Skip navigation

Newsletter 39 (December 2001 - January 2002)

Cover image

Before and after: four bollards removed so that pedestrians and cyclists both have enough space

(Click on image for a larger version)

View as:    Individual sections   |   One big page  |   PDF file [1000 KB PDF]

Contents:

^ Top

Emmanuel Road area

A mixed bag of measures in and around Emmanuel Road has been approved by councillors. Here are the main changes that affect cyclists.

New cycle route

Image as described adjacent
Maid's Causeway to King Street: where the new cycle route will go

A new cycle route is going to be constructed between Midsummer Common and Short Street/King Street. Cyclists will be able to leave Midsummer Common using the existing cattle grid nearest to the Four Lamps roundabout and then cross the three lanes of Maid's Causeway on a raised ramp (but without the assistance of traffic signals). They will then turn right and ride on the Maid's Causeway pavement to the corner opposite the end of King Street, where they will either turn left into Short Street or wait for a gap in the traffic before crossing over into King Street. The pavement will be extended on this corner, creating a possible 'pinch point' for cyclists on the road, and the crossing to King Street will be reconstructed, probably replacing the present flush surfaces with low kerbs.

The resulting cycle route may be useful to some cyclists wishing to get from Midsummer Common to King Street without using the Four Lamps roundabout. However, cyclists heading for Jesus Lane will still need to use the roundabout, and those heading for Emmanuel Road and Drummer Street would be much better advised to use the nearby toucan crossing into Fair Street.

In addition, a low ramp is to be constructed across the entrance to Short Street. The idea is to discourage unauthorised motorists from entering the area and approaching the rising bollards on Emmanuel Road.

New pinch point threat

A new pedestrian crossing point is to be installed across Drummer Street near to the junction with Emmanuel Road. With a taxi rank on one side of this road and several coach stops on the other, this congested location is difficult for both cyclists and pedestrians. Council officers proposed a zebra crossing with build-outs on both sides, despite our having expressed strong objection to this during consultation. In the event, councillors rejected this and sent the plans back to the officers to think again. We do not know what the new plans will propose; the threat of a build-out on at least one side of the road here remains.

^ Top

Third party insurance

I am sorry to report that the CTC has told us, at only four weeks notice, that the third-party insurance rates that we pay to them (for of those of you who opt for it) annually are to more than treble. In addition they will impose a £250 excess. That means they will deduct £250 from any claim, and of course minor incidents which cost less than this are not covered.

This puts us in a financial quandary. We collect from you when you join or renew throughout the year. We charge a small contingency to cover increases and administration. But this doesn't cover anything like the increase they are demanding. This means that if we cannot find an alternative in time, we may have to suspend third party insurance from 29 November 2001. We'll write directly to those of you affected when the position becomes clearer.

If we do have to continue with the CTC scheme, we will have to charge £11 or more per person. Though the existing charge is good value, a new fee of this size would be particularly regrettable for households. We would also have to ask you for a top up for the current year. Not to do that would cost the Campaign more then £2,000, which we clearly cannot afford. Of course we will refund any money you have already paid us for insurance after November, if we cannot continue to offer the insurance at all or you choose not to continue with the increased premium.

We are very sorry this has happened, but I am afraid it is completely out of our control. As well as the individual protection, it is important to us collectively to be able to offer this service because it deflects the motorists' hoary chestnut 'we have to pay insurance, but you don't so you don't deserve any respect from us.'

David Earl

^ Top

Now you can fax us too

Cambridge Cycling Campaign's new phone number - (01223) 690718 - is now fully working. We can now receive faxes as well as voice messages on that number. The system is really quite clever - we receive both voice messages and faxes by e-mail within a few seconds of them arriving, and there's no physical phone involved at all.

Also, just a reminder that our email address also changed at the beginning of October. It is now contact@camcycle.org.uk. In order to avoid junk mail, which was becoming overwhelming, our mail is now filtered and as a result we no longer accept messages blind-copied to us.

David Earl

^ Top

No General Meeting in January

All of the Campaign's policy formation, and much of our decision-making, takes place at monthly General Meetings. These are usually held on the first Tuesday of each month, at the Friends' Meeting House on Jesus Lane, and members are warmly encouraged to come along. The meeting starts at 8  pm, with refreshments available from 7.30  pm.

In the six or so years that the Campaign has existed, I think we've only ever missed or delayed two meetings: one because of bonfire night falling on a Tuesday, and the other because Sustrans scheduled an event in Cambridge on a first Tuesday.

However, 2002 is going prove more troublesome, because Tuesday 1 January and Tuesday 4 June are Bank Holidays (and the Friends' Meeting House is unavailable), and Tuesday 5 November is bonfire night. We have therefore decided not to hold a General Meeting in January 2002. Suggestions for an alternative venue on 4 June are welcome.

Clare Macrae

^ Top

Christmas gathering

Winter draws on, so get your winter drawers on, as the old saying goes.

As Christmas approaches we'd like to make our regular social gathering at CB2 (5-7 Norfolk Street) on Monday 17 December a bit of a festive get-together. For those of you who haven't joined us there yet, it's a pleasantly relaxed cafe which does good food and drink, of the alcoholic persuasion and not. You can eat, drink and pay as much as you like; just turn up from 7 pm with your happy face on.

Tim Burford

^ Top

Coldham's Lane bridge - a pale grey elephant

In the last Newsletter we told you what we had said about the cycle- and foot bridge proposed next to the existing bridge taking Coldham's Lane across the railway. I am very sorry to say that the decision makers ignored all the main points we made. I hesitate to call the result a white elephant. Let us say, a very light grey elephant! What a sad waste of over a million pounds. The extent to which our criticisms of this scheme were taken so lightly has convinced us that we need to think again about how we communicate with the County Council, discussed in Decisions, decisions in this newsletter.

Image as described adjacent
Councillors were placated after being told cyclists could legally use this inadequate pavement. In fact, the signing shows that shared-use ends 3 m short of the roundabout that needs to be avoided.

Our four main points, which we have been making since the scheme was made public in the summer, are:

County Council officers ruled out all discussion about the bridge's structure and location because it had already been decided behind closed doors. It will be at least a metre narrower than the bridge at the station.

They proposed that eastbound cyclists cross and re-cross the road to use the bridge, waiting for traffic lights at both. Councillors have now approved this. Will the lights give any sort of priority to bikes? You must be joking!

They made no proposals at all regarding access to and exit from the Beehive Centre. This could mean a cyclist wanting to go from the Beehive Centre to Coldham's Common (say) would have to first turn right at the roundabout, then wait for signals to cross back over the road again, then cross back over at the other side of the bridge. They completely ignored our representations about replacing the roundabout with traffic signals.

'Ungrateful' cyclists continuing to use the more convenient old bridge will be sworn at and physically intimidated by drivers.

They did take on board a minor point about how to cross over at the Coldham's Common end, but even messed that up. Representations from a councillor (thank you!) have now corrected that.

