A96 Dualling: Inverness to Nairn

[jnty]

https://cycle.travel/route/summary/156588 - There's already a route between the two. I'm not sure why anyone cycling for fun would actively want to travel along the route of the A96 which misses anything of notice

Well by that logic there's already a route for all traffic between Inverness and Aberdeen - the A96 - so they can just cancel the project, job done.

Might active travellers perhaps want to use part of the A96 for their journey? Or need to cross it? I suppose all bypasses are useless because they don't go anywhere?

Being totally honest, bar the bypasses of the few towns which should should be all dual bar Keith that benefit many people, more pollution wise than anything else. I think it's mostly a waste of money. There's no need for dualling in particularly between Fochabars and Inverurie (it's roughly 7k vehicles a day) and even the rest of is debateable, a few extra crawler lanes would be enough with a dual carriageway every 11 mile or so. There's much worse roads in Scotland, even in the Highlands like the A82 which is an absolute death trap for cycles and even cars especially around the Loch Ness area or the NC500 which is single track or Stromeferry which is shut every couple of years with landslides. Just to pick a few.

Yes - I think the blanket dualling commitments were a clever piece of politics but not such a clever piece of roads engineering. I'd much rather a prioritised approach to trouble spots across the whole country than more sparsely used dual carriageway over open countryside.

[HandShandy]

Yes - I think the blanket dualling commitments were a clever piece of politics but not such a clever piece of roads engineering. I'd much rather a prioritised approach to trouble spots across the whole country than more sparsely used dual carriageway over open countryside.

While I agree with this in an economic sense, I've become suspicious of the piece-meal approach to strategic route corridor upgrades due to what has happened elsewhere in the UK. This is evidenced by the frustration of routes like the A66, A303, A75 and to some extent the A9 where bits and pieces of dual carriageway have been put over the years and then there is an endless cycle of upgrade proposals to plug gaps, provide bypasses or undertake duelling - each one often going through multiple cancellations and revisions as government policy changes and objections arrive. The end result being: millions spent, hopes and dreams dashed, 94 pages of discussion on SABRE, accidents continuing to happen and not one bit of road built.

I'm not against targeted upgrades and bypasses as you say but too often I see these done without a regional approach to improvement and you end up just shifting the problem further down the road. The underpass at Raith Interchange on the M74, while great for Raith, just made the situation down the road in East Kilbride even worse.

The tone of this thread and indeed all the other A96 related threads/discussions have soured against the the blanket dualling in the last year or so. Perhaps a symptom of changing attitudes here on SABRE and a welcome mix of opinions from others who consider more than just cars on roads. I, however, remain in the camp of eventually dualling it end to end as part of a sensible route strategy mainly for the interests of reliable journey time, safety improvements and the unlocking of economic potential along the north east. I made a post about this a few pages back.

The worrying aspect of how the Scottish Government intend on paying for this has always been on the back of my mind. The finances don't seem great right now so perhaps some of this might be PFI/DBFO to get it through - time will tell. I support the Scottish Government's commitment to dual this route but I do feel that this environmental review is a convenient way of binning a project they couldn't really ever afford without having to say "We're broke".

[Bryn666]

Given the traffic volumes you could probably achieve a much similar benefit just by providing a modern WS2+1 through the middle sections but I'd definitely agree that Inverness to Nairn is a D2 candidate.

Next I'd prioritise:

* Forres Bypass could be dualled online to provide a safe overtaking section and cater for future town growth.
* Elgin Bypass: probably needs a D2 - I'd run this around the north side and provide an S2 link back to the A941 down the east side of town. This would run roughly between Newton and Lhanbryde.
* Keith Bypass: WS2+1 (like Fochabers) - I'd run this in a directish line from the Crooks Mill distillery down past the substation at Blackhillock and rejoin the A96 at the big bend south of there.

[jnty]

.

[jnty]

Yes - I think the blanket dualling commitments were a clever piece of politics but not such a clever piece of roads engineering. I'd much rather a prioritised approach to trouble spots across the whole country than more sparsely used dual carriageway over open countryside.

While I agree with this in an economic sense, I've become suspicious of the piece-meal approach to strategic route corridor upgrades due to what has happened elsewhere in the UK. This is evidenced by the frustration of routes like the A66, A303, A75 and to some extent the A9 where bits and pieces of dual carriageway have been put over the years and then there is an endless cycle of upgrade proposals to plug gaps, provide bypasses or undertake duelling - each one often going through multiple cancellations and revisions as government policy changes and objections arrive. The end result being: millions spent, hopes and dreams dashed, 94 pages of discussion on SABRE, accidents continuing to happen and not one bit of road built.

