 |
| While the Welsh Government and CBI have said the Newport M4 "Hart Bypass" will boost the economy, does the Port of Newport - which supports 3,000 jobs - stand to be one of the economic losers? (Pic : South Wales Argus) |
After Friends of the Earth Cymru's recent unsuccessful bid to stall the Newport M4 bypass, you would've thought that would be that. However, projects of this scale will always generate their fair share of problems, and I suspect the hurdles this particular project has to clear (political and physical) are beginning to become more obvious.
The proposed route of the M4 bypass ("Black Route" - more here) crosses Newport Docks. BBC Wales reported last week that the owners and operators of Newport Docks - Associated British Ports (ABP) - believe that building a bridge/viaduct to carry the Newport bypass over the port could cost them in the region of £30million in investments.
APB have drip-fed concerns about this for the best part of two years so this isn't a bolt out of the blue - but I believe this is the first time a figure has been put on the potential costs.
Although it's reasonable to say that the decline of coal has seen a decline at Wales' main docks in the south, Newport is still an important cargo port. It's said to handle between 1.5 and 2 million tonnes of goods each year, is the second largest steel port in the UK and is also said to support around 3,000 local jobs.
ABP say that constructing a bridge through/over the docks would prevent it from moving large cranes. If you can't use large cranes, you can't deal with large/bulk cargo, investors will be put off and the docks could lose business to ports with unimpeded larger cranes, like Avonmouth.
Last October, ABP told the South Wales Argus that if the proposed M4 bridge had a height of 25 metres – to put things in perspective that's slightly lower than the Briton Ferry viaduct - 58% of vessels Newport served between 2004-2008 would've been unable to access the port.
So, to avoid these problems the Welsh Government and engineers have to look at either changing the route, or building a viaduct that's at a height to give tall cranes enough clearance. During a discussion on economic development in south east Wales at Tuesday's First Minister's Questions, Lindsay Whittle AM (Plaid, South Wales East) asked (clip) whether a full cost-analysis has been undertaken on increasing the height of the Newport Docks bridge, and whether it would increase the estimated £1billion cost of the bypass?
The First Minister said he was confident an agreement can be reached on the height of the bridge so it doesn't interfere with port workings. On costings, he rejected suggestions that the South Wales Metro and Newport bypass are competing for the same pot of money, as the devolution of borrowing powers was specifically dependant on funding a Newport bypass alone (funding for the Metro will presumably come from separate annual capital budgets).
Building a higher bridge brings its own set of problems because if the bridge is too high, it'll be affected by crosswinds and will have to close or have speed restrictions imposed – like the Severn bridges and the Briton Ferry viaduct - during poor weather.
Aside from a taller, possibly more expensive, bridge - or paying ABP compensation - the other solution to the problem should be staring everyone in the face....
Build a tunnel.
 |
More Motorway Madness?
 |
| The highly-controversial trial partial closure of Port Talbot's Junction 41 is set to end this month. (Pic : BBC Wales) |
It was supposed to last for 6 months and was due to end in March, but was extended to May by Business & Economy Minister, Edwina Hart (Lab, Gower). There's been bubbling anger over the policy from Port Talbot town centre traders and residents, who've opposed the idea since the beginning.
A final report on the effect of the trial closure is still being prepared as far as I can tell, and the long-term future of the junction is awaiting a decision from the minister which, again, is due sometime soon. There's been no word on whether the trial has been a success or not, with anecdotal evidence suggesting that – as feared – some traffic has been diverted onto the old A48 (a residential road) rather than the Port Talbot Distributor dual carriageway through Sandfields.
Turning once again to FMQs on Tuesday (clip), Bethan Jenkins AM (Plaid, South Wales West) asked for an update on the trial and a statement before half-term recess next week. She also asked for details on any research undertaken into alternatives to a trial closure, such as hard shoulder running.
The First Minister replied by saying the announcement was forthcoming this month and AMs would be given a chance to scrutinise the results - though the final decision would be taken separately.
David Rees AM (Lab, Aberavon) followed up by saying ambulances on emergency calls have tried to use the junction but have been caught out by the closure, adding that he has "personal experience" of 999 calls which have been delayed by traffic problems.
The First Minister said that police, fire and ambulance services were informed of the plans and attended meetings on the closure, and they would also have the opportunity to express their views in any future decision – including a permanent closure (if that's what's decided).
Suzy Davies AM (Con, South Wales West) raised concerns that a permanent electricity supply is being installed to the closure sign (implying that the closure could/will remain). She demanded that the First Minister "treat my constituents with a little respect" and publish the findings from the trial closure immediately. Carwyn, unsurprisingly, repeated that a statement was forthcoming.
Finally, Peter Black AM (Lib Dem, South Wales West) asked for a timetable on any decision, and details of any public consultation process following that decision. Again, Carwyn called for AMs to wait for the outcome to be published and repeated there would be a public consultation on any decision the Minister takes.
0 comments:
Post a Comment