A public local inquiry has been launched due to several outstanding objections to the £478m Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section of the A9 dualling programme.

Following a public consultation in the summer of last year, Transport Scotland announced last October that it was working with objectors to resolve the issues.

However, with a number of objections still not removed, Transport Scotland has submitted them to the Scottish Government's Planning and Environmental Appeals Department (DPEA), which has now launched a public inquiry.

A Transport Scotland spokesperson said: ‘Draft Orders and the Environmental Impact Assessment Report for the Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing section of the A9 Dualling Programme were published for public consultation on 30 May 2025. Transport Scotland has been working to properly consider all matters raised by objectors and to resolve these where possible.

‘Given the number of objections received, a Public Local Inquiry will be required to consider objections received and not withdrawn. Construction of the proposed scheme can only commence if it is approved under the relevant statutory authorisation process.'

On 23 March, the DPEA was asked to consider the following applications connected to the A9 dualling project:

  • The A9 Trunk Road (Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing) (Trunking) Order
  • The A9 Trunk Road (Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing) (Side Roads) Order
  • The A9 Trunk Road (Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing) Compulsory Purchase Order
  • The A9 Trunk Road (Pass Of Birnam To Tay Crossing) (Extinguishment of Public Right Of Way) Order.

According to the DPEA, these applications have been referred to the Scottish Government under the Roads Scotland Act, given that objections have been received and not withdrawn.

It added that Information on the cases is being compiled and will be published on the DPEA site ‘in due course'.

Correction: An earlier version of this article said that the objections were not road-related, that the inquiry had been launched by Transport Scotland and that it would be publishing the objections instead of the DPEA