| Traffic |
The current High Street traffic system is fine as it is, the road is wide enough for two vehicles coming from opposite directions to pass one another. Should the proposals go ahead the congestion would be devastating to the entire village and a gridlock would be a regular occurrence. |
Current Traffic Regulation Orders are being retained, with any future alterations developed to ensure traffic can pass each other within sections of Highway where carriageway widths are sufficient. |
| Traffic |
Consider the vital services that rely on our roads, first responders, fire engines, ambulances, the police, and especially the RNLI. In emergencies, when every second counts, the inability of vehicles to manoeuvre effectively could cost lives. |
There is no anticipated impact upon Emergency Services and/or First Responders associated with the proposed scheme. |
| Traffic |
No consideration has been given for disabled access or people with limited mobility. |
Full consideration is given to all users in line with Active Travel Guidance. |
| Traffic |
There is no plan for Pilot Street (the priority for residents) which will become even more dangerous if pedestrians are diverted to that route whilst the purple route is completed. Pilot Street should be addressed prior to any other works not dismissed as 'too difficult'! |
No plans were produced for Pilot Street as we wanted to gain feedback from the residents as to what the issues are and how they can be addressed. |
| Parking |
Making the car park pay & display causes visitors to park in and around the village as they do not want to pay for parking. |
The scheme has not proposed any parking charges or amendments to the current car park arrangements. |
| Pedestrian |
It is very clear from the documents and pictures that a big contributing factor regarding vehicle/pedestrian flow in the ward is parking. Is there a plan to address this? |
The village has a unique and historic layout, as with all villages of this type vehicles were not factors when this was developed, therefore this results in any changes having to fully consider the Highway space available, within St Dogmaels the arrangement of carriageway and on- street parking has been developed over several years of monitoring, any changes to the current arrangements would be resisted, from the initially developed plans the engineers have considered how the current arrangements work, from manoeuvring along the section of carriageway, vehicle passing opportunities, parking, and pedestrian requirement. The initial plan developed therefore retains the current arrangements in essence, whilst consideration to areas of the highway which could be reassigned to create pedestrian facilities. |
| Pedestrian |
Not everyone who goes to the beach is able bodied and fit to walk 2 miles from the village, this proposal is no good to the disabled at all. |
The current infrastructure within St Dogmaels is substandard for the majority of pedestrians and those with mobility needs. The proposed Shared Use Path would provide a safe alternative for Active Travel. For those who may wish to, or are unable to walk longer distances, there is the option of the 408 bus service and Fflecsi Bus service. |
| Shared Use Path |
The proposal will not encourage more people to walk/cycle. |
The survey results indicate that 46% of participants would be encouraged to walk and cycle more frequently and agree that the proposed improves accessibility for people with mobility needs. |
| Shared Use Path |
Why not create a 'shared surface' from the bottom of the High Street (where the boardwalk begins) and continue it up to where you have shown it terminating at Fiedr Fawr? |
The proposal will create a Shared Use Path in phases from St Dogmaels to Poppit Sands upon completion. Further investigations towards Cardigan in the opposite direction could be looked at in the future. |
| Shared Use Path |
A shared pathway with pedestrians and bikes will be hazardous to pedestrians, the bikes will take over. |
Respect is required by all users of various modes; shared facilities are shared. Additional signage 'Care Share' can be implemented along the route. |
| Shared Use Path |
A shared use path must be accessible for a wheelchair user but people with hearing impairment generally do not like shared use paths as they cannot hear bikes. |
All users of a Shared Use Path are required to respect other modes and interact accordingly, as they would on any other public highway. |
| Shared Use Path |
Shared use paths need to be wide to work properly. |
The scheme has been produced in line with guidance from Manual for Streets and the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges Guidelines. Departures from standard widths are permitted within local variation depending on the surrounding environment. |
| Shared Use Path |
