| Parking |
Tenby cannot afford to lose any parking places or have the roads reduced in width. |
There is no intention to narrow the carriageways around Tenby within this proposed scheme. The improvements along Marsh Road have provided additional footways and realigned the carriageway. We acknowledge the concerns regarding parking and carriageway widths. Our Engineering Team carefully considers these factors during the development of any highway project to ensure that all impacts are fully assessed. We aim to retain the existing levels of parking and carriageway width. In many cases, parking facilities are increased as part of improvement developments. The aim of the Active Travel upgrade is to enhance provisions for more vulnerable highway users, prioritising their safety and accessibility. |
| Shared Use Path |
A link between Marsh Road and The Clicketts would be beneficial, particularly for local people. I am undecided about linking Heywood Lane and The Clicketts, mainly due to the design and functionality. I'm also not sure how much use it would get and whether it would introduce additional road safety issues. |
Active Travel improvements aim to provide an option for users to choose which mode of travel they prefer to use for their journey. The improvements are developed in line with Highway Design Standards and Active Travel guidance to minimise any potential conflicts. |
| Shared Use Path |
There needs to be sufficient crossing points for those with limited mobility to gain access without additional cost being incurred or disruption to locals caused. |
The scheme is funded by Welsh Government as part of the Active Travel legislation. The Council is obligated, legally, to provide continuous improvements to the existing and future Active Travel infrastructure. Funding comes directly from Active Travel; and cannot be utilised for other schemes. There is no anticipated cost to local residents. |
| Shared Use Path |
People with mobility issues would be in danger from cyclists. Turning footpaths into multi-user paths increases the hazards for the young and also elderly. |
Mobility issues are assessed during the scheme development and design. Shared Use Paths are typically 3m in width or up to 4.5m with higher volumes of pedestrian/cyclist movement. All users are expected to behave respectfully towards other modes and users. |
| Shared Use Path |
I do not agree with putting an Active Travel path through a housing estate. |
Shared Use Paths play an important role in providing an accessible route for people to walk, wheel, and cycle for many different trip purposes. Accessibility within local neighbourhoods is key, and where quieter routes, such as residential roads can be used due to lower volumes of traffic and speed; they are considered. |
| Shared Use Path |
Part of the proposed cycle path includes The Glebe Hill adjacent to St Johns Hill. On many occasions over the years I have had to assist people using a mobility scooter who cannot make the 13% incline if not more up the hill. This is no easy walk. When cyclists use the hill they snake from side to side to make the steep lower, this makes it impossible to walk up or down the hill at the same time. |
While gradients are considered in the design, Active Travel guidance does allow for local departures from standards based upon local geography. Having said that, where possible, there is another route that could be considered which can be investigated. Currently we are also considering St John's Hill via Rectory Court to Merlin's Court, as an alternative. |
| Cycling |
The current cycle route number 4 passes right through Kiln Park which is not ideal. The entrance to the path behind Gulf Garage Petrol Station is often totally blocked by new static caravans awaiting positioning. Also, there are many small children playing on scooters and skateboards in this area enjoying their holiday. |
The National Cycle Network Route 4 utilises the existing route through Kiln Park in order to remove users from the busier Highway Network (A4139) where there are currently no facilities. We can liaise with the Managers at Kiln Park in regards to retaining the access and avoiding blockages. |
| Cycling |
Cycle paths should be on main roads not through housing estates on pavements directly in front of homes and only when there is sufficient room. |
Shared Use Paths are designed to find safer routes for walkers, wheelers and cyclists away from heavy traffic flow. This can at times include residential roads, country lanes and quiet lanes. Opportunities to cycle through rural areas and Towns need connectivity links in order to transition between the two; Active Travel should be accessible for everyone, regardless of location. Often residential areas are considered as an Active Travel link allowing users to access the facility directly and confidently, capturing users from their doorstep on a comfortable and user-friendly route. |
| Pedestrian |
There are no proposals to link New Hedges to Tenby schools along the main road. How are we meant to walk our children to school? There needs to be a safe and wide enough footpath between New Hedges and Heywood Lane schools. In a few years my children will be attending Bro Preseli via bus and there is no safe footpath for them to access the bus stop on Narberth Road. It is disappointing that this has not been considered, especially with Bryn Hir housing development in the pipeline. |
The missing link of footway between New Hedges and the Park House Nursing Home has been raised previously and has been incorporated with part of a current planning application to provide this link. The current proposals would provide a quieter route, away from traffic, along Slippery Back which would connect into The Glebe, St John's Hill and onto Heywood Lane. Beyond the Park House Nursing Home, there is a footway connecting into Sepentine Hill already, should you choose to walk that route. Within the Bryn Hir Planning application there is also a requirement to provide Shared Use Path that links to National Cycle Network Route 4 and a crossing point on the A487 to facilitate safe crossing. |
| Pedestrian |
