Appendix E - Responses to concerns raised in feedback

Unique ID 001

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Please email the projections for the times to pass through the roundabout at busy periods (all directions)

Response

Thank you for your feedback.

Whilst it is acknowledged that a roundabout will likely result in slightly less of a journey time saving compared to a grade separated junction, the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 2 route option assessment concluded that the roundabout was the preferred junction option at Dunkeld as it offers reduced construction complexity, reduced landscape and visual impacts and overall reduced land take.

Further refined traffic modelling is being undertaken to inform the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development, refinement and assessment and will be published in the DMRB Stage 3 assessment report in Spring 2025.

Unique ID 002

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Disagree with widening of verges - central reserve - makes the whole road wider causing increased environmental damage please design the road to be as narrow as possible.

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

A ramp to the station is essential for when the lift is under maintenance or broken down

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

Very important that the entrance to the underpass is re-located to be in line with top of station road. Underpass could curve to south to avoid railway footbridge

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

please omit the swale adjacent to the Niel Gow statue. this is valuable green space.

Response

Thank you for your feedback.

We note your concern that wider verges and central reserve require a larger land area with resultant environmental impacts, and your preference for keeping the road as narrow as possible. Whilst we acknowledge the desire to minimise the amount of land required for delivery of the project, the developing design takes account of industry standards and best-practice guidance in respect of the safety of all users. As such, in some locations widening of verges and central reserve are necessary for a variety of reasons, such as to provide suitable visibility for drivers on the dual carriageway, so improving driver safety.

In other instances, wider verges allow greater separation between vehicle traffic and paths and footways that are used for Walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders (WCH), where appropriate, thereby improving safety of these users and amenity of the active travel networks that are provided as part of the proposed scheme.

With regards to your comment on access to the station during maintenance or break down of the lift, such details regarding the operation and maintenance methods will be discussed and refined with key stakeholders in due course. Provision of WCH options for local and core paths, including links from Birnam Glen to the railway station building and Station Road, were presented at the community engagement event in August 2024. These proposals will continue to be assessed as part of the ongoing Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 3 design development and will be published in the DMRB Stage 3 assessment report in Spring 2025.

In respect of your comment regarding the location of the pedestrian underpass entrance in-line with the top of Station Road, when we announced the Preferred Route Option in December 2023 it was noted that the angle and position of the underpass would be developed further. As part of the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development, a number of factors have informed the location of the underpass entrance now being proposed, including the impact this has on the design levels for the A9 carriageway, constructability improvements in respect of a reduction in underpass length and structural complexity, minimising the interface with the Listed Building/footbridge, and improved integration with the car park due to being more centralised. For context, the revised location of the proposed underpass entrance is approximately 20 metres from the top of Station Road.

The proposed swale, located at the junction of Perth Road and the A923 in the land you noted to be adjacent to the Niel Gow statue, forms part of the proposed drainage network. This drainage feature provides treatment of surface water runoff, necessary for compliance with the relevant Sustainable Urban Drainage System (SuDS) requirements, from the A923 to improve water quality prior to connecting to the existing drainage network that outfalls to the River Tay. Whilst the design will continue to be refined, efforts will be made to design in such a way to complement and integrate with the local environment.

Unique ID 003

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

No roundabout. Feedback from a9 road users has been ignored, we were promised a grade separated dual carriageway from Inverness to Perth. A roundabout will generate more noise, more pollution, slow traffic and become a road blocker in summer. It is not the solution and will lead to a re-evaluation within the decade.

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

This and the previous events (Jan 24) were not widely advertised and many missed the opportunity to view and comment. Adverts in P&J are essential for Inverness, Aviemore and many road users.

Response

Thank you for your feedback.

As detailed during previous public engagement, the Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section included a number of unique challenges in the development of route options due to proximity of residential properties, sports club, the railway and Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. Due to the constraints, and taking into account the feedback from the A9 Co-Creative process with the local community, a roundabout was included within the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 2 route options assessment which was assessed alongside a grade separated junction option. The Preferred Route option identified is the culmination of an extensive and robust assessment process, which considered a range of engineering, environmental, traffic and economic factors. The ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development and assessment continues to refine the Preferred Route, including the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction.

Whilst it is acknowledged that a roundabout will likely result in slightly less of a journey time saving compared to a grade separated junction, the assessment concluded that the roundabout was the preferred junction option at Dunkeld as it offers reduced construction complexity, reduced landscape and visual impacts and overall reduced land take. We can also confirm that in line with current DMRB standards the provision of a roundabout on the standard of road proposed for the A9 is permitted.

Although traffic on the A9 will have to slow to negotiate the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld, the traffic modelling undertaken at DMRB Stage 2 suggests that queuing would not be experienced on a day-to-day basis and therefore fewer accidents are expected as a result. Additionally, during the on-going DMRB Stage 3 design development, appropriate advanced warning indicators are being developed, in consultation with an independent Road Safety Auditor, and incorporated to reduce the risk of accidents in relation to the proposed roundabout.

In the DMRB Stage 2 route options assessment, there were no significant effects predicted for air quality with regard to human health for the Preferred Route or the other three whole route options assessed. The Preferred Route will be further developed during the on-going DMRB Stage 3 Assessment and in conjunction with this an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is being undertaken. The EIA Report will consider the impacts and effects of the proposed scheme, including associated road traffic noise, on a range of factors including noise and air quality. Baseline and predicted noise and air quality assessments are currently on-going, the outcome of which will determine if mitigation will be required. Should the assessment deem mitigation is required, then there are a number of potential methods which could be considered. The potential impacts and residual effects (after mitigation) will be reported the EIA Report to be published in Spring 2025.

We appreciate your comments on the need for more advertising for public engagement events. The approach taken to advertising for these public engagement events was in-line with that which has been employed for previous engagement activities on this project and wider A9 Dualling projects. We will however continue to review our approach and take account of such feedback to ensure suitable coverage for future events.

Unique ID 004

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

I would like to know if consideration has been taken for the increased noise levels rom buses and extra traffic on Perth and station road, most of the houses are listed and have single glazing.

Response

As part of Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 3 process, we are undertaking an assessment of the environmental impacts and effects of the proposed scheme across a range of environmental factors, including changes in traffic flows and speeds and the impacts and effects on noise and vibration at noise sensitive receptors. Potential impacts will be reported in the Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR).

Should the noise and vibration assessment identify mitigation as being required, then there are a range of potential measures which could be considered depending on various factors such as the nature, location and severity of the impact. Mitigation measures identified, and the resulting residual effects of the proposed scheme (accounting for the implementation of mitigation), will be reported in the EIAR.

We note your comment regarding potential increased traffic flow on Perth Road and Station Road. The traffic modelling undertaken as part of the DMRB Stage 2 assessment did record an anticipated increase in the Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) travelling along Perth Road due to a combination of the proposed scheme and an anticipated increased vehicle usage. Further refined traffic modelling is being undertaken to inform the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development and the EIAR (including assessment of noise and vibration) and which will be published in Spring 2025.

Unique ID 005

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Just provide the information in a simple PDF format, this virtual space is a pain!

Response

Thank you for your feedback regarding the Virtual Exhibition Space. We strive to provide materials in an inviting and engaging manner, however please note that all exhibition materials are also available as PDFs on the Transport Scotland website at Exhibition materials - Community engagement events - August 2024 - Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing - A9 Dualling | Transport Scotland.

Unique ID 006

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

Very disappointed we are not getting the statue back.

Response

Thank you for your feedback. It is not immediately clear from your feedback which statue you are referring to, however we have assumed it is in relation to the Niel Gow statue in Birnam village. We are aware of this statue and are taking its location into account when developing the necessary proposals in this area, and will seek to avoid any impact on it.

Unique ID 007

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Actually seems ok

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

Cyclists will hopefully be directed to cycle route.

Not sure what wheeler is? if electric scooter's maybe not.

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

Perhaps make it useable for increased tourism/visits to Dunkeld/Birnam

Response

We note your positive feedback on the information presented and the general design development of the proposed scheme.

The ongoing Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 3 design development and refinement, in combination with the Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR), will consider integration with and connection to existing facilities for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders (WCH). Where necessary, appropriate signage will also be provided for such facilities, however these proposals will be developed and refined at a later stage of scheme development.

With regard to your query about the term ‘wheelers/wheeling’, the term has been used when referring to wheelchair and mobility scooter users, to reflect our aim for inclusive designs. Sustrans provide a good explanation of the term on their website (How we're making our language more inclusive - Sustrans.org.uk).

Noting your feedback regarding the replacement Dunkeld & Birnam Station car park, this is proposed to provide approximately 50 parking spaces, which would be an increase from the approximately 30 parking spaces provided within the existing station car park. Consultation with key stakeholders through the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development and assessment will help to inform the design and layout of the replacement car park, its integration with active travel and public transport networks, and potential facilities such as EV charging or secure bike parking.

Unique ID 008

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Looking good, great to see roundabout retained. Please could thought be given to how to slow traffic down coming off roundabout and heading to Birnam or Dunkeld.

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

I think a physical barrier is needed on footway between Birnam Junction and Station - no way children can encouraged to use it without this provision.

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

If cycle route diverted through Perth road, can you have with council for cycle pathways

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

Lots of charging in station car park please

provision for e-bike?

can you outline park for construction please?

Response

Thank you for your positive feedback on the general design development of the proposed scheme.

We note your feedback regarding how to slow down traffic coming off the Dunkeld roundabout. The speed limit on the local road network is defined by the local road authority, which in this location is Perth and Kinross Council. As part of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 3 design development and assessment process, consultation is being undertaken with the local authority (Perth and Kinross Council) to identify any mitigating measures required to address impacts from the proposed scheme, including consideration of speed limits on the local road network and any potential changes.

In addition, during the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development and assessment, appropriate advance warning indicators will be developed in consultation with an independent Road Safety Auditor, and incorporated into the design to assist with advising road users that they are approaching the roundabout and should adjust their speed accordingly.

We note your comments on the provision of a physical barrier separating the A9 from the footway between Birnam Junction and the station. The developing design takes account of industry standards and best-practice guidance in respect of the safety of all users, including the separation/buffer between vehicle traffic and paths and footways that are used for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders (WCH). The current proposals for this route include standard-compliant segregation/buffer width between the carriageway edge and the path for the majority of the route, which negates the need for a physical barrier. As part of the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development and assessment, the design of WCH provisions throughout the proposed scheme, including buffer/segregation widths, will continue to be refined. An independent Road Safety Audit will also be undertaken which will consider the safety of all users and inform the ongoing design development. Further details on the provisions for WCH will be published in the DMRB Stage 3 report and Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) to be published in Spring 2025.

With respect to your comment regarding the provision of cycle pathways on Perth Road, this road lies within the local road network and is therefore managed and operated by Perth and Kinross Council. Consultation is being undertaken with key stakeholders throughout the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 assessment to assist with and inform the design development of the proposals, including those for WCH provision throughout the scheme. As noted above, further details on the WCH provisions will be published in the DMRB Stage 3 report and EIAR to be published in Spring 2025.

Thank you for your positive feedback about the car park design and your suggestions of potential facilities in the proposed new car park at Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station. The design of the car park itself will be refined during the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development and assessment process, and will be detailed within the DMRB Stage 3 report to be published in Spring 2025. Specific details regarding facilities incorporated into the car park, such as EV charging and cycle provisions, will be further developed in consultation with the relevant stakeholders in subsequent refinement of the scheme proposals. We appreciate your suggestions and will take this into consideration at the appropriate time.

As part of the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 scheme assessment, initial consideration will be given to how the scheme could be constructed to inform the identification of necessary mitigations which may be required during the construction phase. The precise construction methodology and phasing, including parking arrangements for station users, will however be developed by the construction contractor appointed in due course for this section of the A9 Dualling Programme.

Unique ID 009

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

I have concerns on whether design proposals take the recent 2025 flooding into account - i live in the Ballinluig section of the A9 where we experienced huge water pooling and we rely on an area of land beside the A9 collecting excess water.

Response

Thank you for your feedback.

As part of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 3 design development and assessment, an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is being undertaken which assesses the impacts and effects of the proposed scheme in a range of environmental categories, including flood risk.

The flood assessment work is undertaken based on industry guidance, and in consultation with key stakeholders, and includes a detailed assessment on a range of flood events up to the 0.5%AEP (200-year) plus climate change flood event It is not practical to assess individual historical events. Where adverse impacts are predicted, and if the assessment identifies that mitigation is required, then there are a range of potential measures which could be considered, such as compensatory flood storage areas and flood relief culverts, to counter any adverse impacts of the proposed scheme. Mitigation measures identified, and the resulting residual effects of the proposed scheme (accounting for the implementation of mitigation), will be reported in the EIA Report.

Unique ID 010

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

We feel that this is progressing well and the Community Engagement Events have been very helpful in this respect.

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

Excellent. We hope that they do not suffer from Scottish government cut backs.

Given the predicted increase in traffic along Perth Road, we feel that there is a greater need for a 20mph speed limit particularly if the National Cycle Route (NCN77) is to be diverted along it.

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

A far better layout and the revised access to the station is very attractive.

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

The developing design continues to be informed by the community objectives and the developing design features proposed are much appreciated, particularly the aesthetic design of the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station and the River Tay crossing.

Response

Thank you for your feedback on the engagement events, we are pleased to hear that you found the information presented helpful. We appreciate your positive feedback about the layout of the car park, the access to the station, and the incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design development and assessment work.

We note your concern regarding traffic volume and speeds along Perth Road. The speed limit on the local road network is defined by the local road authority, which in this location is Perth and Kinross Council. As part of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 3 design development and assessment process, consultation is being undertaken with the local authority (Perth and Kinross Council) to identify any mitigating measures required to address impacts from the proposed scheme, including consideration of speed limits on the local road network.

Unique ID 011

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

I object the footpath on the bridge and no new separate footbridge for pedestrians and no barrier between pedestrians & traffic there either.

Response

We note your feedback regarding the lack of a separate or segregated footway, which we understand is in relation to provision on the Tay Crossing bridge at the northern end of the proposed scheme. This feedback will be used, as part of the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development and assessment work, to inform the continued development of walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders provision throughout the proposed scheme. Detailed explanation of the design and assessment of such provisions will be published in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 3 report and Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) in Spring 2025.

Unique ID 012

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Happy

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

important that safe provision is made for all NMUs crossing the underpass to use Castle grounds.

2: Birnam junction - important that safe provision for walkers and cyclists at the underpass and to link in with the much used Dunk/10 path around the river

3: as ref: 3400 preferred

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

i think its important to liaise with plans to make both platforms more accessible, raised platforms etc

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

Appreciate your effort. personally i am happy. Found everyone at the consultation very helpful.

Response

We note and appreciate your positive feedback regarding the general design development of the proposed scheme, and in relation to the efforts and helpfulness of those present at the public exhibition events.

Thank you for your comments on the need for safe walking, wheeling, cycling and horse riding (WCH) provisions. As part of the ongoing Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 3 assessment we have undertaken further consultation with relevant national and local bodies to inform the continued design development of WCH provisions across the scheme. This includes at the locations mentioned in your feedback, namely the proposed underpass access to Murthly Castle grounds and the proposed Birnam Junction underpass. Initial plans showing the proposals under consideration in these areas were available at the engagement events, and the feedback in response to these will be used to inform the design development and refinement of these proposals.

The current proposals at the underpass beneath the A9 which provides access to Murthly Estate comprise a shared-use access due to the low anticipated traffic volume and speeds along the proposed access track.

The current proposals in the area of Birnam Junction include a footpath in the verge of the B867/Perth Road, between the local paths identified as DUNK/14 and DUNK/103, to provide a safe crossing under the A9 carriageway. Consultation is being undertaken with key stakeholders throughout the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development and assessment regarding the proposed WCH facilities and integration and connection with existing routes.

