Monday, 30 August 2021
Cambridgeshire County Council are conducting on-line survey about a series of cycling schemes as a continuation of the schemes funded by the government's Active Travel fund. There are about 20 schemes listed, mostly in Cambridge City but some schemes in the necklace villages and also a few in St Ives and St Neots.The survey has been extended to midnight on Wednesday 15 September 2021 and we would like to encourage more people to help support the best of these proposals by filling in the on-line survey here. We think the schemes that are selected to go ahead will be strongly influenced by the survey results.
The survey does not take long: you can choose to just answer just a few select questions. I encourage you to vote on the schemes that are strongly supported and are most important for you. You can only score the proposals on a 5-point scale from "Strongly support" to "Strongly oppose" so it is very quick to fill in the survey.
Our suggested responses and some brief comments on the individual Active Travel proposals are listed below. We strongly support some of the schemes but we also oppose some of the schemes. Some are more nuanced where we support the need for improvements but we think the proposals need to be revised and improved. The comments are added for explanation and do not form part of the questionnaire.
You can also read the Camcycle comments and analysis of these schemes here. Camcycle have also provided a detailed analysis of the individual schemes and we have added links to these detailed Camcycle analyses as part of our notes.
OUR SUGGESTED RESPONSES AND SOME BRIEF COMMENTS.
The different proposals are listed in the same order that they appear in the consultation questionnaire.
Arbury Road: Modal filter to block through traffic (Q2 in the on-line survey)
We strongly support this proposal.
Camcycle comments
We strongly support this proposal. This would be a transformative change and a big step to completing the transformation of Arbury Road. It is a key missing link to connect the recent new Arbury Road cycle lanes to Milton Road. Maximum benefit if it is combined with the proposed modal filter on Union Lane.
Barton Road Roundabout (Newnham Road/Fen Causeway): Changes to geometry. (Q3)
We strongly support this need for improvements in this location. But the proposed scheme is not good enough.
Camcycle comments
We strongly support the need for changes to the geometry to reduce traffic speeds. Good to reduce to single lane but we are concerned by the potential "pinch-point" for on-road cyclists travelling along Newnham Road from Newnham towards Silver Street and the reverse. The proposed layout would create a long stretch of narrowed carriageway where impatient motorists are likely to try and squeeze past a cyclist on the road.
We think it would be better to change to a compact geometry roundabout and to use the space to create a hard segregated cycle path in both directions around the roundabout. The cycle paths should provide cycle priority at the petrol station entry and exit and on the Fen Causeway arm (i.e. Fendon Road style of cycle priority roundabout).
Berkley Street and Montagu Street (St Neots): Option 1 modal filter or Option 2 junction changes. (Q4, Q5)
We strongly support Option 1. We do not support Option 2.
Camcycle comments
Chesterton Road/ Elizabeth Way roundabout. Small changes to geometry. (Q6)
Neutral to lukewarm support.
Camcycle comments
A large and busy roundabout that is currently very hostile for cyclists, so changes are welcome. But the changes do not really do enough to support the full range of cycle movements.
We would also like to see the scheme expanded to improve the E-W route for cyclists that avoids the roundabout by using the old Chesterton Road and the Toucan crossing on the southern arm of the roundabout. This route needs several improvements to make it the preferred E-W cycle route, including removal of the barriers at the crossing, wider access to the crossing and a wider section of shared use path at the eastern end of the old Chesterton Road to provide a segregated connection to Church Street.
Coldhams Lane. Option 1 modal filter on railway bridge or Option 2 modal filter near Brampton Road. (Q7, Q8)
We strongly support both options. Option 1 seems the better option.
Camcycle comments
We strongly support both options as a way to reduce the through traffic on Coldhams Lane and thus create a safer environment for cycling and walking. But ONLY if this does not compromise the restoration of the modal filter on Mill Road. This is an important relationship because we understand that Mill Road through traffic was partly displaced to Coldhams Lane. We think the Mill Road modal filter is more important than Coldhams Lane, but we would like to have both.
Option 1 seems the better option since HGV access to the industrial estate will have to approach from the south thus removing the requirement for a turning loop at Cromwell Road. But this option does not seem to take advantage of the closure by providing some protection for outbound cyclists to use the road bridge. The separate cycle bridge is not convenient to use for outbound cyclists as they have to cross the road twice - at both sides.
Option 2 might be better for the Chisholm Trail if the modal filter is combined with the Chisholm Trail crossing of Coldhams Lane close to Brampton Road. But Option 2 would require an additional modal filter on Brampton Road to prevent rat-running via Brampton Road and Cromwell Road. If Option 1 is adopted the Cromwell Road junction should be modified to provide an equally good protected crossing of Coldhams Lane to connect the Chisholm Trail into Cromwell Road.
We conclude that both Options are welcome, but either way the modal filter should be combined with a good protected crossing of Coldhams Lane to provide maximum benefit to the Chisholm Trail crossing of Coldhams Lane.
Church Street Chesterton: Modal filter to block through traffic. (Q9)
We strongly support this proposal.
Camcycle comments
We strongly support this proposal. This will provide a huge benefit on this cycle route.
East Road: Various improvements to improve cycle lanes. (Q10)
Neutral to lukewarm support.
Camcycle comments
The proposed improvements are rather modest given the available width. The scheme should reallocate more space to protected cycle lanes. And the proposal must also be combined with existing proposals for the central section to provide a continuous route.
We would really like to see this as part of a larger scheme to include major changes to the Newmarket Road roundabout (to remove the nasty underpasses) and to the Elizabeth Way bridge (to provide better protected cycle paths).
