Stakeholder engagement

Stakeholder Briefings

A series of online briefing sessions were held with stakeholders from across the A96 corridor. The aim of these sessions was to share a summary of the draft outcomes of the Review and to answer any associated questions. The sessions also explained how attendees could provide their feedback.

The sessions were arranged into the following stakeholder groups:

  • Transport Working Groups (North) - included representatives from HITRANS, The Highland Council and Moray Council
  • Transport Working Groups (North East) - included representatives from Nestrans, Moray Council, Aberdeenshire Council and Aberdeen City Council
  • Statutory environmental bodies - included representatives from the Scottish Environment Protection Agency, NatureScot, Scottish Forestry, Historic Environment Scotland and local authorities
  • Non-statutory environmental bodies – included non-statutory environmental bodies who have an interest in the local wildlife, biodiversity and environment along the A96 corridor
  • Active travel and accessibility groups – included stakeholders who have an interest in non-motorised travel and disability access across the A96 corridor
  • Businesses and business organisations - businesses, utility companies, transport operators and emergency service organisations that were identified as having an interest in the Review

Members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs) whose constituencies or regions are within the Review study area were notified of the launch of the public consultation by a letter sent via email.

A roundtable meeting, chaired by the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, was held with interested MSPs in parliament, giving them the opportunity to ask questions and understand the process and outcomes of the Review.

Stakeholder Feedback

This section provides a summary of feedback from stakeholders, provided by email or through the online feedback survey.

Of the 1,409 respondents to the online feedback survey, five were identified as stakeholders and their open question responses (Questions 6-9) are included in this section. These stakeholders are as follows:

  • Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of Commerce
  • a rail network operator
  • The Highland Council
  • Inverness Chamber of Commerce
  • Moray Chamber of Commerce

From the 32 pieces of additional feedback received, 12 were from stakeholders via email and are also included in this section. This includes three pieces of feedback on the outcomes of the draft SEA, which was submitted through the dedicated SEA Gateway email address, and also via the project inbox. A summary of this feedback is included in this report.

For a summary of the remaining feedback, please refer to Section 4 and Section 5.

Local Authority and Regional Transport Partnership feedback

Feedback was received from several local authorities and Regional Transport Partnerships (RTPs) including Moray Council, Aberdeenshire Council, The Highland Council, Nestrans, and HITRANS. A summary of the feedback from these five stakeholders is provided below. It is intended to be representative of the feedback provided, but does not necessarily represent the full range of views expressed by each organisation.

All five stakeholders within this group provided support for the Scottish Government’s current commitment to Full Dualling of the A96.

Additionally, all stakeholders in this category provided mixed feedback on the Improved Public Transport Passenger Interchange Facilities intervention included in the Refined Package, including:

  • three stakeholders welcoming the proposal, expressed concern over its generic nature
  • one stakeholder expressing their view that it would have minimal effect on road users along the A96 due to the longer travel distances of people in this region
  • one stakeholder suggesting that the intervention only partially addresses the barriers residents face regarding public transport, and that more needs to be done to address the lack of availability of public transport infrastructure for certain communities.
  • Four stakeholders within this group provided support for implementing the Refined Package alongside a programme for Full Dualling of the A96.
  • Three stakeholders in this group provided support for bypassing Elgin and Keith. Comments also included that bypasses should be:
    • built as dual carriageways
    • prioritised in the delivery timeline of A96 route upgrades to aid wider developments such as town regeneration schemes, local development plans, and the delivery of affordable housing, especially within Moray and Aberdeenshire.
  • Three stakeholders in this group referenced the wider economic aspirations and proposals identified in the region, including investment in the renewables sector such as the Inverness and Cromarty Firth Green Freeport, and housing development growth within the region.
  • Three stakeholders within this group raised concerns about the Active Communities intervention. They raised concerns over its suitability for residents, given the long travel distances and the high level of car ownership in the area. They also noted that the intervention did not fully consider various socio-economic factors such as who would be the beneficiaries of the intervention. In addition, concerns were raised about the funding and delivery mechanism.
  • Three stakeholders also provided support for the implementation of the Linespeed, Passenger and Freight Capacity Improvements on the Aberdeen to Inverness Rail Line intervention specifically alongside a Full Dualling programme. Two of these stakeholders did note similarities between this intervention with previous proposals.
  • Three stakeholders within this group commented that local and regional perspectives had not been sufficiently reflected in key aspects of the Review’s appraisal process. For example, they questioned if the national target to reduce car kilometres travelled by 20% by 2030 was suitable for a mostly rural area such as the A96 corridor.
  • Two stakeholders provided support for the proposed Targeted Road Safety intervention included within the Refined Package, whilst two other stakeholders expressed support for road safety improvements without specific reference to this intervention. Three of these stakeholders made specific requests for safe overtaking opportunities along the A96.