Additionally, an independent Road Safety Audit will be undertaken to understand any additional safety requirements going forward to inform the design development. Further details on the WCH provisions will be provided in the DMRB Stage 3 report and Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) to be published in Spring 2025.

We note your comment regarding liaison with plans regarding platform levels and accessibility at Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station. The work to raise platform levels is being taken forward by Network Rail, but these proposals are also being taken into account in the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development process. This process has included consideration of a joined-up approach for improved access to and around the Station. The existing access to Platform 2 is not impacted by the proposed scheme, therefore provision of an alternative access to this platform did not form part of the route options developed and assessed as part of the DMRB Stage 2 Route Option Assessment. Whilst the underpass extension to Platform 2 is not required as a direct result of the proposed scheme, Transport Scotland recognises that it presents a unique opportunity to consider a total transport system approach to accessibility to and around the station. Transport Scotland is therefore including an extension of the proposed underpass to Platform 2 within the developing design for the project. A number of details are however still to be confirmed, such as the most suitable and assured mechanism via which the underpass extension could be promoted by Scottish Ministers. Draft Orders and EIAR for the project will be published in Spring 2025, at which time Transport Scotland will seek to provide a further update regarding the potential underpass extension.

Unique ID 013

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Good to see junctions are being addressed

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

Will there be a pavement under the bankfoot/Birnam under bridge?

Concerned that only 2.7m between cyclist and road near station. Unsafe for cyclists?

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

Will it accommodate more cars than currently?

Electric car charges that are fast chargers, cycle stands?

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

Happy that pavement to Quarry Car Park is included. Unhappy that Dunkeld Junction is not priority before all the other dualling projects.

Response

We note your positive feedback on the general design development of the proposed scheme.

We note your comments on the need for safe walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders (WCH) provision. The current proposals in the area of Birnam Junction include a footpath in the verge of the B867/Perth Road, between the local paths identified as DUNK/14 and DUNK/103, to provide a safe crossing under the A9 carriageway. Consultation is being undertaken with key stakeholders throughout the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development and assessment regarding the proposed WCH facilities and integration and connection with existing routes.

Cycle by Design 2021 provides guidance on segregation/buffer widths between vehicle traffic and paths and footways that are used for WCH, where appropriate, and for the A9 carriageway the desirable provision is 3.5m. We can confirm that the buffer width of 3.5m is predominantly provided between the footway from Birnam Junction to Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station and the A9 carriageway, with the exception of the small length of localised narrowing to 2.7m due to a number of constraints including the close proximity of the Highland Main Line Railway. The design development within this area is still ongoing and we are looking to optimise the buffer width and will continue to consult with key stakeholder on this. Further details on the WCH provisions will be published in the DMRB Stage 3 report and Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) in Spring 2025

Unique ID 014

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Positive

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

1 - the underpass will help with access for cyclists and walkers going to Caputh

2 - it would be good if the footbridge where the Braan joins the Tay was reinstated to improve walking access from dunkeld – hermitage

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

The proposal for 50 car park spaces for station is welcomed. Accessible safer.

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

They appear to have been taken into account.

Response

Thank you for your feedback, we note your positive comments regarding the general design development information presented at the engagement event in August, the underpass enabling access to Caputh, the number of spaces in the car park, and the incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

We note your comments on the walking, wheeling, cycling, and horse-riding (WCH) provision over the River Braan to facilitate access between Dunkeld and The Hermitage. The WCH drawings presented at the engagement event in August 2024 included crossings over the River Braan in both verges of the A9 carriageway, with a 2.5m buffer from the carriageway. The current proposals improve the resilience of these routes in future flood events, and improve connectivity and integration with existing routes to Dunkeld and to The Hermitage via Inver. As part of the ongoing Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 3 assessment we will continue to develop the design of WCH provisions along the scheme. Further details on the WCH provisions will be published in the DMRB Stage 3 report and Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) in Spring 2025.

Unique ID 015

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

Any path near road, please keep soft shrubs and trees to create barrier

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

Likes fine.

Will lift be big enough for bikes?

Response

Thank you for your feedback.

We note your comments regarding the need for barrier provision where any path is near a road. As part of the ongoing Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 3 assessment we will continue to develop the design of walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders (WCH) provision throughout the proposed scheme, including buffer/segregation widths, with reference to the relevant and appropriate design standards and guidance. Further details on the WCH provisions will be published in the DMRB Stage 3 report and Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) to be published in Spring 2025.

We note your comment on the lifts being sized to accommodate bikes. It is best practice for the lifts to be designed to accommodate bikes and the design will be further developed in consultation with the relevant stakeholders during the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 assessment. The refinements to the proposed design and further details on the design will be published within the DMRB Stage 3 report and EIAR in Spring 2025.

Unique ID 016

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

I have to cross the A9 at least twice a week as i volunteer in Birnam. It is very dangerous and difficult to judge the speed of oncoming traffic in dark and very wet weather. I would welcome changes here, underpasses, roundabouts, traffic lights, anything would be better

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

Sounds much better tout needs to take northbound platform in aswell. For passengers with luggage it is a distance to walk from the new car park to the station

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

Very good to involve the community

Response

We appreciate your positive feedback on the information presented at the engagement event in August and the involvement of the community in our ongoing design and assessment work.

We note your comment regarding linking the northbound platform to the new pedestrian underpass.

The ongoing Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 3 design development process has included consideration of a joined-up approach for improved access to and around the Station. The existing access to Platform 2 is not impacted by the proposed scheme, therefore provision of an alternative access to this platform did not form part of the route options developed and assessed as part of the DMRB Stage 2 Route Option Assessment. Whilst the underpass extension to Platform 2 is not required as a direct result of the proposed scheme, Transport Scotland recognises that it presents a unique opportunity to consider a total transport system approach to accessibility to and around the station. Transport Scotland is therefore including an extension of the proposed underpass to Platform 2 within the developing design for the project. A number of details are however still to be confirmed, such as the most suitable and assured mechanism via which the underpass extension could be promoted by Scottish Ministers. Draft Orders and Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) for the project will be published in Spring 2025, at which time Transport Scotland will seek to provide a further update regarding the potential underpass extension.

We note your comments regarding the need for safe means of crossing the A9. One of the key objectives of the A9 Dualling programme is to improve safety for motorised and non-motorised users by reducing accident severity and reducing driver stress. These objectives have been taken into consideration throughout all of the design development to date and will continue to be considered within the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development and assessment. Additionally, an independent Road Safety Audit will be undertaken to understand any additional safety requirements going forward to inform the design development

Further details on the pedestrian provisions for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders (WCH) will be published provided in the DMRB Stage 3 report and EIAR to be published in Spring 2025.

Unique ID 017

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Clearly a change needs to be made as safety is a primary concern for access to the villages. The plans do not go far enough to consider the impact to the local community.

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

It is a positive that the groups are being considered and access to existing footpath needs to be incorporated. These users should not Should not need to walk along the A9 to continue

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

Linking the service to the community is important to ensuring opportunities for leisure for the community is at the heart of the plans

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the

Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

These are key and should be the primary concern of the project. The current road is affecting communities terribly

Response

Thank you for your feedback about the importance of opportunities for leisure being at the heart of the plans for the car park and new pedestrian underpass at the station.

We note your comments regarding safety is a primary concern for access to the villages. One of the key objectives of the A9 Dualling programme is to improve safety for motorised and non-motorised users by reducing accident severity and reducing driver stress. These objectives have been taken into consideration throughout all of the design development to date and will continue to be considered within the ongoing Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 3 design development and assessment. As detailed in the DMRB Stage 2 Scheme Assessment report, the proposed A9 dual carriageway will be a Dual 2-lane All-purpose (D2AP) road. The design for the proposed scheme is being developed in accordance with the relevant design standards and guidance, for example through the removal of gaps in the central reserve and the development of suitable standard-compliant junction arrangements to safe access and egress to the A9.

In addition, during the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development and assessment, an independent Road Safety Audit will be undertaken to review the design proposals from the perspective of ensuring safety of all users. This will feed into the design development and refinement process, for example through the identification of measures to assist with advising road users that they are approaching a junction and should adjust their speed accordingly.

As part of DMRB Stage 3 process, we are undertaking an assessment of the environmental impacts of the proposed scheme across a range of environmental factors. Potential impacts will be reported in the Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR). Should the assessment identify mitigation as being required, then there are a range of potential measures which could be considered depending on various factors such as the nature, location and severity of the impact. Mitigation measures identified, and the resulting residual effects of the proposed scheme (accounting for the implementation of mitigation), will be reported in the EIAR to be published in Spring 2025.

We note your comments on the need for safe provision for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders (WCH) users as part of the proposed scheme.

As part of the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 assessment we continue to develop the design of WCH provisions. The provisions presented at the August 2024 consultation event included routes alongside the A9, however we have undertaken further consultation with relevant national and local bodies to inform the continued design development to provide appropriate buffer/segregation width between the road and WCH provisions. Further details on the pedestrian provisions will be published in the DMRB Stage 3 report and EIAR in Spring 2025.

Unique ID 018

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

As part of the dualling programme it is much welcome & a positive step in supporting growing commercial and tourist traffic.

Process of engagement is welcomed and provided valuable information& insight.

Q - why does it require 9-10 professional staff to be on hand? what is the estimated cost?

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

there has to be a common argument to have a national cycle route that goes the whole length of the A9. There are sections currently disconnected prohibiting full cycle access

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

Disabled access would be an issue with distance from car park to platform's. Why does the underpass not provide access to far platform?

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

Community objectives seemed to be at the forefront of engagement and is welcomed. Continued engagement with community councils needs to be ongoing and constant.

Response

Thank you for your feedback. We note both your concerns and your positive feedback on the information presented at the engagement event in August.

We note your comment regarding the number of staff present at the engagement events. The purpose of these events is to allow members of the public an opportunity to engage directly with the project team, view the proposals, ask questions and express their opinions. In order to provide a valuable and informative opportunity for members of the public to seek information on the proposals, we supplement the core project team with technical specialists in areas of the proposals in which we anticipate receiving interest and questions.

We note your suggestion of a national cycle route that goes the whole length of the A9. This is beyond the current scope of the A9 Dualling programme and we cannot comment further at this time. The ongoing Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 3 design development and refinement, in combination with the Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR), will consider integration with and connection to existing facilities for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

The ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development process has included consideration of a joined-up approach for improved access to and around the Station. The existing access to Platform 2 is not impacted by the proposed scheme, therefore provision of an alternative access to this platform did not form part of the route options developed and assessed as part of the DMRB Stage 2 Route Option Assessment. Whilst the underpass extension to Platform 2 is not required as a direct result of the proposed scheme, Transport Scotland recognises that it presents a unique opportunity to consider a total transport system approach to accessibility to and around the station. Transport Scotland is therefore including an extension of the proposed underpass to Platform 2 within the developing design for the project. A number of details are however still to be confirmed, such as the most suitable and assured mechanism via which the underpass extension could be promoted by Scottish Ministers. Draft Orders and EIAR for the project will be published in Spring 2025, at which time Transport Scotland will seek to provide a further update regarding the potential underpass extension.

Unique ID 019

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

We think that the roundabout, even with separate access route from Dunkeld, it will make it very difficult to turn right across to the 822 without traffic lights due to traffic volume.

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

Changes are good but still difficult of access to the opposite side of the track from the station. Need to address the both sides with good paths, lighting and lifts "

Response

Thank you for your feedback. We note your concerns regarding the roundabout at Dunkeld and access to and from Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station.

The Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section included a number of unique challenges in the development of route options due to proximity of residential properties, sports club, the railway and Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. Due to the constraints, and taking into account the feedback from the A9 Co-Creative process with the local community, a roundabout was included within the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 2 route options assessment which was assessed alongside a grade separated junction option. The Preferred Route option identified is the culmination of an extensive and robust assessment process, which considered a range of engineering, environmental, traffic and economic factors.

Drivers on a roundabout have priority over those on the approaches, but no approach arm has priority over the others. Traffic approaching the roundabout on the A9 will have to slow and give way to traffic already on the roundabout, and this will create gaps in the A9 traffic flow that will allow traffic from the local roads, including travelling from Dunkeld, to safely enter the roundabout. Further refined traffic modelling is being undertaken to inform the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development, refinement and assessment and will be published in the DMRB Stage 3 assessment report in Spring 2025.

The ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development process has included consideration of a joined-up approach for improved access to and around the Station. The existing access to Platform 2 is not impacted by the proposed scheme, therefore provision of an alternative access to this platform did not form part of the route options developed and assessed as part of the DMRB Stage 2 Route Option Assessment. Whilst the underpass extension to Platform 2 is not required as a direct result of the proposed scheme, Transport Scotland recognises that it presents a unique opportunity to consider a total transport system approach to accessibility to and around the station. Transport Scotland is therefore including an extension of the proposed underpass to Platform 2 within the developing design for the project. A number of details are however still to be confirmed, such as the most suitable and assured mechanism via which the underpass extension could be promoted by Scottish Ministers. Draft Orders and Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) for the project will be published in Spring 2025, at which time Transport Scotland will seek to provide a further update regarding the potential underpass extension.

Unique ID 020

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

The design solutions presented seem well thought out

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

All seems reasonable

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

It appears to be a neat solution and in some ways ties the railway station more into the community rather than the current separation

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

No comment to make

Response

We note and appreciate your positive feedback on the design proposals presented at the engagement event in August 2024, and how the proposed new pedestrian underpass better links the railway station to the community.

Unique ID 021

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Excellent considering the obvious difficulties but i fear the roundabout is a big mistake

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

The roundabouts i imagine public opinion has obviated commonsense

Response

Thank you for your positive comments about the design development. The Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section included a number of unique challenges in the development of route options due to proximity of residential properties, sports club, the railway and Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. Due to the constraints, and taking into account the feedback from the A9 Co-Creative process with the local community, a roundabout was included within the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 2 route options assessment which was assessed alongside a grade separated junction option. The Preferred Route option identified is the culmination of an extensive and robust assessment process, which considered a range of engineering, environmental, traffic and economic factors.

Unique ID 022

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Sooner rather than alter

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

Speed restrictions put in place sooner than later

Response

We appreciate your feedback and thank you for your support.

We note your feedback regarding speed restrictions, which we have interpreted to relate to the local roads rather than specifically the new car park. The speed limit on the local road network is defined by the local road authority, which in this location is Perth and Kinross Council. As part of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 3 design development and assessment process, consultation is being undertaken with the local authority (Perth and Kinross Council) to identify any mitigating measures required to address impacts from the proposed scheme, including consideration of speed limits on the local road network.

Unique ID 023

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Happy with it.

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

Looks good a big improvement. A lot of thought has gone into it.

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

Hope the residents on the access road are happy, as there will be a lot more traffic going past them

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

It all looks good

Response

Thank you for your positive feedback on the general design development presented at the engagement event in August, including the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders (WCH) provision, and how we have incorporated the Community Objectives into our work.

We note your feedback regarding increased traffic using Station Road to access the proposed new car park, and the impact this will have on residents in this location. Further refined traffic modelling is being undertaken to inform the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development and assessment, which will provide informed projections of the anticipated increased traffic levels on Station Road. This will be used to inform the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) which is being undertaken as part of the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 development and assessment work. The EIA Report will consider the impacts and effects of the proposed scheme, on a range of factors including noise and air quality. Baseline and predicted assessments are currently on-going, the outcome of which will determine if mitigation will be required. The potential impacts and residual effects (after mitigation) will be reported the EIA Report to be published in Spring 2025

Unique ID 024

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

It was useful to be told about the cycle and footpaths

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

Not looking forward to cycling through Birnam Perth road. Would prefer separate path as now

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

Car park will quickly fill with mountain bikers. Is there a way people getting the train can get priority?

