‘Short-sighted and deeply disappointing’ – government scraps M5 Junction 9 and A46 scheme for Tewkesbury
A major road scheme designed to unlock housing and employment growth around Tewkesbury has been dropped from the government’s national roads programme.
The Department for Transport has removed the M5 Junction 9 and A46 (Ashchurch) Transport Scheme from the Major Road Network and Large Local Majors Programme and is not currently considering it for a future Road Investment Strategy.
The scheme proposed a new M5 Junction 9a and a re-routed section of the A46 to improve journey reliability.
Cllr Lisa Spivey, leader of Gloucestershire County Council, said: “This is an extremely short-sighted and deeply disappointing decision by the government. Gloucestershire has been left waiting for months for clarity, only to be told that a scheme of enormous importance to our residents, businesses and future prosperity will not move forward.”
She added: “The government cannot continue to demand that areas such as ours deliver significant numbers of new homes while refusing to invest in the infrastructure needed to support them. Housing growth without the roads, public transport, and active travel connections to serve it is neither responsible nor sustainable.”
The scheme would have supported future housing and employment growth around Tewkesbury, helped the transport network cope with increasing demand, reduced pressure on M5 Junction 9 and the A46 through Ashchurch, and supported better walking, cycling and public transport links.
Cllr Richard Stanley, leader of Tewkesbury Borough Council, said: “There was a clear and compelling case for investment in this scheme. It would have supported major housing growth, opened access to employment land and helped attract investment in strategically important sectors, including advanced manufacturing and defence.”
He added: “This decision risks undermining the Government’s own objectives for growth. It constrains Gloucestershire’s ability to deliver future housing and employment opportunities that are being developed with the support of the government’s own agencies and departments.”
Both councils said they will seek urgent discussions with government to challenge the decision and press for alternative funding routes.