At the joint committee of City and County councils that decided the outcome, councillors seemed to agree with many of the criticisms that we had made. 'It's not very good really' seemed to be the gist of the discussion. Nevertheless, they voted it through anyway, rather than telling officers to go back and come up with something better. 'Something is better than nothing' seemed to be the order of the day - though a delay to reconsider is not the same as abandoning the scheme. The bridge does bring undoubted benefit for pedestrians.

In passing the proposal councillors were also partly persuaded by one argument put by a County Council officer: that access to the Beehive would be provided after all by an 'existing' shared-use pavement round the corner by the roundabout. But this shared-use pavement doesn't actually exist: the existing shared-use stops about three metres short of the roundabout that needs to be avoided.

Obviously, the shared-use pavement could be extended. But this misses the point. A one metre wide footpath alongside a shopping centre is grossly unsuitable for two-way cycling. There is obviously room to do much better, over, for example, the absence of a proper crossing point at the busy shopping centre entrance. We will try to get the details of this scheme reconsidered by the Committee.

What a sad waste of over a million pounds.

So we are now left with plans for a very expensive - but mediocre - bridge which is almost useless when heading away from Newmarket Road and with inadequate access from the Beehive Centre. Many cyclists who might have used a better alternative will now continue to use the existing bridge. They will be sworn at and physically intimidated by drivers because they aren't using the new bridge, and they will be labelled 'ungrateful' because they vote with their pedals by taking the more convenient route.

David Earl

^ Top

Parker's Piece

Parker's Piece path after resurfacing

The pedestrian- and cycle-path from Mill Road to Regent Street has been resurfaced in red, at last obliterating a confusing central white line that was left over from a long-abandoned scheme to segregate cycles and pedestrians. The result is a noticeable improvement on the previous pot-holed surface, but because this was a cheap and cheerful 'slurry seal' and not a full resurface, the result is still quite bumpy. This is one of the busiest cycle paths in Cambridge, and deserves better.


Path after half was resurfaced

We very nearly ended up with a cycle path of half this width. The contractors originally surfaced only one side of the path, and redrew the central white line. Fortunately, when we pointed this out to the City Council, they issued fresh instructions to the contractors and the red surface was extended to cover the whole path and the offending white line. The other diagonal across Parker's Piece will not be resurfaced; not enough money, we have been told.


^ Top

Decisions, decisions

We need to reconsider both how we tell our local Councils what we think and how we arrive at our views. Far too often our criticisms or suggestions are sidelined before they reach councillors, especially County Councillors.

Although occasionally we can be unequivocally enthusiastic, time after time we see road schemes and cycle facilities being constructed which are of disappointingly low quality, mediocre, make no difference, or are entirely detrimental to cyclists. The last year has seen a rash of these. For example, a shared-use path alongside the airport on Newmarket Road, rebuilt at high cost, made no significant improvement. Or consider the cycle lane on Trumpington Road that was built too close to the parking bays, or the continued obsession with pavement build-outs.

The extent to which our representations about Coldham's Lane bridge (see separate article) have been comprehensively ignored, is breathtaking. This is supposed to be a major scheme, specifically for the benefit of cyclists. The dismissal of our formal objection to the recent build-out on Queen's Road, (see article) simply because of the form of words we used in our letter, was outrageous. Sometimes, we encounter a 'can't do' attitude that actively seeks out reasons why something can't be done, rather than how it might be possible.

Strengthening campaigning

These, and other recent absurdities, are making us think carefully about the way in which we communicate with (especially) the County Council. For example, simply writing letters in response to consultations is not having the desired effect. Of course this is still essential, but we need to find ways to make our campaigning more effective.

'Can't do' attitudes actively seek reasons why something can't be done, rather than how it might be possible.

In responding to consultations, we are often under tight time pressure. Nevertheless, we think we can strengthen our campaigning activities by involving more of you in discussions about the streets and areas in which you have a particular interest. Whilst we know your home addresses, it's hard to know the areas you regularly travel through. We propose to ask you shortly. We are also considering how we can help you support our campaigning by backing up our formal responses with your own individual ones.

At the same time, we are aware that there is a wide range of opinions amongst cyclists, whether Campaign members or not, about what is desirable and what is not. This often reflects the experience and confidence of the cyclist - for example, whether roundabouts are a problem - and the varying weight we each place on 'better' (more convenient) versus 'safer' (or at least perceived safer) cycling.

We will be including a wide-ranging questionnaire in the next newsletter. A motion at this year's AGM also specifically asked us to find out about your experiences of harassment on the road.

Developing strategy

Whenever time allows we bring details of consultations to our monthly meetings which, as you all know, are on the first Tuesday of each month at the Friends Meeting House in Jesus Lane. More formal motions can be proposed and debated at the AGM. We have also held several 'strategy days' where we have looked at our general direction and focus. It is too easy to always be involved in the minutiae of particular schemes while neglecting bigger aims and objectives as, for example, expressed in the Campaign's manifesto.

We aren't the only ones under time pressure. Councillors also have an extraordinarily difficult job on the Area Joint Committee that takes most of the decisions that affect us. For example, the agenda for the most recent meeting ran to more than 120 pages, and councillors received it a mere five days before the meeting. In a four-hour meeting, there was a score of items that called for detailed, informed decisions. Councillors are volunteers too, and it is hard to see how they can do a conscientious job under this kind of pressure. We can understand why they often feel obliged to rubber-stamp decisions made by officers.

David Earl

^ Top

Queen's Road

Buildout on Queen's Road

Newsletter 38 reported that yet another buildout was proposed for Queen's Road, at a new pelican near Clare College. This has now been installed, and is as hazardous to cyclists as we feared, especially at those times when there are few parked cars. When this crossing was first announced, we wrote to the County Council supporting the crossing but opposing the buildout. In a disgraceful abuse of authority, County Council officers decided that because we had not formally objected to the crossing itself our letter did not constitute an objection and so would be disregarded. Apparently if we had objected to the crossing the Council would have been legally obliged to consider our views.

^ Top

Houses, houses everywhere

David Earl takes a personal wander by bike through the developments that may happen around our city in the next twenty years.

We can be pretty certain that 'Greater Cambridge' is going to get bigger. The ethos of limiting growth around the city has been discarded, and it is now more a matter of 'where' and 'when' rather than 'if'. What does this have to do with cycling? I think it has a lot to do with it. Firstly, to what extent will new communities and new places of work be conducive to cycling, and to what extent will newcomers want to cycle? And secondly, will people already cycling want to continue in the face of increased pressure on city road space from the larger number of people?

It's easy to automatically assume that all the new housing is needed because of newcomers moving to the area, but the County Council says this is not the case. Less than a third is for in-migration. The remainder is because people are living longer, and because we all prefer to live in smaller household units. But builders still seem to want to build large, profitable houses.

