children living in the severed areas will travel to school by car or public transport and since all road links will be maintained with both corridor options, no significant severance would result. The community catchment of South Queensferry would be unaffected by both southern route corridor options.

15.4.26 Both southern route corridor options would cross the Strathclyde North East railway line though it is anticipated that the new road would be routed over the line. The Dalmeny railway station would not be affected by either southern route corridor option since no new severance of Dalmeny and Queensferry would result. Neither southern route corridor option would therefore directly affect the railway line or its services.

Outdoor Access

15.4.27 Impacts on outdoor access are discussed in paragraphs 15.4.31, 15.4.36 and 15.4.37 below.

South Corridor Option 1

Paths (Existing Conflicts)

15.4.28 Existing crossing points which would be crossed by South Corridor Option 1 are common to both southern route corridor options and as such are discussed in paragraph 15.4.19 (and identified in Table 15.9).

Paths (New Conflicts)

15.4.29 Table 15.11 details the potential impacts which would result on NMU paths from South Corridor Option 1 in the absence of mitigation. In addition to impacts on paths Y and AE which are common to both southern route corridor options (Table 15.10), South Corridor Option 1 would impact on one Core Path (Z2).

Table 15.11: Potential Impacts of South Corridor Option 1 on NMU Paths

Path Ref.	Path Type	Potential Impact (unmitigated)	Change in Journey Length	Change in Amenity Value	Significant
Z2	Core Path	The proposed junction connections of South Corridor Option 1 would sever this route. Without mitigation, NMUs would probably divert via tracks to the northwest of Kirkliston. Junction structures and connecting roads may decrease air quality and reduce tranquillity.	Increase	Decrease	Yes

Community Severance

15.4.30 Potential community severance impacts resulting from South Corridor Option 1 are discussed in paragraphs 15.4.21 to 15.4.25 under impacts resulting from both southern route corridor options.

Outdoor Access

15.4.31 South Corridor Option 1 would result in the potential severance of only one Core Path and would not result in any direct loss of outdoor access facilities and is therefore not considered to have a significant impact on access to the outdoors.

South Corridor Option 2

Paths (Existing Conflicts)

15.4.32 Existing crossing points which would be crossed by South Corridor Option 2 that are common to both southern route corridor options are discussed in paragraph 15.4.19 (and identified in Table 15.9). South Corridor Option 2 would also cross right of way and Core Path Z1 where it is already crossed by the A90, as shown on Figure 15.4. This existing crossing point is identified in Table 15.12. It is assumed that the road improvements along this stretch would incorporate the existing crossing point and no permanent diversion would be necessary. In which case, impacts on journey length and amenity value of this path are assessed as not being significant.

Table 15.12: Existing Crossing Point of NMU Path Assumed to be Maintained by South Corridor Option 2

Path Ref.	Path Type	Potential Impact (unmitigated)	Change in Journey Length	Change in Amenity Value	Significant
Z1	Right of Way / Core Path	South Corridor Option 2 new junction connections would sever this route. However the A90 already crosses the path at this location and there is provision for crossing the A90 using the existing dismantled railway underbridge.	None	None	No

Paths (New Conflicts)

15.4.33 Table 15.13 details the potential impacts which would result from South Corridor Option 2 in the absence of mitigation. In addition to impacts on paths Y and AE (Table 15.10) which are common to both southern route corridor options, South Corridor Option 2 would significantly impact on four paths including two rights of way (AI and AP) and one Core Path (Z2).

Table 15.13: Potential Impacts of South Corridor Option 2 on NMU Paths

Path Ref.	Path Type	Potential Impact (unmitigated)	Change in Journey Length	Change in Amenity Value	Significant
Z2	Core Path	The proposed South Corridor Option 2 junction connections would sever this route at two new locations. Without mitigation, NMUs would probably divert via right of way AH and minor roads to the southwest of Kirkliston. The Core Path would be lost by using this alternative route. Junction structures and connecting roads may reduce air quality and reduce tranquillity. Where Z2 is currently crossed by the M9, the improvements to this road will maintain existing crossing points.	Increase	Decrease	Yes
AG	Other Path	Minor road is located in close proximity to the west of South Corridor Option 2. Amenity value would potentially decrease due to the proximity of the road infrastructure.	None	Decrease	Yes
AI	Right of Way	Path would be severed by the proposed junction connections of South Corridor Option 2 at two locations. Without mitigation, NMUs would probably divert via the minor road at Swineburn, assuming that an underbridge is provided where South Corridor Option 2 crosses the minor road at this location. Junction structures and connecting roads may decrease air quality and reduce tranquillity.	Increase	Decrease	Yes
AP	Right of Way	Path would be severed by the proposed junction connections of South Corridor Option 2. A possible alternative route would be via the south side of Ross’s Plantation along right of way AQ, resulting in the loss of AP as a recreational route. Junction structures and connecting roads may decrease air quality and reduce tranquillity.	Decrease	Decrease	Yes

Community Severance

15.4.34 Potential community severance impacts resulting from South Corridor Option 2 are discussed in paragraphs 15.4.21 to 15.4.25 under impacts resulting from both southern route corridor options.

