Monday, 28 October 2019
The Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP) has started another public consultation on the latest portion of the 'Cambridge South East Transport - Better Public Transport' project.
GCP describe the aim of the overall project as "..to provide better public transport, walking and cycling options for those who travel in the A1307 and A1301 area, improving journey times and linking communities and employment sites in the area south east of Cambridge".
An earlier consultation proposed improvements to the A1307 (the main road from Cambridge to Linton and Haverhill) and the Linton Greenway.
This latest consultation proposes a new bus-only road that would start at the Cambridge Biomedical Campus (which includes Addenbrooke's Hospital) and connect to a new park and ride site beside the A11, between the A1307 and A505. This consultation is concerned with three alternative locations for the park and ride site, and five alternative routes for the new bus-only road.
Summary of proposals (click for larger version)
Image from the
consultation leaflet
See further down this page for maps of each P&R option
This consultation is of interest to cyclists because the proposals include a new shared-use path alongside the new bus road for use by cyclists, walkers and horseriders. We think this has the potential to be a useful and attractive new cycle route. If it was constructed to a high standard, we think this new path will be comparable to the St Ives Greenway (the busway cycle path) and we therefore strongly support this element. We think there is a need for a high quality cycle route between Granta Park (a large business park south of Abington) and Cambridge. We think this path should be included in the proposed network of greenways.
We take a neutral view on the bus road and park and ride elements in these proposals. We understand that the GCP want to improve public transport to help to reduce congestion on local roads, but we also understand that these proposals will be expensive and will require significant new construction in the green belt. We would like to see the cycle path constructed anyway – with or without the bus road – but we realise that this cycle path will probably only be constructed as part of a new bus road.
We at CTC Cambridge have prepared an analysis of the proposals and we invite you to use these comments to inform your own consultation response. You can read our detailed analysis below. The deadline for sending comments to the GCP is
4th November 2019, so you will need to act quickly if you want to take part.
We plan to send our analysis to the GCP as our response, so if you agree or disagree with the comments we make below, or think we have missed anything, please do let us know by sending an email to our campaigning team at campaigning@ctccambridge.org.uk. We'd welcome your views, but remember the short deadline.
Details of the consultation on the GCP website
Consultation Leaflet (pdf)
Consultation questionnaire: online version, pdf version
General comments
The following is the proposed CTC Cambridge response to the Cambridge South East Transport - Better Public Transport Project Public Consultation 2019. Our response is primarily concerned with the details of the shared-use path that is proposed to be constructed alongside the new bus road.
We strongly support the proposal to build a new shared-use path for cyclists and walkers alongside this new public transport route. We think this path will be strongly welcomed by people cycling to work, to school, to the shops or for leisure. We think that a range of cycle journeys will be enabled by this new attractive and safe route. We think it is essential that the path is built to high standard because this is a key factor in achieving a high level of use by enabling more people to cycle and to cycle further. We think a high quality car-free route has the potential to replicate the success of the cycle path alongside the St Ives busway. In this same spirit we think this new path should be seen as a new greenway – it should be designed as part of the planned network of greenways.
We therefore think
the path should be constructed with a width of 4m (instead of the 3m width proposed) to support high levels of use by cyclists. We think the path alongside the St Ives busway demonstrates the importance of providing this extra width. Most of the St Ives path is around 4m wide and we think these wide sections work well with minimal conflicts between cyclists and pedestrians. Narrower sections create more conflicts and should be avoided.
We also think
the path should include an additional branch that diverges from the bus road if necessary to provide a direct desire-line cycle connection to Granta Park. In this context, we have a preference for the black, pink or purple routes as these would automatically provide this wanted direct cycle connection to Granta Park. If the blue or brown route is chosen we strongly recommend that the plans include a separate branch of cycle path to provide a direct cycle path to Granta Park – this branch of cycle path should follow the line of the pink or black route to Granta Park.