Shared use depends on the courtesy of other users. Example - The pedestrians who walk from Cardigan to The Wildlife Centre / Cilgerran share the route with cyclists and this can be a source of aggravation as cyclists seem to have adopted the idea that speed gives them priority. |
Respect is required by all users of various modes; shared facilities are shared. Additional signage 'Care Share' can be implemented along the route. |
| Shared Use Path |
The junctions of entering and exiting any shared use path back onto the busy road to Poppit or the busy High Street. These need to be very well designed for full visibility for anyone sight impaired, hearing impaired, using a wheelchair or young people so they can be fully seen as well as being able to fully see all angles. Currently all similar junctions into or out of footpaths are terrible for visibility and safety onto roads where drivers do not keep to the 20mph limit. |
The scheme has been produced in line with guidance from Manual for Streets and Design Manual for Roads and Bridges Guidelines. Advanced signing of pedestrians/cyclists in the vicinity can be implemented to warn motorists of movement in the area. |
| Shared Use Path |
I really welcome PCC's efforts here, which has long been needed and now that the traffic situation in St Dogmaels is worsening. But sorry to say that neither of these routes is satisfactory for 'shared use' - pedestrian & cyclist. Both routes have two values - for movement around the north of the village, and as routes to Poppit, Cippyn, Cemaes for both locals and visitors. |
The routes are designed to Active Travel guidance and will facilitate Active Travel and pedestrian movement between St Dogmaels and Poppit Sands. They will also provide safer routes, away from vehicles, for locals and visitors to move within the area. |
| Shared Use Path |
St Dogmaels has an ageing population who do not or cannot ride bikes. |
Active Travel and the use of a Shared Use Path is for all ages and the future generations. The Shared Use Path is also welcomed to be used by visitors and those who may wish to ride, but do not currently due to a lack of infrastructure. |
| Shared Use Path |
With narrower spaces for vehicles and pedestrians, we may inadvertently create hazardous situations as cyclists become apprehensive about navigating through the area, which could lead to accidents. |
Any narrowing within the carriageway will be to Active Travel guidance, they are narrowed in order to avoid conflict. This also slows traffic and enhances the awareness of drivers, making more vulnerable users have higher priority. |
| Shared Use Path |
Will PCC have to change legislation to allow cycling on footpaths? |
This is not a footpath it is a Shared Use Path therefore no legislation will need to be changed as cycling will be welcomed. |
| Public Transport |
The Poppit Rocket has been stopped, Fflecsi bus is confusing, car transport seems to be the only option in Rural Pembrokeshire. |
Public Transport within Pembrokeshire does need further improvements; the current Bus Reform and Bus Franchising is underway as part of Welsh Government and Transport for Wales future programmes, this will seek to address the gaps in service. Currently, there is the local 408 bus and Fflecsi Bus in the area. |
| Congestion |
This would cause disruption whilst the work is taking place causing problems, especially for those who live at Poppit and have to use the village route every day. |
A full risk assessment would be carried out before any construction works commence in order to minimise any disruption. This Authority typically adheres to working outside peak tourist season times (i.e. Easter, school holidays) where congestion on the network is typically higher. |
| Congestion |
Currently, traffic naturally forms priority flow in both directions. I believe that enforcing traffic to 'stop' in certain places would create more problems with it building-up. |
A formal priority system would only be installed where it is deemed necessary; the current plans demonstrated an option for consideration only at a feasibility level. Comments relating to traffic flow will be considered within any final designs. |
| Congestion |
The environmental implications of increased congestion should also weigh heavily in your decision-making process. A rise in vehicle emissions due to traffic jams can negatively impact the health of our residents who deserve the freedom to enjoy fresh air in their homes. |
A full environmental impact assessment would be carried out before any construction works commence. However, the scheme itself is not anticipated to directly increase traffic flow in the area. |
| Red Route - Phase 1 Broadwalk |
How can the red route (Boardwalk) be made sufficiently wide without destroying a lot of adjacent trees, plus major engineering works will be needed to create the cantilevered path described. |