Response

We note your positive feedback on the information your received about cycle and footpaths at the engagement event in August.

We also note your comments on the provision of a separate path between Birnam Junction and the station. We can confirm that the current proposals for this route shown at the August 2024 event, includes a separate path alongside the dualled A9 between Birnam Junction and the station with a segregation/buffer width between the carriageway edge and the path for the majority of the route. As part of the ongoing Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 3 design development and assessment, the design of walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders (WCH) provisions throughout the proposed scheme, will continue to be refined, and will be detailed in the DMRB Stage 3 Report to be published in Spring 2025.

We note your comment regarding priority for station users in the new car park. Matters regarding the management and operation of the proposed car park will be discussed and developed with the relevant stakeholders in due course, and cannot be commented upon at this time.

Unique ID 025

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Ideas all good. Priority in getting work started.

Response

We appreciate your feedback and thank you for your support.

The publication of draft Orders and the Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) for the project in Spring 2025 will mark the formal commencement of the statutory process for the project. The current programme for the project indicates construction contract award in Autumn 2028, with this section of the A9 Dualling operational by the end of 2032, however the programme for the project is subject to completion of the statutory process and cannot be confirmed until that time.

Further details on the A9 delivery can be found on the A9 Dualling website here

Unique ID 026

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

I strongly oppose dualing this section of the A9. It’s the only section that is so close to a village and building a larger road beside Dunkeld & Birnam will have permanent negative impacts. The loss of trees and screening between the village and road, the increased noise and pollution and the loss of green space and woodland will harm people and planet. Safely measures can be made without dualling the road.

The road will be too close to the river, harming fragile riparian habitat.

The Dalguise junction is so excessive for the number of vehicles that use the road. It will have a big carbon footprint and will require a large area of semi native woodland to be felled. A junction with waiting lane is all that’s needed to improve safety.

Mistakes have been made so many times with large scale road ‘improvement’ projects in the past that are now being undone at huge cost. The M8 through Glasgow, the main roads along the waterfronts in Dundee and Fort William. Don’t make another mistake.

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

I find the maps really hard to understand, will the orange lines marked as core paths be kept or are they being replaced by the pink lines in some places? E.g opposite the Dunkeld house hotel; will you have to walk up to and along beside the road or will the river side path still be usable?

In general I think that the road is far too close to the river in many places and so options for walking/cycling will be much more limited.

The plans mention keeping the current pedestrian access on Tay bridge at Dalguise. It is so dangerous having pedestrians and a marked NCN cycle route beside fast traffic with no barrier. Surely this can be improved rather than keeping it as it is.

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

I don’t agree with the car park causing local business premises to be demolished without replacement.

I think that be loss of screening from trees between the road and the village by the station will be bad for people’s health, tourism and the feel of the village.

Just improve the rail service and station, then we’re won’t need a bigger road.

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

The community have made it clear that noise and air pollution are key concerns. Pretending to address this with ‘low noise road surfacing’ is a joke! Consider real options like a tunnel, enclosed road or better yet, no dialling and better public transport instead.

Dualling the road completely contradicts the community objective to protect the beauty and natural heritage of the area.

Response

Thank you for your feedback, and we note your opposition to the scheme.

The wider A9 Dualling Programme involves the upgrade of single-carriageway sections of the A9 between Perth and Inverness to dual carriageway. The objectives of the A9 Dualling are to:

Improve the operational performance of the A9 by reducing journey times and improving journey time reliability;
Improve safety for motorised and non-motorised users by reducing accident severity and reducing driver stress;
Facilitate active travel within the corridor; and
Improve integration with public transport facilities.

In order to deliver on these objectives for the wider A9 Dualling Programme, delivery of each of the individual sections of the Programme, including the Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section, is necessary.

As detailed during previous public engagement, the Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section of the A9 Dualling included a number of unique challenges in the development of route options due to proximity of residential properties, sports club, the railway and Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. Due to these constraints, and taking into account the feedback from the A9 Co-Creative process with the local community, route options were developed and included within the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 2 route options assessment. The Preferred Route identified was the culmination of an extensive and robust assessment process, which considered a range of engineering, environmental, traffic and economic factors. The ongoing DMRB 3 design development and assessment continues to refine the Preferred Route.

As detailed in the DMRB Stage 2 Scheme Assessment report, the proposed A9 dual carriageway will be a Dual 2-lane All-purpose (D2AP) road. The design for the proposed scheme, including the proposed Dalguise Junction arrangement to which you refer, is being developed in accordance with the relevant design standards and guidance, for example through the removal of gaps in the central reserve and the development of suitable standard-compliant junction arrangements to provide safe access and egress to the A9.

Additionally, an independent Road Safety Audit will be undertaken to understand any additional safety requirements going forward to inform the design development.

As part of DMRB Stage 3 process, we are undertaking an assessment of the environmental impacts of the proposed scheme across a range of environmental factors. The Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) will detail any potential impacts as a result of the proposed scheme, and will assess the need or otherwise for mitigation. Should the assessment identify that mitigation is required, potential methods and measures to mitigate will be considered depending on various factors such as the nature, location and severity of the impact. Mitigation measures identified, and the resulting residual effects of the proposed scheme (accounting for the implementation of mitigation), will also be reported in the EIAR, which will be published in Spring 2025.

Some of the factors which the EIAR will assess and report on, particularly relevant to the matters raised in your feedback, include:

Population and Land Use (potential impacts and effects on private property and housing, community land and assets, development land and businesses and agricultural holdings);
Biodiversity (potential impacts and effects on habitats and species);
Cultural Heritage (potential impacts and effects on archaeological remains, historic buildings and historic landscapes);
Air Quality, Noise and Vibration (potential impacts and effects on noise and vibration sensitive receptors); and
Climate (impact on greenhouse gas emissions and vulnerability to climate change).

Where habitat such as woodland (including that providing visual screening and that adjacent to rivers and streams) is lost due to the proposed scheme, this will be replaced by compensatory planting providing mitigation for landscape and visual effects and habitat loss.

Additionally, the EIAR will model the potential for noise and vibration impacts and mitigation will be developed where identified as being required. This can include use of measures such as low noise road surfacing, but other alternative and supplementary measures are also available where deemed appropriate and necessary. Impacts and effects associated with noise and vibration and air quality will be reported in the EIAR.

The EIAR includes an assessment of potential impacts and residual effects on Population – Land Use. This assessment includes reporting the potential impacts and residual effects of the change in land use at Birnam Industrial Estate to provide the Dunkeld & Birnam Station replacement car park. The provision of a replacement car park is necessary to ensure the continued operation of Dunkeld & Birnam Station.

We note your feedback regarding the lack of a separate or segregated footway on the Tay Crossing bridge. This feedback will be used, as part of the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development and assessment work, to inform the continued development of walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders (WCH) provision throughout the proposed scheme. Detailed explanation of the design and assessment of such provisions will be published in the DMRB Stage 3 report and EIAR in Spring 2025.

Whilst the proposals continue to be refined as part of the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development and assessment process, we can confirm that the WCH provision throughout the scheme is being developed in accordance with the relevant design standards, namely the DMRB, Cycle by Design 2021, Roads for All 2013, and in consultation with key WCH stakeholders. However, in some locations, it may not be possible to provide a design fully compliant to standards due to the existing topography and numerous local constraints (Highland Main Line railway, River Tay, River Braan, Birnam etc.). In these situations, the WCH proposals are being designed in consultation with the relevant stakeholders to optimise the provision as close to the standards as possible. As part of the scheme design development, an Equality Impact Assessment will be undertaken.

Unique ID 027

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Very informative. Staff excellent and informative.

Response

Thank you for your positive feedback on the information presented at the engagement event in August.

Unique ID 028

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

An at road level video of progress of Dunkeld Junction would be useful.

Response

Thank you for your feedback. We note your request for a road level video of Dunkeld Junction, and will take this into consideration for future public exhibitions, such as those which will be held following the publication of the draft Orders and Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) for the project in Spring 2025.

Unique ID 029

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

What is the cost Benefit ratio for these proposals?

Is there better CBR for upgrading the adjacent rail network?

Is this plan taking land that could be better used to upgrade the rail network?

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

Will Transport Scotland Cycle by Design standards be applied through out the works?

Will works be compliant with Equalities Act specifically not creating physical barriers to those disabled riders using non standard cycles

Where you say standards will be met ""where possible

which locations is this not possible? What are you intentions at those places.

Where construction works require existing Walker Wheelers Cyclist & horse rider routes to be closed for health & safety reasons will alternative safe routes be signposted. If alternative safe routes are not available will onward safe transport be supplied such as Dutch authorities supply a free bus service for people using cycles to bypass major works? If not why not? https://theafsluitdijk.com/nieuws/cycle-path-closure-untill-2025/ "

Response

Thank you for your feedback.

The Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 2 assessment report included a comparison of the Economic Performance for each option and included an Indexed Benefit to Cost Ratio (BCR) against the four route options under consideration. We can confirm that out of these options, the Preferred Route scored the highest. Further details can be found with the DMRB Stage 2 Assessment Report, Volume 1, Part 4: Traffic and Economic Assessment found on the Transport Scotland website. This project is part of the wider A9 Dualling Programme, the objectives of which aim to provide a number of other benefits – it will assist economic growth by improving journey times, journey time reliability, safety and potentially saving costs for businesses. Further refined economic assessment of the proposals will be undertaken as part of the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 Assessment, which will be reported in the DMRB Stage 3 Report to be published in Spring 2025.

We note your comments suggesting that the Highland Main Line (HML) railway should be upgraded by the Scottish Government instead of progressing the A9 Dualling. The proposal to dual the A9 between Perth and Inverness emerged from the Strategic Transport Projects Review (STPR), which is a multi-modal transport study. STPR also identified improvements to the HML as a priority intervention for the Perth to Inverness corridor. The improvements to the HML have been completed in two phases. Phase one of the project delivered two additional services each way per day and average journey time improvements of 6 minutes. Phase 2 delivered signalling upgrades at Aviemore and Pitlochry stations, along with an extension of the passing loop at Aviemore and the reconfiguration and extension of the platforms at Pitlochry, enabling simultaneous arrival of trains at both these stations. Whilst Transport Scotland are progressing with the A9 Dualling Programme, improvements to the HML are also being delivered concurrently. Whilst there are currently no active rail enhancement projects on the HML, Transport Scotland continues to revise its programme of rail works against priorities in the context of available funding, and remains committed to the continued investment in rail and improving rail services in Scotland in order to provide more sustainable and reliable forms of travel for people in Scotland.

We note your comments on the design of standard compliant facilities for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders (WCH).

Whilst the proposals continue to be refined as part of the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development and assessment process, we can confirm that the WCH provision throughout the scheme is being developed in accordance with the relevant design standards, namely the DMRB, Cycle by Design 2021, Roads for All 2013, and in consultation with key WCH stakeholders. However, in some locations, it may not be possible to provide a design fully compliant to standards due to the existing topography and numerous local constraints (HML railway, River Tay, River Braan, Birnam etc.). In these situations, the WCH proposals are being designed in consultation with the relevant stakeholders to optimise the provision as close to the standards as possible. As part of the scheme design development, an Equality Impact Assessment will be undertaken.

As presented at the Community Engagement Event in August 2024, the ongoing design development will assess impacts to routes used by WCH, and the design will aim to integrate and connect with existing provision where possible. Further details on the WCH provisions will be published in the DMRB Stage 3 report and Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) to be published in Spring 2025.

During construction, programming of construction activities and any associated impact on WCH routes within the construction area will be the responsibility of the appointed Contractor, who will have an obligation to coordinate and manage impacts to ensure the safety of all users.

Unique ID 030

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Some positives whereby A9 junction safety is improved. For residents much seems overlooked by a lack of detail in design and crucial local amenities being overlooked entirely.

Construction traffic will negatively impact Station Road and the villages for years. Noise and congestion really affected daily life in Birnam when SGN replaced the gas line in 2024. The increased construction vehicle trips up Station Road were very noticeable too.

WRT permanent change, Station Road street will become busier with busses and cars accessing the street much more frequently due to the parking and Station access. Disappointingly, no traffic calming provisions preventing speeding through our villages and up Station Road are included.

Is there southbound access via the Birnam junction? If only from the Dunkeld junction, congestion in Dunkeld will affect those seeking to access Birnam from the A9. Currently it's possible to head south to the Birnam junction to avoid Dunkeld junction congestion.

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

As one of many keen cyclists and runners in the village, many of us are not confident that something as good as now is being offered. It is difficult to tell exactly from the plans how or if free access under the A9 will be maintained.

At the consultation in early 2024 many of us remember some of your team members not even being aware of the existing access behind the Birnam Arts Centre to get up Inchewan Burn and Birnam Hill. This was concerning particularly as this is a popular PKC Public Right of Way, so what is really being considered in the designs?

The current access we have is a very important amenity to residents and visitors and has not been presented in enough detail within the current designs.

We recently lost a key access bridge over the River Braan in the 2023/24 winter storms connecting Inchewan. If a new bridge access could be included within future design proposals, a clear improvement to safety of walkers / cyclists / horse-riders would be demonstrated.

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

It's difficult to tell what the full details are from what has been provided. I'm concerned that the industrial estate is being replaced for a car park, with no alternative or community grant being proposed. This means the loss of some small businesses space which does not seem to be addressed at all, how is long term and sustainable economic growth being promoting through this design?

As stated in 1, the increased traffic on Station Road due to the station access is concerning particularly due to a lack of traffic calming measures.

I asked at the in-person consultation about possibly having the speed limit in Birnam reduced to 20mph (as is in Dunkeld already) and was told this would only be up to PKC. I know this is something which could be included in your proposals and found this response lazy. Surely this would be appropriate to propose, to ensure safety of cyclists, hikers and pedestrians who use the street already to access local amenities and the PKC rights of way.

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

Based on these designs, none of the objectives are really being met at this time.

For example, it's not clear what makes the design environmentally sound, and I cannot see any design measures which would reduce road noise or pollution, particularly if the solution is to have a large roundabout at the Dunkeld junction.

The increased construction traffic may dissuade visitors attending our village and negatively impact the local economy. There do not seem to be any community grants or proposals at this time proposed to negate this effect.

No measures outlined will enhance the scenic beauty and natural heritage as many trees and habitats will need removed with no clear improved replacement proposed aside from a few trees being planted (the current seems far removed from biodiversity net gain principles).

There is no clear improvement demonstrated toward enhancing wheeling / cycling / walking, maybe a bit of a revamp by necessity along the A9, but no clear enhancements.

Response

Thank you for your feedback and we note your concerns.

We note your feedback on the general design development information including improved A9 junction safety, concerns with construction traffic and the layout at Birnam Junction.

On your feedback regarding the impacts of the vehicles including public transport going to the new car park on Station Road, as part of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 3 design development, consultation is being undertaken with the local authority (Perth and Kinross Council) to identify any mitigating measures required as a result of the new proposals, including traffic calming measures.

Regarding your suggestion of lower speed limits along the roads within Little Dunkeld and Birnam, speed limits on these local roads are the responsibility of Perth and Kinross Council, and as it is beyond the current scope of the A9 Dualling programme we cannot comment further at this time.

We can confirm that a southbound diverge from the A9 is not provided at Birnam Junction. The DMRB Stage 2 route option assessment considered three grade-separated junction options for Birnam Junction, taking account of constraints, potential environmental, engineering, and traffic and economic effects to identify a preferred junction option. The DMRB Stage 2 assessment concluded that traffic volume was not considered a significant factor in determining the preferred junction option, however the preferred option was found to have less impact on ancient woodland loss and encroachment on the River Tay flood plain. Further refined traffic modelling is being undertaken to inform the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development, refinement and assessment, and this will be published within the DMRB Stage 3 Assessment Report in Spring 2025.

