As the Market Town of the Future exhibition ends, we consider the main features of The Masterplan, starting today with the possibilities for St Peter’s Square. We've covered The Square almost every year since we started this Blog. For further reading, look in 2006 and 2007 and 2008 and 2009 and 2010.
Of the six areas upon which the Caerdydd/Cardiff students concentrated, possible changes to St Peter's Square are the most important. It's not just me saying that. Trawl the exhibition response questionnaires and this is the one facet of The Masterplan that has engaged people the most, indeed where change is expected. That's because it's the one proposal most likely to be ranked usually first or otherwise second by respondents.
The essence of the proposal is that the market should be "given back" to the people as pedestrian space, and there should be a better balance between walking and traffic. Here, we tend to agree. The top of town, our centrepiece, indeed our unique centrepiece, is strewn with traffic, moving and parked. The exhibition calls St Peter's Square "blighted by the dominance of the car". It says there's no "reward" for climbing the hill to St Peter's Square, when finding a roundabout and disconnected buildings, owing to the road layout.
Not that everyone shares this viewpoint. Some comments in the exhibition book question whether the removal of traffic and parking would be a good thing. Fewer parking spaces equate to fewer people in town, especially those who are unable to walk. Should we weaken footfall still further?
It's here that we need to balance views. The motoring lobby is no doubt a strong one, given that so many of us in Rhuthun/Ruthin own and run cars. Shops will no doubt fear that reduced parking will affect their businesses. The Square is on a hill and those who cannot easily walk may suffer if parking's removed.
Is this something that just has to be overcome? Do we simply need to take a leap, a measured risk? How else will be put the heart back into Rhuthun? Remember, parking on the Square is limited to just seven legal spaces plus lawful accommodation around its periphery for no more than about ten more. Bus users who let's face it tend to be older already have no real choice and they must walk up form Market Street. It *can* be done.
The proposal is to enhance and extend the space, offering something flexible and adaptable. It envisages seating to take in the views beyond Clwyd Street. The space becomes suitable for a range of activities, including a market. It wasn't that long ago that St Peter's Square was known as the Market Place.
The scheme doesn't rule traffic out, it simply tries to level the playing field. In all honesty, we aren't sure how or whether this will work, this mix of pedestrian priority & calmed traffic. Deliveries will need to be maintained and the scheme envisages obstacles and surfaces that introduce traffic "uncertainty". This may force through traffic out of the town and along Park Road where, let's face it, it should be.
While supporting this concept as the No. 1 priority, I do have reservations that a carless Square might actually look vacant, devoid of activity and abandoned. It's again a matter of balancing views. The benefits of such a major shift of emphasis outweigh the disadvantages.
Lastly, one of Tesco's big strengths is adjacent parking. Losing parking on The Square might discourage people in town. But the limited Square parking we currently enjoy hardly competes at all with Tesco's own. The town cannot simply offer a parking free-for-all as a means of competing with its new neighbour and whatever happens, we will never be able to provide anything like as much. If you accept this is the case, the idea of a carless or car-reduced Square is a good one. It offers something akin to the antithesis of Tesco.
What do you think?
Of the six areas upon which the Caerdydd/Cardiff students concentrated, possible changes to St Peter's Square are the most important. It's not just me saying that. Trawl the exhibition response questionnaires and this is the one facet of The Masterplan that has engaged people the most, indeed where change is expected. That's because it's the one proposal most likely to be ranked usually first or otherwise second by respondents.The essence of the proposal is that the market should be "given back" to the people as pedestrian space, and there should be a better balance between walking and traffic. Here, we tend to agree. The top of town, our centrepiece, indeed our unique centrepiece, is strewn with traffic, moving and parked. The exhibition calls St Peter's Square "blighted by the dominance of the car". It says there's no "reward" for climbing the hill to St Peter's Square, when finding a roundabout and disconnected buildings, owing to the road layout.
Not that everyone shares this viewpoint. Some comments in the exhibition book question whether the removal of traffic and parking would be a good thing. Fewer parking spaces equate to fewer people in town, especially those who are unable to walk. Should we weaken footfall still further?It's here that we need to balance views. The motoring lobby is no doubt a strong one, given that so many of us in Rhuthun/Ruthin own and run cars. Shops will no doubt fear that reduced parking will affect their businesses. The Square is on a hill and those who cannot easily walk may suffer if parking's removed.
Is this something that just has to be overcome? Do we simply need to take a leap, a measured risk? How else will be put the heart back into Rhuthun? Remember, parking on the Square is limited to just seven legal spaces plus lawful accommodation around its periphery for no more than about ten more. Bus users who let's face it tend to be older already have no real choice and they must walk up form Market Street. It *can* be done.The proposal is to enhance and extend the space, offering something flexible and adaptable. It envisages seating to take in the views beyond Clwyd Street. The space becomes suitable for a range of activities, including a market. It wasn't that long ago that St Peter's Square was known as the Market Place.
The scheme doesn't rule traffic out, it simply tries to level the playing field. In all honesty, we aren't sure how or whether this will work, this mix of pedestrian priority & calmed traffic. Deliveries will need to be maintained and the scheme envisages obstacles and surfaces that introduce traffic "uncertainty". This may force through traffic out of the town and along Park Road where, let's face it, it should be.
While supporting this concept as the No. 1 priority, I do have reservations that a carless Square might actually look vacant, devoid of activity and abandoned. It's again a matter of balancing views. The benefits of such a major shift of emphasis outweigh the disadvantages.Lastly, one of Tesco's big strengths is adjacent parking. Losing parking on The Square might discourage people in town. But the limited Square parking we currently enjoy hardly competes at all with Tesco's own. The town cannot simply offer a parking free-for-all as a means of competing with its new neighbour and whatever happens, we will never be able to provide anything like as much. If you accept this is the case, the idea of a carless or car-reduced Square is a good one. It offers something akin to the antithesis of Tesco.
What do you think?