I'm not against targeted upgrades and bypasses as you say but too often I see these done without a regional approach to improvement and you end up just shifting the problem further down the road. The underpass at Raith Interchange on the M74, while great for Raith, just made the situation down the road in East Kilbride even worse.

I think the principles you are espousing here are reasonable but I don't think they are embodied in at least the A9 dualling project as currently organised. The 'enlongated' southern section of dualling now fires a growing volume of traffic at the increasingly busy flat
junctions on the S2 by Dunkeld, which are now probably bottom of the list to be improved behind cheaper and easier, but marginally necessary, 'middle of nowhere' dualling. This approach would be even worse for the A96 where the disparity of need is so stark - an A9-style approach would probably dual all the 'easy' intermediate sections before building any bypasses, completely wrongly.

The era of 'strategic route corridor improvements' in Scotland is probably over - well before the deal with the Greens the Scottish Government kept the Queensferry Crossing the same 'width' as the Forth Road bridge, judging that a net increase in road capacity could not be justified. Going forward road schemes will probably be judged largely on safety improvements to the road and surrounding area as well as modal shift opportunities for bypassed communities.

The worrying aspect of how the Scottish Government intend on paying for this has always been on the back of my mind. The finances don't seem great right now so perhaps some of this might be PFI/DBFO to get it through - time will tell. I support the Scottish Government's commitment to dual this route but I do feel that this environmental review is a convenient way of binning a project they couldn't really ever afford without having to say "We're broke".

On this we can certainly agree - I have to laugh at the vitriol that's been unleashed against the Greens here and elsewhere over the A9 and A96 projects when both are continuing at exactly the same speed as they were before the election - glacially.

[KeithW]

Yes - I think the blanket dualling commitments were a clever piece of politics but not such a clever piece of roads engineering. I'd much rather a prioritised approach to trouble spots across the whole country than more sparsely used dual carriageway over open countryside.

The problem is as we have seen on the A1 is that the Highways England and its predecessors have a habit of saying - "We upgraded this road 20 years ago so take it off the list" see the A14 between Brampton Hut and Thrapston as an example.

You can see this clearly on the A66 where the early dualling has flat junctions rather than GSJ's

Then there is the seemingly eternal upgrading of the A9.

[A72]

On this we can certainly agree - I have to laugh at the vitriol that's been unleashed against the Greens here and elsewhere over the A9 and A96 projects when both are continuing at exactly the same speed as they were before the election - glacially.

The SNP have been in bed with the Greens since long before the last election, and for a vast majority of the time since these projects were announced. This, and their posturing over projects like Sheriffhall mean this vitriol is very much justified.

[Herned]

Given the traffic volumes you could probably achieve a much similar benefit just by providing a modern WS2+1 through the middle sections but I'd definitely agree that Inverness to Nairn is a D2 candidate.

How much cheaper is 2+1 really though? Looking at current schemes, the A40 in Pembrokeshire is costing £15m per km for 2+1, the A96 between Inverness and Nairn is also £15m per km. Obviously it's not as simple as that as there a many other costs to consider, but I would have thought the difference would be pretty marginal - 10% or something

[Bryn666]

Given the traffic volumes you could probably achieve a much similar benefit just by providing a modern WS2+1 through the middle sections but I'd definitely agree that Inverness to Nairn is a D2 candidate.

How much cheaper is 2+1 really though? Looking at current schemes, the A40 in Pembrokeshire is costing £15m per km for 2+1, the A96 between Inverness and Nairn is also £15m per km. Obviously it's not as simple as that as there a many other costs to consider, but I would have thought the difference would be pretty marginal - 10% or something

Land costs are presumably much less in Scotland. Geotechnical works also will be vastly different.

But the simple reality is you don't need a D2 for much of it - there are more pressing schemes in Scotland like fixing the worst bits of the A82, A77, A75, etc.

[jackal]

I agree with Herned - S2+1 costs almost as much as D2 but lacks the big safety gain of the central barrier, while in capacity terms it's a short term bodge (climbing lanes excepted). But Bryn is certainly right about there being more pressing schemes than the A96.