Some of the factors which the EIAR will assess and report on, particularly relevant to the matters raised in your feedback, include:

Population and Land Use (potential impacts and effects on private property and housing, community land and assets, development land and businesses and agricultural holdings);
Biodiversity (potential impacts and effects on habitats and species);
Cultural Heritage (potential impacts and effects on archaeological remains, historic buildings and historic landscapes);
Air Quality, Noise and Vibration (potential impacts and effects on noise and vibration sensitive receptors); and
Climate (impact on greenhouse gas emissions and vulnerability to climate change).

We note your comments on the need for safe walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders (WCH) access to existing footpaths and amenities. All existing WCH grade-separated (under the A9) crossing of the A9 carriageway are being retained within the proposed design, and three new grade-separated WCH crossings have been added at Birnam Junction, Dunkeld & Birnam Station underpass, and Dalguise Junction

We note your comments on the WCH provision over the River Braan. The WCH drawings presented at the engagement event in August 2024 included WCH crossings over the River Braan in both verges of the A9 carriageway, with a 2.5m buffer from the carriageway. These routes have been included in the design over the reinstatement of the previous footbridge to improve the resilience of this route during future flood events, and improve connectivity to the proposed northbound bus layby, Inver, and The Hermitage. An independent Road Safety Audit will be undertaken to understand any additional safety requirements going forward to inform the design development

As part of the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 assessment we will continue to develop the design of WCH provisions along the scheme. Further details on the WCH provisions will be published in the DMRB Stage 3 report and Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) in Spring 2025.

Unique ID 031

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Safety at A9 junctions is welcomed, however there is a massive impact and change on the small village of Birnam which I feel is not being taken into consideration with the revised proposals.

The noise and construction traffic will massively impact on the village for years.

The massive traffic layout change for Station Road has not be taken into account. The change of routing traffic into the quiet street of Station Road will now be subject to frequent busses, station customers and general access to the station. It is incredibly disappointing and frustrating to see that the use of this road has been proposed to be changed with no traffic calming measures attributed to it.

It is also unclear from the drawings and narrative if there is southbound access from the A9 Birnam Junction – which again will result in increased traffic through the already congested Perth Road between Birnam and Little Dunkeld.

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

The plans are unclear as to what the cycle route is in the village. As a keen cyclist and runner, I make daily use of the excellent path network around Birnam Hill from the Bankfoot junction to the station, as well as the underpass near the station. It is difficult to ascertain from the drawings what path – if any – will be maintained.

At the consultation in January 2024 many of us remember some of your team members not even being aware of the existing access behind the Birnam Arts Centre to get up Inchewan Burn and Birnam Hill. This was concerning particularly as this is a popular PKC Public Right of Way. One team member also expressed surprise that there was already an existing underpass to the station from Station Road, which is extremely concerning.

The current access we have is a very important amenity to residents and visitors and has not been presented in enough detail within the current designs.

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

As a resident of Station Road and as mentioned above, I have major concerns above the huge changes planned for the street. The proposed change of routing traffic into the quiet street of Station Road – which currently only serves residents, Birnam Arts customers and the Birnam industrial estate – will mean it will be subject to a huge increase in traffic, and it is incredibly disappointing and frustrating to see that the use of this road has been proposed to be changed with no traffic calming measures attributed to it. The significant increase in traffic - which carries a greater and more likely risk of speeding and greater risk to vulnerable pedestrians negotiating this change of road use – at the moment, has no additional safety measures attributed towards it. I strongly oppose the proposals.

Regardless of the safety implications, it is also disappointing that several well-loved and established local businesses will be forced to relocate as a result of these proposals.

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

I am yet to be convinced that the current designs offer meaningful biodiversity net gain.

There is no clear improvement demonstrated toward enhancing wheeling / cycling / walking, maybe a bit of a revamp by necessity along the A9, but no clear enhancements.

Response

Thank you for your feedback and we note your concerns.

The Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) will assess and report potential impacts and residual effects across a range of environmental factors. These include People and Communities – Accessibility (potential impacts and effects on walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse riders), Biodiversity (potential impacts and residual effects on habitats and species), Air Quality, and Noise and Vibration (potential impacts and effects on noise and vibration sensitive receptors).

Where habitat such as woodland is lost to the proposed scheme, this will be replaced by compensatory planting and will be reported in the EIAR when it is published in Spring 2025.

Additionally, the EIAR will model the potential for noise and vibration impacts and mitigation will be developed where identified as being required. This can include use of measures such as low noise road surfacing and noise barriers. Impacts and effects associated with noise and vibration and air quality will be reported in the EIAR.

On your feedback regarding the impacts of the vehicles including public transport going to the new car park on Station Road. As part of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 3 design development, consultation is being undertaken with the local authority (Perth and Kinross Council) to identify any mitigating measures required as a result of the new proposals, including traffic calming measures.

We can confirm that a southbound diverge from the A9 is not provided at Birnam Junction. The traffic modelling undertaken at DMRB Stage 2 expects that the increase in traffic on Perth Road due to the omission of a southbound diverge slip road at Birnam Junction, would be offset by the reduction of traffic destined for the north of Birnam, Little Dunkeld and Dunkeld on Perth Road. The DMRB Stage 2 assessment concluded that it is expected that the increase in traffic on Perth Road due to the omission of a southbound diverge slip road at Birnam Junction, would be offset by the reduction of traffic destined for the north of Birnam, Little Dunkeld and Dunkeld on Perth Road. Further refined traffic modelling is being undertaken to inform the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development, refinement and assessment and will be published within the DMRB Stage 3 Assessment Report in Spring 2025.

We note your comments on the continued pedestrian and cyclist access to existing footpaths and amenities and can confirm that this access will continue. We can also confirm that we are aware of the existing access behind the Birnam Arts Centre to Inchewan Burn and Birnam Hill. Provision of walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders (WCH) options for local and core paths, including links from Birnam Glen to Station Road, were presented at the community engagement event in August 2024. As part of the ongoing Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 3 assessment we will continue to develop the design of WCH provisions along the scheme. Further details on the WCH provisions will be published in the DMRB Stage 3 report and Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) in Spring 2025.

Unique ID 032

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

After your consultation through the creative process, much good work had been negated by ignoring the number one priority of dropping the road to allow station road be connected to the station. Please abandons this bonkers proposal and wait until you have a resolution to get vehicles to the station.

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

Absolutely awful. Please think again. The train station is no good for disabled people who will have to walk from the car park to the get to the platform. Disabled people need to be dropped off right at the station building

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

It feels like you only want community objectives it they agree with you.

Response

We note your feedback on the preferred route, access for disabled people to Dunkeld and Birnam station and the Community Objectives.

The Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section of the A9 Dualling Programme included a number of unique challenges in the development of route options due to proximity of residential properties, sports club, the railway and Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. The section of the corridor in the vicinity of the station is particularly constrained. As detailed during the Preferred Route Exhibitions held in January 2024, the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 2 route option assessment assessed four whole route options. These included the Community's Preferred Route Option, and three further whole route options which were developed taking into account the feedback and outcomes from the A9 Co-Creative process with the local community, including the community Objectives for the proposed scheme. The route options were then assessed and evaluated comparatively to consider factors such as potential environmental, engineering and traffic and economic factors. The identification of the Preferred Route Option was the culmination of an extensive and robust assessment process.

We note your comment about access to Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station for people with disability. The designs for the station access shown at the community engagement event in August 2024 include stairs and a lift linking the station buildings and platform to Station Road and the proposed replacement car park via the new pedestrian underpass.

As part of the design development, consultation with key stakeholders including accessibility groups is undertaken to inform the design. Further detail on the accessibility to the station will be published in the DMRB Stage 3 Assessment Report in Spring 2025.

We also note your comments regarding incorporation of the community objectives for the proposed scheme. The developing design has and continues to be informed by these community objectives, and the design includes features such as those listed below which aim to address some of those objectives:

Low-noise road surfacing;
Aesthetic design of Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station and the River Tay crossing;
Safety features such as lighting, road markings and signage;
Provisions for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders; and
Improved connectivity with bus and train links.

Unique ID 033

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

It is extremely unsafe especially for the lone travellers. who designs a pedestrian subway to make way to a car in these times? it will be a master for antisocial behaviour. D you press the button for help to sate loudly and clearly that you are scared of the person beside you?

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

The distance of the car park to the platform is unacceptable for those with mobility problems/ What is the plan for when the lift is out of order? These will be likely as it is so isolated.

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

You have killed the active plans on the community to bring the station back in use with the design. The station is isolated to the village with no vehicle access

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

You have ignored the community response of 700+ people to drop the A9 and imposed a pedestrian subway without warning.

Response

Thank you for your feedback and we note your concerns regarding access to and from Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station.

The Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section of the A9 Dualling Programme included a number of unique challenges in the development of route options due to proximity of residential properties, sports club, the railway and Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. The section of the corridor in the vicinity of the station is particularly constrained. As detailed during the Preferred Route Exhibitions held in January 2024, the DMRB Stage 2 route option assessment assessed four whole route options. These included the Community's Preferred Route Option, and three further whole route options which were developed taking into account the feedback and outcomes from the A9 Co-Creative process with the local community, including the community Objectives for the proposed scheme. The route options were then assessed and evaluated comparatively to consider factors such as potential environmental, engineering and traffic and economic factors. The identification of the Preferred Route Option was the culmination of an extensive and robust assessment process.

Consultation with key stakeholders including accessibility groups, Network Rail and ScotRail is being undertaken to inform the design development of the station underpass and includes consideration of mitigation measures such as lighting and width of the underpass. Further detail on the accessibility to the station will be published in the DMRB Stage 3 Assessment Report in Spring 2025.

With regards to your comment on access to the station during maintenance or break down of the lift, such details regarding the operation and maintenance methods will be discussed and refined with key stakeholders in due course. These options will continue to be assessed as part of the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development.

We note your comments on the community objectives. The developing design has and continues to be informed by these community objectives, and the design includes features such as:

Low-noise road surfacing;
Aesthetic design of Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station and the River Tay crossing;
Safety features such as lighting, road markings and signage;
Provisions for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders; and
Improved connectivity with bus and train links.

Unique ID 034

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

It is disappointing that the two elements of the community preferred route: sinking the A9 and giving vehicles uses access to the station - have been dropped for your final design.

Response

Thank you for your feedback and we note your concerns regarding access to and from Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station.

The section of the corridor in the vicinity of the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station is very constrained and as such the existing at-grade junction to the station from the existing A9 carriageway, together with the car park, is removed due to the proposed A9 mainline alignment.

One of the key aspirations through the A9 Co-Creative Process was to improve connectivity to the Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. The railway station will be accessible from Birnam via Station Road. A new replacement car park, with approximately 50 parking spaces, will have provision for both public transport and active travel facilities. A new pedestrian underpass, incorporating stairs and a lift, will provide a link for pedestrians from the car park to the railway station building and platform. Consultation with key stakeholders through the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 assessment will assist with designing the layout of the replacement car park and its facilities (EV charging, secure bike parking etc).

Unique ID 035

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Hello

I have a copy of your 8 page brochure with proposed scheme and have seen the online exhibition - please may I ask the following:

Approximately how many trees will be planted along the route?
Will these trees be planted with a stake and tree protector?
How long will the stakes and tree protectors be in place?
What commitment is there to remove the tree protectors and stakes once they are no longer required for the health of trees?
Who will be responsible for removing the tree protectors?

Please may I comment about earlier dualling works north of Perth when trees were planted with tree protectors: some of the trees failed to establish and are now dead but tree protectors remain in place. And other, healthy trees, have now outgrown the tree protectors - it appears that nobody is responsible for removing these plastic protectors, stakes and nylon ties. I expect to see you address these issues in the Environmental Impact Assessment Report.

Thank you for your attention

Warmest regards

Response

Thank you for your feedback and we note your concerns regarding the planting of trees and maintenance of tree protectors.

The Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) will assess and report potential impacts and residual effects across a range of environmental factors including Biodiversity (potential impacts and residual effects on habitats and species).

Where habitat such as woodland is impacted by or lost as a result of the proposed scheme, mitigation will be provided through the provision of compensatory planting. The EIAR for the proposed scheme will detail the assessment of impacts of the proposed scheme, including identification of the areas of woodland lost or impacted by the scheme, and will also detail the identification and quantification of areas of compensatory planting to be provided.

With regard to how trees will be planted, it is acknowledged that tree protectors and stakes can be utilised to support the establishment of young trees. These are not always necessary or beneficial, depending on factors such as the species and maturity of the trees planted, and these details will not be determined until later in the development of the scheme proposals.

Should tree protectors be required, there are a variety of products which are available, including biodegradable tree protectors. In respect of the requirements and timing around removal of tree protectors, and the responsibility to do so, this would typically be defined in the relevant contract for the planting works.

Unique ID 036

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

To whom it may concern.

I write to note my objections on a roundabout being built as part of the A9 Dunkeld Junction. As a resident of Dunkeld & Birnam I use the A9 daily. History shows (M80 Glasgow for one) that roundabouts only create traffic on busier days (for the A9 this being Fri-Mon) to build up and therefore create long queues and not forgetting the impact this has on the climate too. This needs to be thought through more and to say that the residents voted for this is misleading as it was proposed as a temporary measure in the interim not permanent. I would like my objections noted

Response

Thank you for your feedback and we note your concerns regarding the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction.

As detailed during previous public engagement, the Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section of the A9 Dualling included a number of unique challenges in the development of route options due to proximity of residential properties, sports club, the railway and Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. Due to these constraints, and taking into account the feedback from the A9 Co-Creative process with the local community, a roundabout was included within the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 2 route options assessment which was assessed alongside a grade separated junction option. The Preferred Route identified was the culmination of an extensive and robust assessment process, which considered a range of engineering, environmental, traffic and economic factors. The ongoing DMRB 3 design development and assessment continues to refine the Preferred Route, including the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction.

Whilst it is acknowledged that a roundabout will likely result in slightly less of a journey time saving compared to a grade separated junction, the DMRB Stage 2 route option assessment concluded that the roundabout was the preferred junction option at Dunkeld as it offers reduced construction complexity, reduced landscape and visual impacts and overall reduced land take.

Peak traffic conditions on the A9 were also assessed as part of the DMRB Stage 2 assessment. It was determined through testing that satisfactory operation would still be achieved at the roundabout under normal peak operations. Further refined traffic modelling is being undertaken to inform the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development, refinement and assessment and will be published within the DMRB Stage 3 Assessment Report in Spring 2025.

Potential and residual impacts and effects on the environment, including climate, will be reported in the Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) which will also be published in Spring 2025.

Unique ID 037

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Dear Sir/madam

I wish to submit the following concerns/objections about the above and ongoing consultations on the design process at Birnam. The current designs do not reflect the community wishes we voted for in 2022.

Birnam junction

The roundabouts should minimise the impacts on the environment and specifically ancient woodland areas around the existing Birnam Junction, north side as this is a very sensitive habitat for red squirrels, otters and pine martens. There are many protected sites for red squirrels in this area and active breeding dreys. This wildlife corridor should remain intact and the best use is to use the existing slip road (i.e the old currently disused slip road out of Birnam for south bound) and minimise impacts on the woodlands in this area. This slip road could even be cut deeper to allow it to be tunnelled to maintain the wildlife corridor. The north bound exit to Birnam should utilise the original community preferred route of a new exit near the entry to Murthly Estate with an underpass at the current junction but minimising landtake in this area to the existing road. It may be possible to remove all embankments completely and have rock faces here to minimise damage to ancient woodland. Road traffic impacts on wildlife here are already significant with otter, pine marten, deer and red squirrel deaths on the road at very high levels. There is a very good case for a green bridge and or underpass near the Birnam junction, ideally on the south side near the Murthly junction to link these woodlands.