A full environmental impact assessment would be carried out before any construction works commence. There is also the 3:1 planting requirement where the Woodland Trust recommends planting at least three trees for every one felled, or as specified in the felling license. |
| Red Route - Phase 1 Broadwalk |
It would be very sad if the boardwalk was installed, and the materials didn’t last very long. |
We will assess the lifespan of materials, appropriate for the area, and determine what will be suitable during a detailed design phase. |
| Red Route - Phase 1 Broadwalk |
The Graig footpath serves a very important role in the community without imposing too much on the natural landscape. I fear that increasing the demand on this path and the 3 meter cantilever suggested would change the landscape altogether and enter Pilot Street at a traffic pinch point. The ideal would be to keep the Graig as it is, a narrow pedestrian path, and keep it maintained against erosion as it can be without too much intrusion. This would take some of the pressure off the High Street, providing a by-pass for pedestrian footfall such as school children, dog walkers, commuters and coastal path walkers. |
The erosion of the current route by the River Teifi is undermining the stability of the bank and access to the route will no longer be possible without an intervention. The proposed cantilever route will 'float' above the bank and allow for minimal disturbance to natural patterns. The proposed route would ensure the long-term viability of the Graig. |
| Red Route - Phase 1 Broadwalk |
The raised ramp will potentially flood houses. |
A full risk assessment would be carried out before any construction work in order to assess any drainage / potential flood issues. |
| Red Route - Phase 1 Broadwalk |
The proposals will destabilise the cliff and we will lose the Graig as a Footpath forever, despite it being the only safe route from the middle of St Dogmaels for pedestrians heading to the North end of the village or walking the Wales Coastal Path. |
The erosion of the current route by the River Teifi is undermining the stability of the bank and access to the route will no longer be possible without an intervention. The proposed cantilever route will 'float' above the bank and allow for minimal disturbance to natural patterns. The proposed route would ensure the long-term viability of the Graig. Geological investigations to date have confirmed that the bank is suitable to carry the load of the proposed boardwalk. |
| Red Route - Phase 1 Broadwalk |
At the North end of the Graig footpath there is 18 metres between walls most of which is less than 1.3 m wide and does not comply with Active Travel Act Guidance. This 18m section between the walls is too narrow for a push bike and pedestrian to pass. (Active Travel Act Guidance Section 9.6.4 Pedestrian routes should have a clear unobstructed width of 2.0m (desirable minimum), which allows two wheelchair users to pass one other. Where physical constraints make this impossible a clear width of 1.5m (absolute minimum) should be maintained to enable a wheelchair user and walking companion to travel side by side.) |
While the overall scheme has been designed in accordance with Active Travel Guidance; departures from the minimum widths are permitted in areas of local variation. In order to provide a clear start/end point to the route - the north end of the Graig has been identified. It is substandard in width now, and people are using it to travel this route; within the proposed scheme - riders may be asked to dismount and all users are expected to behave accordingly and respect all other users. |
| Purple Route - Phase 2 Village |
It is so narrow that if a bike comes out of the Graig path onto Pilot Street even if it is being pushed there is not enough space for a pedestrian to squeeze past. Pedestrians will have to get out of the bike’s way and step backwards into the road – risking their lives. |
Respect is required by all users of various modes; shared facilities are shared. Additional signage 'Care Share' can be implemented along the route. |
| Purple Route - Phase 2 Village |
During the summer months the tourism traffic is very heavy as it is, the probable bottlenecks created by this proposed scheme will only create more congestion. |
The Current Traffic Regulation Orders are being retained, with any future alterations developed to ensure traffic can pass each other within sections of Highway where carriageway widths are sufficient. |
| Purple Route - Phase 2 Village |
This will obstruct access to the front of many houses on the High Street. |
There are no proposals to obstruct any properties on the High Street. |
| Purple Route - Phase 2 Village |
In general Pilot Street is very narrow and needs some traffic calming and is dangerous for road users especially in holiday season. Large commercial and farm vehicles use this route. Could a priority system / traffic lights be installed? |