The changes at The Croft and Gas Lane could be useful, but the need to The Green seems very low. There is a need for a route into Town along The Norton as many people walk that way to and from the doctors and hospital. |
The volume of traffic along The Norton and the existing infrastructure does not lend themselves to utilising this route for a Shared Use Path. As such, this route was dismissed from further consideration. |
| Pedestrian |
There is a lack of pavements around the Leisure Centre which is very well used. |
There is an existing footway along the A4139 in front of the Leisure Centre. The current proposals include provision of a Shared Use Path along The Clicketts, Heywood Lane and Marsh Road to facilitate Active Travel. |
| Public Transport |
Transferring the bus route from the village core to the by-pass improves village pedestrian safety (no footpaths) and air pollution. |
Noted. |
| Public Transport |
People with mobility issues will have difficulty with accessibility to anything in Tenby. If there was a town bus service, I think that would improve accessibility all round and link into the wider public transport network. |
The forthcoming Bus Reform and Franchising is currently looking into the needs for improved service, frequency and connectivity within the South West Region. A Tenby Town Bus may be considered within this scheme. |
| Traffic |
Reducing the speed limit to 30mph for the by-pass section adjacent to Penally Rail Station will improve pedestrian safety. |
Noted and passed on to our Traffic Team. |
| Traffic |
The Croft to The Green would turn St Johns Hill back into a two-way traffic system which never worked before and was changed because it was so dangerous. |
The Shared Use Path improvement applies to walking, wheeling and cycling traffic flows which would be two- way. The proposals are not seeking to alter the one-way vehicular traffic flow. |
| Traffic |
Cyclists that travel at 30mph plus should not mix with pedestrians. The speed limit is 20mph, cars do not adhere to it and cyclists certainly will not. |
Cyclists are expected to adhere to the Highway Code and behave respectfully when mixing with other modes. The same applies to vehicles; driving the speed limit and adhering to the 20MPH is the law. |
| Traffic |
Tenby often has poor pavement capacity, and few effective road measures to cope with high volume car use, e.g. speeds of 30mph plus in the 20mph, distributor roads like the Narberth Road and The Norton. |
The historical nature of Tenby, as with other locations within Pembrokeshire, restrict the existing infrastructure and further improvements. The population of Tenby with visitors provides a seasonal tidal increase in traffic flows. This will need to be addressed through other means, such as improved bus facilities, improved rail connections, improved Active Travel links in order to reduce vehicle numbers and reduce congestion. |
| Slippery Back |
It's very difficult to assess whether large amounts of public funds should be spent when there's no indication of the level of need. Currently, when I walk my dog up Slippery Back, I rarely pass anyone else. Naturally with the new housing development there is likely to be more people walking the route. |
The proposed route along Slippery Back provides a connection from New Hedges into Tenby, away from the A478. The route is popular with many residents and visitors in the area and the formation of a Shared Use Path may enable those in the area with the opportunity to travel via walking, wheeling or cycling. |
| Slippery Back |
I use Slippery Back to access the Cemetery sometimes and I have always walked all around the lanes including Blind Mans Lane to exercise my dogs. Will it really be possible to purchase private land to change the route? |
Discussions with landowners are underway; the final route choice option will depend on whether third-party land discussion are successful. As such, we have developed options for consideration. |
| Glebe to Green |
The proposed changes will have a large impact to many residents on The Glebe as there is a high demand for parking, not just for residents but for early morning swimmers visiting the beach. Local children use the narrow access road to get to the playground, increasing the traffic along this narrow lane will likely result in accidents. |
On-street parking levels are to be retained as current, the initial option developed considered that each driveway access position would not to be available for on- street parking due to blocking access, therefore development of the Active Travel connection is currently considered to have minimal effect along this section of highway. There has also been consideration for traffic calming within the developed arrangement to address traffic speeds and conflict with children playing. |
| Glebe to Green |
The route will remove homeowners parking when parking is a priority in The Glebe. It will also be dangerous for children to play outside their homes if a cycle way is introduced in a residential estate. |
There are no proposals to remove homeowners parking, the on-street parking is to be retained as current. The minor realignment of the footway opposite the potential Shared Use Path would be to Active Travel standard width requirements, the carriageway amended to a width suitable for a housing estate. Suitable signage could be erected asking cyclists to dismount in busy areas where children play. |
| Glebe to Green |
While the intention behind introducing cycle lanes and accessible routes might be to promote greener, healthier transportation alternatives, the specific context of The Glebe, suggests that such an intervention could disrupt the delicate balance of community space, safety, and historical resident privileges. Any such changes need a thorough, participatory approach involving all stakeholders to ensure that the solution doesn't end up being more detrimental than beneficial. |
