EXCLUSIVE: By Dave Lord

UNCERTAINTY LAST night surrounded the £15 million project to upgrade one of Scotland’s deadliest road junctions.

Initial work got under way at the Ballinluig blackspot last month but Perth and Kinross councillors have thrown a spanner in the works by refusing an application for a quarry to provide the required sand and gravel.

The A9 north of Perth is considered to be one of Scotland’s most dangerous roads and numerous lives have been lost at Ballinluig.

Campaigners—backed by The Courier—had fought tirelessly for improvements and were delighted when plans for a new grade- separated junction were announced.

Civil engineering firm Balfour Beatty had submitted planning applications for two temporary quarries as a total of some 100 cubic metres of sand and gravel is needed.

Members of the local authority’s influential development control committee yesterday heard that material from both sites might well be required.

Nevertheless, councillors voted —albeit by the narrowest of margins—to approve only one of the applications.

As a result Balfour Beatty was given permission to form one quarry at Ballachallan two miles south of the junction but was denied plans to establish a similar quarry close to the settlement of Guay.

Some villagers had objected to the proposal on the grounds of a loss of amenity and it was rejected on the say-so of committee convener Willie Wilson, who made the decision after councillors voted five in favour and five against.

Speaking to The Courier after yesterday’s meeting Balfour Beatty’s operations director Russell Rennie admitted the firm could not be sure sufficient material would be available at Ballachallan.

Asked if the council’s controversial decision would ultimately delay the potentially life-saving Ballinluig upgrade, he said, “Our priority is to ensure we have enough material to complete the work.

“We cannot be sure that there is enough at Ballachallan and this will need to be further investigated. Obviously our preference was for both sites to be approved.”

Speaking during the meeting itself he told councillors the Ballinluig upgrade would “remove a major accident blackspot” from the country’s trunk road network.

“Granting permission for both sites would ensure the project is completed on time, which is in the public interest.”

Some councillors had pleaded for both applications to be given the green light, warning of potentially dire consequences.

Leading them was Highland Perthshire councillor Ken Lyall.

“The whole country has waited a long, long time for this junction to be upgraded and we cannot jeopardise it at this stage,” he said.

“This would only be a temporary measure with the quarries being used for some six months and the sites then reinstated.

“There have been no statutory objections (from the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency or Scottish Natural Heritage) and I just feel a little discomfort for a few months over winter will not harm anyone.”

Lorraine Caddell was similarly minded. “This is an extremely important project,” she said. “I think it would be prudent and proper to approve both of these applications. This must be moved forward as quickly as possible.”

Eleanor Howie was another to back both the Balfour Beatty applications. “The correct material simply has to be available for this junction,” she said.

“The biggest issue for local people is surely that the Ballinluig improvements are completed as quickly as possible and—for the tax payer at least—within budget.”

However, development control committee convener Willie Wilson did not share such concerns.

“I am sure there would be enough material at Ballachallan,” he said, although he gave no evidence to back up the statement.

Alan Jack seconded Mr Wilson, saying, “We all want the junction improvements to go ahead but if we are short of material there are other sites that could supply sand and gravel.”