We want to emphasise the importance of creating this direct cycle connection to Granta Park for different users. Firstly, and most obviously, it is important to provide a convenient and direct (desire-line) cycle route for commuters to and from Granta Park. Secondly, it will provide the first section of a cycle route to Hildersham and to Linton via Granta Park and Pampisford Road. In both cases cyclists want a direct cycle route – it would not be acceptable for this connection to be an indirect dog-leg route (e.g. a dog-leg via park and ride site B).
In the longer term, this new 'greenway' cycle route to Granta Park has the potential to be extended with further improvements beyond Granta Park. An off-road cycle path could be constructed along Pampisford Road – possibly as part of a bus road extension, or perhaps using the old rail line – to provide an improved off-road cycle connection from Granta Park to the Hildersham/A1307 crossing. At the A1307 there is an existing proposal (as part of the Linton Greenway) to build a new toucan crossing of the A1307 and this crossing would also be needed to complete this southern route. At the Hildersham junction this southern route can then connect to an improved section of cycle path alongside the A1307 to complete the route to Linton Village College and to Linton.
Impact on the Sawston Greenway
We note with concern that the proposed route overlaps the route of the Sawston Greenway for the section close to the Biomedical Campus. This raises a series of important considerations.
Firstly, this overlapping section of the route must be reflected in the design of the shared use path. We assume that this first section will use the same shared use path for both routes - we think this would be a sensible arrangement. If the two routes are combined it means that the path will need to be increased in width (i.e. wider than 4m) for the whole of this common section to accommodate the combined flow of the existing DNA path and the new path. It is particularly important to provide significant extra width at the junction (where the two paths split) so that cyclists and pedestrians on the two paths can merge and split safely.
We think that the cycle connections into and across the Biomedical Campus need to be significantly improved to provide the feeder connections for these two shared use paths. This requires all the connecting cycle paths to be widened (the paths connecting to Francis Crick Avenue and to Dame Mary Archer Way). And there is a need for better routes into and across the Biomedical Campus.
Second, we observe that this overlap with the Sawston Greenway means that the best arrangement is for the shared use path to be located on the southern side of the new bus road. This arrangement is consistent with the preferred arrangement identified in our specific comments below.
We are particularly concerned to ensure that this overlapping of the two routes does not have a negative impact by delaying any improvements to the existing DNA path between the Biomedical Campus and Granham's Road. We think that this complete section of the existing DNA path needs to be widened to at least 4m as a high priority project. We also think that lighting should be added to this section. We think it is important to ensure that these early-stage proposals for a new bus road do not cause any further delay to these much needed improvements to the existing DNA path.
We want to emphasise the importance of making improvements to the existing DNA path to handle the existing high levels of use on this path. We argue that these improvements are needed urgently to address serious safety concerns: the high levels of use cause dangerous conflicts on the narrow path and there have been serious accidents on this section of path. Higher levels of use are expected as the Biomedical Campus expands and these risks can only increase. These improvements must not be delayed.
Specific comments on each park and ride option
Park and ride site A
If park and ride site A is chosen, the cycle path can follow the proposed purple route to the edge of the site. But we think an extra section of new path should be added at the park and ride site to provide a more direct connection to Granta Park. We would suggest adding a new path along the southern boundary of the site to provide a more direct connection between the two proposed arms of the path. This more direct path is needed to avoid requiring all cyclists to Granta Park to take a dog-leg diversion through the P&R site. Cycle paths into the park and ride site are still needed on both sides but this direct desire-line 'bypass' is also needed.
Park and ride site B
If park and ride site B is chosen, we have a strong preference for the pink route because this route will make it easy to provide a direct cycle path connection between Cambridge and Granta Park by combining the line of the pink route together with a direct spur to Granta Park. We think it is important that this direct cycle route is still provided even if the brown route is chosen for the bus road. We are concerned that the brown route could require all Granta Park cyclists to divert via park and ride site B and we think the resulting indirect cycle route would make the route much less attractive for cyclists that are not using the park and ride. To be clear, if the brown route is chosen we understand that the plans will include a cycle path between Granta Park and park and ride site B via Newmarket Roadbut we think that this indirect park and ride connection is not an acceptable substitute for the direct connection that is possible with the pink route. Moreover, we think that this cycle path connection between Granta Park and park and ride site B should not use Newmarket Road anyway because this would require cyclists to use the existing sub-standard footbridge to cross the A11 to access the park and ride site. Instead, we think it would be better for this connection to follow the line of the pink route and thereby avoiding the footbridge. This is why we have a strong preference for the pink route.