Whilst traffic lights would not work in this area, there could be the possibility of a priority system and/or further traffic calming measures. This will need to be discussed with the Road Safety Traffic Department. |
| Purple Route - Phase 2 Village |
Pedestrian access through the village centre is restricted by the lack of suitable infrastructure. In addition, the lack of signage for alternative routes within the village doesn’t make these easy to find. |
Noted; improvements to signage would be part of the scheme. |
| Purple Route - Phase 2 Village |
Residents on the High Street do not have the benefit of off-road parking and must therefore stop outside their homes to load and unload. The proposal doesn’t appear to consider this. |
We are utilising space within the highway to provide a betterment; the ad-hoc parking for loading/unloading will not be impacted and cannot be guaranteed. |
| Purple Route - Phase 2 Village |
As a resident of the High Street, the position of the priority flow appears to be directly in front of our house. Firstly, we wouldn't be unable to continue to park our car here - this would mean yet another car looking for scarce roadside parking in the village. It would also cause issues with access - at times we would have no choice but to pull up outside and that would create chaos with the 'controlled traffic flow. |
The final design has not yet been confirmed, and all comments will be considered. |
| Purple Route - Phase 2 Village |
The village route needs the same surface levels of road and footpath for many reasons, not raised footpaths and give ways. |
Any improvements will be assessed with the village aesthetic in mind. |
| Purple Route - Phase 2 Village |
If the Emergency services needed to stop on the High Street there would be no access for any other vehicles to pass as the High Street with paving either side would only allow 2133.6mm approximately and an ambulance width is 2080mm. |
Where existing narrowing's are, we would consider installing infrastructure in a manner which could be provide a shared space. |
| Purple Route - Phase 2 Village |
Some properties are Listed Buildings along High Street, parts to which cannot be paved over. |
Any areas that have listed building status will not be paved over, any final designs would take this into account. |
| General |
This will change character of village to its detriment. |
The Shared Use Path is not likely to change the character of the village but enhance the available infrastructure for those who wish to walk and cycle. |
| General |
The proposal will lower the value of houses as it will be taking parking away so people will not want to buy them. |
The on-street parking is being retained; not removed. |
| General |
The most pressing issue is the lack of a safe active travel route between St Dogmaels and Cardigan. This is the route that would link to local educational establishments, services, shops, the Cardigan Health Hub etc. It is also the route used for National Cycle Network Route 82 and the Wales Coastal Path. The demand is huge compared with journeys between St Dogmaels and Poppit Sands (local population approximately 50). There is already an established Right of Way alongside the river between St Dogmaels and Cardigan, but this is under water when the tide comes in. What is needed is a timber boardwalk with a steel sub-structure similar to that currently under construction along a part of the Carlingford Lough Greenway at Newry, Northern Ireland. An elevated boardwalk (above high tide level) would allow wildlife such as otters to gain access to the shoreline. |
The proposals introduce a boardwalk along the existing route which will form part of a wider strategic route to Poppit Sands. The on-street route along the St Dogmaels Road into Cardigan is an existing route which is suitable for those riders who feel confident. At present there are no plans to look for a connection to Cardigan within this scheme, however, it could be considered as a potential scheme in the future. |
| General |
How can you reduce car dependency in a rural village miles from peoples work over, an hour to the nearest hospital, ambulances are basically non available and up to two miles from a butcher, baker, main store and with an ageing population? |
The provision of a safe, secure, Shared Use Path may encourage those users who wish to undertake smaller journeys in and around the village, or to Poppit Sands, by Active Travel mode - rather than vehicle. The scheme is not designed to replace the vehicle or to prohibit those who wish to travel by vehicle for longer distances from doing so. It is about providing options for those shorter journeys that can be undertaken by walking or wheeling. |
| General |
Local businesses will lose out by reducing parking on the High Street. |
The on-street parking is being retained. |