Reason - To minimise impacts on ancient woodland and protected species above.

Dunkeld/Inver junction

I have not yet seen a design acceptable to me as I believe the traffic congestion on a roundabout at the junction with current designs would be unacceptable. I foresee major flaws in this design, and believe a flyover (or underpass) is needed at this junction to allow traffic to pass freely past Dunkeld. This would alleviate issues with traffic congestion. I agree on the difficult issues here with the margins between the River Braan and junction being a major consideration but the land to the south on the Inver side could be utilised more effectively. The noise issues are also a concern. However, the built up in traffic at this junction with this design would in my view give the same issues as in Perth at Inveralmond, with large queues building up in summer causing even more congestion.

The knock on effect on traffic build up extending back into Birnam and Little Dunkeld and then onto the old Telford bridge is also a major concern. Currently traffic can build up in summer and extend way back into Dunkeld bringing the whole place to gridlock. This is unacceptable.

General comments

This section passes through an area designated as National Scenic Area NSA. The design of the road here is therefore guided I hope by an understanding to maintain this character. This should retain and minimise damage to the natural environment. There will be significant ecological and landscape impacts with this dualling.

I believe embankments are not always necessary and cutting routes through some areas with hard rock revetments may be a better option to minimise loss to valuable habitats.

I would also ask you to reflect on the cumulative Environmental Impact Assessment of the whole A9 dualling process. I believe this has not been addressed and could therefore be legally challenged. I have some major concerns about this process and the various sensitivities in key areas such as Birnam, Pitlochry and The Cairngorms National Park. Key animal species such as wildcats, pine marten red squirrels and capercaillie could be affected as well as several protected sites e.g. River Tay SSSI/SAC, Craigellachie SSSI.

There also appears to be little information about flood risk assessment.

In a related topic, recently woodlands and forests have been clear-felled in the area and this very much relates to flood risk on the A9. There should be a policy of no clearfell along the A9 corridor as this further contributes to increased risk of flooding on the Tay catchment with the old A9 recently being severely damaged. More thoughtful and clever design should be incorporated into the catchment management planning for the dualling, including better management of run-off and creation of wetlands adjacent to the road to alleviate flood risk. I have not seen any design of this in the plans to date. Any flood management and run-off control should also be in areas of low quality habitat such as arable/improved pasture or low ecological value habitat.

Regards

Response

Thank you for your feedback and we note your concerns about the design developments presented at the community engagement events.

The Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section of the A9 Dualling Programme included a number of unique challenges in the development of route options due to proximity of residential properties, sports club, the railway and Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. As detailed during the Preferred Route Exhibitions held in January 2024, the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 2 route option assessment assessed four whole route options. These included the Community's Preferred Route Option, and three further whole route options which were developed taking into account the feedback and outcomes from the A9 Co-Creative process with the local community, including the community Objectives for the proposed scheme. The route options were then assessed and evaluated comparatively to consider factors such as potential environmental, engineering and traffic and economic factors. The identification of the Preferred Route Option was the culmination of an extensive and robust assessment process. The ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development and assessment continues to refine the Preferred Route, including the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction and the arrangement of Birnam Junction.

With regards to Birnam Junction, as part of the Co-Creative Process a number of junction options were considered (and subsequently voted for by the public), which resulted in a grade separated junction being the preferred option in proximity to the existing Birnam Junction for the community. This junction was included in the Community’s Preferred Route Option. As part of the DMRB Stage 2 an assessment, including engineering and environmental aspects, on the Murthly/Birnam Junction options, including the community’s option, was undertaken and this is presented in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB Stage 2) report which is available to view on Transport Scotland’s website at the following location: https://www.transport.gov.scot/media/gokornm4/06-dmrb-stage-2-vol-01-part-06-appendices.pdf.

Noting your comments in respect of the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction, whilst it is acknowledged that a roundabout will likely result in slightly less of a journey time saving compared to a grade separated junction, the DMRB Stage 2 route option assessment concluded that the roundabout was the preferred junction option at Dunkeld as it offers reduced construction complexity, reduced landscape and visual impacts and overall reduced land take.

Peak traffic conditions on the A9 were assessed as part of the DMRB Stage 2 assessment. It was determined through testing that satisfactory operation would still be achieved at the roundabout under normal peak operations. Further refined traffic modelling is being undertaken to inform the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development, refinement and assessment, and will be reported on in the DMRB Stage 3 Report to be published in Spring 2025.

As part of DMRB Stage 3 process, we are undertaking an assessment of the environmental impacts of the proposed scheme across a range of environmental factors, including biodiversity, landscape noise and vibration, and the water environment (including flood risk). The Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) will detail any potential impacts as a result of the proposed scheme, and will assess the need or otherwise for mitigation. Should the assessment identify that mitigation is required, potential methods and measures to mitigate will be considered depending on various factors such as the nature, location and severity of the impact. Mitigation measures identified, and the resulting residual effects of the proposed scheme (accounting for the implementation of mitigation), will be reported in the EIAR, which will be published in Spring 2025.

Additionally, the assessment will report the potential for cumulative effects in relation to combined effects of the proposed scheme on environmental receptors and the combined effects of the proposed scheme with other developments, in accordance with the relevant Environmental Impact Assessment legislation and guidance.

Flood assessment work is undertaken based on industry guidance, and in consultation with key stakeholders. Where adverse impacts are predicted, and if the assessment identifies that mitigation is required, then there are a range of potential measures which could be considered, such as compensatory flood storage areas and flood relief culverts, to counter any adverse impacts of the proposed scheme. Mitigation measures identified, and the resulting residual effects of the proposed scheme (accounting for the implementation of mitigation), will be reported in the EIAR.

Unique ID 038

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

The roundabout is a bad idea, just look at Perth on a Friday evening.

Why not spill the flow, have southbound leave and join at Dunkeld and then restore the junction at Inver for Northbound on off, with an underpass to the 822

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

Looks good

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

Love it.

Response

Thanks for your feedback and we note your concerns regarding the roundabout at Dunkeld. We also note your positive feedback in respect of the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders, and that you are satisfied with the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

In relation to the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction, as detailed during previous public engagement, the Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section of the A9 Dualling included a number of unique challenges in the development of route options due to proximity of residential properties, sports club, the railway and Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. Due to these constraints, and taking into account the feedback from the A9 Co-Creative process with the local community, a roundabout was included within the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 2 route options assessment which was assessed alongside a grade separated junction option. The Preferred Route identified was the culmination of an extensive and robust assessment process, which considered a range of engineering, environmental, traffic and economic factors. The ongoing DMRB 3 design development and assessment continues to refine the Preferred Route, including the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction.

Although traffic on the A9 will have to slow to negotiate the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld, the traffic modelling undertaken at DMRB Stage 2 suggests that queuing would not be experienced on a day-to-day basis and therefore fewer accidents are expected as a result. Additionally, during the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development, appropriate advanced warning indicators, in consultation with an independent Road Safety Auditor, will be developed and incorporated to reduce the risk of accidents in relation to the proposed roundabout.

Unique ID 039

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

(see notes enclosed)

General Design Development - approved

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

A77 cycle route to tie in with recent Network Rail proposals for ramps and steps with gutter at side of steps for bike wheels.

See also photo, of model enclosed (again) which shows all proposed route to Birnam Hill and Glen whilst preserve

ng the building on Station Road

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

The loss of the existing station car park (32 spaces) along with the on-street spaces in Station Road will result in a nett loss of spaces (see explanatory notes enclosed). I understand the inter-city buses are about to be enlarged and these may not make to turn circle shown unless the turning circle shown is only for smaller local buses

The hole required to reduce the levels for the underpass looks to be approx. 4m deep (below the existing A9 level) to accommodate a pedestrian tunnel, services etc. Apart from the visual impact, the access to the adjoining properties on Station Road will be seriously compromised. Winter access would also be difficult. Opinions I have heard indicate that an underpass is not popular especially with elderly travellers. These proposals give no access for disabled passengers to Platform 2.

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

All elements of the various A9 junctions etc seem to be accepted including the re-routing of cycle route A77 down to Birnam via Perth Road.

Response

Thanks for your feedback. We note your positive feedback on the information presented at the engagement event in August.

We note your comments about the National Cycle Route NCN77 tie-in to the walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders (WCH) provision proposed by Network Rail at Dunkeld and Birnam Station. We are aware of, and in consultation with Network Rail regarding the accessibility improvements being considered at the railway station, however the progression and integration of these with existing provisions is out-with the remit of Transport Scotland. In respect of integration with the proposed A9 Dualling project, the ongoing Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 3 design development and refinement, in combination with the Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR), will consider integration with and connection to existing facilities for WCH. Further details on the pedestrian provisions will be published in the DMRB Stage 3 report and EIAR in Spring 2025.

We note the photograph of the model provided in your feedback. An outline design has been developed based on this photograph to consider its viability, with consideration of appropriate design standards including headroom clearance to the structure over the proposed A9 carriageway. For A9 Dualling schemes, a minimum high load route headroom clearance of 6.45m is required for structures passing over the A9 carriageway.

In the outline design of this proposal, the industrial estate and access roads to the railway station and car park would require to be of a significantly longer length than that indicated in the model to facilitate tie-in’s and appropriate gradients on approach to the structure over the A9 mainline.

This area of the proposed scheme is constrained due to the presence and close proximity of various features including the industrial units, surrounding properties and limited distance between the proposed A9 carriageway and the railway station platform. As a result, substantial engineering works, including retaining walls of approximately 7.5m in height for each of the access ramps, would be required to minimise the design footprint of the proposal. It is also indicated that, contrary to the model which suggests the industrial estate units as remaining in place, the footprint and magnitude of the engineering works required to achieve the outline design would impact on the operational viability of these units. The outline design developed for this proposal also indicates that, as a result of the footprint of the required engineering works, the number of car parking spaces which could be provided would be significantly less than that mentioned in the proposed model, and railway operations in and around the station would also be heavily impacted. The proposal would also result in an increased walking distance for railway station users not arriving by car, and would not include the proposed integration with public transport and active travel proposals.

Following consideration of the outline design, the associated impacts mentioned above, and consideration of the likely environmental impacts of the proposal, it is considered that the outline design proposal would not provide any additional benefits in respect of satisfying the scheme objectives when compared to the proposed scheme..

Noting your feedback regarding the replacement Dunkeld & Birnam Station car park, this is proposed to provide approximately 50 parking spaces, which would be an increase from the approximately 30 parking spaces provided within the existing station car park. The ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development takes constructability into consideration including access to properties in close proximity to the replacement car park. Consultation with key stakeholders through the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development and assessment will help to inform the design and layout of the replacement car park, its integration with public transport networks. Further details in this regarding will be provided within the DMRB Stage 3 Report and EIAR to be published in Spring 2025.

Unique ID 040

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

See attached. LAYBYS so constituted are too narrow for Commercial Vehicles. On/off slips need to be more like those for a motorway. NB, Agricultural traffic and cycles will be entitled to use the dual carriageway.

The current junction is not lit at night. It should be. In peak times it has been taken me up to 30 minutes to enter the A9 northbound and southbound consists of both commercial traffic and car users over the 24 hour period.

The current plan suggests that a roundabout is to be built accommodating both traffic from Dunkeld and from Crieff directions.

I suggest that when driving on a dual carriageway road, drivers adopt a style of driving akin to driving on a motorway. There are no roundabouts on a motorway. Other dual carriageway trunk roads throughout Britain have replaced roundabouts with either graded junctions or upgrades to motorway status. A roundabout at the Dunkeld junction is not the best way of upgrading this road. It should be a graded junction with the north south through trunk traffic being on the upper level and joining and leaving traffic at the lower level.

Other roundabouts on the A9 suffer from vehicle accidents and many more near misses. They cause delay during peak traffic times. The Keir at Dunblane, Broxden and Inveralmond at Perth, Kessock Bridge and A9 A96 junction at Inverness, all exhibit these traits.

I maintain that if a roundabout is built, it will be because monetary restraint has been put into the mix. In the building industry we have seen the folly of using short life concrete or flammable cladding. The A90 from Perth via Dundee to Aberdeen has seen so many accidents because the cheap option of construction has been taken. Graded junctions have had to be constructed retrospectively and in the case of laurencekirk on the A90, years of campaigning for change to the junction was finally accepted some years ago but no work has yet commenced. Build a substandard design and problems will mount in the future. Drivers also take part of the blame but construction should have cognisance that the same mistakes will occur so the road should be built to minimise adverse actions.

I believe a graded junction should be built here. Comments such as it is not suited to the rural environment does not hold water. The A9 carries daily supplies to the north of the country. It takes a huge tourist traffic. It supports a population that may work in the Central Belt and lives in highland areas. Government policy has not supported a rail network that will take any pressure off the A9 road in the future.

Test bores for the new A9 alignments were undertaken ten years ago. The Government work on a system of annual budgets that can work against efficiency and cost. Issuing a contract for a small section of road is short sighted. A contract should be issued for completing the remaining sections between Perth and Inverness. Assembling Manpower, Equipment and supplies of materials is costly and to disperse the physical items and labour expertise is equally costly. The Government need to have the appropriate financial cost restraints built into a contract that can be amended over the longer period but the cost should be underwritten from the start. This road was scheduled to be finished by 2025 when the commitment to dual the A9 was agreed. Are we supposed to believe it will be finished by 2035?

Perhaps someone will see the light, that is if the new road at this junction is lit at night. !!"

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

Is there access for buses? Will buses call at station? Will the lift service both platforms?

Response

Thank you for your feedback and we note your concerns.

As detailed during previous public engagement, the Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section of the A9 Dualling included a number of unique challenges in the development of route options due to proximity of residential properties, sports club, the railway and Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. Due to these constraints, and taking into account the feedback from the A9 Co-Creative process with the local community, a roundabout was included within the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 2 route options assessment which was assessed alongside a grade separated junction option. The Preferred Route identified was the culmination of an extensive and robust assessment process, which considered a range of engineering, environmental, traffic and economic factors.

Although traffic on the A9 will have to slow to negotiate the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld, the traffic modelling undertaken at DMRB Stage 2 suggests that queuing would not be experienced on a day-to-day basis and therefore fewer accidents are expected as a result. Additionally, during the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development, appropriate advanced warning indicators, in consultation with an independent Road Safety Auditor, will be developed and incorporated to reduce the risk of accidents in relation to the proposed roundabout.

The ongoing DMRB 3 design development and assessment continues to refine the Preferred Route. The design, including the junctions, slip roads and lay-bys, are developed using the relevant design standards, The proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction is proposed to include lighting which will also be designed in line with the relevant design standards.

The upgrade of two existing lay-bys located to the south of the scheme were presented at the community engagement event in August 2024. The upgraded type A lay-by consists of a segregation island between the carriageway and the lay-by to increase separation from parked vehicles and the live traffic. This type of lay by will provide sufficient width and length to accommodate commercial vehicles.

In respect of the overall delivery of this project and the wider A9 Dualling Programme as a whole, in December 2023 the Scottish Ministers announced a Delivery Plan for completion of the A9 Dualling Programme, including the delivery of the Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section. Further detailed information regarding the A9 Delivery Plan and the work done to inform it can be found on the A9 Dualling website here

The ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development process has included consideration of a joined-up approach for improved access to and around the Station. The existing access to Platform 2 is not impacted by the proposed scheme, therefore provision of an alternative access to this platform did not form part of the route options developed and assessed as part of the DMRB Stage 2 Route Option Assessment. Whilst the underpass extension to Platform 2 is not required as a direct result of the proposed scheme, Transport Scotland recognises that it presents a unique opportunity to consider a total transport system approach to accessibility to and around the station. Transport Scotland is therefore including an extension of the proposed underpass to Platform 2 within the developing design for the project. A number of details are however still to be confirmed, such as the most suitable and assured mechanism via which the underpass extension could be promoted by Scottish Ministers. Draft Orders and Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) for the project will be published in Spring 2025, at which time Transport Scotland will seek to provide a further update regarding the potential underpass extension.