Two big new residential areas are competing for acceptance, though who knows, we may end up with both: the large area east of the A14 near Oakington, which over time might end up as large as half the size of today's Cambridge; expansion of the City north and east of Cherry Hinton using the airport and land between it and the A14, swallowing Teversham, and linking into Fulbourn. This latter option is the City Council's preference. Cambourne, to Cambridge's west, will be South Cambridgeshire's largest village when complete.

Nevertheless, it could well be the case that newcomers are less likely to cycle than people who have absorbed the city's cycling culture. Will they be reluctant to use public transport too? A recent advert for NTL staff at their offices on a big new business park near Waterbeach sums it up: 'plenty of car parking, no need to rely on unreliable public transport'. (Actually, you probably couldn't if you wanted to, as there is hardly any public transport to their location!)

A new settlement at Oakington might be big enough to sustain internal cycling, it could be designed for this from the outset. But planners please note - Groningen would be a much better model for this than Milton Keynes' abysmal cycleways. However, in general people no longer live close to where they work. Oakington is too far from central and southern Cambridge for most people to consider cycling (though perhaps not from northern Cambridge and the science park, especially if connected alongside a public transport link that will almost certainly be built on the old St Ives line). And the formidable barrier of the A14 lies between it and most other destinations.

Eastern Cambridge would be much more suitable for cycling connections with the rest of the city. But would it result in some of the Marshall's workforce who currently cycle having to use cars to get to the new site, wherever that might end up (if it is prepared to move at all, that is)? New development here is also amenable to building in cycling from day one. I think we should be talking about things like home zones, streets engineered for people not just cars, links between otherwise dead-ends, and connections to the city. Cycleways come low down on my shopping list of cycle friendly infrastructure. If you do have them, Dutch style is best because then the cyclist doesn't play second fiddle to the car.

Even if some people, old and new, can be bullied, persuaded or bribed to use public transport or cycle, there will undoubtedly be more traffic arising from the hugely increased population criss-crossing the City and South Cambridgeshire. This makes cycling a less attractive proposition for those who have never tried. It may also cause more existing cyclists to give up. Cycle paths may offer an alternative for some, but there isn't room to put them everywhere. And for many cyclists this is as unwelcome a prospect as the harassment and difficulties created by extra traffic.

On a more positive note, new development means new money, and developers will be required to provide community infrastructure. Both non-residential and residential development will probably have to fund transport infrastructure over quite a wide area around their sites.

There are numerous non-residential proposals. Huge western expansion of the University of Cambridge is already well under way. In the longer term, the University also wants to expand south of Huntingdon Road near the city boundary. In the south, Addenbrooke's has major expansion plans for the area south of Long Road.

This has the potential for achieving a lot, or it could be wasted on fussy, minimum vision projects that don't even maintain the status quo. Could we see a broad, smooth, uninterrupted, north-south corridor opened up for cyclists alongside the railway (as in our Chisholm Trail proposal) funded on the back of such schemes? Or might we get a narrow, fenced-in track, with a bridge over the river that has to be walked, and pelican crossings at every intersecting road, because they have put most of the money into a guided busway?

Finally, will people who have been here for years have to continue to suffer the inadequacies of the present roads and public transport, whilst the new occupiers get all the goodies? For example, I notice that the station nominally put in Fulbourn is in the new development, serving the existing population least well. The guided bus would link the new Oakington and nearby villages to Cambridge. But why shouldn't Sawston or Burwell have equally good access?

If the only infrastructure investment is for connecting up the new houses or offices, then the existing Cambridge cycling population will have to endure the increased, city-wide traffic. It is the users of the new developments and their immediate neighbours who will get the best deal and, arguably, they are the least likely to make good use of it. There's a strong case, in my opinion, for saying that the impact of development on this scale is so large that it affects the whole area. Therefore money available to reduce the impact should be applied anywhere in and around the city.

If handled well, new development on this scale has the prospect to help cyclists and promote cycling; handled badly, it could destroy Cambridge's cycling culture entirely. Either way, I think the Cambridge of twenty years' time will feel rather unlike today's city.

David Earl

^ Top

Madingley Road bus lane

Councillors on the Cambridge Environment and Transport Area Joint Committee have approved the construction of a short length of bus and cycle lane on Madingley Road on the city-bound approach to the M11 junction. The aim of this lane is to allow buses to bypass the M11 signals and its queue of morning, peak-time traffic.

The start of the bus lane will be a very narrow 3 m before widening to a more acceptable 4.5 m. In this wider section, cyclists and buses will be sharing a segregated lane with a kerb on both sides, though a 1.5 m advisory cycle lane marking should help to reduce conflict.

Westbound cyclists will see no change other than a general narrowing of the carriageway and a possible pinch point at the M11 signals. The speed limit here is 60 mph. The existing pavement cycleway will also be widened and the vegetation that often obstructs it will be cut back.

Second bus lane deferred

A second section of bus and cycle lane is proposed for further along Madingley Road. This would start shortly before Conduit Head Road and continue until just past Madingley Rise. The road here is very wide (it was at one time a four-lane dual carriageway). Space for the lane will be created mainly by removing an existing area of hatching.

In the original version of this scheme the speed limit was to have been reduced to 30 mph. The speed limit along this section of Madingley Road is currently 40 mph, although a recent survey showed that 15% of drivers were exceeding the speed limit, and 1330 vehicles on one day were exceeding the speed limit by more than 25%.

Councillors decided to take a stand against the police's objection to a 30 mph limit.

During the consultation period the reduced speed limit was welcomed by the Campaign and by local residents. The police, however, objected. They said that drivers would not respect a 30 mph limit, and that they would not be prepared to enforce it. As a result of this police objection, council officers withdrew the proposal.

At the Area Joint Committee it was clear that several councillors wanted to see a 30 mph limit, and were very unhappy with the position that the police had taken. They said that because it had been included in the original proposals, it was unfair to approve the scheme with a higher limit.

After an impassioned debate, councillors decided to take a stand and voted to defer this second bus lane until 'more consultation' with the police had taken place. The scheme will return to the committee for consideration at their next meeting in January.

^ Top

Obstructions

Image as described adjacent

The obstructions subgroup met in September. Our purpose is to campaign for the removal of all those physical obstructions that make cycling around Cambridge more difficult than it needs to be. We're thinking of things like bollards, narrow gaps, chicanes and pinch stiles which are inconvenient for all, but can make routes impassable for cyclists carrying children or towing a trailer.

Because there is such a large number and wide variety of cycle route obstructions within the Cambridge area, our initial task is to identify a small number of locations (10 or so) which represent the most 'unnecessary impediments to cyclists, pedestrians and persons using other forms of non-motorised transport.' These will be visited, photographed and discussed at a future meeting (date to be announced). Recommendations for improvement will be compiled on an individual basis since the obstructions vary in their physical nature and in their purpose (although in some instances their purpose no longer exists - such obstructions should simply be removed).

