M4 Newport Relief Road given go-ahead

[Bryn666]

Designer congestion on a new road once again so we can facilitate more car based development and then wonder why the new road doesn't work.

Seriously these large fee grabbing groups that come up with this need showing the door.

[jackal]

I had a thought or two while watching that visualisation.

1. What's been said here is correct about J29. It'll be a terrific bottleneck where the M4 joins the 'old M4'.

2. I wonder what the plan is for the old road. Because of the smart motorway, presumably it will have to remain trunk to remain under SWTRA control from Coryton. Are we looking at possibly M47, M48 or a downgrade to a new A-number very un-befitting of a former first 9 motorway? A la A404(M).

Edit: It could even be A48(M) as the A48(M) currently terminates at J29 anyway. It could run straight 'through' the interchange and around Newport to Magor.

They will have to widen the first part of the M4 to the west just beyond J29, or have the old M4 around Newport use C/D lane/carriageways to flow into the A48(M) with links in/out of the new M4 from the south of Newport heading west round the norh of Cardiff. C/D lanes would be better as the old M4 could flow into the A48(M) and all of it could become the M48 linking to the M48 the other end with a similar set of C/D lanes. The New M4 would just be that the new M4, with links only to the other older parts.

Its the best way to do it and in a way its putting the old route back together as the M48 and the A48(M) were originally both part of the M4, so with the old section north of Newport the old M4 from the Awley fork, all the way into Cardiff could be the M48.

Its just a shame that they didnt think of C/D lane/carriageway arrangements either side of Newport as that would have stopped there being quite a bottleneack at J29.

J29 looks perfect to me. The conflicting flows are effectively braided, which is a superior solution to C/D lanes. If only J23 was designed to this high standard, as in earlier plans.

[A9NWIL]

J29 looks perfect to me. The conflicting flows are effectively braided, which is a superior solution to C/D lanes. If only J23 was designed to this high standard, as in earlier plans.

I wrote that before seeing the plans, you are right J29 is good, J23 is not!
Perhaps in the future they will have to at the least build freeflow links from M48 to M4 west that way resilience would be maintained at least over the bridges.
Ideally J23 needs to be like J29. Scrap the roundabout and have the B road connect to both ways of both M4 and M48, perhaps on the brades to save bother of weaving?

[mattling]

The M50/A40/A449 route is still likely to remain the signposted way to South Wales as it cuts the corner. No one is going to drive to Bristol and back across realistically speaking.

I often travel between Coventry and Cardiff. It's often close whether M42-M5-M50-A449-M4 is quicker or A46-M5-M4. I often make the decision based on the tolls. So I would definitely use the Bridges more if the tolls went, and I expect that would be true for a lot of traffic from the East Midlands.

[Berk]

But when is the report going to come out?? Christmas 2018, 2019, 2020...

[Berk]

I’m getting a little concerned about this process. When I last wrote, the inquiry report had only just been handed over, not to ministers but their lawyers. So it’s spent the last 6, or 7 weeks or so with their legal team, and only in the last week or so has it been handed over to ministers.

The ministers (including the new First Minister) will have to make a decision both on the inquiry evidence and the report (including the new legal advice). Isn’t the purpose of producing a report so that ministers don’t have to go all over the evidence from scratch again??

Suffice to say it won’t be possible to make a decision before the end of the year. In fact, I’d be very surprised to see a decision before the end of January, or even before we’ve left the EU (if that’s still on track).

I’m genuinely starting to believe the road will either not proceed on environmental grounds, or be subjected to yet another delay - until after the 2020 elections. I thought this was supposed to be the Assembly session that nailed the M4 Newport bypass. Clearly not.

Mind you, I could be reading the situation entirely the wrong way, and ministers are trying to act as robustly as possible to protect the scheme from any possible legal challenge. Which would save money in the long run...

[ANiceEnglishman]

Lee Waters AM, an opponent of road building, has been appointed as junior transport minister in the new Welsh Government. This doesn't sound like good news for those wanting the new M4 to be built (or indeed the A465 dualling to be completed).

Edit: He's just said on TV that he won't be involved in the M4 decision.

[roadtester]

Hauliers are complaining that the Welsh government is dragging its feet over the scheme:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-470 ... nel=social

[Euan]

To be fair, there would have been a delay in the decision while the process of selecting the new First Minister was taking place. Hopefully the AMs will be able to vote on the relief road soon.

[Berk]

Like I posted earlier, the scheme had to go to public inquiry (being based in Wales). Then for some reason known only to themselves, the inquiry report was delivered to the (Welsh) government’s lawyers first, rather than direct to ministers, as is usually the case.

Either the evidence and hearings were so contentious it will be difficult to get the road built anyway, or they have decided to create a useless layer of bureaucracy, so they can deem environmental and social needs are more important than improving air quality, and congestion.

[DB617]

I'm wondering at this point whether the A4810(M)/A48(M)/whatever Blue Route might be a more feasible option given the weight of opposition and the fact that the funding for the relief road is just not likely to materialise now. A grade separated distributor motorway or special road for Newport, mirroring Eastern Avenue in Cardiff, would at least relieve the long distance traffic of some of the weaving nonsense at Tredegar Park > High Cross and Malpas > Coldra (though this one not so much). Since there is already designer congestion on the 'palatable to ABP' version of the Black Route that went to the inquiry with three new closely weaving junctions along its length, the whole thing is in dire need of smashing to bits really.