Consultation with key stakeholders through the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 assessment is assisting with the design and layout of the replacement car park and its facilities including public transport provisions.

Unique ID 041

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

The further design developments are an improvement on the previous design.

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

The proposals are welcomed.

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

I consider the change of design to be an improvement. However, I am concerned that the car park may simply be used by general users requiring car parking spaces to Birnam Arts, and will therefore cause problems for rail users.

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

I can see that there has been a response to these objections.

Response

Thank you for your feedback. We note your positive comments on the information presented at the engagement event in August and the developing design.

In relation to your concerns on the car park being used as parking for Birnam Arts visitors, matters regarding the management and operation of the proposed car park will be discussed and developed with the relevant stakeholders in due course, and cannot be commented upon at this time. It should however be noted that the replacement Dunkeld & Birnam Station car park will provide approximately 50 parking spaces, which would be an increase from the 30 parking spaces provided within the existing station car park area.

Unique ID 042

Not Used

Unique ID 043

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Take aware large piece of grass to let cars go on to the A9 south.

Response

Thank you for your feedback. We have noted your comment and would be happy to discuss this further if you want to contact us again either by email or at a future community event.

Unique ID 044

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

The roundabout design is inappropriate in this setting and will create unnecessary congestion for North/South A9 drivers, and likely cause different safety issues, eg drivers not expecting congestion. A junction with no north / south disruption is required.

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

No comment

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

No comment.

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

The local objectives, are currently outweighing the national objectives for the design and therefore this design is inappropriate and North / South Travel should be prioritised. A separate junction with slip roads is required to ensure the A9 flows safely.

Response

Thank you for your feedback and we note your concerns regarding the roundabout at Dunkeld.

As detailed during previous public engagement, the Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section of the A9 Dualling included a number of unique challenges in the development of route options due to proximity of residential properties, sports club, the railway and Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. Due to these constraints, and taking into account the feedback from the A9 Co-Creative process with the local community, a roundabout was included within the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 2 route options assessment which was assessed alongside a grade separated junction option. The Preferred Route identified was the culmination of an extensive and robust assessment process, which considered a range of engineering, environmental, traffic and economic factors. The ongoing DMRB 3 design development and assessment continues to refine the Preferred Route, including the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction.

Although traffic on the A9 will have to slow to negotiate the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld, the traffic modelling undertaken at DMRB Stage 2 suggests that queuing would not be experienced on a day-to-day basis and therefore fewer accidents are expected as a result. Additionally, during the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development, appropriate advanced warning indicators, in consultation with an independent Road Safety Auditor, will be developed and incorporated to reduce the risk of accidents in relation to the proposed roundabout.

Unique ID 045

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

I strongly disagree with the proposal to build a roundabout at the Dunkeld junction, which will cause traffic congestion & more accidents. It is not necessary as there is plenty of space to build a proper over/under pass junction - please reconsider this.

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

Generally good - all sections of road should have walking/cycling routes located nearby, but ideally with sections of trees/bushes between cycle routes and roads to provide safety and a more enjoyable experience for users.

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

Plenty of parking facilities is good - also ensuring that this is free 24 hours a day to encourage park and ride with the train routes - better for car emission reduction.

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

It is important to ensure that the community objectives are closely considered at every step - I agree with this incorporation. But at the same time it is important that works progresses swiftly to get this important section of the A9 dualled.

Response

Thank you for your feedback.

As detailed during previous public engagement, the Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section of the A9 Dualling included a number of unique challenges in the development of route options due to proximity of residential properties, sports club, the railway and Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. Due to these constraints, and taking into account the feedback from the A9 Co-Creative process with the local community, a roundabout was included within the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 2 route options assessment which was assessed alongside a grade separated junction option. The Preferred Route identified was the culmination of an extensive and robust assessment process, which considered a range of engineering, environmental, traffic and economic factors. The ongoing DMRB 3 design development and assessment continues to refine the Preferred Route, including the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction.

Although traffic on the A9 will have to slow to negotiate the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld, the traffic modelling undertaken at DMRB Stage 2 suggests that queuing would not be experienced on a day-to-day basis and therefore fewer accidents are expected as a result. Additionally, during the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development, appropriate advanced warning indicators, in consultation with an independent Road Safety Auditor, will be developed and incorporated to reduce the risk of accidents in relation to the proposed roundabout.

With regards to your comments on the inclusion of trees/bushes between the walking/cycling routes and road, as part of the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development we will continue to refine the segregation/buffer provision in accordance with the relevant design standards and guidance. Provision of vegetation such as trees or bushes within these areas would need to take into consideration a number of other factors, including the availability of sufficient space, potential impact on visibility for all users, and the ongoing maintenance and operation implications. We will continue to refine the design proposals, and further details on the provisions for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders (WCH) will be published in the DMRB Stage 3 report and Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) in Spring 2025

We note your comment on the car park being free of charge. Consultation with key stakeholders through the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development and assessment is assisting with the design and layout of the replacement car park. Matters regarding the management and operation of the proposed car park will be discussed and developed with the relevant stakeholders in due course, and cannot be commented upon at this time.

Unique ID 046

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

A9 should be in a cutting past the railway station, with a surface level car park (like Stirling Station) and the Dunkeld junction should be grade separated with the A9 continuing through, as per the other proposed junctions. Its meant to be an upgrade.

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

Irrelevant to the thousands of vehicles everyday passing through. I appreciate that politically these must be catered for. But over bridges and underpasses with parallel segregated shared footways are more than sufficient.

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

Ridiculous, as above hiding the station building won't satisfy the heritage folks, separating the parking from the A9 is good. But lower the A9 into a cutting (like Stirling station) and provide surface level access to the station from the village.

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

Waste of time, this isn't a local bypass around a sleepy hamlet. It's a national transport corridor. Some locals will never like a project, they didn't like the original A9 project.

Response

Thank you for your feedback.

As detailed during previous public engagement, the Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section of the A9 Dualling included a number of unique challenges in the development of route options due to proximity of residential properties, sports club, the railway and Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. Due to these constraints, and taking into account the feedback from the A9 Co-Creative process with the local community, as well as feedback from the public and other stakeholders, amongst the four whole route options included within the DMRB Stage 2 route options assessment were a lowered main carriageway passing the railway station, the roundabout at Dunkeld Junction, and a grade separated junction option at Dunkeld. The Preferred Route identified was the culmination of an extensive and robust assessment process, which considered a range of engineering, environmental, traffic and economic factors. The ongoing DMRB 3 design development and assessment continues to refine the Preferred Route, including the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction.

Unique ID 047

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

The design is severely flawed purely because of the proposed roundabout, I worked for many years as a long distance LGV driver where I witnessed the delays and devastation from tragic accidents on the A1 where roundabouts were sited but have been removed

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

Acceptable.

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

Acceptable.

We would appreciate your feedback and any suggestions on our incorporation of the Community Objectives within our ongoing design and assessment work.

The A9 Dualling project must be about saving lives’ NO ROUNDABOUTS PLEASE’

Response

Thank you for your positive feedback about the walker, wheeler, cyclist and horse-rider (WCH) design developments and the proposed access at Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station that were presented at the community engagement events.

Regarding the proposed roundabout, as detailed during previous public engagement, the Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section of the A9 Dualling included a number of unique challenges in the development of route options due to proximity of residential properties, sports club, the railway and Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. Due to these constraints, and taking into account the feedback from the A9 Co-Creative process with the local community, a roundabout was included within the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 2 route options assessment which was assessed alongside a grade separated junction option. The Preferred Route identified was the culmination of an extensive and robust assessment process, which considered a range of engineering, environmental, traffic and economic factors. The ongoing DMRB 3 design development and assessment continues to refine the Preferred Route, including the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction.

Although traffic on the A9 will have to slow to negotiate the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld, the traffic modelling undertaken at DMRB Stage 2 suggests that queuing would not be experienced on a day-to-day basis and therefore fewer accidents are expected as a result. Additionally, during the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development, appropriate advanced warning indicators, in consultation with an independent Road Safety Auditor, will be developed and incorporated to reduce the risk of accidents in relation to the proposed roundabout.

Unique ID 048

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

The smaller aspects - station, walkers / cyclists provision is actually pretty good, the choice of a roundabout is concerning.

This will result in heavy traffic, and environmental impact as vehicles stop and restart. Strongly against this plan.

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

Though not a frequent cyclist, the plans seem widely accessible/

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

Plans suggest an appealing design, if properly realised, and good accessibility.

Response

We note your positive feedback on the design developments for station access and walker, wheeler, cyclist and horse-rider provision presented at the engagement event in August.

Although traffic on the A9 will have to slow to negotiate the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld, the traffic modelling undertaken at DMRB Stage 2 suggests that queuing would not be experienced on a day-to-day basis. Peak traffic conditions on the A9 were assessed as part of the DMRB Stage 2 assessment. It was determined through testing that satisfactory operation would still be achieved at the roundabout under normal peak operations. Further refined traffic modelling is being undertaken to inform the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development, refinement and assessment.

As part of DMRB Stage 3 design development an assessment, an Environmental Impact Assessment is being undertaken to assess and evaluate the environmental impacts of the proposed scheme across a range of environmental factors. Potential impacts will be reported in the Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR). Should the assessment identify mitigation as being required, then there are a range of potential measures which could be considered depending on various factors such as the nature, location and severity of the impact. Mitigation measures identified, and the resulting residual effects of the proposed scheme (accounting for the implementation of mitigation), will be reported in the EIAR to be published in Spring 2025.

Unique ID 049

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

I travel to Glasgow and Edinburgh on the A9 regularly. I'm concerned introducing a roundabout at Dunkeld will cause delays similar to Perth. Could you provide me with the analytics on traffic flow estimates to help me understand the decision, please?

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

Looks great. Well thought out design with parking on the other side of the A9.

Response

Thank you for your positive feedback about the new car park layout at Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station.

The DMRB Stage 2 Scheme Assessment Report, Volume 1, Part 4: Traffic and Economic Assessment concluded that some delays to through traffic on the A9 are anticipated at the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction, which would be an average of approximately 15 seconds across the day in both northbound and southbound directions. The traffic modelling also concluded that queuing would not be experienced on a day-to-day basis. Further details on the DMRB Stage 2 traffic can be found on the A9 Dualling website: https://www.transport.gov.scot/media/fnudvehh/04-dmrb-stage-2-vol-01-part-04-traffic-and-economic-assessment.pdf.

Unique ID 050

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Dear Sirs,

I strongly object to the proposed roundabout for the Dunkeld junction on the A9 dialling project. It beggars belief that in the 21 century, any progressive government agency or those working for them would even consider a roundabout as a feasible option for the trunk road network.

I cannot understand why Transport Scotland are not actively planning to do away with the likes of the Keir, Broxden, Inverlalmond and the 6 roundabouts and 2 traffic lit junctions on the A90 at Dundee to improve connectivity, improve competitiveness, attract investment and reduce journey times. The A9, A90 and A96 are crucial pieces of national infrastructure north of the central belt, not some side roads of no significance which is how they are being managed in places.

To add yet another roundabout to the trunk road network is a complete farce and will only cause more delays, more pollution, more frustration, increase journey times, reduce competitiveness, deter investment and maintain Scotland as the current laughing stock of the Western world when it comes to trunk road networks.

I still look forward to the day where I can drive from Dover to Inverness or Aberdeen without using pieces of joke infrastructure either put in place or not dealt with by some very backward thinking people who are supposed to be working on my and my fellow citizens behalf to make our lives better.

Yours sincerely,

Response

Thank you for your feedback.

Although traffic on the A9 will have to slow to negotiate the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld, the traffic modelling undertaken at DMRB Stage 2 suggests that queuing would not be experienced on a day-to-day basis and therefore fewer accidents are expected as a result. Additionally, during the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development, appropriate advanced warning indicators, in consultation with an independent Road Safety Auditor, will be developed and incorporated to reduce the risk of accidents in relation to the proposed roundabout.

Unique ID 051

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Dear Sir/Madam

As a professional driver who uses the full length of A9, from Inverness to Perth, several times a week, I would like to add my objection to this incredibly short-term solution to issues faced with dualling the road at Dunkeld & Birnam and the junctions there-at.

To insert a roundabout at this location on what would, otherwise, be a 100+ mile unbroken stretch of dual carriageway seems like penny pinching in the extreme.

I can reliably predict massive queues building here at busy times, leading to frustration, bad decisions and accidents. Just look at the terminal roundabouts at Inverness and Perth at present, for an idea of what it will be like just after it opens. And then, project on to what it will be like with the traffic flows in, say 20 years?

Further, there is also the environmental cost of all those countless tonnes of traffic all having to bring itself down from 60/70 mph to zero, only to have to regain their road speed after negotiating the roundabout! What is the impact and cost of this? OK the cost is spread out over each vehicle owner but it's still a combined cost to the economy! And all that brake dust and CO2 being dumped into what is, arguably, one of the most environmentally sensitive stretches of the A9.

Please re-think this short-term, blinkered, bean-counter view of a ""solution"", and let's have a proper grade-separated junction here. We've waited long enough; surely we deserve it!

Yours Faithfully

Response

Thank you for your feedback.

Although traffic on the A9 will have to slow to negotiate the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld, the traffic modelling undertaken at DMRB Stage 2 suggests that queuing would not be experienced on a day-to-day basis and therefore fewer accidents are expected as a result. Additionally, during the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development, appropriate advanced warning indicators, in consultation with an independent Road Safety Auditor, will be developed and incorporated to reduce the risk of accidents in relation to the proposed roundabout.

Unique ID 052

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

One hates to jump on a bandwagon just "....'cos it's there...." but if, as I understand, the A9 dualling project is to feature a roundabout rather than a grade-separated junction for access to D&B then I really must. Given that there's already such a junction for Ballinluig and Aberfeldy it is hard to understand why D&B should not also have the safer, faster option and I call on the planners to ensure that it does.

Response

Thank you for your feedback.

With regard to your comment on the inclusion of a roundabout at Dunkeld junction, as detailed during previous public engagement, the Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section of the A9 Dualling included a number of unique challenges in the development of route options due to proximity of residential properties, sports club, the railway and Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. Due to these constraints, and taking into account the feedback from the A9 Co-Creative process with the local community, a roundabout was included within the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 2 route options assessment which was assessed alongside a grade separated junction option. The Preferred Route identified was the culmination of an extensive and robust assessment process, which considered a range of engineering, environmental, traffic and economic factors. The ongoing DMRB 3 design development and assessment continues to refine the Preferred Route, including the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction.

Unique ID 053

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

I live in Dunblane and travel north via the A9 regularly due to family and friends living in Grantown On Spey.

I use the Keir roundabout daily and it can be a nightmare at different points throughout the day, I have seen it take 20 minutes and more to be able to access it when it gets busy, regardless of what junction used.

Adding a roundabout to the new layout will only cause further congestion and not reduce journey times or frustration for drivers.

If you are to build a new road then it should be undertaken correctly from the beginning so no changes will be required in the years to come.

Slip road/fly overs are the only correct option.

A roundabout will just cause a complete bottleneck, therefore should not even be considered.

Please use this email as an objection to the current plans.

Thank you for your time

Regards.

Response

Thank you for your positive feedback about the new car park layout at Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station.