The subgroup is now co-ordinated by Nigel Deakin. Many thanks to Martyn Smith for getting the subgroup launched. If you feel strongly that a particular obstruction should be targeted, please tell me.

Nigel Deakin phone 311073 e-mail nigel.deakin@espansiva.co.uk

^ Top

Dear Dr Dynamo

Dr Dynamo

Signalled cycle crossings

Got a question about cycling? Write to Dr Dynamo!

Dear Dr Dynamo,

I've got a question for you about those signalled crossings you sometimes get when a cycle path crosses a road. Are you breaking the law if you cycle over them without waiting for the green bicycle to light up? The lights often take so long to change, even if there's no traffic around, and I get so impatient.

Yours, Philip D, Petersfield

Dear Philip,

That's a very good question. Cycle crossings are getting quite common around Cambridge, and quite a few people have been asking me whether it's legal to cross over them when the signals show red. Obviously, this is only something you would want to do when there's no traffic around - late at night, for example.

The answer is that it depends on what type of crossing it is. There are two types of cycle crossing: cycle-only crossings and toucan crossings (of which there are two variants).

Cycle-only crossings

Let's discuss cycle-only crossings first. The term 'cycle-only crossing' comes from rule 66 of the Highway Code, which says:

66. Cycle-only crossings. Cycle tracks on opposite sides of the road may be linked by signalled crossings. You may ride across but you MUST NOT cross until the green cycle symbol is showing

So what is a cycle-only crossing? As the name suggests, it's a crossing for cycles only, not for pedestrians. There is usually a separate pedestrian crossing alongside, though not always.

The easiest way to spot a cycle-only crossing is by the signals that face you when you use it. They look similar to ordinary traffic lights, with red, amber and green lights, with the difference that the amber and green lights (but not the red light) have cycle symbols.

Image as described adjacent Image as described adjacent
Traffic signals at a cycle-only crossing. Cycles must stop.
Image as described adjacent
Cycles may ride across.

As the Highway Code says, you 'MUST NOT cross until the green cycle symbol is showing.' The words MUST NOT mean that this is the law (in this case, the Traffic Signs Regulations & General Directions 1994). So when you use a cycle-only crossing you must, Philip, be patient and wait for the green cycle symbol.

If there is an adjacent pedestrian crossing, there will be a 'no left turn' or a 'no right turn' sign as well, to stop you from turning into the path of pedestrians when they are crossing.

There is a small number of cycle-only crossings in Cambridge, including

Toucan Crossings

Now let's talk about toucan crossings, and start by seeing what the Highway Code says about them:

65. Toucan crossings. These are light-controlled crossings that allow cyclists and pedestrians to cross at the same time. They are push button operated. Pedestrians and cyclists will see the green signal together. Cyclists are permitted to ride across.

So what's a toucan crossing? The answer lies in the name - 'two can'. At a toucan crossing, both cyclists and pedestrians cross in the same place.

You can easily spot a toucan crossing because the signals are quite different from those used at a cycle-only crossing. It looks, in fact, much like an ordinary pedestrian crossing, with red and green man symbols facing you on the opposite side of the road. Next to the green man, however, is a green cycle symbol.

Toucan crossings don't have the red traffic light seen at cycle-only crossings. And this is significant: at a toucan crossing, the red pedestrian symbol is advisory, and you're not breaking the law if you decide to ride across anyway.

Image as described adjacent Image as described adjacent
Traffic signals at a toucan crossing (normal type).
Cycles are advised to stop, but it is not an offence to ride across. Cycles may ride across.

There are now quite a lot of toucan crossings around Cambridge. Our local councils prefer them to cycle-only crossings because they're much cheaper to install. For example, toucans have, in recent months, been installed at:


Image as described adjacent Image as described adjacent
Cycles are advised to stop, but it is not an offence to ride across. Cycles may ride across.
Traffic signals at a toucan crossing (alternative type).

There's an alternative, less common, type of toucan crossing. Instead of signals facing you on the post opposite, the box with the push-button has red and green symbols that tell you when to cross.

As with the normal toucan, these symbols are advisory only.

There's only one toucan crossing like this in Cambridge, though it's one of the most important in the city: Maid's Causeway near Fair Street.

New regulations

I can see that you're an honest fellow, Philip, and want to be sure that it's legal to cross a toucan crossing at any time, irrespective of whether the red or green man is showing.

I agree that the Highway Code is a bit vague. However, I think it is significant that although the Highway Code explicitly tells you it is an offence to ignore a red signal at a cycle-only crossing, it doesn't say anything about you needing to stop at a red man on a toucan crossing. In the end, you must decide for yourself. I'm not a lawyer. (Nor am I a real doctor, now you mention it!).

And it seems that the government has also spotted that this area could be clearer. The law on pedestrian crossings is defined in the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions, 1994 . The government has recently announced an update to these regulations, and I've had a look at the new draft regulations. These state that:

The red pedestrian signal in diagrams 4003.5 [an illuminated red man on the far side of the road] and 4003.7 [an illuminated red man above the push-button unit], and the red cycle symbol in 4003.7 [an illuminated red cycle above the push-button unit], are advisory rather than mandatory for both cyclists and pedestrians. Proposed revision of the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions, 1994, Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, September 2001.

Please note, Philip, that I'm not suggesting when you come to a toucan crossing you should ride across the crossing without regard to whether the lights are red or green. In most cases, you simply won't be able to cross safely until the lights change to green. You should stop and make sure that it is safe to do so before riding across. But if there's no traffic, you can cross without worrying about breaking the law.

Incidentally, if you come across a toucan when riding along the road (rather than along the cycle route that crosses it) then you will see a standard set of traffic signals, with the normal red, amber and green lights. The usual law applies here, and you must never pass those signals when they are at red.

So to answer your question, Philip: if you find a standard red traffic light facing you then you must always stop. If you come across a red man, or illuminated symbols on the button box, then, in my view - and in the Government's - you are allowed to make your own choice as to whether to stop or not.

Hope this helps, Philip. Happy Cycling!

Dr Dynamo

If you have a question about cycling, ask Dr Dynamo and he'll try to answer it.

^ Top

Small ads

Please note: that the adverts below may now be out of date. Please note also you can now submit adverts for the small ads section of the newsletter online.

Free to members, on cycling subjects

For sale

Free to a good home: roof rack for carrying two bikes, suitable for VW Polo or similar. Contact: Tony or Joan phone (01223) 564807 e-mail j.paterson@ic.ac.uk

Wanted

I am looking for a second hand tricycle fitted with two child seats - any condition considered. Julian Allwood phone (01223) 338181 e-mail jma42@cam.ac.uk

^ Top

City Centre update

Thank you to all who, at short notice, signed our recent petition seeking to rescind the Cambridge city centre cycling ban.

The petition gained us the opportunity to speak for five minutes at the Cambridge Environment and Transport Area Joint Committee meeting on 29 October. The text of this presentation is reproduced below.

