RE FORMER ARJO WIGGINS, OLD MILL BUSINESS PARK, ref. 12_01663_DCO
I have tried to find any assessment of the Cowbridge Road West/Northern Site Access Road junction in respect of pedestrians.
I visited the site today and see no Notices about this scheme that is described in the proposed Conditions as:
“ Construction of a new traffic signal junction at Cowbridge Road West/Northern Site Access Road junction with pedestrian/cycle ‘Toucan’ crossing facilities across the access road (Staggered) and Cowbridge Road West – East side (Straight Across) as indicated in the Paramics model”.
The Paramics document on the website gives no description of the footpaths to and from this planned junction. The map shows “shared” cyclist and pedestrian paths, but the document does not justify forcing pedestrians to ‘share’ the paths, which has proved so bad elsewhere in Cardiff. You’re actually spending to segregate the path over Cardiff Bridge!
Is there in the numerous documents any discussion of forcing pedestrians to ‘share’ the footpaths? Is there anything in the officers’ report that informed Councillors this is proposed? The ILLUSTRATIVE_STREET_HIERACHY document doesn't show it - no bicycles at all!
On my visit I saw many pedestrians using the footpath over the west side of the bridge, there were occasional cyclists in both directions. Is there anything in the documents that recognises that these pedestrian and cyclist movements should be accommodated in the proposed junctions scheme?
I ask this as the roadway changes in the Paramics plan appear to take much space away from the shared pavement, despite it being already very inadequate in places (eg. the 2-metre width over the river bridge and at the peak of the roundabout). Did you consider requiring ‘Paramics’ to design in an adequate width pavement plus two-way cycleway along the full stretch? If not, why not – and why did you not require the developers to fund it out of the huge £5 million cost estimate?
I wish to object to the scheme because it would significantly worsen this pedestrian route; also that the toucan crossing would be in the wrong place for pedestrians crossing from the riverside walk to Wroughton Place. Cyclists would continue to use the 2-metre pavement over the river Ely bridge, as they are not provided for on the roadway, continuing with this substandard arrangement is unacceptable when there are s.106 funds that could be used to remedy it.
If, as it appears, you’ve slipped up because neither the Paramics document or your report has considered the interests of pedestrians in this junction scheme, what do you do now - after recommending it to the Committee without having considered us and without having put up site notices to alert the public ?