Unique ID 054

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Hello

I’d like to comment on the proposed roundabout for the A9 Dunkeld junction.

I feel that a roundabout here, rather than a grade separated junction is a poor solution for both people passing on the A9 and those joining at the junction. There will be congestion, look at Inveralmond, Broxden and the Roundabout at the South end of the Kessock Bridge in Inverness.

There will be collisions as people slow down for the roundabout.

This seems like a poor solution, based on cost rather than functionality and safety.

A full grade separated junction would be much better.

Response

Thank you for your positive feedback about the new car park layout at Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station.

Unique ID 055

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Dear Sir,

We are writing to strongly oppose the idea of a roundabout at Birnam.

In England, they have just spent millions removing all the roundabouts on the A1, and vastly improved the safety of the route as a consequence! Why put in something which is a known hazard, when a tunnel for the local routes and slip roads onto a dual carriageway would be so much safer?

Unless there are some serious bends in the roundabout, local traffic is never going to be able to get out safely.

Perhaps you are unaware that a large portion of road users on the A9 are foreign tourists? Their rules are different, and, to our cost in places like Orkney, they do not observe the British Highway Code and give way to the right! They would charge straight onto a roundabout and cause mayhem!

The whole purpose of dualling the A9 from Perth to Inverness was to make the road safer and enable a smooth transit of traffic, whether business or leisure... If you need lessons in how to improve safety and create a local tunnel, you only have to consult the Swiss or Italians!

Your proposals are a false economy, which will only lead to yet further heartbreak, and defeat the object in the first place! Kindly rethink - and then do a properly advertised consultation, so that locals and regular users of the route (like ourselves) can have a proper say in the project.

Yours sincerely

Response

Thank you for your positive feedback about the new car park layout at Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station.

Unique ID 056

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

As person who drives this road I would like to comment that I believe the plans to be ill thought out. In my experience roundabouts on major route dual carriageways cause problems.

I lived in North Wales just off the A55 dual carriageway for 8 years. My village was one of only 2 on that road to have access by roundabout, all the other towns and villages have slip roads. Allegedly these are the only 2 roundabouts on the whole TransEuropean Network route from Eastern Europe to the port at Holyhead. The junctions at Penmaenmawr and Llanfairfechan would have been upgraded to slip roads around now if the UK had not left the EU and the Welsh Government had not consequently lost the funding.

The roundabouts cause delays and build ups in heavy traffic even although the traffic barely slows down on approach. Poor line of sight and speed of approaching traffic make it very difficult to pull out especially if attempting to turn right around the roundabout.

I would urge you to reconsider your plans.

Response

Thank you for your positive feedback about the new car park layout at Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station.

Unique ID 057

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Good afternoon

Please future proof the design and do side roundabouts here. There is enough short sightedness in some of the Scottish road designs-eg the new Queensferry crossing. Why it was not 3 lanes each way is beyond me as we have the same traffic jams as we had with the Forth road bridge.

In England all the main routes a1M, a338 etc have had their roundabouts converted to flyovers etc.

In addition we have enough problems with roundabouts in Dunblane, Perth and Inverness so let’s learn the lesson now please.

Response

Thank you for your feedback and we note your concerns relating to the roundabout at Dunkeld.

As detailed during previous public engagement, the Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section of the A9 Dualling included a number of unique challenges in the development of route options due to proximity of residential properties, sports club, the railway and Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. Due to these constraints, and taking into account the feedback from the A9 Co-Creative process with the local community, a roundabout was included within the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 2 route options assessment which was assessed alongside a grade separated junction option. The Preferred Route identified was the culmination of an extensive and robust assessment process, which considered a range of engineering, environmental, traffic and economic factors. The ongoing DMRB 3 design development and assessment continues to refine the Preferred Route, including the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction.

Unique ID 058

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

To Whom It May Concern,

I’m emailing to provide feedback on the proposed plans for a roundabout at Dunkeld junction on the A9.

I am a resident of Birnam and do not support these plans. I believe it will cause huge congestion at this junction similar to that which we see at the Inveralmond and Broxden roundabouts. I would like to see a proper flyover and slip road at this junction which would help the traffic flow better both on the A9 and for those joining the road at the junction at Dunkeld.

Regards

Response

Thank you for your positive feedback about the new car park layout at Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station.

The DMRB Stage 2 Scheme Assessment Report, Volume 1, Part 4: Traffic and Economic Assessment concluded that some delays to through traffic on the A9 are anticipated at the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction, which would be an average of approximately 15 seconds across the day in both northbound and southbound directions. The traffic modelling also concluded that queuing would not be experienced on a day-to-day basis. Further details on the DMRB Stage 2 traffic can be found on the A9 Dualling website: : https://www.transport.gov.scot/media/fnudvehh/04-dmrb-stage-2-vol-01-part-04-traffic-and-economic-assessment.pdf.

Unique ID 059

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Hi,

I think the proposed roundabout on the new A9 section at Dunkeld may turn out to be a mistake I think that road safety should be prioritised over cost consideration.

Thanks.

Response

Thank you for your feedback and we note your concerns relating to the roundabout at Dunkeld.

As detailed during previous public engagement, the Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section of the A9 Dualling included a number of unique challenges in the development of route options due to proximity of residential properties, sports club, the railway and Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. Due to these constraints, and taking into account the feedback from the A9 Co-Creative process with the local community, a roundabout was included within the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 2 route options assessment which was assessed alongside a grade separated junction option. The Preferred Route identified was the culmination of an extensive and robust assessment process, which considered a range of engineering, environmental, traffic and economic factors. The ongoing DMRB 3 design development and assessment continues to refine the Preferred Route, including the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction.

We can also confirm that in line with current DMRB standards the provision of a roundabout on the standard of road proposed for the A9 is permitted. Additionally, during the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development, appropriate advanced warning indicators, in consultation with an independent Road Safety Auditor, will be developed and incorporated to reduce the risk of accidents in relation to the proposed roundabout.

Unique ID 060

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Hello

I am a Pitlochry resident who commutes to Dunkeld daily so I use the Dunkeld junction to get on / off the A9 multiple times every day. I note that the current proposal includes a roundabout which will make it marginally safer for vehicles trying to join the A9. However I believe it will be create disastrous issues with queuing traffic travelling north & south who are already on the A9.

Last year there were traffic lights on a rolling stretch just North of Dunkeld which regularly (every Friday & Monday) caused delays of 4 hours and caused absolute carnage for road users. The lights had to be removed every Sat & Sunday because the whole stretch from Perth to Pitlochry ground to a halt. Now I understand that a roundabout won’t cause cars to stop for the same length of time as traffic lights but I do believe there will still be a significant queueing issue caused by a roundabout that will lead to impatience and won’t reduce the number of accidents from people pulling out in too small a gap.

This section really needs to have flyovers and slip roads and I would urge you strongly to consider options other than a roundabout.

Many Thanks

Response

Thank you for your feedback and we note your concerns relating to the roundabout at Dunkeld.

As detailed during previous public engagement, the Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section of the A9 Dualling included a number of unique challenges in the development of route options due to proximity of residential properties, sports club, the railway and Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. Due to these constraints, and taking into account the feedback from the A9 Co-Creative process with the local community, a roundabout was included within the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 2 route options assessment which was assessed alongside a grade separated junction option. The Preferred Route identified was the culmination of an extensive and robust assessment process, which considered a range of engineering, environmental, traffic and economic factors. The ongoing DMRB 3 design development and assessment continues to refine the Preferred Route, including the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction.

Unique ID 061

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Having looked at plans it would seem difficult to understand why a roundabout would be the solution at Dunkeld? Surely an underpass/ flyover, although more expensive, would be better option to let main carriageway run uninterrupted? To have this amount of traffic having to slow down and accelerate alone, plus potentially creating standing queues and an increased in acceleration and deceleration noise must trigger environmental concerns?

Second point would be safety, as simple fact statistically must be an increase in accidents as other roundabouts have shown?

My vote would be to let it flow using another solution. As a regular user of this road, the sooner the road built the better. Very positive that this moving forward.

Response

Thank you for your feedback and we note your concerns relating to the roundabout at Dunkeld.

As detailed during previous public engagement, the Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section of the A9 Dualling included a number of unique challenges in the development of route options due to proximity of residential properties, sports club, the railway and Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. Due to these constraints, and taking into account the feedback from the A9 Co-Creative process with the local community, a roundabout was included within the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 2 route options assessment which was assessed alongside a grade separated junction option. The Preferred Route identified was the culmination of an extensive and robust assessment process, which considered a range of engineering, environmental, traffic and economic factors. The ongoing DMRB 3 design development and assessment continues to refine the Preferred Route, including the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction.

Unique ID 062

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Good afternoon,

Having reviewed the proposal for a roundabout at the A9 Dunkeld junction I would like to object to it; i now live in Blairgowrie but still work in Kindallachan and lived on the A9 corridor for over 20 years. In my experience the roundabouts at Inveralmond and Broxden cause a huge amount of traffic tailbacks and I think these issues would be replicated at a roundabout in Dunkeld. I would be interested to know the research behind this proposal.

In my opinion a junction similar to that at Ballinluig would be the best option although clearly not the cheapest it would be at least safe and keep traffic flowing.

I trust common sense will be used in the decision making and look forward to seeing a much improved proposal.

Regards

Response

Thank you for your feedback and we note your concerns relating to the roundabout at Dunkeld.

Unique ID 063

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Dear Sir/Madam

I am writing to express my concern at the proposed roundabout to be installed at Dunkeld upon the dualling of the A9. The roundabouts at Broxden and Inveralmond are already terrible traffic blackspots for those of us travelling from the Highlands to Edinburgh or Glasgow, please do not add a third. Surely a graded interchange with either tunnel or flyover would be far more effective in maintaining both traffic flow and road user safety. I have recently returned from Madeira, where the use of tunnels is a marvel; I can't understand why we are so reluctant to use the same solution here.

Best regards

Response

Thank you for your feedback and we note your concerns relating to the roundabout at Dunkeld.

Unique ID 064

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Dear Sirs,

Having just see your online presentation on your proposals for a roundabout at the A9 Dunkeld turn-off I offer you 2 profound quotes:

If a job's worth doing it's worth doing well.
Do it once and do it right.

Now, can Transport Scotland and the design engineers at Jacobs honestly say they have full confidence they are following these 2 statements?

I think the answer to that is a definite NO.

They don't have to look very far away at similar situations to know that a roundabout is not the answer!

Response

Thank you for your feedback and we note your concerns relating to the roundabout at Dunkeld.

As detailed during previous public engagement, the Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section of the A9 Dualling included a number of unique challenges in the development of route options due to proximity of residential properties, sports club, the railway and Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. Due to these constraints, and taking into account the feedback from the A9 Co-Creative process with the local community, a roundabout was included within the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 2 route options assessment which was assessed alongside a grade separated junction option. The Preferred Route identified was the culmination of an extensive and robust assessment process, which considered a range of engineering, environmental, traffic and economic factors. The ongoing DMRB 3 design development and assessment continues to refine the Preferred Route, including the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction.

Unique ID 065

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

To whom it may concern,

Thank you for the online Information I am writing however to raise significant concern about the at level roundabout on the A9.

The speed that cars will approach the roundabout on the A9, leading to heavy breaking and a significant speed differential I believe is not safe enough. On what is a curved part of the A9 there needs to be a flyover for direct traffic and a slip road to allow those who need to slow to take the roundabout. The A9 is used by a significant amount of tourists and those who do not know the road.

It would also lead to significant tail backs that can be avoided, albeit a more expensive solution but would be future proofed and safer.

Best Regards

Response

Thank you for your feedback and we note your concerns relating to the roundabout at Dunkeld.

As detailed during previous public engagement, the Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section of the A9 Dualling included a number of unique challenges in the development of route options due to proximity of residential properties, sports club, the railway and Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. Due to these constraints, and taking into account the feedback from the A9 Co-Creative process with the local community, a roundabout was included within the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 2 route options assessment which was assessed alongside a grade separated junction option. The Preferred Route identified was the culmination of an extensive and robust assessment process, which considered a range of engineering, environmental, traffic and economic factors. The ongoing DMRB 3 design development and assessment continues to refine the Preferred Route, including the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction.

Unique ID 066

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Dear team

Thanks for the further chance to view plans last week.

You advised it is never too soon to comment on some of the ""finessing"" elements of design, in terms of landscaping, choice of materials etc. A few things that are in my mind at present:-

The default option in road-building seems to be concrete. Given the significant impact in places of the proposed works (high retaining walls etc) I feel that there is a strong case for stone facings, living walls etc to minimise the impact. It could feel very oppressive and urban in this rural setting if we have too much concrete. I am thinking in particular of the retaining walls near the Dunkeld junction, at the station underpass etc.
The proposed underpass to the station has apparently had to be moved off-centre. It will no longer make a potentially interesting architectural ""end point"" to the view up Station Road. At present there will be a view of a plain wall. I feel this in particular, should it remain in such a position, needs very careful design (ideally an engineering solution should be found to move it back to the top of Station Road). I gather there has been some talk of art works that could be used in this area/the underpass. I am not sure I am in favour of this as art work is very subjective, can date/fade/degrade over time etc. I think that there are places where it could be good to incorporate scope for the community to have local information boards etc. This aspect will need very careful consideration to ensure there is a plan for updates/refurbishment etc over time.
I still have some concerns about how safe it will feel for people using the underpass in darkness - with the entrance to the underpass moved away from the top of Station Road that concern might be exacerbated.
My husband advised that there will apparently be a ""swale"" near the Niel Gow statue near the Dunkeld junction. I had not realised this and am concerned this may not be appropriate for this setting. I feel the community needs to fully understand the implications of this and the extent to which it can become a positive feature rather than something that looks like an ""industrial"" development.
Disabled access to the station must be guaranteed - how will this be achieved in the event, say, of the proposed lift being out of action?

I hope these comments help inform the design process.

With kind regards.

Birnam resident (rail user, cyclist, walker, car driver)

Response

We note your comments about the use of more natural materials to potentially enhance the design aesthetics. Consultation with relevant parties will be ongoing through Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 3 design and assessment and later stages of the design work to determine the design finishings.

We note your comment on the location of the pedestrian underpass. A number of factors including design levels, reduction in underpass length, increased distance from Listed Building/footbridge and improved integration with the car park, due to being more centralised, have contributed in the underpass entrance moving approximately 20m from the top of Station Road. Consultation is ongoing with relevant stakeholder groups inform the design development including potential finishings at this location.

We appreciate your concern for the usage of the pedestrian underpass at night. However, the current proposals will include lighting to industry standards for both the car park and the pedestrian underpass to help improve visibility and safety.

With regards to your comment on access to the station during maintenance or break down of the lift, such details regarding the operation and maintenance methods will be discussed and refined with key stakeholders in due course. Provision of walking, cycling and horse-riding (WCH) options for local and core paths, including links from Birnam Glen to the railway station building and Station Road, were presented at the community engagement event in August. These options will continue to be assessed as part of the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development and will be published in the DMRB Stage 3 assessment report in Spring 2025.

The DMRB Stage 3 design development is ongoing to refine the design and consider the accessibility of all routes. Consultation is ongoing with key stakeholders including accessibility groups will be undertaken

Consultation with key stakeholders including accessibility groups is ongoing throughout the DMRB Stage 3 assessment to assist with the design and layout of the station and replacement car park.

Unique ID 067

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Hello Jacobs

I have tried to find (without success) the online feedback form advertised on the back of the paper feedback form given out at your Birnam feedback event. The online information says that the consultation is closed. I know this is not the case and we have until 6 October to make comments but this apparent discrepancy is confusing and unhelpful.

I would like to record the following comments on the proposals as they affect the area around the village of Inver. A couple of the points below are questions and I would be grateful to receive a reply to these.

