A9 dualling

The study of British and Irish roads - their construction, numbering, history, mapping, past and future official roads proposals and general roads musings.

There is a separate forum for Street Furniture (traffic lights, street lights, road signs etc).

Registered users get access to other forums including discussions about other forms of transport, driving, fantasy roads and wishlists, and roads quizzes.

Moderator: Site Management Team

Post Reply
User avatar
Berk
Member
Posts: 9779
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 02:36
Location: somewhere in zone 1

Re: A9 dualling

Post by Berk »

Maybe because... they’re so rare, they’re not really seen as a viable option?? I can’t think of a single project in the UK in that format.
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19205
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: A9 dualling

Post by KeithW »

paully wrote: Mon Apr 08, 2019 22:31 I don't know why a single-carriageway width cut & cover solution hasn't been proposed, with one carriageway on top of the other.

This would solve a few of the problems:
- the approach to the roundabout/GSJ (delete as applicable) wouldn't be in the dark
- the current LILO junction at the station, as well as the car park could be maintained
- much cheaper due to 50% less excavation work

Only downside would be the lack of a through route during construction, the idea proposed above where Birnam is used as the main road may be the only option.
There are/were a few instances of multi level viaducts in the USA. The Cypress Freeway in Oakland and the Oakland Bay Bridge come to mind and the Tinsley viaduct in Sheffield is a UK example. However they are wide multi lane structures. You really don't want a narrow D2 version as apart from anything the consequence of a serious accident could be nasty, especially if followed by a fire. Rescue from such structures is not a trivial task as was found in 1989 when the top level of the Cypress Freeway collapsed onto the lower level.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cypress_S ... lapsed.jpg
dcrc2
Member
Posts: 111
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 23:22
Location: Stevenage

Re: A9 dualling

Post by dcrc2 »

paully wrote: Mon Apr 08, 2019 22:31 I don't know why a single-carriageway width cut & cover solution hasn't been proposed, with one carriageway on top of the other.
I think this misses the reasons why a tunnel was suggested in the first place. It's not just space constraints that they're trying to solve. The point of the tunnel in the community's option is:
- reconnecting the town to its train station;
- hiding the road (and the associated noise and pollution) as it passes very close by to properties.

So the double-decker carriageway just gets you the worst of both worlds - you have the significant expense and construction difficulties of a tunnel, while not actually achieving the benefits that a full tunnel would provide.
dcrc2
Member
Posts: 111
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 23:22
Location: Stevenage

Re: A9 dualling

Post by dcrc2 »

SouthWest Philip wrote: Mon Apr 08, 2019 17:23 If one of the issues is the railway station being cut off from the town by the the A9, would it be possible to swap the road and railway alignment around?
That was actually one of the longlisted options in the "co-creative" process. I think whoever suggested this deserves some sort of prize for creativity. I can't find the documents online any more, but I think it was dismissed largely because of the disruption that would be caused while they tried to build it: it would require a lengthy closure of the railway.
B9127
Member
Posts: 694
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 20:45
Location: Angus Scotland

Re: A9 dualling

Post by B9127 »

The Station building is Grade 3 listed so move it up the line towards Pitlochry - there is a space just before the railway crosses the A822 - its not the first time buildings have been demolished and rebuilt - then put the railway in a tunnel or leave it there and squeeze the extra carriageway between the railway and the existing carriageway - problem solved, There is a mention that the platforms are sub-standard as the ballast has raised over the years and it now needs wooden steps on the platform to help passengers
Motorways travelled 2019 - M90 - M9 - M80 - M8 -M77 - M73 -A74(M) -M6-M42-M40 -A404(M) - M4 - M5 -M50 -M56 much better so far than last year
A9Dan
Member
Posts: 155
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 22:07

Re: A9 dualling

Post by A9Dan »