[KeithW]

I agree with Herned - S2+1 costs almost as much as D2 but lacks the big safety gain of the central barrier, while in capacity terms it's a short term bodge (climbing lanes excepted). But Bryn is certainly right about there being more pressing schemes than the A96.

That depends on the criteria, the S2 sections of the A96 have a poor safety record and the traffic through towns such as Nairn, Elgin and Keith is horrible both for road users and residents. At an absolute minimum these should be bypassed. Even where bypasses have been built such as Forres the quality is low and the primary purpose seems to be serving industrial estates.

Forres Bypass
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@57.60656 ... !1e1?hl=en

Huntly Bypass
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@57.44225 ... !1e1?hl=en

Fochabers Bypass
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@57.62140 ... !1e1?hl=en

[jackal]

I agree with Herned - S2+1 costs almost as much as D2 but lacks the big safety gain of the central barrier, while in capacity terms it's a short term bodge (climbing lanes excepted). But Bryn is certainly right about there being more pressing schemes than the A96.

That depends on the criteria, the S2 sections of the A96 have a poor safety record and the traffic through towns such as Nairn, Elgin and Keith is horrible both for road users and residents. At an absolute minimum these should be bypassed. Even where bypasses have been built such as Forres the quality is low and the primary purpose seems to be serving industrial estates.

Forres Bypass
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@57.60656 ... !1e1?hl=en

Huntly Bypass
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@57.44225 ... !1e1?hl=en

Fochabers Bypass
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@57.62140 ... !1e1?hl=en

But isn't the existing S2 Forres bypass actually quite appropriate for a 12k AADT road? Likewise at Fochabars (10k AADT). What is it exactly that triggers the requirement for a grade-separated bypass of adequate existing bypasses? Why are they being prioritised ahead of vastly more congested roads like the 32k AADT S2 Ayr bypass?

It's hard to see the full A96 dualling as anything other than legacy pork barrel politics that even the SNP now recognize as unjustifiable, and are trying to drag out as much as they can. A fairer and more realistic approach to the A96 corridor would be to add further single carriageway bypasses like the existing ones to the places that lack them, and spend the savings on more urgent improvements elsewhere (e.g., A77, Broxden, Dundee NW bypass).

[Bryn666]

But isn't the existing S2 Forres bypass actually quite appropriate for a 12k AADT road? Likewise at Fochabars (10k AADT). What is it exactly that triggers the requirement for a grade-separated bypass of adequate existing bypasses? Why are they being prioritised ahead of vastly more congested roads like the 32k AADT S2 Ayr bypass?

It's hard to see the full A96 dualling as anything other than legacy pork barrel politics that even the SNP now recognize as unjustifiable, and are trying to drag out as much as they can. A fairer and more realistic approach to the A96 corridor would be to add further single carriageway bypasses like the existing ones to the places that lack them, and spend the savings on more urgent improvements elsewhere (e.g., A77, Broxden, Dundee NW bypass).

It's nice when I can agree wholeheartedly with you, Jackal! I can understand the political capital in "spending money in the Highlands" but there isn't the population density to warrant much of it, whereas there are areas in the Central Belt that desperately need fixing no matter what.

I'm sure people point to the A74 and go "but that got upgraded and it runs through nothing", but there was much more political value for the wider UK in connecting Glasgow to England.

[Osthagen]

It's nice when I can agree wholeheartedly with you, Jackal! I can understand the political capital in "spending money in the Highlands" but there isn't the population density to warrant much of it, whereas there are areas in the Central Belt that desperately need fixing no matter what.

You could argue that there is logic to spending money on Highland roads, simply not the A96; the A82 around Loch Lomond is bellowing out much louder for improvement than the A96.

[KeithW]

You could argue that there is logic to spending money on Highland roads, simply not the A96; the A82 around Loch Lomond is bellowing out much louder for improvement than the A96.

The problem is doing much more than already has been is going to be very expensive, disruptive and protestors will be attracted like flies to honey.

Take a section like this.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@56.22407 ... 8192?hl=en

To produce a nice straight wide road you have a limited number of options which will involve :-

1) Digging out a lot of rock and felling trees
and/or
2) Encroach on the Loch driving piles to support the rocks
and/or
3) Produce endless investigations into the environmental effects

Technically it can be done given enough time and money, politically I have my doubts. The Pulpit Rock scheme cost over £9.2 million

[jnty]

You could argue that there is logic to spending money on Highland roads, simply not the A96; the A82 around Loch Lomond is bellowing out much louder for improvement than the A96.

