Motorists cannot trust Labour and it shows

Motorists cannot trust Labour and it shows

Responding to the leader of the UK opposition claiming he is on the side of motorists, Natasha Asghar MS, Shadow Transport Minister, said:

“Keir Starmer claims he is on the side of motorists, yet you only need to look at the record of Labour in Wales to see what Labour really think of motorists.

“With Labour’s ban on road building, 20mph speed limit, scrapping of the M4 relief road and road charges on the horizon their war on motorists punishes commuters.

“While Labour introduce restrictive policies on motorists, the Welsh Conservatives will always look out for the best interests of motorists simply going about their daily lives.”

Motorists furious at the Welsh Government’s road tolls and congestion charge plans

Plans for the Aberdare Bypass scrapped by Welsh Labour Government

Plans for the Upper Rhondda Fach Relief Road scrapped by Labour

Inspector’s report

  1. 10.15  NSA 20.2 concerns the safeguarding of a route to extend the recently-constructed Porth Relief Road through the Upper Rhondda Fach as far as Maerdy. This would be a major scheme and the March 2007 Report to the Council’s Cabinet estimated the cost at £105m. The cost may have risen since then. There is no evidence as to how this might be funded and the Council acknowledges in Document EB14 that there is no certainty that work would commence within the LDP period. However the route shown on the Proposals Map would mostly follow the line of a disused railway and TAN 18 (paragraph 8.23) allows for the safeguarding of such railway routes for transport purposes beyond the LDP period. The inclusion of the scheme in the LDP is justified on that basis.
  2. 10.16  NSA 20.3 however concerns the extension of the above road beyond Maerdy. Appendix 1(d) indicates that the road would extend as far as the A4061 Rhigos Road but acknowledges that the proposal has not been developed sufficiently to enable the identification of an approved route to be safeguarded. No route is shown on the Proposals Map and the route could not follow a disused railway as there is none in this location. As the implementation would logically depend on the prior implementation of the above NSA 20.2 scheme, NSA 20.3 would not be constructed within the LDP period. Moreover the March 2007 Report to the Council’s Cabinet estimated the cost then at £45m and there is no indication as to how it might be funded. With no identified route and no realistic prospect of commencement within the LDP period, the inclusion of the scheme in the LDP would serve no purpose. It would risk blight over a wide area, would mislead local residents and those considering investment in the area, and would contravene national policy in TAN 18. IC07 would accordingly delete the scheme.

Inspector’s report

  1. 10.17  IC07 Delete NSA 20.3 Upper Rhondda Fach Relief Road Extension (Beyond Maerdy) and the associated text at Appendix 1(d).
  2. 10.18  SSA 18.1 and the associated text at Appendix 1(d) refer to the safeguarding of land for upgrading to dual carriageway with junction improvements along about 10km of the A4119 between Ynysmaerdy and Williamstown, as shown on the Proposals Map. The cost for the full scheme was estimated in the March 2007 Report to Cabinet at £35m. It may since have risen. Appendix 1(d) describes the scheme as dependent on the scale of development in the area with developers to be required to assist with the cost. However, the EB81 Strategic Transport Infrastructure Needs Studies only supported the need for one junction improvement (at the A4119/A4073 roundabout) to provide for development proposed in the LDP, and did not support the full scale dualling of the route. Whilst other local improvements may prove necessary as the result of detailed Transport Assessment, the prospects of justifying sufficient developer contributions to fund the full dualling scheme are therefore remote. No other funding source has been identified.
  3. 10.19  The Council’s only justification for the full scheme rests on a possibility that traffic growth may lead to a chance of the scheme being included in a future SEWTA RTP programme. Whilst the Council points out that this would be an on-line widening scheme which would not pass immediately adjacent to any development sites, there remains the possibility of blight to nearby residential and other properties as a wider, faster road would have a greater environmental impact.

Inspector’s report

  1. NSA 20.1 and NSA 20.4 concerns safeguarding for two schemes for cross valley links at Mountain Ash to bring environmental relief to other routes. (The council only built one Scheme) These are relatively modest proposals and the schemes would be located in the Heads of the Valleys area
  2. Rhondda Cynon Taf Local Development Plan up to 2021 – Inspector’s Report 2011 where the Council refers to the possibility of funding from grants, the Council’s own resources and developer contributions. The inclusion of the schemes is justified
  3. Mountain Ash is a bottleneck for commuters, yet the cross-valley scheme is said to be complete.

Spread the love
Team @ AberdareOnline

Team @ AberdareOnline

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *