Question One Analysis

In total, 109 out of 112 respondents provided a response to this question.

The bullet points below provide a list of code descriptions in order from most commented to least commented for this question.

The total number of comments does not match the total number of responses, as there can be more than one code assigned to a response. The bullet points below show all of the comments that were derived from the coding exercise together with the number of comments, which are shown in the brackets. The paragraphs below provide more details about the themes identified.

• Theme - Preferred Route Option Design (90 comments)
  • Detailed design suggestions, including mitigations (28 comments);
  • General support for the scheme/preferred route design (24 comments);
  • Support for specific design details of the scheme (14 comments);
  • Refers to similar designs or junctions (9 comments);
  • Concerns about future traffic (8 comments); and
  • Comments about speed limit (7 comments);

• Theme - Dunkeld & Birnam Railway Station (64 comments)
  • Concern around proposals for train station, including access (26 comments);
  • Suggestion for train station improvements, incl. mitigations/parking (18 comments);
  • Support proposal for train station (11 comments); and
  • Comments about train station's car park (9 comments)

• Theme - Proposed Dunkeld Roundabout (31 comments)
  • Against the roundabout at Dunkeld (24 comments); and
  • Support the roundabout at Dunkeld (7 comments)

• Theme - Environment (29 comments)
  • Concerns about noise/pollution levels (12 comments);
  • Suggestion for active travel improvements (9 comments); and
  • Concerns for climate impact (8 comments)

• Theme, Comments about the Co-Creative process and its outputs (7 comments)

Preferred Route Option Design

The most mentioned theme related to the design of the Preferred Route Option, 90 comments were received.

Detailed design suggestions, which also included mitigation suggestions, were made 28 times. Those suggestions related to various topics across the whole scheme. The most commonly mentioned suggestions included noise barriers/mitigations as well as pollution mitigations and light barriers/mitigations in various places along the route (i.e. between Birnam Junction and Dunkeld Roundabout or from Station Road to the south). Some comments asked for the planting or replanting of trees due to safety and aesthetic reasons along with climate impact mitigations. Trees were also mentioned in reference to noise and pollution mitigation. Two comments proposed design changes to Dalguise Junction. Some comments raised concerns and suggested the mainline, in the vicinity of the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station, should be the cut and cover or short tunnel option. Details of these design suggestions, and responses, can be found in Appendix J.

A total of 24 comments were received in support of the Preferred Route. The comments included those that were satisfied with the proposals and others expressed the opinion that it is a good compromise, and the overall solutions are good considering the challenges. In addition, 14 comments supported specific parts of the scheme including the access to Murthly Castle and the Birnam, Hermitage and Dalguise Junctions.

Comments were also received in relation to concerns about an increase in the future traffic volumes, details on the traffic modelling and impacts on privately owned property.

Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station

A total of 64 comments were received in relation to Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station. Of these, 11 were in general support and noted that access to the station will be improved with the new design. Of these comments, 27 raised concerns on the vehicular and pedestrian access to the station.

Nine comments were received in relation to the car park proposals, stating that it would not provide convenient access to the station and will not encourage train usage. The spaces within the car park were also commented on, with 2 comments detailing that the car park is not only used by passengers, but also by tourists and other residents, therefore it should have additional capacity.

Eighteen comments were received on general design features including aesthetics of the station and that the design should be in line with local heritage, extending the underpass to Platform 2, safety, vandalism, EV charging and cycle/pedestrians’ access to the station. Other comments in relation to the station were directly linked to the Preferred Route not including the tunnel and reconnecting the Dunkeld and Birnam Railway Station to Station Road. Details of these design suggestions, and responses, can be found in Appendix J.

Proposed Dunkeld Roundabout

A total of 31 comments were received about the proposed roundabout at Dunkeld.

Of these, seven were in support of the roundabout with 24 expressing concerns including tailbacks, traffic jams, and increased journey times. Also mentioned was safety given the 70mph speed limit and the roundabout not being a grade separated junction. Details of these concerns, and responses, can be found in Appendix J.

Nine comments were received as examples of junctions on the existing road network. Mentioned as a good example was Ballinluig Junction, with roundabouts at Keir, Broxden, Sheriffhall, Longman and Inveralmond raised as junctions often having tailbacks and traffic jams. Details of these design suggestions, and responses, can be found in Appendix J.

Environment

A total of 29 comments were received on the environment. Of these, 12 comments were in relation to concerns that the design would increase noise and pollution levels within Dunkeld and Birnam.

Nine comments suggested active travel improvements including improvements to the cycleways and footpaths along the scheme. There were also suggestions that segregated paths are preferred for safety reasons. There were 8 comments on the scheme’s impact on climate. Other concerns included impact on the local wildlife and woodlands and the lack of wildlife passes within the design, location of attenuation ponds, and requesting that hedges are not planted due to safety concerns. There were also opinions that building roads in general should not be a priority during a state of climate emergency.

Details of these design suggestions, and responses, can be found in Appendix J.

Co-Creative Process

Seven comments were in relation to the Co-Creative process and its outputs, with 5 of these detailing concerns about the community’s decision to include the at-grade Dunkeld roundabout. Three of these comments critiqued the involvement of the community group as not being indicative of what the majority of locals and road users want.