The problem is doing much more than already has been is going to be very expensive, disruptive and protestors will be attracted like flies to honey.

Take a section like this.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@56.22407 ... 8192?hl=en

To produce a nice straight wide road you have a limited number of options which will involve :-

1) Digging out a lot of rock and felling trees
and/or
2) Encroach on the Loch driving piles to support the rocks
and/or
3) Produce endless investigations into the environmental effects

Technically it can be done given enough time and money, politically I have my doubts. The Pulpit Rock scheme cost over £9.2 million

I wonder what degree of (particularly heavy) traffic could reasonably divert via any reasonable combination of A84/A9/A85/A86? Is there any way this could to use to justify other 'wanted' work that can't quite be justified at the moment? Probably hard to include A96 in a valid diversion route though..!

[rileyrob]

I wonder what degree of (particularly heavy) traffic could reasonably divert via any reasonable combination of A84/A9/A85/A86? Is there any way this could to use to justify other 'wanted' work that can't quite be justified at the moment? Probably hard to include A96 in a valid diversion route though..!

As I recently explained here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=43510&p=1238026#p1237606 - most hauliers already avoid the A82 Loch Lomond section when possible. To a certain extent this is putting additional pressure on those routes you mention, and if the A82 was brought up to standard it would help to spread the load and add an element of resilience that is currently missing, especially with the ongoing issues at the Rest and be Thankful.
I don't think there is anyway that the communities of Argyll, Lochaber and probably further afield could be convinced that the proposed A82 improvements should be shelved.

[KeithW]

I wonder what degree of (particularly heavy) traffic could reasonably divert via any reasonable combination of A84/A9/A85/A86? Is there any way this could to use to justify other 'wanted' work that can't quite be justified at the moment? Probably hard to include A96 in a valid diversion route though..!

Well travelling to Skye from NE England I have gone via A68/A702/M90/A9/A869/A86 to Spean Bridge and the A82/A87 to Kyle of Lochalsh , that was before Pulpit Rock was widened.

[jabbaboy]

You could argue that there is logic to spending money on Highland roads, simply not the A96; the A82 around Loch Lomond is bellowing out much louder for improvement than the A96.

The problem is doing much more than already has been is going to be very expensive, disruptive and protestors will be attracted like flies to honey.

Take a section like this.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@56.22407 ... 8192?hl=en

To produce a nice straight wide road you have a limited number of options which will involve :-

1) Digging out a lot of rock and felling trees
and/or
2) Encroach on the Loch driving piles to support the rocks
and/or
3) Produce endless investigations into the environmental effects

Technically it can be done given enough time and money, politically I have my doubts. The Pulpit Rock scheme cost over £9.2 million

I wonder what degree of (particularly heavy) traffic could reasonably divert via any reasonable combination of A84/A9/A85/A86? Is there any way this could to use to justify other 'wanted' work that can't quite be justified at the moment? Probably hard to include A96 in a valid diversion route though..!

imo the two roads which would help it the most in the Highlands would be the A889/A86 and A890 at Strathcarron and Coulags.

If both of those would be done then traffic could be directed the places avoiding most of the A82 ie.

Fort William -> Edinburgh/Glasgow via A86/A889/A9
Skye -> Inverness / Moray via Strathcarron
Skye -> Edinburgh / Glasgow via A82/A86/A889/A9
Fort William -> Inverness via A82/A86/A9

The Loch Ness part of the A82 isn't much better than by Loch Lomand in places and Strathcarron needs done regardless because of the rockslips but it's getting barely anywhere since Highland Council are having to fund it.

[A9Dan]

National Transport Strategy (NTS2) - Second Delivery Plan - 2022-2023 published today: https://www.transport.gov.scot/publicat ... 2022-2023/

We will continue to progress the preparation of A96 Dualling Inverness to Nairn (including Nairn Bypass) scheme with a view to completing the statutory process. This work is separate from the wider A96 Corridor Review which is currently being undertaken - a transparent, evidence-based review of the programme which will report by the end of 2022.

Hopefully at least Made Orders for Inverness to Nairn by this time next year then although there are now some serious doubts over the funding for any transport schemes: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland- ... s-61728712