General discussion and AOB including points raised by the A83 Taskforce Members

Adrian Curtis of Cairndow Community Council noted that in relation to the two junctions in and out of Cairndow, the community is of the opinion that traffic is travelling too fast and it is difficult to get on/off the road safely. AC queried if electronic signs could be installed or other improvements to the junctions?

Tanja Waaser (TW) responded that TS are currently in the process of installing vehicle activated signage. Regarding the junctions, annual road safety screenings show that there are no recommendations to improve this junction. From 2021-23 there were no accidents in this location, with no evidence of any accidents since.

AC noted that speeding traffic is always an issue.

WS noted that this is a poor junction and further works should be investigated. Speeding vehicles are an issue.

David Sumsion (DS) noted that both junctions are on tight bends. DS feels that the speed limit should be reduced or the junctions should be completely reconfigured.

FH noted a national speed review is ongoing and will be issued for consultation.

JG noted he has three queries. The first is in relation to traffic management being on the A83 since 2020 and how we can be more effective. The A83 has not been open to two way traffic for four years, but this has already been discussed. JG continued to ask if monies are committed to these improvements for a permanent solution or will they be subject to future review, and finally JG asked for the Terms of Reference document to be updated.

FH responded that all the works to date contribute to ongoing spend, and the RaBT project remains a key priority in the Programme for Government. Moving forward to looking at budgets for 2025/26, there is not an earmarked ‘pot’ of money for the project, but year to year budget planning is ongoing.

JG asked if in two years’ time, there is a risk that money will not be available, which is why he is challenging at this time?

FH responded that TS is well practiced in carrying out these risk assessments and budget planning. FH also noted that future funding would be subject to the completion of the statutory process

FH suggested that in future, the Taskforce consider splitting into two – one specific to the RaBT works and one for the wider A83 Trunk Road.

Morag Goodfellow (MG) asked about the fiscal challenges with the project and noted that with a number of hydroelectric schemes in the area perhaps European Tunnellers could provide expertise for this project?

FH noted that she has been clear on the fiscal challenges, and that whilst tunnellers will be here, it is not our intention to revisit the Stage 2 assessment.

JG added tunnelling works are ongoing elsewhere, and that if the preferred route becomes unaffordable then there is an opportunity to look into tunnelling.

GR responded that we have gone through the formal assessment process and the reasons for the selection of the preferred route can be found in the Stage 2 assessment. GR continued to note whilst AWJV maintain a strong Scottish workforce for this project, these consultants are global organisations and can draw on expertise internally to provide information and guidance when required on a number of topics, including tunnelling. This was reiterated by RG.

Lawrence Shackman (LSh) noted that a tunnel built for water as part of a hydroelectric scheme is significantly different to one required for people / traffic.