Home   News   Article

Councillors voice strong criticism for A96 consultation timing


By David Porter

Easier access to your trusted, local news. Subscribe to a digital package and support local news publishing.



Click here to sign up to our free newsletters!

Members of Aberdeenshire's infrastructure services committee met today to start the formal process of feedback on behalf of the council on Transport Scotland's final route choice for the dualling of the A96.

Councillor Peter Argyle
Councillor Peter Argyle

Opening the discussion chairman Peter Argyle stressed that at this point in time: "We are not looking at an agreed response at present, we are gathering comments from the various committees.

Explaining the current situation head of transport at the council Ewan Wallace said: "Transport Scotland have reached the end of the stage 2 of consultation and have agreed a final route proposal.

"There will be a formal meeting with members of the Garioch committee on February 23 and also with Formartine and Marr members.

"The route chosen goes south of Inverurie and past Inveramsay and out to Glens of Foundland.

"It equates to 36km of road and from our perspective a large amount of side roads and the de-trunking of the A96 which would come back into our ownership.

"After 24 months there would be the start of the formal legal process including the compulsory purchase orders, at which time the council can take a formal position.

"We have flagged issues for Transport Scotland to discuss, we are keen for example to see proposals around pedestrian access and non-motorised transport.

"One of the impacts we don't have info on is traffic flow on side junctions and we will be seeking further details on that aspect with some urgency."

Councillor Argyle expressed the view taken by local groups and many residents that the timing of the consultation was at best questionable.

He said: "I wrote on January 7 to Mr Mathieson the cabinet secretary expressing my concern, and it was a strongly worded letter on the timing of the consultation.

"I did not think it was appropriate to put out something of this significance just days before Christmas and particularly for those living in the corridor of the route, getting something like this before what was going to be a challenging Christmas was not in any shape or form appropriate.

"I asked for the reasons for the choosing of that date and pointed out that we as a council did not know until it was launched either.

"I had an acknowledgement from the Transport Scotland secretariat on January 19 saying thank you for your letter and we hope to respond within 20 working days.

"I am hopeful but not confident that we will get a response before the consultation runs out.

"I am not impressed.

"It is not long enough for the local authority to respond, not least as it is not due to be finished till 2030 and a few weeks will not make any difference."

On the report itself he said: "We wanted the route to be as close to the original as possible and hoped it would follow the existing one.

"But we have a route and there does seem to be some logic in the one that has been selected but it leaves us with issues in traffic in Inverurie and the links to the A947."

Councillor John Cox said: "This is obviously quite disappointing, what is missing is the economic case to chose this route other than cost.

"They have failed to substantiate their comments around this, especially the population north of Inverurie and this must take in the Buchan and Banffshire coast and the amount of traffic that comes from that area of Aberdeenshire heading south and using the AWPR.

"There is little benefit to traffic heading south.

"If this is the route there has to be holistic route improvement for the whole north-east built into this plan and Transport Scotland have to make this part of the equation."

Councillor Paul Johnston commented: "There is an element of cost in pounds that doesn't take into account the carbon footprint that comes with new roads.
"As a council we now have a carbon budget and for transparency in capital programmes there should be understanding of what the implications are in terms of the carbon footprint that should be updated at each stage.

Fellow councillor David Aitchison questioned the time scale: "I think the area committee inputs are going to be very important to the response and I would hope that they are going to be accepted given the dates involved."

Head of transport Ewan Wallace explained: "I did update Transport Scotland at officer level that feedback would be past the timescale.

"They did indicate that they would rather have more informative feedback and would be willing to work with us.

"It is more important that we get the best information and get the best out of this for our communities, but we await a formal response on this."

Public replies can still be made until February 15 at via this link


Do you want to respond to this article? If so, click here to submit your thoughts and they may be published in print.



This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies - Learn More