Inquiry sessions for Dalwhinne to Crubenmore have now been planned over three days from 10 June. It is however possible that these will not be required if the objection can be resolved before then. There remain three statutory objections (Phoenes Estate, SSE/SSE Generation and Argo Invest/Ben Alder Estate). The former two intent to be represented at the inquiry. There is also a non-staturtory objection from Transform Scotland.
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19205
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: A9 dualling

Post by KeithW »

B9127 wrote: Tue Apr 09, 2019 12:45 The Station building is Grade 3 listed so move it up the line towards Pitlochry - there is a space just before the railway crosses the A822 - its not the first time buildings have been demolished and rebuilt - then put the railway in a tunnel or leave it there and squeeze the extra carriageway between the railway and the existing carriageway - problem solved, There is a mention that the platforms are sub-standard as the ballast has raised over the years and it now needs wooden steps on the platform to help passengers
I don't think you should underestimate the problems or expense of putting the train in tunnel. The Highland main line is already marginal in terms of gradients and clearance with a limit of 30 mph on the Killiecrankie tunnel and viaduct. There are also issues about ventilation. The line is not electrified so you will need good ventilation to remove the diesel fumes.

There have been several discussions on the rail forums about this line and there was a formal investigation in 2006 that made it clear that the steep uphill gradient from Killecranke through Blair Atholl to Dalwhinne was excessive. Start from further down in a tunnel and it would likely become critical. Also there is a need to widen the track footprint as the clearances are sub standard. One of the reasons for the study was the desire to increase the loading gauge to allow taller containers to use the line but one of the things that became clear was that dualling the A9 would be cheaper and was seen as a higher priority. Network Rail would doubtless relish the chance to build a new twin track line with less taxing gradients and better loading gauge but the costs would be high and there seems little support from the Scottish Government for the idea so their improvements were limited to station modifications, resignalling and improved passing loops to allow HST's to operate on the line.

https://www.railengineer.co.uk/2017/03/ ... -new-hsts/
B9127
Member
Posts: 694
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 20:45
Location: Angus Scotland

Re: A9 dualling

Post by B9127 »

How about just move the station leaving the line in place -would that leave enough space for another carriageway
Motorways travelled 2019 - M90 - M9 - M80 - M8 -M77 - M73 -A74(M) -M6-M42-M40 -A404(M) - M4 - M5 -M50 -M56 much better so far than last year
User avatar
Glen
Social Media Admin
Posts: 5426
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 02:16
Location: Inbhir Pheofharain
Contact:

Re: A9 dualling

Post by Glen »

B9127 wrote: Tue Apr 09, 2019 12:45 The Station building is Grade 3 listed so move it up the line towards Pitlochry
The stations building and footbridge is category A listed, which is the highest category (not grade) of listing.

http://portal.historicenvironment.scot/ ... on/LB11139
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19205
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: A9 dualling

Post by KeithW »

B9127 wrote: Tue Apr 09, 2019 20:19 How about just move the station leaving the line in place -would that leave enough space for another carriageway
It would be easier to remove the Birnam industrial estate and modern houses to the north of the A9 and leave the station where it is. In an ideal world the cut and cover tunnel option would seem the best way forward. Its a relatively short section (1.5 km) which has the added advantage of reducing road noise. The station remains where it needs to be and regains easy access to the town. However its extremely expensive and would be very disruptive during the prolonged construction period.

All these options have been considered in an options document prepared for the next stage of consultation along with cost estimates.
https://www.transport.gov.scot/publicat ... -dualling/
https://www.transport.gov.scot/media/44 ... ds-1-9.pdf
https://www.transport.gov.scot/media/44 ... -10-18.pdf

The option I suspect Highways Scotland prefer is putting the A19 in an underpass between Birnam and the station but another option is an at grade improvement removing the Birnam industrial estate and modern houses to create the space needed.
Duncan macknight
Committee Member
Posts: 338
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2015 10:59
Location: Inverness

Re: A9 dualling

Post by Duncan macknight »

My personal preference is a cut and cover tunnel but smaller that what’s being proposed. Similar to the one on the A9 in Stirling.

