COUNCILLORS have slammed a £44,000 review of Wichelstowe’s transport masterplan that backed existing proposals to dig a tunnel under the M4, arguing its findings were contrived.

Swindon Council commissioned the study last year to consider whether current proposals to build a tunnel under the M4, to the south, were the best transport option for the town.

Residents and councillors argue the tunnel is too expensive and a bridge would be more effective to ease congestion. Others point out wet ground around where the tunnel would be dug mean it could face engineering problems.

But a Freedom of Information request by the Adver showed the study will confirm the M4 tunnel as the best option when it is officially published next month.

According to the costings, a railway bridge to Great Western Way would cost £12.2m, while a railway tunnel to Blagrove Industrial Estate would cost £14.8m. By contrast, the M4 tunnel south is expected to cost £8.7m, while an M4 bridge would come in at £8.4m.

Parish councillor John Newman lambasted the findings of the report, arguing a bridge to Great Western Way over the railway would be cheaper and offer better transport options for residents.

“The M4 tunnel is going to be a tremendous cost to the people of Swindon and it’s not going to solve any of the transport problems, just the reverse,” he said.

“It’s not a relief road in any sense, shape or form.”

Coun Wayne Crabbe (Con, Wroughton and Wichelstowe) said it was clear the costs presented in the report had been contrived, and he believed a railway bridge to Blagrove Industrial estate would be far cheaper.

He added: “There’s engineering problems with doing the tunnel. It’s very wet ground, it will need pumping from day one.”

A briefing on the cost of four options for improving western access to Wichelstowe was held on June 10 with Wroughton Parish Council. The minutes of the parish council’s planning committee two days later show members believed the costings were contrived to show the M4 route would be cheaper.

The council agreed to submit a Freedom of Information request to get more details of how the prices of the different options were worked out for the report.

Wichelstowe project manager Rob Powe backed the findings of the study, arguing that it followed government guidelines in making its choices.

The review was meant to consider the impact the various alternatives would have on transport links, the landscape and environment, as well as the costs, risks and design standards of the options.

“The feasibility study has considered 15 options including a number of bridges and tunnels crossing both the M4 and the railway line,” Mr Powe said.

“The overall approach has followed the national transport analysis guidance process, and this has identified that the M4 bridge and M4 tunnel are the preferred options.

“All the M4 south options outperform the alternative options and verify the original consented strategy of crossing the M4.”