We were keen to point out that we're not asking for cyclists to be able to speed through the city centre, expecting pedestrians to jump out of the way. We accept that cyclists must ride with care and consideration for pedestrians: Trinity Street demonstrates how this already works.

Following discussions, Councillors on the committee resolved that:

there should be a comprehensive review of cycling access in the city centre, with a view to minimising cycling restrictions whilst maximising pedestrian and cycling safety.

The next critical stage is to ensure that the terms of that review give a fair hearing to all.

Clare Macrae

^ Top

Ending the City Centre Cycling Ban

Cambridge Cycling Campaign Presentation to Cambridge Environment and Transport Area Joint Committee, Monday 29 October 2001

Thank you for the opportunity to present Cambridge Cycling Campaign's petition to lift the City Centre daytime cycling ban in St Mary's/Market Street, and in Sidney Street.

Cambridge Cycling Campaign seeks to represent the whole range of Cambridge cyclists - old and young, experienced and inexperienced, fast and slow. We have about 700 subscribing members drawn from a wide range of age groups and social backgrounds. The campaign argues that the ban is outmoded and unnecessary and that it should now be brought to an end.

Cycle ban road sign

Contrary to the view expressed in paragraph 2.12 of the papers for this meeting, considerable concern was expressed about the cycling ban during the recent series of Pedestrian Zone review workshops.

The report also neglects to mention that at the Public Inquiry, the City Council supported the lifting of the ban in Sidney Street. The Inspector's recommendations agreed with this, but the County Council overrode both the City Council and the Public Inquiry recommendations and confirmed the ban in both streets.

Cambridge Cycling Campaign asks you to support the ending of the ban in both streets. Here are some of the reasons why we make this request.

It is important to stress the obvious point that in Cambridge a high proportion of people cycle and that every day a very high percentage of those arriving in central Cambridge do so by bicycle. Every additional person encouraged to come by bicycle eases the very great pressures on public transport and on the overburdened city road system and every person discouraged from cycling increases those pressures. It is not just in the interests of cyclists that cycling should be encouraged: it is, we believe, in everyone's interests.

Cycling in Cambridge should be actively encouraged. Current city centre rules, especially the cycling ban, tend to discourage cycling and to make cyclists feel unwelcome. Nationally attitudes to cycling have become much more positive during the last decade and we think that the time is ripe to adopt a more cycle-friendly policy in Cambridge city centre and to signal this by ending the ban.

^ Top

Trumpington Road improvements?

Those of you unfortunate enough to have been using Trumpington Road for the last five months will know that cyclists appear to belong to an underclass. The requirements for safety, comfort and convenience for them lie well below those for motorists, Park and Ride passengers, and pedestrians. To put this into context, in 1997 the Campaign counted some 1300 cyclists in 12 hours on Trumpington Road south of Long Road, and flows will be much higher at the Brooklands Avenue end.

Obstructions on shared use path

The improvement of some two miles of shared use have made this a 'disaster area' for cyclists. Although work started in July (see Newsletter 37), from Brooklands Avenue to Exeter Close on Shelford Road only one short section is finished, with much of the remaining sections ending up with loose and uneven surfaces obstructed by lighting columns and street furniture.

These improvements are not primarily aimed at benefiting cyclists but, instead, allow road space to be used for bus lanes. Unlike some cyclists I'm not against this if it is part of a plan designed to reduce the amount of motor vehicles entering the city, and if the cycle route is of high quality. Unfortunately, here I don't consider the means justifies the end, where a high quality route and other objectives are slowly being diluted.

This work is supposed to be supervised by WS Atkins (Consulting Engineers), and I had thought the plan was to complete all cycleway works by the start of the school term in September. I met Richard Preston of the County Council in May to look at working drawings prepared by the consultants, and a number of items were raised at that time. I felt the meeting was positive and it was agreed that I could email WS Atkins if I had concerns. I have never had a single reply to any of my emails to WS Atkins.

Time and space prevent me from listing all the things that have gone wrong, but I will detail some problems.

At the time of writing we are only two weeks from the opening of the new Trumpington Park and Ride site. Then it is proposed to narrow the inbound lane to 3.0 metres over a long section north of Long Road to provide space for an outbound bus lane. Will this be done even though the works on the cycleway are incomplete? What should cyclists do then: drive to the park and ride and catch a bus, or obstruct traffic in the narrow vehicle lane?

It is very clear that it was possible to schedule much of the disruptive work on the road to just the half term week, so why is it not possible to have the same standards of scheduling and control for works on cycle and foot paths?

Jim Chisholm

^ Top

Kicking buses

Photo of bus showing rear overhang

By the time you read this there should be about 30 new buses operating Citi routes throughout Cambridge. These new buses are very long: 12 metres rather than the 10 metres or so of most existing vehicles. More important, for the safety of cyclists, is the large rear overhang of some 3.5 metres and the lack of experience of many bus drivers. When such a vehicle makes a sharp turn in a confined space the driver may apply full lock from stationary and then move off. This causes the rear of the vehicle to move sideways in the opposite direction to the front. This rear kick out can be as much as 0.8 metres. The bus driver is not always aware of this danger - I've witnessed a bus damaging the side of a stationary car like this, and the bus driver denied it could be his fault as he was turning in the opposite direction. In other countries, some articulated buses are 'wedge shaped' at the rear to minimise kick out. I'm not convinced that these Citi buses are the best option for many of our city and estate roads, and I'm told that similar buses have themselves suffered rear-end damage when turning.

Make sure you don't get trapped by the kick out!

Diagram showing 'kick out' when bus turns

Jim Chisholm

^ Top

Liaison Group resurrected

Image as described adjacent
One of the initiatives of the Think Cycling to be seen on the back of most buses in the City. The work of this project will now be folded into the Travel For Work project.

After an absence of a year and a half, the Cambridge Area Cycling Liaison Group has met again. This committee was formed several years ago as a result of our lobbying, after the City Council's 'cycling working party' subcommittee was disbanded. The long lapse was mainly a result of changed roles at the County Council, but it looks as if there is now good news on that front.

The liaison group's role is to discuss cycling strategy. It has no powers, but its advice is reported to councillors. It brings together County Council and Cambridge, South Cambridgeshire and Huntingdonshire district council officers, Cambridge Cycling Campaign, the CTC, and walking and disability groups. One of the changes that has occurred at the County Council over the past few years is that most schemes in the City are now channelled through the Cambridge Projects team (headed by Richard Preston). It was very regrettable, therefore, that they were not represented at the meetings; they were invited.

Most of the issues discussed are reported elsewhere in this newsletter. However, we also wondered whether the terms of reference for the group were still correct (most felt they were, though there is recognition that walking needs to be considered in its own right). The committee will be particularly concerned about the County's cycling strategy, and the extent to which it really does inform decision-making. The City Council is also in the early stages of drawing up its own strategy, but has been told firmly that it must not challenge anything in the County's strategy.

