Welsh Government statement today.
This statement highlights key road projects for delivery in the remainder of this Assembly, recognising that progress will be subject to statutory consents and funding availability. I intend providing a further update to Assembly Members before the summer recess of rail infrastructure priorities.
I have already made a written statement on 26 June on my intention to consult on a draft plan and associated assessments for the M4 corridor around Newport in September, that, if implemented, would lead to a motorway being built to the South of Newport, addressing capacity and resilience problems on this key artery widely recognised as essential to support the Welsh economy.
In addition, I intend to progress the Eastern Bay Link in Cardiff and an upgrade to Junction 28 on the M4. These projects are an important element in improving access to the Central Cardiff Enterprise Zone and enhancing connectivity within the city region.
The A465 remains a priority and I will progress the remaining phases of the dualling in view of the route’s strategic importance for the Upper Valleys, Ebbw Vale Enterprise Zone and as an national and international link.
To improve access to the St Athan - Cardiff Airport Enterprise Zone, I will fund improvements to Five Mile Lane.
At present it is little more than a wish list although in my opinion it is these relatively small pieces of infrastructure that need to be in place before the economy of SE Wales can "motor" along.
At present though they cannot be funded but it is just possible that Labour are actually putting some forward thinking in place in getting the various consultation and planning hurdles out of the way and be in a position to actually make use of borrowing powers when they seem likely to be granted in a few years time.
While Labour should really have dealt with these projects a decade ago lets give Edwina a little bit of credit for recognising that transport links are vital to the city centre Enterprise zone. Not much though.
Yet another 'dear Santa' letter from the doofi in the senedd. What Jeremy says also fills me with dread - that WG may borrow funds. They have shown time and again they are incapable of spending money wisely preferring populist policies that get them re-elected rather than actually take Wales forward.
Whatever happened to the millions both WG and CCC promised each year for the CBD? As always, lots of talk but the reality will be somewhat different. This story will be no different. Wales doesn't have a pot to piss in and WG aren't going to get the gilt yields that the UK government has.
There seems to be a lot clearing going on within the Rover Way metal works right next to the road. It got me thinking as to whether Rover Way was potentially going to be duelled?
Certainly a lot cheaper than the new section they were going to build closer to the water and the metalworks is the only pinch point on the route. Other than that, there are wide green verges to the west and the land on the edge of the old airfield to the east. Could just about get the width of say the A48 in Llandaff, 4 lanes but no central reservation.
Does anyone know what the original plan was at all?
THe way the A4323 just ends on a ski jump looks as if something was planned, but later ditched. That and the way one of the roundabouts on Ocean Way has just one entry and exit is quite a bizarre juxtaposition.
It's been like that for decades. I can't imagine why anyone would think "right, we'll just have to leave the A4323 like this, until someone plans somewhere else for it to go" or the opposite situation with that roundabout, to have planned ahead so far in advance to the extent that they said "I think we'll make a roundabout here in advance, because in a few decades time, the Eastern Bay Link will be able to spur onto it"
When the Butetown link was completed in about 1995, the plan had been to start the next section in the late 1990s or early 2000s, I believe. However, the fairly substantial (but unfunded) road schemes planned by the outgoing Major administration were largely cancelled by Labour in 1997 as it sought to keep to the very tight spending totals it inherited from him. And when the tap came back on in 2000, it largely went to schools and hospitals, rather than transport - and the transport part largely went to railways and to road schemes in more 'deprived' areas.
So the reason it looks like they planned to continue building is that they did. I distinctly remember an old AA map my dad had which showed the planned route too with an exit/interchange at the eastern end of Ocean Park, and then a continuation on to Southern Way on a route to the south of Rover Way.
The Eastern Bay link is shown on a lot of road maps from around 2000. IIRC the existing flyover above Newport Road would be dualled, and then fly over the Pengam roundabout and then continue on a new route down to the coast, and then hug the coastline to the south of gypsy camp and sewage works before turning in and flying over Atlantic Way roundabout before connecting to Bute tunnel.
One of the reasons quoted for delaying construction was that RSPB complained about destroying bird habitats on the coastal section which were specifically created to offset habitats lost when the barrage was built.
To overcome this it was suggested that a partial link between Bute tunnel and Atlantic Way roundabout could be built first but this was objected to by council (I think) becuase it would encourage more use of Rover Way. So all or nothing.
So the next time you are stuck in a traffic jam on Newport Road blame the seagulls..
I think I'm right in saying that there have been two options over the years.
The first was a coastal route involving extensive viaducts - hence the 1990s "ski jump". I believe there was a cheaper option considered in the 2000s that involved cutting through Ocean Park - hence the weird roundabout. I'm not sure which of the two is currently being "progressed". Who knows - it may provide us with a third piece of transport archaeology!
i always wondered what the purpose of that roundabout was on Ocean way. it has to be the strangest ever traffic calming measure if it's not to join up with the PDR
Nope, there was a sister viaduct all designed and ready to be built parallel with it. Unfortunately that design is completely redundant now as it would have been to British Standards, and any new build would need to be to Eurocodes. Strikes me as odd as the existing viaduct is fine (ish)
all good news, but a bit of a wish list - how long does it take - the a465 to finish will be early 2030s I reckon.
anyone seen the traffic layout on the a48 to cowbridge just pats dyffryn.....the vale must have got a good deal on lights|!