The current proposals are in preliminary design, all comments will be taken into consideration before making any further decision as to this section of the route. We appreciate the importance of preserving the character and function of local communities, particularly in areas with historical significance and long-established resident needs. We are fully committed to engaging with local stakeholders throughout the process to ensure that any changes are sensitive to the unique context of the area. Maintaining community space, ensuring safety, and respecting resident access and amenities are key priorities in the design and consultation process. |
| Glebe to Green |
The route through The Glebe seems unnecessary and will displace existing parking provision for residents with no alternative offered. The alleyway adjacent the pub is extremely steep and greatly limits the options for those with mobility needs. The means to provide those options then become very expensive. The Merlin’s Court route is the obvious best option and compliments the Slippery Back and North Beach car park routes. It may improve to access to where public transport services are located but the actual services provided is a much bigger discussion. |
While gradients are considered in the design, Active Travel guidance does allow for local departures from standards based upon local geography. Having said that, where possible, there is another route that could be considered we will investigate this option. Currently we are also considering St John's Hill via Rectory Court to Merlin's Court, as an alternative. |
| Glebe to Green |
Many of the householders along the affected section of the estate have had alterations made to the front of their houses to facilitate accessible entrances and vehicles, the proposals do not appear to reflect this. Meanwhile, the Travel Route construction seems to include widening one side of pavement to meet the route requirements, narrowing the opposite side and thereby creating a gap between road and former pavement. The road is of concrete construction and finish, so a challenge to materials that can be used satisfactorily. Finally, the proposed use of the slope going down from the estate to St John’s Hill appears to increase risk of collisions between pedestrians and bicycles. |
On-street parking levels are to be retained as current, the initial option developed considered that each driveway access position would not to be available for on- street parking due to blocking access. The minor realignment of the footway opposite the potential Shared Use Path would be to Active Travel standard width requirements, the carriageway amended to a width suitable for a housing estate. Comments are noted regarding concrete road construction and are already understood as factors by the Engineers and will be taken into account. We understand that the potential for conflicts between pedestrians and cyclists is an important consideration, especially in areas with varying terrain. As part of the design process, our Engineering Team carefully assesses the layout and potential risks to ensure the safety of all users, they closely evaluate the slope's design to explore solutions that can mitigate any risks, such as clear appropriate signage. |
| General |
I'm curious as to what assessment of 'need' has been made within the locality? Have feasibility studies been undertaken? If so, where can the results be viewed? |
The public consultation element follows on from the initial feasibility study which was undertaken in 2023, traffic surveys which were undertaken in 2024. The public consultation survey results will be published on our website in due course. |
| General |
This proposal completely contradicts the Councils policy of not making unnecessary expenditure due to financial difficulties. |
The scheme is funded by Welsh Government as part of the Active Travel legislation. The Council is obligated, legally, to provide continuous improvements to the existing and future Active Travel infrastructure. Funding comes directly from the Active Travel Fund, managed by Welsh Government, and cannot be used for any other areas (such as Housing, Education or Highways). |
| General |
There is no requirement for additional accessibility enhancements for individuals with disabilities on the suggested routes, as these routes are often steep and not accommodate those with mobility restrictions. |
Detailed design has not yet been undertaken; the final design will consider whether any additional accessibility enhancements are required. Our Accessibility Officer has been involved in the preliminary design discussions and will continue to be consulted throughout the design of the scheme. |
| General |
For someone with mobility needs there will be benefit, but not all. They all have steep inclines and could be a safety issue even for able bodied cyclists, particularly in the wet and with leaves covering surfaces. With the current financial situation, the Council struggle to maintain roads/paths clear of leaves. This is not a criticism of the services; it is the reality of the situation. Without knowing the implementation costs it is difficult to say whether I fully support the proposed changes. However, I do like and support the concept of introducing Active Travel routes. Getting them used can be the hard part. |
Noted. All schemes have been designed with Active Travel guidance in mind to meet criteria. Where gradients are difficult to achieve, alternative routes have been considered. Where there is not alternative, the departure from standard is accepted within local variations. |
| General |
There is no requirement for any of them in my opinion. They would be mostly used by visitors in the summer months, and I think what little money we get allocated from the Welsh Government should benefit locals. Sometimes I wish you would ask residents what they need. |
The Public Consultation process is about obtaining feedback from local residents with regards to potential future schemes. Money allocated for Active Travel cannot be spent on other areas (such as Housing, Education or Highways) and if we did not apply for the funding, it would be spent in other Local Authorities. Feedback from residents is important in determining whether schemes progress and whether alternatives need to be considered in design, routing and or location. |