AN independent review into the A96 has concluded against fully dualling the road that runs between Aberdeen and Inverness.
The report concluded that full dualling is likely to have “major negative effects” when assessed against environmental criteria.
Published by consultants Jacobs Aecom, the review instead suggested improvements including new bypasses at Elgin and Keith.
It further put forward a “refined” package of eight options which included the new bypasses, improvements for the Aberdeen to Inverness railway, and targeted road safety improvements.
The Scottish Government committed to dualling the 86-mile road between Aberdeen and Inverness in 2011, but the SNP’s former coalition partner has said the plans will hinder attempts to hit emissions targets and would be too costly.
READ MORE: John Swinney: Pensioners 'betrayed' by Labour over fuel payment cuts
Speaking ahead of a statement in Holyrood on the publication of the A96 corridor review, the Scottish Greens transport spokesperson Mark Ruskell called for the majority of the project to be scrapped.
The report states: “Although dualling would result in reduced traffic through settlements, it would be expected to result in an increased number of vehicles overall.
"The scale of the infrastructure involved has the potential to significantly impact the environment which will need to be assessed and mitigated, for example, impacts on biodiversity and species.
"In general, the option does not promote a modal shift and the anticipated overall increase in vehicle kilometres travelled does not support the key climate change policy target of 20% reduction in car kilometres by 2030 and meeting net zero by 2045."
Consultants instead recommend new bypasses at Elgin and Keith which they argue will deliver economic benefits with “shorter journeys, reduced congestion and fewer delays”.
The recommendation includes improvements to cut journey times by 25 minutes.
Transport Secretary Fiona Hyslop is due to give a statement to parliament about the plans today.
A public consultation has now been opened to hear views following the outcomes of the review.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here