Business groups feedback

Feedback was received from five organisations representing business and enterprise interests. These included Moray Chamber of Commerce, Inverness Chamber of Commerce, Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of Commerce, Highlands and Islands Enterprise and the Scotch Whisky Association. A summary of the feedback from these stakeholders is provided below. Please note, this summary reflects feedback from several organisations in this group, but does not necessarily represent the feedback of all.

All five stakeholders supported the proposed Linespeed, Passenger and Freight Capacity Improvements on the Aberdeen to Inverness Rail Line. Comments included requests for a clear and detailed delivery timeline, and for improved rail services to be better integrated with the wider transport network to support a shift to more sustainable travel.

Four stakeholders within this group provided support for the Scottish Government’s commitment to Full Dualling, citing reasons such as improved road safety, shorter journey times, and support for regional economic growth.

Four stakeholders expressed their view that the A96 urgently needs upgraded to cope with increasing traffic levels and to support regional transformation, particularly in the renewable energy sector, as well as for local developments.

Three stakeholders within this group raised concerns that delays to upgrading the A96 are holding back economic growth in the region.

Additionally, three stakeholders within this group expressed their view that the Refined Package should be delivered in full if Full Dualling is not delivered, or that it should be delivered alongside Full Dualling.

Three stakeholders supported building dual carriageway bypasses of Elgin and Keith, asking that these be prioritised in the A96 upgrade programme.

Two stakeholders supported prioritising the Targeted Road Safety Improvements intervention, with another providing support for key safety interventions without explicit reference to the intervention included within the Refined Package.

Other stakeholders

Feedback was also received from a single healthcare service provider. A summary of their feedback is provided below:

The stakeholder commented that there is a need to improve access to healthcare facilities for both employees and patients along the corridor. They noted the importance of better local and affordable transport options that are not affected by congestion to support the wider socio-economic wellbeing of the area.

They provided support for encouraging a shift away from private car use by improving public transport and promoting active travel options. They also raised concerns about current barriers faced by rural communities in accessing services due to limited public transport and active travel infrastructure.

Additionally, they provided support for the Targeted Road Safety Improvements intervention, aimed at reducing injuries and fatalities of road users.

Feedback was also received from a single rail network operator. A summary of their feedback is provided below:

The stakeholder provided support for the draft outcomes of the Review, specifically proposals to improve public transport and active travel.

They also requested that the development of the Active Communities and the Improved Public Transport Passenger Interchange Facilities interventions in the Refined Package consider how these can be integrated within the wider rail network.

The stakeholder requested further consultation on the Linespeed, Passenger and Freight Capacity Improvements on the Aberdeen to Inverness Rail Line. This included a request for additional timetable analysis and how rail infrastructure would interact with any proposed road improvements.

Statutory and non-statutory environmental groups

During the consultation period, feedback was received from two statutory environmental bodies via the dedicated SEA Gateway and one non-statutory environmental body via the Review email address. The organisations that provided feedback were Historic Environment Scotland, NatureScot and Buglife.

Consultation on the draft SEA was a statutory process and separate from the wider public consultation.

A summary of feedback provided by environmental bodies is provided below:

Stakeholders in this group were generally content with the SEA methodology and draft outcomes.

Requests were made for more detail and updates on several parts of the draft SEA, including, but not limited to:

  • How the Refined Package will enhance biodiversity and how important biodiversity sites will be protected.
  • How the Refined Package proposes to align with the aims of the Six Qualities of Successful Places, as set out in National Planning Framework 4.
  • How the Refined Package will protect landscape, visual amenity and key views.
  • How the Refined Package will promote green infrastructure.
  • How the historic environment was considered in the SEA baseline.
  • How potentially significant impacts on historic environment assets will be assessed and mitigated in future stages.

The statutory bodies recognised the need for further environmental assessment at any detailed design stages.