I’ve thought about the Dunkeld junction for a while and a roundabout is obviously not going to happen. My preferences would be to built a junction to lower standards to reduce the amount of land, probably 2 Lilos or to close the junction all together and a simple underpass joining up Birnam and the A822/A923.
B9127
Member
Posts: 694
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 20:45
Location: Angus Scotland

Re: A9 dualling

Post by B9127 »

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/ne ... ng-scheme/ DC Thomson hype or just a normal objector?
Motorways travelled 2019 - M90 - M9 - M80 - M8 -M77 - M73 -A74(M) -M6-M42-M40 -A404(M) - M4 - M5 -M50 -M56 much better so far than last year
A9Craig
Member
Posts: 145
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 00:54
Location: Inverness

Re: A9 dualling

Post by A9Craig »

A statutory objector the same as any other, but clearly has the dosh to enlist extensive professional help. See his

Closing Submissions (click "Open Document")

Basically, he just wants the second carriageway to be built further away from his house.
Altnabreac
Member
Posts: 506
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 11:50

Re: A9 dualling

Post by Altnabreac »

Updates on the DPEA website:

Tay Crossing to Ballinluig has a modest 18 objections, 9 of which are statutory.

Killiecrankie to Glen Garry has an impressive 17 statutory and 171 non statutory objections. As expected the battlefield site is the main bone of contention.

Complete
A9 Kincraig - Dalraddy (September 2017)

Under Construction
A9 Luncarty - Pass of Birnam (February 2019)

Contract Let
none

Procurement Underway
none

Made Orders Published
none

Public Local Inquiry (PLI) report with Ministers
A9 Glen Garry to Dalwhinnie (February 2019) https://www.dpea.scotland.gov.uk/CaseDe ... ?ID=119863
2 objections (1 statutory landowner, 1 non-statutory) being dealt with by written submission.

Public Local Inquiry (PLI) report being written
A9 Pitlochry to Killiecrankie (March 2019) https://www.dpea.scotland.gov.uk/CaseDe ... ?ID=119865
2 objections (1 statutory landowner, 1 non-statutory) being dealt with by written submission.

Public Local Inquiry (PLI) Hearing sessions date set
A9 Dalwhinnie to Crubenmore (June 2019) https://www.dpea.scotland.gov.uk/CaseDe ... ?ID=120011
Reporter appointed Jan 19. 4 objections remain, 2 landowners, 1 utility, 1 non statutory (Transform Scotland).
SSE objection partially withdrawn March 2019. Inquiry date proposed for 11 June, may be that all except Transform Scotland withdraw objections leading to cancellation of hearing.

Public Local Inquiry (PLI) pre-inquiry meeting occurred
None

Public Local Inquiry (PLI) ordered
A9 Tomatin to Moy (January 2019) https://www.dpea.scotland.gov.uk/CaseDe ... ?id=120174
Reporter appointed March 2019. 11 objections remain, 8 landowners, 2 utility, 1 non statutory (Transform Scotland).
A9 Killiecrankie to Glen Garry (March 2019) - https://www.dpea.scotland.gov.uk/CaseDe ... ?ID=120283
Reporter appointed April 2019. 189 objections remain, 17 statutory and 171 non statutory.
A9 Tay Crossing to Ballinluig (March 2019) - https://www.dpea.scotland.gov.uk/CaseDe ... ?ID=120312
Reporter appointed April 2019. 18 objections remain, 9 statutory and 9 non statutory.

Dalraddy to Slochd and Crubenmore to Kincraig expected to be going to PLI in "Spring 2019" in TS letter to Network Rail from October 2018.