Though it still has to be finalised, it now seems quite likely that the County Council will once more appoint a full-time cycling officer. John Richards' role as Cycling Officer has been considerably diluted over the years as he has taken on more responsibility for South Cambridgeshire traffic management. This is in addition to a new post to be funded in the Travel For Work partnership. This person will bring together the part time posts previously held by Katherine Harvey and Sarah Goretzki for cycling promotion under the Think Cycling banner, and running the Cycle Friendly Employers scheme.

David Earl

^ Top

Letters

Münster

Responses (from David Earl) are interleaved with this letter in italics.

I would like to comment that, while the Münster experience clearly puts UK efforts to shame, there are certain features of Cambridge - particularly Central Cambridge - that cause genuine problems. I would like to know just how useful a comparison Münster is. For instance:

Is Münster's city centre as busy as Cambridge's on a Saturday and are bikes allowed in then?

It looked like it, on Saturday morning, but it was perhaps not so busy later on. Bikes are banned at certain times in some key streets, pretty much as in Cambridge. On the other hand, the central ring and the penetration of the streets you can use arguably makes the impact of this less.

Are the city-centre streets as narrow as in Cambridge?

Some of them, yes. Pretty similar in many ways I'd say - except for the cobbles.

Are there limitations to access - e.g. the Backs and only a few river crossings?

No, not really for the City Centre, though further out the railway line and further out still the motorways do, in much the same way as Cambridge.

How many tourists does Münster get? Foreign Language students?

Quite a lot of tourists, many on bikes (in fact we had problems renting bikes because of the demand that weekend). I don't know about Foreign Language Students.

Are there many dormitory towns near Münster, beyond easy cycling distance, as for instance Comberton, Bar Hill etc.

Yes. It is quite similar to Cambridge in that respect.

I'm sure there is a lot to learn from Münster but I can't really put these lessons properly into a Cambridge context from what I've read. The main message seems to be that Münster drivers respect cyclists and that may be a tricky thing to change in the UK.

Hugh Hunt

Parking

Image as described adjacent
Short stay cycle parking outside Trinity College.

The cycle parking trial and survey currently underway doesn't seem to address the matter of cycle-parking density. In some areas, for example outside Sainsbury's and elsewhere in town, there are so many bikes that, pleasant though many of the proposed stands are, there is not enough provision for bike parking. In places where space is lacking there is a case for providing less-secure, high-density short-stay parking. Sure, have some secure, well-spaced stands too, reserved for those with special needs. The stands outside Trinity, for instance, are remarkably easy to get bikes in and out of, not damaging to wheels, very high density and while you can't secure your bike to the rack it is fine for short stay, not great for overnight. More of the same, please, elsewhere in Cambridge.

Hugh Hunt

Simon Nuttall says: the Triangle 10 and 20 near the Talos statue on Guildhall Street were chosen to address the issue of capacity. Like the Trinity stands they have a high and low position and provide a secure anchor for the frame; they have, though, not proved popular.

An obstruction

Dear Obstruction Group People

I'm happy that you exist and it looks like your achievements can already be enjoyed in various places. Thank you!

Do you have anything going on this? Travel on bike or on foot from Burrell's Walk (past the University Library) and then cross Queen's Road to get to Garret Hostel Lane. The obstructions (posts and a fence) especially on the UL side make it so difficult - and sometimes impossible - for a 'larger' number of people (more than three) to pass in the few seconds of green light that everybody waits for a long time.

Estheranna Stäuble

^ Top

AGM report

The sixth Annual General Meeting of the Cambridge Cycling Campaign took place on 6 November 2001. Our invited speaker, Bill Park Weir, described recent developments in the Travel for Work and Cycle Friendly Employers schemes.

Bill encourages anyone whose employers might be interested in reducing their travel costs to contact him to find out what the schemes can offer. See http://www.tfw.org.uk and http://www.cfe.org.uk for more information.

New co-ordinator, and elected officers

Image as described adjacent
Clare Macrae hands over the Co-ordinator's ceremonial badge of office to new Co-ordinator David Dyer.

The changes are:

Our thanks go to outgoing committee member Martyn Smith for his many contributions over the last year.

As mentioned last time, after five years as Campaign Co-ordinator, I decided not to stand for the post again at the 2001 AGM. I wanted a break from the administrative and organisational aspects, to be able to concentrate on liaison and campaigning, for which there just hasn't been time as the organisation has grown.

As Co-ordinator, I have learned much from fellow Campaign members, made many valued friendships, and benefited from the hard work that so many people put into an organisation they care about, not least the dedicated team of people who make the Saturday stall work. Thanks to all of you.

One final change: we have created a new (non-committee) post of Secretary, and are pleased that our webmaster, Martin Lucas-Smith, has offered to take on this role.

The new committee line-up is recorded in Elected Officers.

Clare Macrae

^ Top

Experimental cycle parking

Cambridge cyclists deserve better bike parking than that made from bent galvanised scaffolding tubes. Around the Guildhall, the world's biggest ever cycle parking experiment is quietly underway. In May the old wheel benders in that area were ripped out and replaced with eight different types of cycle rack. The new cycle parking ought to reduce cycle theft by making it easier to lock a bike properly, and was reported in Newsletter 35 .

Evaluation of how effective the racks are is now under way, and included the cycle parking survey enclosed with Newsletter 38 . The evaluation of the racks uses four criteria: what people think of the racks, counts of how well bikes are locked to them, counts of levels of use and finally maintenance costs.

Each rack was carefully selected for inclusion in the experiment and had to pass several tests before winning a place on the highway. Cambridge is about to get a lot more cycle parking in the city centre and the choice will largely be made on the results of this experiment.

Below I list some reasons why I thought these cycle racks should be included in the experiment.

Fin

Fin

This elegant shark's fin shape was chosen enhance the look of the front of the Guildhall. It provides a range of heights for securing the frame to the rack.


Scissors

Scissors

Shape provides a high-up locking point that won't allow the bike to fall over. Easily accommodates bikes with baskets. These are located at the end of Peas Hill, and at the corner of Drummer Street and Emmanuel Street.


Chunky Sheffield

Chunky Sheffield

Thicker tubing than normal Sheffields to prevent use of car jacks to break D-locks. This particular model is located alongside the Guildhall in Peas Hill, do not confuse them with other types of Sheffield rack around the city.


Inverted U with crossbar

Inverted U with crossbar

Crossbar provides more locking options and prevents the rack tubing from being cut and prised apart. The shape provides good support for a wide range of bikes, and those with baskets. These are located alongside the Guildhall in Guildhall Street.


Triangle 10 Triangle 20

Triangle 10 and 20

This most radical rack designs provide wheel baskets to hold the bikes securely, one in the low position and one high up. This enables the racks to be put close together to give high capacity cycle parking in a small space. The arched stem provides high-up locking points for the bike frame, and differs in style between the two models. These are located in Guildhall Street near the statue of Talos.