Mitchams Corner. Reallocation of road space to create more protected cycle lanes. (Q11)
We strongly support this need for improvements in this location. But the proposed scheme is not good enough.
Camcycle comments
We support the need for major changes to this complex junction to make it safer and more accessible for cyclists.
But the plans needs some changes to better support the full range of cycle movements on all arms. This includes:
1) Chesterton Road arm (west) needs improved cycle access from Chesterton Road. The cycle lane approach to the advanced stop box needs to be wider and there needs to be provision for cyclists to leave the road and to join the new cycle path on the inside of the gyratory. Provide a route via the signal crossing but also provide a dropped kerb to move directly from the road (the advanced stop box) to join the cycle path - this should be combined with an early green on the traffic lights.
2) Victoria Road arm needs to provide more width for a protected cycle lane to remove the pinch-point at the entry to the gyratory. Access to the central cycle path is also desirable via a new crossing.
3) Milton Road arm (west) needs better protection for the cycle lane heading out along Milton Road.
4) Milton Road arm (east) needs to support cyclists using the existing central route by crossing at the island.
5) Chesterton Road arm (east) needs to support cyclists heading west to cross diagonally to join the bidrectional cycle path. But must also support the on-road options for straight ahead and turning left.
6) Victoria Ave arm (south) needs to support N-S movements for cyclists leaving/joining the central cycle route.
Newmarket Road/ Barnwell Road roundabout. (Q12)
We do not support this scheme.
Camcycle comments
We do not support this scheme as it does not do enough to support cycling.
Change to the geometry are welcome but more significant changes are needed.
A short term simple change would be to add a new Toucan crossing on the western arm (Newmarket Rd west) to create a more direct route from the Barnwell Road cycle path into Wadloes Road.
Rustat Road. Modal filter to block through traffic. (Q13)
Camcycle comments
We strongly support this proposal.
Trumpington Street roundabouts. (Q14)
We strongly support this need for improvements in this location. But the proposed scheme is not good enough.
Camcycle comments
We support the need for improvement but this scheme is flawed and we think it should be significantly improved.
We would like to see all approaches reduced to a single lane and some other changes made to reduce conflicts.
There should also be at least one additional crossing to match the N-S desire line for pedestrians (e.g. a new Toucan crossing on Trumpington Road located halfway between the two roundabouts).
Union Lane: Modal filter to block through traffic. (Q15)
We strongly support this proposal.
Camcycle comments
We strongly support this proposal. This will make a big improvement to this route, especially if combined with the Arbury Road modal filter.
Vinery Road: Modal filter to block through traffic. (Q16)
We strongly support this proposal.
Camcycle comments
Dry Drayton/ Madingley. 1-way except cycles on two roads. (Q17, Q18)
Lukewarm support or Neutral.
Camcycle comments
Option 1 (between Dry Drayton and Madingley). We support this change but it must be combined with a speed limit reduction to 40mph to avoid dangerous speeding. It would be better to introduce a modal filter.
Option 2 (between Madingley and Coton). We support this change but it must be combined with a speed limit reduction to 40mph to avoid dangerous speeding. It would be better to introduce a modal filter.
Needingworth Road (St Ives). New shared use path. (Q19)
We strongly oppose this scheme. This is bad design.
Camcycle comments
We oppose this change - this is a deprecated approach and a better approach is needed.
The proposal of a shared foot/cycle path is impractical at peak times due to the large number of people walking & cycling to various schools & pre-schools that are on or just off Needingworth Rd.
We recommend that a modal filter is use to reduce traffic levels.
Station Road (Histon): Modal filter to block through traffic. (Q20)
We strongly support this proposal.
Camcycle comments
St Neots Road (Hardwick): Modal filter to block through traffic. (Q21)
We strongly support this proposal.
Camcycle comments
M11 Bridge Barton Road: New wider cycle path over bridge using existing nearside lane. (Q22)
We strongly support this proposal.
Camcycle comments
We strongly support this proposal. This replaces a narrow and dangerous path.
The crossing improvement on the slip road of the western roundabout is also welcome but does not go far enough. We think the cycle approaches should be realigned to provide better sightlines and widened to provide more waiting space. It would be better to move the kerb on both sides of the crossing (rather than just on the eastern side) and also to straighten the approach on both sides.
The crossing improvement on the NW arm of the Coton roundabout (Grantchester Road) is welcome - reducing the traffic to a single lane will reduce the dangers of this crossing where only 1 lane of traffic gives way to cyclists. Cars tend not to give way and hence it would be desirable to try and give more priority to crossing cycles.
We think the plans should also include an additional cycle crossing on the NE or SW arm of that Coton roundabout to make it easier to cross from Grantchester Rd (Coton) to Coton Rd (Grantchester). This will require reducing the width by changing to a single lane of traffic in both directions and providing a cycle refuge in the central island. It will also require a short section of cycle lane on both sides to connect to the crossing so that cyclists do not have to ride along the A603 nor cycle on the roundabout. This cycle path can use the space created by removing 1-lane of motor traffic.
Broadway (St Ives). Better cycle lanes and reduction of parking. (Q23)
Neutral. It is not clear what changes are being proposed.
Camcycle comments
Neutral position due to lack of details. Could be worthwhile if it deals with the car parking problems.
The current arrangement causes problems mainly as a result of vehicles circling to find a parking space and double parking if there is no space. It is hard to see how reducing the number of parking spaces will help unless this is combined with segregated cycle paths to prevent cars from waiting or parking on the path.
We would like to see parking completely removed from one side to provide space for segregated cycle paths.