Draft Orders published - Exhibition feedback published
A9 Dalraddy to Slochd (September 2018) - Exhibition responses published October 2018

Draft Orders published - Exhibition held
A9 Crubenmore to Kincraig (October 2018) - https://www.transport.gov.scot/publicat ... -dualling/

Draft Orders published
none

DMRB Stage 3 exhibition held (Interim detailed design consultation)
none

DMRB Stage 2 (Preferred Route) designs published
none

Pre Stage 2 Route Design Options exhibition
A9 Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing (March 2019)- https://www.transport.gov.scot/publicat ... -dualling/

Construction Time Estimates:
Luncarty - Pass of Birnam - 22 months
Tay Crossing to Ballinluig 2 - 2.5 years
Pitlochry to Killiecrankie 3 - 3.5 years
Killiecrankie to Glen Garry 3 - 3.5 years
Glen Garry to Dalwhinnie and Dalwhinnie to Crubenmore 3 - 3.5 years
Crubenmore - Kincraig 3.5 years
Dalraddy to Slochd 4.5 years
Tomatin to Moy 2.5 - 3 years
Nwallace
Member
Posts: 4239
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 22:42
Location: Dundee

Re: A9 dualling

Post by Nwallace »

A9Craig wrote:A statutory objector the same as any other, but clearly has the dosh to enlist extensive professional help. See his

Closing Submissions (click "Open Document")

Basically, he just wants the second carriageway to be built further away from his house.
A house that apparently he doesn't even live in, preffering his other house at the back of Pitlochry.

Sent from my BKL-L09 using Tapatalk

B9127
Member
Posts: 694
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 20:45
Location: Angus Scotland

Re: A9 dualling

Post by B9127 »

Nwallace wrote: Tue Apr 16, 2019 14:41
A9Craig wrote:A statutory objector the same as any other, but clearly has the dosh to enlist extensive professional help. See his

Closing Submissions (click "Open Document")

Basically, he just wants the second carriageway to be built further away from his house.
A house that apparently he doesn't even live in, preffering his other house at the back of Pitlochry.

He notes on his website that the A9 in very handy when you visit to rent one of his premises
Motorways travelled 2019 - M90 - M9 - M80 - M8 -M77 - M73 -A74(M) -M6-M42-M40 -A404(M) - M4 - M5 -M50 -M56 much better so far than last year
User avatar
Euan
Member
Posts: 1851
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 07:59
Location: North Ayrshire

Re: A9 dualling

Post by Euan »

Nwallace wrote: Tue Apr 16, 2019 14:41
A9Craig wrote:A statutory objector the same as any other, but clearly has the dosh to enlist extensive professional help. See his

Closing Submissions (click "Open Document")

Basically, he just wants the second carriageway to be built further away from his house.
A house that apparently he doesn't even live in, preffering his other house at the back of Pitlochry.

Sent from my BKL-L09 using Tapatalk
How to solely stop new roads from being built - buy a new house near every proposed site for a new road in the whole country...
E-roads, M-roads, A-roads, N-roads, B-roads, R-roads, C-roads, L-roads, U-roads, footpaths
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19205
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: A9 dualling

Post by KeithW »

Euan wrote: Tue Apr 16, 2019 23:34 How to solely stop new roads from being built - buy a new house near every proposed site for a new road in the whole country...
Meet Mr Compulsory Purchase Order...
GrahameCase
Member
Posts: 165
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 08:59
Location: East Central Scotland

Re: A9 dualling

Post by GrahameCase »

I’m increasingly being drawn toward the idea that large chunks of the project are going to be completed under the DBFO (Design,Build,Finance,Operate) model - especially when there’s going to be huge swathes hitting “shovel ready” at the same time. The question being if this is the case will there be a consortium or Company willing to take on a DBFO like this ?
——
Roads Geek primarily focused on Scotland
/ owner of a 7 year old laptop that doubles as a top spec gaming pc
Stravaiger
Member
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2017 13:27

Re: A9 dualling

Post by Stravaiger »

DBFO??

Wont happen

All eggs in one basket?

Never!
Post Reply