Scottish Government

ROADS (SCOTLAND) ACT 1984; ACQUISITION OF LAND (AUTHORISATION PROCEDURE)(SCOTLAND) ACT 1947
M74 SPECIAL ROAD (FULLARTON ROAD TO WEST OF KINGSTON BRIDGE) ORDERS
REPORT OF PUBLIC LOCAL INQUIRY INTO OBJECTIONS
VOLUME 1 : MAIN REPORT

M74 INQUIRY : SUMMARY OF MAIN CONTENTS OF REPORT

General background

This motorway proposal has been in place for many years. It is a proposal in the approved structure and local plans for the area, and has been included in the road programmes of the Strathclyde Regional Council, the Scottish Executive, and the two highway authorities who have succeeded the regional council. Planning permission for the road was issued in 1995, and subsequently renewed.

The current proposal that is the subject of these orders, and the objections to them considered at the public inquiry, generally follows the line of the road approved in 1995, but differs in not having direct motorway links to the Kingston Bridge and deviating northwards at Polmadie to avoid affecting the railway maintenance facilities. The new motorway would complete the M74 by linking the existing northwestern end of the motorway at Fullarton to the M8 to the southwest of the Kingston Bridge. There would be two intermediate junctions at Cambuslang Road and Polmadie Road. The new motorway would be 6 lanes wide, and much of it would be elevated on embankments and viaducts to pass over the various surface roads and railways, and to cover areas where there is ground contamination. The cost of the road is currently estimated at £375-500 million.

A comprehensive environmental assessment has been carried out, published in the two large volumes of the Environmental Statement.

Objections to the proposed motorway and associated compulsory purchase order

Approximately 340 individuals and organisations objected to the proposed motorway. Among them are the following organisations :

Friends of the Earth Scotland Joint Action Against the M74 (JAM74)

5 Members of the Scottish Parliament object to the proposals.

The vast majority of the objections from individuals express concern about similar issues, some 280 of them being in identical or nearly identical terms. The issues of most widespread concern to objectors are :

• Inequitable/undesirable use of public funds (mentioned by 49 objectors)
• Environmental concerns (mentioned by 49 objectors)
• Congestion/traffic concerns (mentioned by 42 objectors)
• Concerns about economic benefits (mentioned by 36 objectors)
• Concerns about contaminated land (mentioned by 18 objectors)
• Community severance effects (mentioned by 17 objectors)
• Lack of studies of transport alternatives (mentioned by 10 objectors)
• Concerns about impacts on health (mentioned by 9 objectors)
• Concerns about visual impact (mentioned by 5 objectors)
• Cycling and pedestrian issues (mentioned by 4 objectors)
• Concerns about lack of public consultation (mentioned by 3 objectors)

Friends of the Earth Scotland and JAM74 combined to make a joint presentation, and also represented a further 40 or so individual objectors. This joint work was of considerable benefit to all concerned (including the Reporters) as it resulted in more efficient use of inquiry time and avoided the potential duplication of effort by witnesses.

In addition, there were 42 objections to the proposed compulsory purchase order by businesses or persons having an interest in the land proposed for acquisition. By the close of the inquiry, this number had been reduced to 31 through agreed acquisitions or withdrawal for other reasons. A further 6 objections have been withdrawn since the inquiry closed, leaving 25 for consideration.

Support for the proposal

Letters of support for the proposal have been lodged by :

Main effects of the proposed motorway

The main effects of the proposed motorway are fully explained in the various chapters of this report.

The proposal would provide a major new radial motorway into Glasgow from the southeast. This extra road capacity would accommodate predicted traffic growth (assumed to be about 25% under the high growth scenario), and would itself generate further traffic, amounting to about 5% additional vehicle kilometres in the wider Glasgow area. Both of these increases would be in direct conflict with the Scottish Ministers' commitment to stabilise road traffic at 2001 levels by 2021 contained in Scotland's Transport : Delivering Improvements (2002). The additional traffic made possible by the road would add to greenhouse gas emissions, amounting to about 135,000 tonnes of CO2 per year in 2020 compared to the predicted situation without the new road.