While new lane viaduct would have to conform to Eurocode design it does not mean it could not look exactly the same as existing. When the original contractors DMD built the first lane they kept the moulds so they could be reused on lane 2 which old have meant a large cost saving - but they will be long gone now in any case.
So new designers would be instructed to follow same profile and general appearance - users would not be able to tell if internal wall thicknesses are increased, or rebar percentages or stress loading etc.
No votes here for UKIP....
that's nice nail varnish you're wearning there murf
Question is what happens when it meets the Llanedeyrn roundabout? It's busy enough now
If this link road does follow the shown route along the coast, and the Newport bypass gets built south of Newport, I wonder if it'd be possible, or desirable, to connect the two?
Seems to have gone quiet about PDR completion - http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/1bn-package-wales-rubber-stamps-7078793
They're cracking on with what looks like a slip road that leads onto the 4232 at junction 33, avoiding the roundabout, which can only be a good thing.
all needed more urgently than much of the metro plans,
at my last count the metro paper trail and consultant costs were nearing 1 million.................
Are things beginning to slowly start to possibly commence to consider starting?
I saw this tender advertised:
Eastern Bay Link - Queens Gate Roundabout to Ocean Way Roundabout
This project would see the construction of a dual carriageway that would improve access to Cardiff Bay, the Cardiff Central Enterprise Zone (CCEZ) from the M4 to the east of Cardiff and contribute to enhancing connections within the Cardiff City Region.
The proposed works involve the provision of a dual carriageway between Queens Gate Roundabout to the Ocean Way Roundabout to the east. Due to the current layout of an existing dockland access road, two level crossings and a railway line to the neighbouring Celsa site, the alignment will require a high skew bridge to accommodate these.
Type of Contract Please select the type of contract for this procurement Works
Contract duration Contract duration 19 months
That's great news.
Found a public link to the details here: http://www.sell2wales.gov.uk/search/show/search_view.aspx?ID=JUN036525.
It says 19 months to completion from the award of the contract, who knows it could be drivable by mid 2016.
This looks promising, although I won't get too excited as this isn't the full completion of the PDR - the Queensgate tunnels to the Ocean Way Roundabout is a length of about 1.2km of dual carriageway (although it will cut about 2km of 30mph single carriage ways off your journey and save you going down the Central Link, East Tyndall Street and Ocean Way)
Cautiously optimistic, although 19 months to complete - plus however long the tender stage runs for... Doubt we'll see any work before the end of next year.
Lets hope it also has decent cycle and pedestrian access like the Taff viaduct.
Tenders have to be in by the start of July - but heaven knows how long the evaluation phase will be. 19 months from exchange of contracts to completion seems fairly ambitious, but deliverable. We could possible see completion in late 2016.
The budget seems a little on the low side to me - £25 to £30 million. I know its just 1.2km, but I imagine it will require some quite complicated engineering.
Very good news. It seems to me that once this has been completed the pressure on Rover Way will be such that they'll have to move pretty quickly to complete the whole scheme.
Indeed. How do you think we should interpret this:
"The proposed works involve the provision of a dual carriageway between Queens Gate Roundabout to the Ocean Way Roundabout to the east. Due to the current layout of an existing dockland access road, two level crossings and a railway line to the neighbouring Celsa site, the alignment will require a high skew bridge to accommodate these."
Is it basically a single continuous bridge from one roundabout to the other? If so, then a connected pedestrian/cycle route like that over the Taff seems necessary as there seems little practical option for an alternative surface route. It should be quite easy to attach it to the existing decent provision around Pierhead Street. Roverway already has a designated shared use pathway (although it is no leisure cycle) and Ocean way is fine for cycling, and could easily have a shared use designation on the quite wide and underused pathways.
I think I would actually prefer if they put a footpath along roath dock road at surface level - if there was a choice.
Having walked over the flyover across the taff a few times, the noise from 4 lanes of high speed traffic is really not a pleasant experience.
However a footpath attached would certainly be better than nothing if a surface level path is not an option.
I wonder if they would alter the Welsh Coastal path route should a cycle/foot path be included with the development.
I've both walked and cycled the Taff viaduct several times. I agree to walk is functional but not great fun. It takes quite a while, it is noisy and you really notice the cars rush past. On a bike the same stretch is much less problematic, as you move much more quickly so it takes less time, and it just feels a more normal environment for a bike. I quite enjoy cycling over it as it is part of a pretty decent stretch of cycle network, until you get to the ISV where it becomes bitty.
There is a little bit of info about the PDR extension on the Welsh government website:
It does state one of the objectives as being:
Indeed, that's how it looks to me
I guess the yellow line is the cycle/pedestrian route. Perhaps it will be designed so that the ski ramp link could be added in a future phase when work is done around Rover Way area. This current version either puts a bottle neck at Queensgate roundabout or Ocean Way roundabout, and Queensgate is probably the better of the two to cope with it.
Bigger version of the pic here: http://wales.gov.uk/docs/det/publications/140627-eastern-bay-link-image.pdf
Yes, I guess that makes sense as Rover way can not currently handle the amount of traffic that could be directed that way with continuous flow.
I guess I'm just being impatient and want the council/WG to finish the PDR, rather than picking it up, doing another short section and putting it down for another few decades
So no completed flyover? Seems a waste as this will snarl traffic up and therefore negate some of the benefits. Seems the truism is true, not enough money to do it properly but more than enough to do it more than once.
CARDIFFWALESMAP - FORUM