WHY THE VALE CABINET DEFERRED A DECISION ON PENARTH ONE-WAY SCHEME

A bus using the  “wrong” side of the road as surveyors investigate just what lies buried beneath the Windsor Rd/Plassey St junction. in preparation for the proposed experimental one-way system. If the Project Board’s recommended “Option 2” is approved, the roundabout will disappear – – but the intervention of Penarth Vale Labour councillor Neil Thomas has put a spanner in the works

It’s now emerged that the Conservative-run Vale of Glamorgan Council cabinet decided to defer taking a decision on the controversial new One Way System for the “Gateway to Penarth”  following objections raised by Vale Labour member –  Cllr Neil Thomas ( Labour St Augustines). 

As reported by PDN on Monday January 7th, the Vale’s cabinet had been due that day to approve a recommendation made by its “Project Board” which had been evaluating 4 different options  for the scheme  – and the results of an extensive public consultation.

The preferred option – Option 2 – involves a proposed One-Way system and the elimination of the roundabout. As reported on Monday, a decision has been deferred – it now emerges – because of the intervention of a Labour councillor

As reported on Monday, the Project Board had recommended that the council’s cabinet should approve  an experimental version of “Option 2″ .

Vale Cllr Neil Thomas (Labour St Augustines)

This plan involves removing the roundabout at the junction of Plassey St and Windsor Road, making part of  Plassey St ( from the junction up to High St) a one way (uphill only) route and also making a short section of High St that runs between the Windsor Arms Pub and the Police Station into a one way route.

It’s now become clear that Cllr Neil Thomas had notified the Vale Cabinet that he would “call in” the scheme if the cabinet decided to go ahead with the experimental layout – hence the deferral of a decision until “later this month”.

Plassey Street once had more that 70 trees lining both its sides . Controversially the Labour-run Penarth Town Council gave its tacit approval to chop down the few that are left.

Meanwhile the Labour run Penarth Town Council ( of which Cllr Thomas is no longer a member) has come in for criticism from environmentalists for having given its tacit approval to a different version of the scheme  – “Option 4”.

“Option 4” would have involved the removal of several street trees in the area. Penarth Town Council has stoked outrage from green lobbyists for having written to the Vale of Glamorgan Council to say the following:-

Street Trees Penarth Town Council members understand that the narrowing of lower Plassey St  to implement the one-way system, parking bays  and cycle lane will inevitably result in the necessary removal of many of the existing street trees. This is seen as an acceptable compromise in order to improve the environment more generally.”

Penarth Town Council’s letter had added a rider saying “However, PTC would require that money will be guaranteed as ring-fenced within the project budget to ensure that the re-plaiting of new, suitable species of street trees within root cages takes place in order to preserve the tree-lined aspect of the street.”

 

 

About NewsNet

Penarth Daily News email address newsnet@sky.com. Penarth Daily News is an independent free on-line fair and balanced news service published by NewsNet Ltd covering the town of Penarth in the Vale of Glamorgan, Wales, UK. All our news items are based on the information we receive or discover at the time of publication and are published on the basis that they are accurate to the best of our knowledge and belief at that time. Comments posted on the site by commentators reflect their opinions and are not necessarily shared, endorsed or supported by Penarth Daily News.
This entry was posted in Penarth Daily News. Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to WHY THE VALE CABINET DEFERRED A DECISION ON PENARTH ONE-WAY SCHEME

  1. Local says:

    Why can’t they spend the money on something important such as a new GP surgery for that end of town? Complete waste of money.

    • Philip Rapier says:

      This will double the rat run traffic on Portway at morning Rush Hour. I feel sorry for the poor Marina Residents
      Any safety improvements on the Windsor Roundabout are most welcome.

  2. OB says:

    Waste of Money? Absolutely. Removing the roundabout will create an unobstructed racetrack in both directions for drivers who believe that speed limits don’t apply to them. Funds would be better spent on dealing with the chaotic traffic in the shopping area on Windsor Road between the clock tower and Hickman Road junction.

    • Penarthur says:

      Now I would be in favour of pedestranising the high street- town layout makes it viable to divert traffic to other routes, but Penarth desparetely needs a central car park

  3. mikeyorke says:

    These funds should go to the local schools as time and time again 106 money is waisted on projects such as these that don’t need implementing.

    If they want to spend it on sorting the roads out on Penarth then they need to make exiting Penarth by the Tesco roundabout over the bridge 2 lanes. Get rid of the path on the train station side along and over the bridge. Use a small bit of land from the old Cogan community centre (or whatever it is) and place a humped zebra crossing to get from Tesco to train station

  4. Peter Church says:

    How about 20 sets of traffic lights as this seems to be road planners answer to everything!