The Scottish Executive publication A Partnership for a Better Scotland (2003) contains a high level commitment to target 70% of transport expenditure on public transport by 2006. The trunk road authority hopes that construction of the new motorway will have started by that year. An analysis of road and public transport schemes that are scheduled for construction in the west of Scotland during the period 2004-2008 shows that road schemes, including the M74 completion, would amount to about £837-1181 million, while committed public transport schemes would amount to £75 million, with a further £360-£560 million for public transport schemes that are not yet commitments. Even if all of these came to fruition, the public transport component would amount to 35% and the road component to about 65%, virtually reversing the balance proposed in the high level commitment.

The results of the environmental assessment, which are summarised in the table on page 10-12 in chapter 10 of this report, show that there would be a series of significant adverse effects on residential communities along the route of the new motorway, principally at Eglinton/Pollokshaws Road, Oatlands/Polmadie, north Toryglen, Rutherglen (west/ central), Farme Cross, and Rutherglen (east). These effects are due to community severance, visual intrusion, traffic noise, and disruption during construction, including piling, night time working, and difficulties for pedestrians and cyclists.

The destruction of property along the proposed route would be surprisingly small for a project of this size, partly reflecting the long period during which the motorway line has been safeguarded. Less than 10 dwellings would be directly affected. However a number of businesses would be affected, with an important group at Polmadie where the current proposal deviates from the line that has been safeguarded and approved. The trunk road authority has estimated that businesses providing some 2,800 jobs would be affected by the new road. The timescale envisaged for the start of construction is such that it would probably not be possible for some of the larger and more complicated of these businesses to successfully relocate to new sites before the land is required for the start of construction. If some of the more significant businesses are unable to relocate successfully elsewhere in the area, there would be potentially very serious implications for these businesses and their employees, for the local economy, and for the wider Scottish economy where many other businesses are supplied with specialist services by the businesses under threat.

The new road has also been criticised for not promoting social inclusion and environmental justice, on the basis that it would cause community severance; would be of little use to the local population who have low levels of car ownership; and would have an adverse effect on the environment of the local communities without providing local benefits.

On the positive side, the road would be expected to ease congestion on various parts of the motorway and main road network, especially on the M8 where it passes through Glasgow city centre and on the main radial routes on the east side of Glasgow which would be relieved of traffic. Journey times would be expected to improve, to the extent that M8 journeys through the city centre at peak periods might be reduced by 5-10 minutes. The reduction of traffic on the surface network would be expected to improve conditions for public transport, pedestrians, cyclists, business deliveries, and residents.

The new road would bring improved vehicle accessibility for the south side of Glasgow and the area to the west of the Kingston Bridge south of the Clyde. This would be expected to make these areas more competitive in comparison to other areas, so that they would attract a greater share of new employment in the years to come. These extra jobs would be located mainly in Glasgow and South Lanarkshire, with benefits extending to North Lanarkshire, East Renfrewshire, and Renfrewshire, but not as far as Inverclyde and West Dunbartonshire. These jobs would be likely to be drawn away from the Forth valley, the Stirling area, and Ayrshire. However the improved accessibility could be gradually eroded by continuing traffic growth unless measures are taken to lock in the benefits. No such measures were proposed in the evidence presented to the public inquiry by the highway authorities.

Conclusion

Drawing these various strands together, and looking at all the policy, transport, environmental, business, and community disadvantages of the proposal as a whole, it is concluded that the proposal would be very likely to have very serious undesirable results; and that the economic and traffic benefits of the project arising from the transfer of future jobs from other parts of Scotland would be much more limited, more uncertain, and (in the case of the congestion benefits) probably ephemeral. It is therefore concluded that the public benefits of the proposal would be insufficient to outweigh the considerable disadvantages that can be expected.