15.4.35 In addition to potential severance of the Echline community catchment, the school catchment area for Kirkliston would be severed by South Corridor Option 2 (Figure 15.5b). However, it is likely that most children living in the severed areas will travel to school by car or public transport and since all road links will be maintained, no significant severance would result.

Outdoor Access

15.4.36 Impacts on access to outdoor facilities to the south of the Firth of Forth would be most significant for South Corridor Option 2, due to the potential severance of paths at five locations. A reduction in amenity is also likely to be significant for South Corridor Option 2.

15.4.37 The accessibility of Ross’s Plantation, Swineburn Wood, Muiriehall Wood and Humbie Reservoir would be reduced by South Corridor Option 2 without mitigation. It is likely that pedestrians and others would have to divert their usual journeys to these areas via alternative existing pathways. This option would also result in the loss of some woodland at these locations (Chapter 6: Land Use).

15.5 Potential Mitigation

15.5.1 At DMRB Stage 2 assessment of route corridor options, the detailed design has not been developed and mitigation detail therefore cannot be accurately defined. The objective of this section is therefore to identify ‘standard’ or ‘anticipated’ mitigation taking into account best practice, legislation and guidance. This mitigation is taken into account in the subsequent identification of likely residual impacts in Section 15.6 (Summary of Route Corridor Options Assessment), to provide a robust basis for comparative assessment and selection of a preferred route corridor option to be taken forward to Stage 3.

15.5.2 Potential mitigation measures are listed in Tables 15.14 and 15.15 for the northern and southern route corridor options respectively.

Table 15.14: Potential Mitigation Measures – Northern Route Corridor Options

Northern Route Corridor Option (s)	Path Ref.	Path Type	Users	Significant Impact	Potential Mitigation / Recommendations
North Corridor Option 1	A	NCR 1	Cyclists	No	Cycle route will be maintained alongside the existing A90 and slip roads to the B981.
North Corridor Option 2	A	NCR 1	Cyclists	Yes	NMU access provision from existing road bridge to B981 to allow continued access along the National Cycle Route. Alternatively NCR1 could be routed over the proposed replacement bridge on a traffic free pathway, though this would create a longer route and require diversions at north and south ends of the proposed replacement bridge.
Either Northern Route Corridor Option	A2	NCR 1	Cyclists	Yes	Overbridge to allow continued cycle use along the National Cycle Route.
Either Northern Route Corridor Option	B	Core Path	Pedestrians Cyclists	Yes	Underbridge to allow continued pedestrians and others use along this Core Path.
Either Northern Route Corridor Option	D	Core Path	Pedestrians Cyclists	Yes	None required if path is maintained beneath proposed viaduct.
North Corridor Option 2	H	Right of Way	Pedestrians	Yes	Overbridge to allow continued pedestrians and others use along the right of way to the B980.
North Corridor Option 2	I	Right of Way / Core Path	Pedestrians Cyclists Equestrians	Yes	Overbridge to allow continued pedestrians and others use along the right of way and links to the Core Path network in Inverkeithing.
North Corridor Option 2	L	Core Path	Pedestrians	Yes	Overbridge to maintain community links along the Core Path network from Inverkeithing to Rosyth.
North Corridor Option 2	M	Footpath / Cycleway	Pedestrians Cyclists	Yes	Underbridge to maintain community links from Inverkeithing to Rosyth along the A985.

