Login Register

Upgrading M5 junction 10 'would cost more than £13m'

By Gloucestershire Echo  |  Posted: January 22, 2013

Motorway

Motorway

Comments (16)

TRANSFORMING junction 10 of the M5 from a two-way into a four-way junction would cost more than £13 million, it has been estimated.

The bid, backed by an Echo campaign, was prompted more than a year ago by plans to replace the junction's 40-year-old motorway bridge.

The Highways Agency has calculated the cost to upgrade the busy intersection would be £13.2million.

Feasibility

Related content

But the authority said its feasibility study had shown the remodel "would not have an overall benefit to the road network in the local area at this time".

There are currently plans in the pipeline to spend a similar sum to repair the Piffs Elm Bridge at the junction.

Tewkesbury MP Laurence Robertson, who has been a leading advocate for the transformation project, believes the two pieces of work should be done at the same time to minimise disruption.

He said: "I am campaigning for this and I want to see the minister again to talk about this issue.

"Now we have that figure, it is about trying to move it forward. It is an ideal opportunity to remodel the junction while the bridge work is being done.

"Obviously there are a lot of businesses in that area and they would all benefit while the new fire station would be able to access the motorway southbound.

"It would also take pressure off of other junctions.

"It could all be done at once – doing it separately five or 10 years later would be wasteful. Also, doing it at the same time could mean a possible discount."

Highways bosses have set out a timetable which would see the bridge work carried out in the spring.

The Department of Transport had initially insisted that the Piffs Elm Bridge could not be repaired, only replaced.

But it has since backtracked, saying innovative working techniques will allow for repairs after all.

The road will not be closed to traffic while the work is done, but delays are expected as the work goes ahead. The bid to turn the junction into an "all movements junction" has been backed by businesses who say doing so would increase trade and prevent unnecessary journeys through Cheltenham.

David Owen, chief executive of Gloucestershire Local Enterprise Partnership, said: "Gloucestershire's Local Enterprise Partnership is in favour of firmly advocates four-way access at Junction 10 of the M5. Gloucestershire thrives on logistical advantage – its ability to connect customers with markets and we see Junction 10 as a significant issue.

"We shall continue to exploit the LEP's direct line to Government and national media to put the case to secure business growth through infrastructure changes."

Do you have something to say? Leave your comment here...

max 4000 characters

16 comments

  • Jane__H  |  January 24 2013, 2:06AM

    It can't cost that much more by making it a two way???

    Rate 0
    Report
  • Matt1006  |  January 23 2013, 3:49PM

    Seems the decision has been made, and it's bridge repair works only, no junction upgrade: http://tinyurl.com/b773ocb Works in April, apparently. And presumably May, June, and a while longer after that too. Be now be handy if the HA could confirm ASAP full details of what they are actually going to do, timescales, road closures / restrictions etc. As the Beeb article states April, presumably they will be starting after the Easter holiday, so provisionally Monday 8th April.

    Rate 0
    Report
  • safeandnice  |  January 22 2013, 11:13PM

    As it's not in danger of collapse they could do what theyve done at Over. Keep the present bridge as an example of historical bridge from the er 60s. Build a new junction next to it. How much would they save by not knocking it down?

    Rate 0
    Report
  • Coingrass  |  January 22 2013, 8:55PM

    £13.2 million! Why, that's nearly as much as the government borrows every hour!

    Rate 0
    Report
  • Jane__H  |  January 22 2013, 6:49PM

    I would love to see the breakdown of the costings even 12m to replace the bridge seems rather a lot.

    Rate   2
    Report
  • Walker100  |  January 22 2013, 4:09PM

    "would not have an overall benefit to the road network in the local area at this time". What do the HA call "local"? Is this the area just around Tewkesbury Rd? The fact is making the junction all directions would remove additional movements from the junctions either side and drastically reduce traffic using J11 and then using PE Way as a rat run.

    Rate   5
    Report
  • safeandnice  |  January 22 2013, 11:20AM

    Matt roads are often quoted at million pounds per mile. Once the bridge is sorted surely a million is enough to put in the two short bits of roads to the motorway, expecially if its done at the same time IsitJimKerr one of the issues is that they havent been upgrading the A38 to keep pace with local traffic. If anything theyve been reducing its capacity from pre M5 days. What they dont want is for the M5 to act as a route for local traffic otherwise it wont have the capacity for through traffic

    Rate 0
    Report
  • Shireresident  |  January 22 2013, 11:19AM

    A possible way of making an all movements junction economically viable would be to revisit the "Boddington New Town" proposals made by Hitchens a decade or so ago. Just think, it could solve all the problems around housing pressure and improve the highway network at the same time. I'm surprised it's not been mentioned before, or am I?

    Rate   1
    Report
  • geraint2010  |  January 22 2013, 11:13AM

    In the 1930s recession good old Keynesian policies were employed resulting in America building a network of four-lane highways across their nation, Germany doing the same, while here in the UK the London underground was extended out to the suburbs. Curious how, in the current recession, we can't even get on with improving this junction let alone sorting out the A417 at Crickley Hill, Nettleton Bottom, and Maisemore.

    Rate   5
    Report
  • IsitJimKerr  |  January 22 2013, 10:52AM

    ................the authority said its feasibility study had shown the remodel "would not have an overall benefit to the road network in the local area at this time". So they are basing the whole outcome of this very important piece of infrastructure down to what? A feasibilty study that we have no details of! We are constantly being told by various experts, that the way forward is to build a better infrastructure, for road, rail and air, yet here we are, just like The Air Balloon, coming up with piecemeal temporary solutions, and as has been said, a development in 5 or 10 years would cost the full amount of the difference, yet surely, someone could come up with a better price for the whole lot. So come on HA, start investing in Gloucestershire, otherwise, as per Gloucester Railway Station, companies will just pass us by.

    Rate   3
    Report

      YOUR COMMENTS AWAITING MODERATION

       
       

      MORE NEWS HEADLINES

       
       
       

      MOST POPULAR