Park and ride site C
If park and ride site C is chosen, we have a strong preference for the black route because this route will allow a direct cycle path connection between Cambridge and Granta Park by combining the line of the black route together with a direct spur to Granta Park. Again, we think it is important that this direct cycle route is still provided even if the blue route is chosen for the bus road. We are again concerned that the blue route could require all Granta Park cyclists to divert via park and ride site C and this would again make the cycle path much less attractive for cyclists who are not using the park and ride. If the blue route is chosen we understand that the plans include a proposed cycle path along Newmarket Road. We agree that this is a good route for the
connection between Granta Park and park and ride site C, but we still have a strong preference for using the black route to provide a direct route between Granta Park and Cambridge.
Lastly, if park and ride site C is chosen, we think the existing cycle path between Babraham and Abington should be rerouted to replace the existing footbridge with a more accessible cycle crossing of the A11 using the new bus road bridge. The drawing for park and ride option C appears to show that this cycle path is routed over the new bus bridge for the blue route, but the drawing does not show a similar rerouting of the cycle path for the black route. We think the cycle path should be rerouted to use the new bridge in both cases. We prefer the black route as detailed above, but it is important that the black route includes a new (rerouted) cycle crossing of the A11 using the new bus bridge.
Specific comments on the details of the path design
On the details of the proposed designs we have several detailed comments.
First, we are disappointed by the proposed width of the cycle path at 3m. We note that the drawings show a 2m verge between the bus road and the cycleway so there is no need to restrict the width to 3m. We think 4m tarmac and 1m spacing is a better arrangement. A 4m width would reduce conflicts at busy times and creates a better experience for both cyclists and pedestrians.
Second, we think the design should place the cycle path on the south side of the bus road because this arrangement will make it easier to include additional cycle and pedestrian access connections from Shelford, Stapleford and Sawston. The consultation implies that the only connection points will be at the road crossings, but we think this is an unnecessary restriction. We would like the plans to include additional connections for cyclists and pedestrians by adding shared use paths to connect more directly to nearby residential areas and industrial areas. As specific examples, we would like to see a direct connection to the proposed new football stadium and direct connections to housing (especially any new developments) on the western side of Sawston. Conveniently this preference is aligned to our earlier point – locating the cycle path on the south side is also preferred to allow for the wanted spur connection to Granta Park.
Third, we think the road crossings - where the new cycle path crosses roads - need to be signal controlled crossings (toucans) and must be designed using good cycle route practice. Good practice means no awkward turns, dropped kerbs in the right place and loop detectors for cycles. Equally, the cycle path should remain on the same (south) side for the complete route, and not swap from side to side at the road crossings. We think the road crossings on the St Ives busway were poorly designed for cyclists and we want to ensure that better designs are used for this new route.
Fourth, we think the proposed layout of the parking at the bus stops should be reversed because the layout that is illustrated is likely to cause conflict between the cycle path users and the car park users. The drawings in the leaflet show the cycle path and the parking both on the same side of the bus road at the stops. We think it would be much better to reposition the car parking on the opposite side to the cycle path (i.e. locate the parking on the northern side of the bus road) so that the pedestrian movements between the bus stop and the car park do not cross the cycle path. This would be similar to the design of the St Ives busway where the parking at St Ives and at Longstanton is on the opposite side to the cycle path and we think this arrangement works well.
Lastly, we also think the bus road should include another intermediate stop for the western side of Sawston. When combined with the extra access points as detailed above, this would be a more convenient stop for people walking and cycling from the western side of Sawston. This intermediate stops would not need to have any parking for motor vehicles: it could be similar to the Fen Drayton lakes stop on the St Ives busway.