A draft of the forthcoming cycling strategy for Cardiff has been released and it looks like things are looking up.
If you were to write a cycling campaign wish list, chances are it would contain many of the usual suspects –segregated lanes, better lighting & surfaces, more cycle parking.
Well, knock us down with a feather, just look what is said to be in the plan:
The council says it will incorporate the following into the scheme design.
- Segregation between bikes and cars on main roads
- 20mph speed limits and traffic calming on streets with lower amounts of traffic
- Parking protected bike lanes
- Segregation from pedestrians on off-road paths
- Lighting and better running surfaces
- Direct routes to destinations
- Cycle parking in convenient locations
Source: This is the decade-long plan to improve Cardiff for cyclists and pedestrians – Wales Online
Among the plans are two main arteries, running north to south and from east to west –something we’ve been asking for. Although it is worth noting that this is north to Lisvane Reservoir (where new homes are planned), not north to Tongwynlais!
Please have a read the draft and let us know what you think in the comments section below.
The strategy is tabled for the Environmental Scrutiny Committee at the Council on 6th December, but the public consultation will end on 27th March 2017, which should make the Council elections next year very interesting indeed.
We’ve gone into some detail on the various plans, breaking things up over the course of a number of posts. Feel free to have a read of the following:
- Cardiff Cycling Strategy 2016-2026 – Deep Dive Part 1 – The Strategy
- Cardiff Cycling Strategy 2016-2026 – Deep Dive Part 2 – Primary Route East-West
- Cardiff Cycling Strategy 2016-2026 – Deep Dive Part 3 – Primary Route North-South
- Cardiff Cycling Strategy 2016-2026 – Deep Dive Part 4 – The Taff and Ely Trails
- Cardiff Cycling Strategy 2016-2026 – Deep Dive Part 5 – Connections & Conclusions
Cardiff Council has taken a lot of justifiable criticism for its failure to support cycling, so the publication of a draft strategy is long overdue. Cynics will point out the proximity to the local elections in May, so we must hope that the new council will continue to develop and implement it regardless of political persuasion.
There are a lot of good things in here, for example segregating cycle and pedestrian paths from roads, more cycle parking, filling in broken connections, promoting and securing cycling to school.
Definitely a step in the right direction at last.
Well this is fantastic! Obviously it is still fairly vague at this stage and it will be important to keep an eye on progress. How do you, Sustrans and the other cycling and user groups intend to work together? Is there a case for a central hub on Facebook (or elsewhere) where people from all groups can be directed and talk together rather than (or as well as) lots of parallel discussions being had across the city to ensure that the pressure for the best outcome can build? I have no doubt that there will be plenty of dissenters when this goes out to consultation…
Hi Jenny, the current plan is for the council to write out to everyone who put their name down, but they’ll also be meeting with Cardiff Cycle City, of which we are a part. Current plan is to hold a workshop at some point in the new year, but plans are still to be firmed up.
The item was pulled from 6 Dec. Scrutiny Cttee as the chair Cll Paul Mitchell considered the plan needed more work, esp. on primary cycling routes and pedestrian routes.
The Cycling Campaign is dubious about the dropping of the Enfys Network’s pattern of primary routes for the 4 routes (new in parts) that fail to serve big parts of Cardiff. The focus on the new developments areas is fundamentally wrong and unfair to Cardiff’s Cyclists, and goes back on the Active Travel objective to build a comprehensive and coherent network of primary, secondary and local routes.
Don’t think the Enfys pattern was perfect either. Few opportunities to traverse Cardiff from the suburbs without gravitating to the centre.
Some very strange decisions made on some of the purple routes. Often very indirect, which flies in the face of the design guidance really.
Thought the plan was ok, but the maps don’t necessarily echo the ambition of the plan. The East-West route looks promising though.
We objec ted to nothing in the Western Ave corridor, so what they give us is – Western Ave, full length from Ely roundabout to Gabalfa. And none of the road lanes necessary to get over the Taff, no improvement to the low quality underpass at the Gabalfa interchange, and none of the Ely road, St Pauls Rd route to Pontcanna fields set away from the main high-pollution road.
The east route likewise sticks with the high-pollution Newport Rd instead of a new ped-cyciist bridge to New Rd, Rumney then on a 20mph roadway thru to St Mellons. I see no attempt to avoid high traffic, high pollution roads as is done in London. Nor much attempt to meet the Active Travel criterion of 20mph for cycle-routes. … the result of refusing to develop the Integrated Network and Strategy with our cycling groups, failing to disclose and discuss the principles at the Cycling Liaison group (or with its chair Iona Gordon who’s the Council’s “Cycling Champion”)
Where do we respond to the consultation? Can’t find anything on the council website. I have some comments to make about Whitchurch and its connections to the city centre.
Aled, consultation starts in the new year.
They planned to approve only the Integrated Network Map at this stage, with the Strategy up for approval at the 19th Jan. Cabinet, with consultation to follow. Now the Scrutiny Cttee might give both a mauling in mid-Jan, you could write to its chair Mitchell, Paul (Cllr) about needing high-quality routes thru Whitchurch (cross town and radial).
The Enfys network has primary and secondary routes; the Active Travel guidance specifies primary (commuter) secondary and local routes – it’s not right for Cardiff to use a different definition of ‘primary’ and ‘other’ routes. We need to retain and build on the Enfys primary route network.
“Segregation from motor traffic and pedestrians on main roads” is proposed as a principle: why not improve segregation on the Taff trail, where there’s space for separate ped/cyclist routes in the park?
contact Mitchell, Paul (Cllr) chair of Environmental Scrutiny via
email@example.com. Paul says he makes one third of his trips by bike, hoping to increase to the target 50% modal split.
I would like to see the trains being supportive of this and having more access to trains with a bicycle, especially from the area I am coming into Cardiff from. Without access to the correct amount of trains and carriages that allow cycles to be transported, this is of no help to those commuters who wish to access the cycle network from a distance, e.g. Rhondda Cynon Taf. Surely having enough carriages and trains to carry cycles will only strengthen the need for this and will reduce the amount of cars on the road in the city centre too.
Currently, from the nearest train station to me for example, there is an issue with commuters getting onto the train without cycles, let alone cyclists accessing them. Change is needed for all, not just for those who live within a 4 mile radius of the city!
Hi Jayne, thanks for your comment. Completely agree, which is why we covered the recent consultation on the Wales & Borders Rail Franchise. Rail is a big part of the whole shift towards sustainable transport, but it would be an improvement if the current services from outside Cardiff, particularly on the Pontypridd line had room for people, let alone bikes. A big change is needed when the contract changes hands.