Table 15.15: Potential Mitigation Measures – Southern Route Corridor Options

Southern Route Corridor Option (s)	Path Ref.	Path Type	Users	Significant Impact	Potential Mitigation / Recommendations
Either Southern Route Corridor Option	Y	Core Path / NCR 76	Pedestrians (incl. vulnerable) Cyclists Equestrians	Yes	None required if path is maintained beneath the proposed viaduct.
Either Southern Route Corridor Option	AE	Right of Way	Pedestrians	Yes	Planting to screen visual impacts of the road infrastructure.
South Corridor Option 2	Z1	Core Path	Pedestrians (incl. vulnerable) Cyclists Equestrians	No	None required if proposed junction structures do not affect the existing underbridge and use by pedestrians and others along this Core Path.
Either Southern Route Corridor Option	Z2	Core Path	Pedestrians (incl. vulnerable) Cyclists Equestrians	Yes	Corridor Option 1: One overbridge to maintain community links between Kirkliston and Winchburgh along this Core Path and the B9080. Corridor Option 2: One overbridge and one underbridge to maintain community links between Kirkliston and Winchburgh along this Core Path and the B9080.
South Corridor Option 2	AI	Right of Way	Pedestrians Cyclists Equestrians	Yes	Two underbridges to maintain use by pedestrians and others along the path to link with Core Path Z2.
South Corridor Option 2	AP	Right of Way	Pedestrians	Yes	A new path to link the severed sections of the right of way through Ross’s Plantation.

15.5.3 As indicated above, the main requirement for mitigation is to ensure that consideration is given to the location of any proposed junction structures and that the design of any overbridges and underbridges maintains access for NMUs. Any bridges should take into account potential barriers to disabled people such as the gradient or surfacing and should be compliant with the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act (1995) (paragraph 15.2.16).

15.5.4 With appropriate mitigation i.e. the provision of overbridges and underbridges in the Forth Replacement Crossing design, community links would be maintained and no new community severance is likely to result.

15.5.5 All route corridor options would have an impact on some local paths and appropriate diversions would need to be provided to ensure access is maintained during construction in compliance with legislative requirements. Core paths are protected under the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 (refer to paragraph 15.1.8). As noted in paragraph 15.3.2, access along rights of way is protected by the Countryside (Scotland) Act 1967, however, diversions can be considered if the proposed diversion is deemed suitable by the planning authority. In addition, under the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984, rights of ways are considered as roads, and consequently there are diversion and extinguishment procedures available under this Act.

15.6 Summary of Route Corridor Options Assessment

15.6.1 With appropriate mitigation (Section 15.5: Potential Mitigation) there would be no significant residual journey length impacts on paths. Access along all paths and to outdoor facilities would be maintained regardless of route corridor option, and therefore no community severance would result.

15.6.2 For all the options where paths would cross the route corridors via an overbridge or underbridge, it is likely that NMUs would experience a reduction in amenity value. The level of significance of the decreased amenity has not been assessed at Stage 2 but will be determined at Stage 3 taking into consideration changes in traffic flow data, the visual assessment, and proposed mitigation measures.

Northern Route Corridor Options

15.6.3 Overall, North Corridor Option 1 would result in the least number of paths being directly affected. No communities would be directly affected in terms of severance or loss of community facilities by either northern route corridor option.

North Corridor Option 1

Paths

15.6.4 Two new crossing provisions are proposed for Core Path B and path A2 (NCR1) to reduce the potential impact on journey length impact. Two rights of way (H and I) are located in close vicinity to the west of the route corridor option though no significant impacts are likely. Residual adverse amenity value impacts would remain on both Core Paths B and D due to the visual impact of the route corridor option.

Community Severance

15.6.5 With the new crossing provisions, links between Rosyth and North Queensferry would be maintained. North Corridor Option 1 would not directly sever any communities, catchment areas or result in the loss of any community facilities.

Outdoor Access

15.6.6 Access to public parks, woodlands and Ferry Loch would be maintained through the provision of new crossings. St Margaret’s Marsh and St Margaret’s Wood would remain accessible underneath the viaduct structure of the proposed replacement bridge.

North Corridor Option 2

Paths

15.6.7 Six new crossing provisions are proposed, for NCR1 (A2), Core Paths B, I (also right of way), L, right of way H and other path M, to reduce impacts on journey length. In addition, access to the affected section of NCR1 (A) would be reinstated, possibly through re-routing over the proposed replacement bridge which would result in an increased journey length. Residual adverse amenity value impacts would remain on all paths crossed by North Corridor Option 2 due to the visual impact of the route corridor option.

Community Severance

15.6.8 With the new crossing provisions, access between the communities of Rosyth, North Queensferry, Inverkeithing and Dunfermline would be maintained. North Corridor Option 2 would not directly sever any communities, catchment areas or result in the loss of any community facilities.

Outdoor Access

15.6.9 Access to public parks, woodlands (including Castlandhill Wood) and Ferry Loch would be maintained through the provision of new crossings. St Margaret’s Marsh and St Margaret’s Wood would remain accessible underneath the viaduct structure of the proposed replacement bridge.

