The National Assembly for Wales planning inspector who spent more than a year considering the case for a new M4 route south of Newport gave it his overwhelming backing in his report, published today.
Bill Wadrup, who led the inquiry with the support of Aidan McCooey, submitted his 559-page report to the Welsh Government in September of 2018.
In it, he clearly detailed the environmental and health benefits of the project and explained why there were no other suitable alternatives capable of significantly improving the M4 around Newport.
He concluded that the proposal for a six-lane relief road following the so-called black route south of Newport from Junction 23 to Junction 29 was a good use of public funds, that environmental objections were overstated and that it was in the public interest.
Despite his conclusion, First Minister Mark Drakeford on Tuesday on cost and environmental grounds, and has set up a commission to look at other solutions instead.
The vast bulk of his report detailed the objections raised by the charities, campaign groups, environmental bodies and individuals who criticised the scheme.
Yet he concluded that the criticisms "do not, either jointly or separately, outweigh the proof of public benefits that the scheme would bring".
"To my mind, there is nothing in the remaining written objections, either local or strategic, which would cause me to conclude that implementation of the scheme would have unacceptable adverse impacts," he wrote.
Bargoed-born Mr Wadrup, a civil engineer who died in February before his report was made public, said that his recommendation was made after carefully considering the "valid and strong competing interests at issue".
What determined his final decision was the fact he "found the evidence of severe problems on this part of the M4 to be incontrovertible and the case for developing a scheme to address that issue overwhelming".
He wrote that there was little doubt the proposed new route for the M4 south of Newport would be effective.
"It is evident that the scheme would reduce the traffic on the troublesome existing sub-standard motorway by half and would, at a stroke, solve the congestion problem, drastically reducing incidents, delays and pollution from which thousands of people would benefit," he wrote.
Mr Wadrup said he was convinced the new M4 route would also "substantially reduce personal injury accidents as well."
"Without the scheme, the evidence points to traffic conditions substantially deteriorating relative to today’s already unsatisfactory situation and, in all probability, the south Wales economy suffering further," he wrote.
He described the overwhelming support from local authorities, industry and business as "very impressive".
And, looking at the £1.4bn cost, he wrote: "I am persuaded that the high cost would give a positive economic rate of return, which has probably been underestimated in the evidence, and in removing travel uncertainty, negative perception and reality of frequent motorway delays, might well give a further economic boost to the region."
Even bus services in Newport would get a boost he said "by removing congestion and uncertainty and [relieving] the hard-pressed Newport SDR".
Environmental and economic benefits would be felt across a large area, he wrote, as congestion and traffic were reduced.
"Excellent access to Newport residential and industrial areas and to Newport Docks would be provided from the proposed and existing motorways," he wrote.
Mr Wadrup was also overwhelmingly clear that the vast bulk of the Gwent levels would not be affected by the proposed route.
"The inescapable reality is that only about 2% of the Levels by area would be affected and approximately 2% of the reen [drainage ditch] network by length," he wrote.
Addressing those who said the scheme "would destroy the areas of Special Scientific Interest, he wrote: "Those assertions are wrong."
He said Welsh Government had taken "extraordinary steps" to replace the affected land through the purchase of replacement land that the excavation of new reens and ditches which "would more than offset the damage caused by the scheme".
"To put that into further context, in the medium term the Levels would be larger and ecologically in better condition than they are today," he wrote.
Concluding, he wrote: "Measures are clearly and urgently needed to address the particular problem with the M4 around Newport. I conclude that the balance falls clearly on the side of constructing the scheme from which so much public benefit would accrue. Compensation would be payable to those directly impacted, and in my view, with the dedication promised, the adverse ecological effects of the scheme can be satisfactorily mitigated by the medium term."
He said that the decision by civil servants and ministers to look at a roads-based solution had only been taken after "a large package of practicable options, including alternative routes and public transport options" were deemed incapable of providing a solution.
He described the consultation process as "an exemplar".
Why the alternatives weren't suitable
The inspector looked at 28 different solutions proposed for the M4. He said many were "limited, local highway improvements" that could be dealt with by Monmouthshire council.
He said that all the solutions which proposed improving the current M4 could not "address the current, or future, problems of the M4". He said they would not be a good use of public money and "should be rejected as insufficient, wasteful of public money".
Looking at the several alternatives around the "blue route", which involve upgrading roads through Newport including the A4810 and the A48 southern disributor, he said they were "severely deficient in terms of offering relief to the motorway both in the short or long term and would thereby be unsustainable".
He added that such blue route ideas would involve "building an elevated urban expressway close to where people live and burdening still further an important collector/distributor road" and "should not be considered further".
Finally, he looked at "strategic alternatives west of Llanwern steelworks" which he said would not offer "a significant improvement to the M4 around Newport. One of these was known as the green route.
What would happen if the black route doesn't go ahead
Mr Wadrup wrote that the M4 would get significantly worse if the relief road south of Newport wasn't given approval. He predicted:
- Excessive queuing during peak periods
- Stop-start or slow-moving traffic being the norm for many hours of the day, giving rise to additional air pollution, with its knock-on effects for health and climate change
- A knock-on of additional traffic into Newport
- An increasing burden on buses
- Worsening congestion on the A48 SDR and its approach roads, especially for lorries and commercial vehicles
- An increase in crashes, and other incidents on the M4 between Castleton and Magor which would “exacerbate the poor conditions, cause economic harm to the country, pollution in the urban area of Newport as traffic diverts and the potential increase in accidents”
- A likely worsening of the perception that it is difficult to access South Wales for business, tourism and leisure
What the scheme would have entailed
The proposal looked into by the inspector was for a 23km (14-mile) section of motorway with three lanes in each direction linking Junction 23 (Magor) with Junction 29 (east Cardiff).
The route would have been south of Newport and was widely known as the black route. It would have needed a large cable-stayed bridge across the Newport Docks and Rivers Usk and Ebbw.
Newport Docks would have needed internal alterations; new junctions would have been needed along with new side roads, footpaths, cycleway and accesses. And the existing M4 would have been downgraded to an all-purpose trunk road.
The objections
316 individual objections, including four community councils
5,870 virtually identical emails arising from campaigns by the RSPB (4,859 emails), Woodland Trust (705 emails), Wildlife Trusts Wales (165 objections) and Gwent Wildlife Trust (141 objections).
The reasons for objecting were summarised by the inspector as:
The unacceptability of all major road construction
Limited traffic, accident and congestion problems on the existing M4
Traffic growth has already abated or future growth is unproven
The significant cost or poor value for money or impact on other projects needing funding
Pollution - in terms of noise, air or global warming
Environmental effects on the Gwent levels and wildlife
The effect on industry, businesses, farms and the docks
Problems caused to local communities
The support
- There were 218 expressions of support from six councils, 15 national and regional organisations, 42 industrialists, 80 individuals, 152 letters
The alternatives
- 28 alternatives were proposed