That said, choosing to investigate and design a different option would cost years and millions more after further hand wringing. God, I love Wales but I hate how big the obstacles our tiny Government creates itself are.

[Berk]

What’s the point of funding a poor quality alternative (which in any event will just deteriorate into a ‘development road’)??

A lot of the detractors seem to forget, we’re talking about building a motorway-quality road, that can handle the volumes of traffic that enters South Wales. The volumes that actually enter, rather than what some environmental groups deem “acceptable”. In a democracy, you cannot stop the movement of goods and people.

Besides which, a relief, or development road would only cater for the local area. Whereas the M4 services the whole of South Wales. No environmental campaigners all the way up to the First Minister have tried to explain how building a road under-capacity from day 1 would help reduce local congestion and air pollution.

It would be like replacing the current M4... with the current M4. The problems would stay the same.

If you built a road like the current ‘Newport Bypass’ today, it would fall too far below the standard of a motorway (and even a DC), and would probably have a 60, or even a 50 limit and SPECS enforcement slapped on it. Which is pretty much what’s going to happen anyway.

Maybe this is a cue for roads in Wales to follow the same (NSIP) planning process as in England?? So it doesn’t take 20 years to say “yes, we want this, let’s go and build this”, only to find that costs have risen five times with all the dithering and delay.

[A9NWIL]

What’s the point of funding a poor quality alternative (which in any event will just deteriorate into a ‘development road’)??

A lot of the detractors seem to forget, we’re talking about building a motorway-quality road use, that can handle the volumes of traffic that enters South Wales. The volumes that actually enter, rather than what some environmental groups deem “acceptable”. In a democracy, you cannot stop the movement of goods and people.

Besides which, a relief, or development road would only cater for the local area. Whereas the M4 services the whole of South Wales. No environmental campaigners all the way up to the First Minister have tried to explain how building a road under-capacity from day 1 would help reduce local congestion and air pollution.

It would be like replacing the current M4... with the current M4. The problems would stay the same.

If you built a road like the current ‘Newport Bypass’ today, it would fall too far below the standard of a motorway (and even a DC), and would probably have a 60, or even a 50 limit and SPECS enforcement slapped on it. Which is pretty much what’s going to happen anyway.

Maybe this is a cue for roads in Wales to follow the same (NSIP) planning process as in England?? So it doesn’t take 20 years to say “yes, we want this, let’s go and build this”, only to find that costs have risen five times with all the dithering and delay.

Very true! I dont know how environmentalists can be so stupid! You cant stop people using a road if its the only major route into the area! You simply have to cater for those who wish to use it! Anything else will cause more environmental issues than it would attempt to solve!

[Euan]

It's worth remembering that the levels of environmental pollution in the area as a whole would not change as a result of the new road being built, it would merely be "redistributed" to other areas and would actually improve the air quality of other areas with more congestion previously. In addition to that, isn't the most fuel-efficient speed to drive at about 60mph anyway? If so then the quantities of slower traffic should be minimised.

[Patrick Harper]

It's worth remembering that the levels of environmental pollution in the area as a whole would not change as a result of the new road being built, it would merely be "redistributed" to other areas and would actually improve the air quality of other areas with more congestion previously. In addition to that, isn't the most fuel-efficient speed to drive at about 60mph anyway? If so then the quantities of slower traffic should be minimised.

That would only be true if traffic levels were to remain constant in the future, and the new road were not to attract further development.

[Euan]

It's worth remembering that the levels of environmental pollution in the area as a whole would not change as a result of the new road being built, it would merely be "redistributed" to other areas and would actually improve the air quality of other areas with more congestion previously. In addition to that, isn't the most fuel-efficient speed to drive at about 60mph anyway? If so then the quantities of slower traffic should be minimised.

That would only be true if traffic levels were to remain constant in the future, and the new road were not to attract further development.

That's a fair point. I think traffic levels on the roads would still increase anyway even if there wasn't an economic boost, so there is sense in upgrading the roads to meet the inevitable future demands.

[rhyds]

The problem is the current M4 can't deal with today's traffic, let alone the increased throughput now the tolls have been scrapped on the Severn Bridge. The newport section is an aging, twisty D2M which has had every capacity increasing trick thrown at it short of banning odd/even numberplates.

[roadtester]

The newport section is an aging, twisty D2M which has had every capacity increasing trick thrown at it short of banning odd/even numberplates.

Don't go giving them ideas!

[Herned]

It's worth remembering that the levels of environmental pollution in the area as a whole would not change as a result of the new road being built, it would merely be "redistributed" to other areas and would actually improve the air quality of other areas with more congestion previously. In addition to that, isn't the most fuel-efficient speed to drive at about 60mph anyway? If so then the quantities of slower traffic should be minimised.

Actually, free-flowing traffic should create less pollution, certainly from diesel engines. More NOx is produced in stop-start traffic

[ANiceEnglishman]

Welsh Secretary Alun Cairns 'understands the enquiry backs the road'

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-politics-47071609

Of course, it's not up to him to decide whether to actually build it.