Noise mitigation. The village of Inver already suffers from high noise levels from the A9. Once trees are removed for the dualling process this noise will only increase. I would ask that sound barriers or lowered speed limits are considered to protect the health of residents and visitors in Inver village.
Access to River Tay. At present the River Tay Core Footpath can be accessed via the old mill lade from Inver Village. Without this access we would have a long detour to get to the Tay path safely via the A9 underpass beside the River Braan. I ask that our access via the old Mill Lade is maintained for benefit of residents and visitors.
Valuable Trees. Alongside the Inver Mill Lade are several large lime trees which are very valuable for roosting and nesting birds in spring and throughout the winter. I am concerned that these trees will be felled during the dualling process. They are not in the immediate line of the road and so could easily be avoided but experience from elsewhere shows that many trees are felled indiscriminately. I ask that these trees, and where possible other ancient and valuable trees, are left standing.
Otter deaths. Several otters have been killed on the A9 100meters or so north of where the north bound railway emerges from the Inver tunnel. This seems to be a particularly dangerous spot for otters crossing. I ask that provision is made to make this area safer for otters following small burns that run into the Tay.
Invasive species. Himalayan Balsam, Japanese Knotweed and Piri Piri Bur are all problems in the Dunkeld area. The construction work is highly likely to spread these species. What measures will be taken to reduce the likelihood of these species being spread even more?
Tay Core Path screening. The River Tay core path will be severely impacted by the A9 dualling. In several places the noise levels will be considerably increased and the visual impacts will also be detrimental to those using the path. I would ask that consideration is given to screening by hedging or other means to help address both of these concerns in the Dunkeld and Inver areas.
Junction safety. Please can you tell me if any attention is being given to improving safety at the Dunkeld and Birnam junctions prior to the dualling process, which is several years away.

I look forward to receiving confirmation that these comments have been received and to hearing answers to the questions posed above.

Thanks and kind regards

Response

Thank you for your feedback. We apologise for the difficulties you had looking for the online feedback form and thank you for preserving and providing your feedback.

As part of Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 3 process, we are undertaking an environmental impacts assessment (EIA) which considers the impact of the proposed scheme across a range of environmental factors, including noise, landscape, wildlife (including otters) and community impacts. Potential impacts will be reported in the Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR). Should the assessment identify mitigation as being required, then there are a range of potential measures which could be considered depending on various factors such as the nature, location and severity of the impact. Mitigation measures identified, and the resulting residual effects of the proposed scheme (accounting for the implementation of mitigation), will be reported in the EIAR to be published in Spring 2025.

We are aware that the existing Mill Lade culvert is used as an unofficial pedestrian route between Inver and the River Tay. The culvert is not only sub-standard in height for pedestrian provision but also as its main function is to carry the existing watercourse to the River Tay it is susceptible to flooding. Therefore, it is not feasible to consider the culvert appropriate for pedestrian users as part of the proposed scheme. Proposals for walking, cycling and horse-riding (WCH) were presented at the Community Engagement Event in August 2024 which included access to the River Tay being provided via a footway from Inver passing under the dualled A9 at the River Braan structure.

With regards to valuable trees, the EIAR mentioned above will include an Arboricultural Assessment. This will identify trees of significance, these being ancient, veteran or notable trees; large mature trees; trees notable for their ecological/cultural/historic significance and trees covered by tree protection orders. The proposed scheme will be designed to avoid, where practicable, such trees and where there are unavoidable impacts, mitigation will be developed to reduce potential impacts and effects.

Reasonable precautions will be taken during construction to avoid spreading of soil-borne pests and diseases; animal and crop diseases; tree pests and diseases; and invasive species. A biosecurity protocol will be developed by the Contractor in consultation with the Animal and Plant Health Agency, the Scottish Government’s Environment and Forestry Directorate and the Scottish Government’s Agriculture, Food and Rural Communities Directorate, taking cognisance of relevant UK and Scottish Government biosecurity guidance.

On 16 December 2022, the then Minister for Transport announced an additional £5m package of targeted shorter-term safety measures to be delivered between Perth and Inverness from then until 2025. Work on these short-term measures commenced in early 2023 and has been progressing at pace, with a range of road marking and signage improvements delivered along the route, including delivery of lining and signing improvements around Dunkeld. The final A9 Short Term Measures are scheduled to commence in March 2025.

Transport Scotland commissioned the Operating Company BEAR Scotland to carry out a high-level assessment to investigate potential improvements for traffic joining the A9 from the A923 and A822. The Interim Review Report, which identified and assessed potential improvement options, is currently being reviewed by Transport Scotland and the Birnam and Dunkeld Junctions Action Group.

Transport Scotland assesses the safety performance of the trunk road network, including the A9 between Dunblane and Scrabster, on an annual basis. To date, Transport Scotland has installed solar powered illuminated road studs in 2021/22 to provide greater clarity of junction layout at night, along with new/refreshed red infill surface in hatched areas to give greater emphasis to turning areas and separating streams of traffic. In addition, directional traffic signs were improved at the Dunkeld and Inver junctions. Through this process, a number of investigations are currently being progressed on the A9, including some between Perth and Inverness. These locations include Dalnaspidal (near Drumochter) and Lynwilg (near Aviemore).

Unique ID 068

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Reference the recent A9 consultation in Birnam Institute. 2 items of feedback for your consideration:

Dunkeld Roundabout

My earlier comments to not appear to have been considered (copy attached for ease of reference). The updated project boards and narrative omit any reference to this issue.

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

Proposed Jubilee Bridge Crossing

The existing bridge has a narrow pedestrian pavement to one side which also acts as a shared cycleway. As a cycle it is a very uncomfortable and unsafe method of crossing this busy bridge. The separation from significant volumes of fast and heavy vehicle traffic is inadequate, with the subsequent vehicular turbulence proving dangerous to cyclists, many of whom are young children.

I was expecting that the plans for the upgrading for this bridge, which will cater for increased vehicle speeds up to 70mph from the present 60mph, to include for an improved and segregated cycleway/pedestrian route. This should be a key design principle in such a new crossing. However I was informed at the walk-in session that the intention was to continue with the present solution with no separation and/or segregation.

I urge you to reconsider this and to make provision for fully separated provision, of which there are many good examples elsewhere. Improved safety provision for non-vehicular users should be an essential part of the project.

Response

Thank you for your feedback and we note your concerns. With regards to your previous comments, a response was included in the report on the Preferred Route Announcement engagement, published August 2024: https://www.transport.gov.scot/publication/consultation-report-preferred-route-exhibition-pass-of-birnam-to-tay-crossing-a9-dualling/. Unfortunately, there were no contact details on your previous feedback and we were unable to respond to you directly.

We note your feedback regarding the provision for pedestrians and cyclists on the Tay Crossing bridge (Jubilee Bridge) at the northern end of the proposed scheme. This feedback will be used, as part of the ongoing DMRB Stage 3 design development and assessment work, to inform the continued development of provision for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders throughout the proposed scheme. Detailed explanation of the design and assessment of such provisions will be published in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 3 report and EIAR Report in Spring 2025.

Unique ID 069

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Dear Sirs

BIRNHAM TO TAY CROSSING DUALLING PROPOSAL

I refer to the recent consultation about the design proposals for this section of 'dualling the A9'.

I wish to submit my strong objection to the proposal for an 'at-grade' roundabout on this section.

I am a regular user of the A9 and believe the dualling of the road is one of the most essential infrastructure projects in Scotland. The link between Perth and Inverness, and beyond, is vital for the continued economic development of the Highlands. Traffic levels have increased significantly over recent years and at periods of peak traffic flow the road is currently unable to cope. The number of serious and fatal accidents is alarming. I fully support the dualling programme

However, I cannot believe that a proposal would be out forward that effectively halts all traffic driving the A9 north and south by the inclusion of an 'at-grade' roundabout. How does this meet your environmental objectives? I cannot understand why an engineering proposal cannot be brought forward that incorporates a grade separated roundabout, with joining and departing slip roads.

It seems perverse to design in an obstruction, an 'at-grade' roundabout, for the dualling of this section of the road. Apart from the accident risks associated with the roundabout there will be significant environmental and driver costs and queuing problems associated with the requirement to slow down and stop at the roundabout, and then accelerate away. Additional fuel and electricity will be used and there will be significant noise and environmental pollution with both extra fuel use and tyre wear.

Why have Transport Scotland allowed you to continue with a proposal that effectively halts all the A9 traffic going both north and south? It seems a very short sighted decision which will adversely affect the long term effectiveness of the dualling programme. The route between Perth and Inverness should be free flowing, without interruption.

The Highway Code says, ""When reaching a roundabout you should:

Always give priority to the traffic coming from the right, unless you have been directed otherwise by signs, road markings or traffic lights

Check if the road markings allow you to proceed without giving way (always look right before joining just in case)

Watch out for other road users on the roundabout

Check the traffic has moved off in front of you before you proceed to enter the roundabout.""

I understand Inverness has one of the fastest growing economies in Europe. Business expansion is important to the Highlands and there is already the on-shore and off-shore wind farm industries the Space Port, the Freeport, increasing tourism and various other developments putting pressure on the A9. Most traffic will need to get to Inverness, and beyond, unhindered by an unnecessary 'at-grade' roundabout. How does this proposal take account of future traffic growth?

I feel this is a very short sighted design approach to the dualling of this section. The lessons from motoring history show us that roundabouts on major highways create problems that usually require expensive remedial actions. The A9 is the major and only direct route to the Highlands. South of the border we see such major highways linking cities as motorways but that is not the case for Perth to Inverness - so surely the road should be obstruction free?

What is proposed appears to be an incredibly short sighted approach and I urge you to rethink this aspect of the dualling proposal.

Please can you acknowledge my response and take account of my objection in your consultation analysis report. Please may I have a copy of the consultation report once it is completed?

Kind regards

Response

Thank you for your feedback and we note your concerns relating to the roundabout at Dunkeld.

As detailed during previous public engagement, the Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section of the A9 Dualling included a number of unique challenges in the development of route options due to proximity of residential properties, sports club, the railway and Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. Due to these constraints, and taking into account the feedback from the A9 Co-Creative process with the local community, a roundabout was included within the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 2 route options assessment which was assessed alongside a grade separated junction option. The Preferred Route identified was the culmination of an extensive and robust assessment process, which considered a range of engineering, environmental, traffic and economic factors. The ongoing DMRB 3 design development and assessment continues to refine the Preferred Route, including the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction.

The DMRB Stage 2 Scheme Assessment Report, Volume 1, Part 4: Traffic and Economic Assessment concluded that some delays to through traffic on the A9 are anticipated at the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction, which would be an average of approximately 15 seconds across the day in both northbound and southbound directions. The traffic modelling also concluded that queuing would not be experienced on a day-to-day basis. Future year modelling formed part of this assessment.

A copy of the full Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing Community Engagement Event Consultation Report is available on the Transport Scotland website.

Unique ID 070

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Hi, we are probably one of the properties that is going to be heavily impacted with the development of the new railway station car park and all the other things that is going to happen up here ,lowering of the footpath along the top and bringing it even nearer to our property a thing we are hoping can be avoided , it will be a busier footpath if this development goes ahead this side of A9 a lot more noise impact as cyclists don’t seem to be able to talk to each other more shout now if there is no change to latest proposals, would it be possible for a sound deadening type fence on the downside of the footpath to screen us from the public, and as I’ve said before some type of screening fence ,wall ,along side of A9 on verge area to hide the traffic from us as we notice when we don’t see the traffic passing it seems to work better for us than actually seeing the traffic in winter time when the vegetation is bare leaves off the trees I know it sounds daft but not seeing the traffic seems to have a better feeling mentally. There is going to be some type of drainage settlement flood pond does that have to be in the area other side of footpath if yes could it be elongated longer to prevent footpath coming closer .There is ground lowering proposed on the road into station cottages and on the boundary of our property we are really hoping you can avoid this .

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

The view from our property into the new car park isn’t going to be great for us either as the artist’s impression isn’t a true picture to the angles of our property to the car park the wall along the top of the property’s on the downside of the carpark where it turns won’t screen us very well ,we will be subjected to a lot more activity, and vehicles people coming and going car doors closing general noise lights of the vehicles shining in you windows from a very early time in the morning going for trains we think this is going to have a massive impact on our mental health the only thing we have to protect us from even say a bus running away is our hedge ,what about building a wall on face of our property on pavement side to the height the hedge is now would that be acceptable just a thought .Good points tho the entrance to the station through the underpass has been moved further away ,even if you moved it slightly further not a lot might save doing lowering around our property ,I would like you to email me back if there is any of the questions I have asked have any developments .

Response

Thank you for your feedback and we note your concerns relating to the footpath and station car park.

As part of DMRB Stage 3 design development and assessment process, we are undertaking an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) to consider and evaluate the environmental impacts of the proposed scheme across a range of environmental factors, including noise, visual and public health impacts. Baseline and forecast assessments are being undertaken which will be reported in the Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) to be published in Spring 2025.

Should the EIA identify mitigation as being required, then there are a range of potential measures which could be considered depending on various factors such as the nature, location and severity of the impact. Mitigation measures identified, and the resulting residual effects of the proposed scheme (accounting for the implementation of mitigation), will be reported in the EIAR in Spring 2025.

The drainage feature referred too will be a swale which is currently proposed to be approximately 20 metres long and would be situated immediately alongside the footway between the replacement car park and Birnam Glen Road. The swale would generally be dry and not of a significant depth with gentle grass slopes and could also be designed in such a way to complement its local environment.

Unique ID 071

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

Good overall. Is having a large roundabout is the best option for the Dunkeld junction? These normally get really busy because trunk road traffic is mixing with local traffic. I think a grade-separated junction with smaller roundabouts is better here.

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

Much better than it currently is so I think they look good.

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

Good refinement, it seems to have a more flowing and accessible layout now. Though provision of bus and cycle facilities is crucial here so make sure to include them.

Response

Thank you for your feedback and we note your concerns relating to the roundabout at Dunkeld.

As detailed during previous public engagement, the Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section of the A9 Dualling included a number of unique challenges in the development of route options due to proximity of residential properties, sports club, the railway and Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station. Due to these constraints, and taking into account the feedback from the A9 Co-Creative process with the local community, a roundabout was included within the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Stage 2 route options assessment which was assessed alongside a grade separated junction option. The Preferred Route identified was the culmination of an extensive and robust assessment process, which considered a range of engineering, environmental, traffic and economic factors. The ongoing DMRB 3 design development and assessment continues to refine the Preferred Route, including the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld Junction.

We thank you for your feedback on the WCH provision and replacement Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park. Matters regarding the management and operation of the proposed car park will be discussed and developed with the relevant stakeholders in due course, and cannot be commented upon at this time.

Unique ID 072

Feedback

We would appreciate your feedback on the General Design Development.

I'm not sure why you got rid of the roundabout at Dalguise Junction. It would slow cars down and it would give cars a chance to turn around safely if e.g. they took the wrong turn. In fact I think there should be a roundabout at the other T junction too.

We would appreciate your feedback on the proposals for walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders.

Really positive

We would appreciate your feedback on the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park and access proposals.

Looks good

Response

Thank you for your feedback and we note your concerns relating to the change in junction provision at Dalguise Junction.

As part of the ongoing design development, the proposed junction arrangement between the southbound off-slip at Dalguise Junction and the B898 has been changed to a priority junction. This is considered suitable for the anticipated traffic volumes and speeds forecast for this location and requires a smaller footprint.

Advance warning signage including signage at the junction will be provided to ensure vehicles have adequate notice to plan ahead for any changes in direction.

We thank you for your positive feedback on the walkers, wheelers, cyclists and horse-riders (WCH) provisions and replacement Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station car park

< Previous | Contents