SF

SF

The front of a bike slides into the arms of this rack. It provides a high up place to lock the frame and front wheel to the rack. They are a good replacement for the old vee grips as they take up roughly the same amount of room on the ground. These are located opposite the main entrance to the Arts Theatre in Peas Hill.


Austrian

Austrian

Like a low Sheffield rack whose ends have been curved round to hold the front wheel of the bike. This stops the bike falling over. The long section provides many places to attach a D-lock to the frame. These are located in Fisher Square near the rear entrance to Lion Yard.

Simon Nuttall

^ Top

Hardwick to a crossroads near Coton

Map of route

As you may be aware, the route from Hardwick to Cambridge is on the council's list of proposed cycle schemes, and money has been allocated to allow construction to begin next spring. Although the Hardwick Cycling Campaign (HCC) saw the council's preliminary proposals nearly two years ago when we voiced our concern with several aspects of the scheme, very little has changed now that more detailed plans are available.

Officially, the scheme is a Hardwick-Coton cycle path, but it doesn't actually reach Coton so cyclists will have to use the road to reach the Coton-Cambridge cycle path. Then it will link up with one of Cambridge's worst, least-used cycle paths along the north side of Madingley Road into Cambridge.

Briefly, the proposal is to build a shared use cycle path on the south side of the road starting as you exit Hardwick along St. Neots Road. This then crosses Long Road and uses a short section of disused carriageway to bypass the roundabout at Madingley. It continues on the south side of the road and here it is intended to leave a 1 m separation from the carriageway where possible. However, on the steepest part of the route, down the hill near Madingley, there will be no separation from the road and cyclists will also have to brake sharply at the bottom to give way to traffic on the Coton road. The details of the junction at Coton are still subject to further investigation, and no indication is given in the plans of how cyclists are supposed to cross. Once across this road, the cycle path continues for around 100 m before cyclists have to dismount, wait for a gap in the 60 mph traffic to cross the carriageway to a central island, then wait for another gap in the traffic to cross the other carriageway before they can continue their journey on the existing path.

In addition to two busy roads, 14 further access points are marked on the route, many of them requiring cyclists to stop. The council believes that this scheme is the best way to encourage more people to cycle to Cambridge from villages in the west. Ultimately, it will form a major part of a cycle route from Cambourne to Cambridge.

Comments about the scheme should be sent to Box ET, Shire Hall, Cambridge by Wednesday 28 November.

Paul McMahon, HCC co-ordinator

^ Top

Leisurely social rides

Every second Sunday of the month, Cambridge Cycling Campaign organises a leisurely ride to which everybody is welcome. We meet at 2 pm at Brookside, near Lensfield Road, for a gentle countryside ride which always includes a stop at a tea shop or café. We're usually back in Cambridge by 6 pm. Please bring lights.

The ride on Sunday 9 December 2001 will be about 20 miles and will explore the area west of Cambridge. Lovely towns and wide fields in sight! We will ride through or by Cambridge - the Coton footpath - Coton - the American Cemetery - Madingley - Dry Drayton - Hardwick (where we might have tea in the Blue Lion) - Toft - Comberton - Barton - Grantchester - Cambridge

After that, the next ride will be on Sunday 13 January 2002. We plan to start at the earlier time of 1 pm. This will give us more hours of light in the winter months.

Estheranna Stäuble

^ Top

Summer cycling festivals

Having helped organise the Cambridge Festival of Cycling over the past few years, I was interested in seeing what happens at other cycling festivals around the UK.

Spokefest, Leicester

Image as described adjacent
Racing in Leicester.

This event was a bit like a three-day-long try-a-bike show. I guess that there were about 25 delegates (who were either staying in a university hall, or were camping). Three had cycled from Germany, via Cambridge. This had taken them over five days on recumbent bicycles heavily laden with tents and other luggage, including the latest satellite navigation equipment. I thought that was impressive, until the Bikefix team turned up, well after midnight, having cycled up from London. One of them had towed a trailer laden with four other recumbent bikes all the way.

There were several organised rides, one that took us along the Sustrans route out of Leicester past the Space Centre . This amazing looking building, which houses a Blue Streak rocket, looks like one of the Michelin man's legs, but is made out of transparent material. It was very disappointing not to find cycle parking immediately outside the main entrance, where there was an ideal space for it.

The try-out show itself was held in one of the main central shopping streets of Leicester. For most of the afternoon, recumbent bikes of all sorts hurtled around a fenced-off area of this busy street to the amusement of onlookers. Kids stood in the queues waiting for a go. Xntrick Cycles of Littleport (near Ely) provided a number of unusual hard-to-balance-on machines that were very popular. There's no street in Cambridge big enough to hold such an eye-catching event.

I took the opportunity to visit Leicester's Bike Park, where cyclists pay up to £1 per day to leave their bike in the basement of this central unit which doubles as a bike repair and accessory shop. The cycle parking in the rest of the city generally appears to consist of poor quality, grim looking galvanised Sheffield stands, some stacked awfully close together. The city seems to be in the process of 'Sustransformation', and so we were often cycling along isolated closed off roads that suddenly divert onto a bit of green painted pavement and then on to pelican crossings that require us to dismount. One awful straight-on junction only activates the traffic lights for you if you are on the pavement.

Spokefest closed with a long procession of cyclists leaving for Brighton.

World Human Power Vehicle Championships, Brighton

Image as described adjacent
Racing in Brighton.

Each morning for four days I picked my way through tents, tricycles, velomobiles, and past the cantilevered push-me-pull-you recumbent tandem on my way to breakfast in the hospitality suite of Brighton's racecourse, with the day's challenge in mind: 1 km time trials at the circular track at Preston Park, criterium racing at the hilly Hove Park, sprints on Hove promenade and, finally, a dreaded two hour road race on Goodwood motor racing circuit. I should say that I didn't do any training whatsoever for these events other than the normal cycling I do everyday, and I don't belong to any 'gym'. A fairing attached to my bikeE put me in the faired class and this proved to be a further hurdle to world championship success.

The serious racers had their own team colours, very low bikes with contoured rear fairings and covered rear wheels. The fastest bikes are fully faired, and made so narrow that lubrication between the shell and legs is essential, at least until enough sweat has been built up.

The Cambridge Cycling Campaign was represented by Dave Hembrow and myself. At the meet, I learned that it's not air that stops you, it's the vacuum created that pulls you back! This meant that Dave's home-made cardboard rear fairing was going to prove a lot more useful than the £200 I had paid for a transparent front fairing for my BikeE.

The world human power speed record is timed over a 200 metre stretch. It was recently broken at Battle Mountain, Nevada, by Sam Whittingham in the Varna Diablo travelling at 80.55 mph. We were almost blown away by the strong sea breeze on Hove promenade and, despite a strong tail wind, I only managed a speed of 24 mph, whilst David just missed 30 mph. The winner at over 45 mph did the 200 metres in only 9.8 seconds.


Image as described adjacent
Incredibly complicated pedestrian zone sign.