Southern Route Corridor Options

15.6.10 Overall, South Corridor Option 1 would result in the least number of paths being directly affected and would have least impact on rights of way. No communities would be directly affected in terms of severance or loss of community facilities by either southern route corridor option.

South Corridor Option 1

Paths

15.6.11 One new crossing provision is proposed for Core Path Z2 to reduce the impact on journey length. Residual adverse amenity value impacts would remain on all paths crossed by South Corridor Option 1 due to the visual impact of the route corridor option.

Community Severance

15.6.12 With the new crossing provision on Core Path Z2, access between the communities of Winchburgh and Kirkliston would be maintained. South Corridor Option 1 would not directly sever any communities or result in the loss of any community facilities. Maintenance of paths AE and Y underneath the viaduct of the proposed replacement bridge would avoid any potential severance of Linn Mill from South Queensferry. Travel within the Echline school catchment area would be maintained along the continued road links.

Outdoor Access

15.6.13 The new crossing provision on Core Path Z2 would maintain any potential links to outdoor access facilities located in Winchburgh, Kirkliston and the surrounding area.

South Corridor Option 2

Paths

15.6.14 Four new crossing provisions are proposed for Core Path Z2 (two locations) and right of way AI (two locations) to reduce the impacts on journey length. Residual adverse amenity value impacts would remain on all paths crossed by South Corridor Option 2 due to the visual impact of this option.

Community Severance

15.6.15 With the new crossing provisions, access between the communities of Winchburgh and Kirkliston would be maintained. South Corridor Option 2 would not directly sever any communities or result in the loss of any community facilities. Maintenance of paths AE and Y underneath the viaduct of the proposed replacement bridge would avoid any potential severance of Linn Mill from South Queensferry. Travel within the Echline and Kirkliston school catchment areas would be maintained along the continued road links.

Outdoor Access

15.6.16 The new crossing provisions would maintain any potential links to outdoor access facilities located in Winchburgh, Kirkliston and the surrounding area including Ross’s Plantation, Swineburn Wood, Muiriehall Wood, and Humbie Reservoir. However, while access to these areas will be maintained, there will be some loss of woodland (Chapter 6: Land Use).

15.7 Scope of Stage 3 Assessment

15.7.1 In accordance with DMRB Volume 11 Section 3, Part 8, an assessment of the preferred route corridor will be undertaken to identify any significant impacts on pedestrians, cyclists, equestrians and communities. The assessment will be based on the following steps:

• confirm information gathered from relevant statutory bodies and local councils including types of users through desk-based assessment and site visits;
• undertake additional consultation with relevant organisations e.g. SNH, local councils, Scotways and Sustrans;
• refine the Stage 2 assessment of the amenity value of paths using traffic flow data and the Stage 3 visual assessment;
• incorporate findings from the socio-economic assessment into the assessment of community effects;
• update and define level of impact significance for changes in journey length, amenity and community severance; and
• propose appropriate mitigation measures based on refined assessments.

15.8 References

City of Edinburgh Council (2006). Rural West Edinburgh Local Plan, Adopted June 2006.

City of Edinburgh Council (2008). Adopted Edinburgh Core Paths Plan (2008). www.edinburghcorepaths.org.

City of Edinburgh Council (2008). Edinburgh Core Paths Plan – Final Draft (2008). www.edinburghcorepaths.org.

Countryside (Scotland) Act 1967. HMSO.

Disability Discrimination Act 1995. HMSO.

Fife Council (2002). Dunfermline and the Coast Local Plan, adopted April 2002.

Fife Council (2008). Core Path Proposals Draft.

Fife Council (2008). Dunfermline and West Fife Local Plan, under preparation.

Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003. HMSO.

Ordnance Survey (2006) Explorer Map 1:25000, Sheet 350: Edinburgh, Musselburgh & Queensferry.

Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 s3(3). HMSO.

Roads (Scotland) Act 1984. HMSO.

Scotways (2008) Personal Communication, Jo Doake.

SNH (2005). Scottish Outdoor Access Code. Scottish Natural Heritage.

SNH (2006). A Handbook on Environmental Impact Assessment. Scottish Natural Heritage.

The Highways Agency et al. (1993). DMRB Volume 11 Pedestrians, Cyclists, Equestrians and Community Effects, Section 3, Part 8, June 1993. The Highways Agency, Scottish Executive Development Department, The National Assembly for Wales and The Department of Regional Development Northern Ireland.

West Lothian Council (2005). West Lothian Local Plan, finalised 2005, to be adopted 2008.

West Lothian Council (2008). West Lothian Draft Core Paths Plan.