  5. Max Wallis says:

    This S106 money is earmarked for highway works £260,000 specified as
    – Cogan Hill & Terra Nova Way Junction Contribution £165,000
    – Windsor Road & Plassey Street Junction Contribution £95,000
    They are also trying to use the “Sustainable transport Contribution” £1,280,700
    – Dingle Road Station Footbridge Contribution £700,000
    – Cogan Station Improvements Contribution £85,000
    – Bus Stop Contribution £40,000
    – Cycle Storage Contribution £20,000
    – Pedestrian / Cycle Link Contribution £435,700
    Much of the latter went on the zig-zag path (with high-cost lighting), Penarth Heights never got its one bus-stop with shelter that was demanded.
    It cannot be used for schools (they got other S106 money), but the rail-station contributions could be spent on better access to Cogan station.
    One could be to reopen the tunnel from Tesco’s to Cogan station carpark and Andrew Rd/Leisure Centre for pedestrians and cyclists. Transport-for-Wales have bought the site (of the ex-OAP hut) so could be persuaded of this priority.
    Second could be a foot/cycleway thru the woodland (hill slope east of the railway) from Plassey Rd/Hill Terr down to Tescos. That’s the best option for “sustainable transport” spending.
    The Vale Council have always claimed they have no money to spend imaginatively; in this case they have plenty but can only think of wasting it on reconstructing cycleways on the highway, with Toucan crossings to cause hated delays for “active travel” cyclists.

    • EJJones says:

      I’d love to know when the schools of Penarth got the other share of the money. #oversubscribed and budget cut every year.

  6. Anything that stops Plassey St being used as cut-through and taking priority over Windsor Rd will improve general traffic flow at peek times.

    All we need now is yellow boxes on the Tesco/Cogan roundabout or traffic lights.

  7. Andrew Worsley says:

    Never ceases to amaze me that as long awaited problems need fixing those pulling the strings ignore them for either stupid ideas or projects that can wait. How about fixing the pavements outside Boots and the Coop so pedestrians don’t have to play hopscotch every time it rains to avoid numerous puddles of varying size due to poorly laid paving that undulates rather than be as it should be … flat or with a gentle slop to run of rainwater. The problem also exists on the opposite side around the bus stop and near the entrance to the arcade plus the bank . I remember those who laid the stones being called back to fix the problem that was even worse initially with one end of the zebra crossing resembling a small pond and the whole of one end was unusable. They were fetched back to fix it and only put in a grate to drain off SOME of the water as the problem still exists . Get these ‘cowboys’ back or get some other to do it ,why should the people be inconvenienced every time it rains in the town centre ? Its about time those with the power to do things HAVE NO PRIDE IN PENARTH AT ALL .. If they had they would fix these problems instead of putting a stupid designer bench outside or the stupid viewing platform that is never seen by casual visitors to the town (just as well as its now considered a danger) with all the money thrown down the drain doing that unasked for folly , the Council could have fixed all the above problems including the rusting useless CCTV cameras. Ether do your job PROPERLY or find another job and have some pride and consideration .

  8. Andrew Worsley says:

    DESIGNER BENCH OUTSIDE THE BANK ……..it should have read Also …… SEEM TO HAVE NO PRIDE IN PENARTH AT ALL

  9. Plassey Resident says:

    Does anyone know what they mean by an ‘experimental version’?

  10. mikeyorke says:

    Maybe they could build a multi-story car-park on the police station car-park. They’ve recently taken delivery of about 40 stone filled metal crates that, as I understand it, are to hold up the failing wall of their car-park.

    Now the police have started to put their massive bins on the street taking up a valuable parking space. Not even sure they are allowed to do that?

  11. Andrew Worsley says:

    Penarthur correction ……………the Police cannot do what they want , but they think they can ! But due to public indifference, apathy etc etc the Police in this part of the country think they can get away with anything , most are either poorly trained it seems . The PSCOs were/are shoved out on the streets to make up for the lack of Police on the beat, these ‘hobby bobbies’ trained to seek out or cut down anti social behaviour , but due to the lack of adequate learning of the very laws they are supposed to enforce , they make glaring errors and are not quizzed or corrected by their superiors. For instance is it against the law to chalk on the pavement ? answer … NO some chalk is made for this very purpose for pavement artists……and yet a certain PSCO openly believed that no one was allowed to use chalk on the footpath ..and he also used that well known reliable source of information ‘malicious gossips’ and took all their blinkered , biased , unsubstantiated garbage , as …gospel and never questioned it one bit , much easier for him than obtaining actual proof , if it was good enough to hunt down Witches in the 16th and 17th Centuries it was good enough for him !!! NOT FIT TO BE A PSCO much less in the Police Force (and yet he is ,along with others of his ilk and their lack of judgement is deemed perfectly acceptable!!????)…. Just to mention graffiti on walls using paint is a different matter as chalk is washed off with the rain graffiti isn’t .

    • Frank Evans says:

      Calm down sir????????. Breath and pause between sentences!!!!
      DON’T GET OVER EXCITED

  12. Andrew Worsley says:

    Sorry Frank thanks for your concern ……….but I was in a hurry at the time …………..nice to know you are a rock of support…………………or something like that!!?

    • Frank Evans says:

      If your in a hurry use less exclamations and using caps lock also is a time consuming business.
      PS I hope some of our PCSOs don’t read your rubbish.

  13. Andrew Worsley says:

    Well Frank to them it will be rubbish as it refers to the very things they would deny. As for rubbish in a broader sense I read your contributions often and try to work out the thinking behind them , so far its still a lost cause.

Comments are closed.