We took over Goodwood, for one of their statutory 'quiet Sundays'. Eighty five of us started. I finished in 71st place averaging 15 mph, and Dave came in 54th place at 20 mph. I was lapped (during every lap) by the winner, fellow Briton Ian Chattington, who covered over 69 miles in the 2 hours.

Racing tests machinery and people and, although I came away in 73rd place overall, this was because I took points from every event, the only person below me like this was a 10 year old girl. At least we weren't one of those hospitalised with a broken nose, or out of the race with a buckled wheel.

This friendly event closed with a tearful organiser handing out the prizes and looking forward to next year's championships in Brantford, Canada.

Just a final footnote for those of us used to cycling only in and around Cambridge. Brighton is a shocking reminder of what cycling is like for everyone else. The long steep hills are one thing, but hostile city centre dual carriageways are another and traffic dominates the sea front. The city's new bus information system didn't work, and the buses bully their way along their own lanes in which cyclists are banned. But at least the buses in Brighton do turn up!

Simon Nuttall

Links

Bikefix - www.bikefix.co.uk
Xntrick Cycles - http://homepage.ntlworld.com/john.jermy/xntrickcycles.htm
Spokesfest - www.spokesfest.freeserve.co.uk
National Space Centre - www.nssc.co.uk
British Human Power Club - www.bhpc.org.uk
Blue Yonder - www.blueyonderchallenge.co.uk

^ Top

Cycling shorts

Construction has started on a shared-use cycle track along the outbound side of Newmarket Road between the Airport Way roundabout and Stow-cum-Quy. Although the new track will only be 2 m wide (whereas national standards specify a minimum of 3 m for two-way paths), and although it's too early to know how smooth the surface will be, the track will be a big improvement on the existing narrow and bumpy path. The first section to be built is from beyond the first lay-by to High Ditch Road, where work has now started. The path is being laid with stone kerbs on each side, and with a width of between 1.5 and 2.0 m. From High Ditch Road to the tunnel under the A14, all the utility companies have been carefully marking where their wires and pipes are located, but the digging has not yet begun.

On 8 November there were a couple of diggers somewhat casually parked next to the Quy roundabout, so it may be that work on the traffic lights at the B1102-A1303 junction is about to start, too. The local parish council has said that the plan has been approved, and the original intention was to start before the end of the year if possible.

The speed limit for St Neots Road, Hardwick, was reduced from 60 to 40 mph at the beginning of September. Advisory cycle lanes have been added to make the road look narrower and the entrance to the village is now more clearly marked with a coloured road surface and additional signage. Early indications are that traffic speeds have reduced considerably throughout the village.

Image as described adjacent
This bridge was repaired.

At the end of September we reported to Railtrack that there was a rotten timber on the Tins railway bridge (the path over the quarry between one end of Mill Road and Cherry Hinton). It was fixed on 12 October. We are still trying to find a way to get that bridge, and the one at Burnside, improved. The Burnside bridge (at the Mill Road end of the Tins path) is too narrow for many cycle trailers, and is slippery when wet. Sight lines on the Tins railway bridge are poor, as we reported back in Newsletter 20 (October 1998).

Cambridgeshire County Council has been named Local Authority of the Year at the inaugural National Transport Awards.

An advertising campaign has been telling motorists of the £80 Penalty Charge for driving or parking in one of London's 700 bus lanes. The campaign includes roadside posters, radio ads, ads on the backs of buses, posters at bus stops and adverts on car park barriers throughout London. Companies whose employees regularly drive in London, and fleet and hire companies, also received information directly. We'd love to see work like this in Cambridge, or nationally, covering both bus and cycle lanes. More information, including fascinating details of the roadside and on-bus video systems being used to gather evidence for prosecution of offending drivers, can be found on Transport for London's web site, http://www.streetmanagement.org.uk

Nigel Deakin, Mike Causer, Paul McMahon and Clare Macrae

^ Top

The things people say - number 1

Cartoon

Often the people who come up to our stall with a bee in their bonnet or who harangue us on the roads don't want to hear an answer. They just want to let off steam or display their prejudice or ignorance. We'll put down some of our answers we might have given over the next few issues.

I pay my road tax (so I've got a right to use my car as I please), but you (b***y) cyclists pay nothing. Why should I pay for all this cycling stuff?

Not true. Most cycling initiatives and the local roads that cyclists use almost exclusively are paid for out of local taxes. We pay Council Tax, and the income tax that subsidises the Council, just as much as you do. And you get a bigger share of that than we do.

Part of my income tax goes to building motorways. As a cyclist I'm not allowed to use motorways. A motorway costs £30 million a mile. Cycling infrastructure costs peanuts in comparison.

I'm making your life easier. By riding a bike, I'm not one more car sitting in the queue in front of you, which is why you're so mad in the first place.

If you take all the environmental damage and injuries that motor vehicles create into account as well as road construction and so on, what you pay in car-related taxes doesn't pay for it all. We're subsidising you with the taxes we pay!

And in any case, tax on beer doesn't go to subsidising breweries, does it? Why should tax on cars go into subsidising motoring? It's a way of raising money, just like any other tax.

David Earl

^ Top

Station area developments

In Newsletter 32 there was a description of proposed developments in the railway station area. It now seems unlikely that these will go ahead soon and, even when they do, they are will probably not be as originally proposed. What has changed?

Image as described adjacent
Spillers' Mill dwarfs the station buildings beside it, but it will be gone in a few years

Firstly, it appears that more of the area may be available as Spillers' Mill will close in two years, releasing another piece of land for development. Secondly, the plans to demolish one of the buildings in Station Road to construct a building for GO-East (Government Office for East of England) have been dropped, and I've heard that GO-East may now move to offices on the Brooklands Avenue site. Last, but not least, changes at Railtrack mean that plans of this type are likely to be put 'on hold'.

What should the Campaign do now?

I have always found it odd that several million pounds can be spent taking the odd minute or two off train times to London, whereas an order of magnitude smaller sum would reduce many cycle and pedestrian journeys to the station by more than the odd minute or two. Remember 60% of trips to or from the station are by cycle or on foot.

Jim Chisholm

^ Top

Web watch

Cambridge Cycling Campaign's new web site was launched on 4 October. There's a lot of extra information on the new site, and it is organised in a more logical way for easier access. We're making an effort to keep the front page updated with local campaigning news, so it is worth making frequent visits. Our thanks go to the Campaign's new webmaster, Martin Lucas-Smith, for a job very well done.

  www.camcycle.org.uk

A new section has been added to Cambridgeshire Constabulary's web site: the Aladdin's Cave of bicycles recovered in the Cambridge area. If your bike is stolen or lost, be sure to look at:

  www.cambs-police.co.uk/camops/recovered/cycles/gallery.asp

Cyclists.org.uk, launched by Campaign member Richard George, is a very useful site. It bills itself as 'the UK Cyclist's Portal - providing news, information and chat for non-competitive cyclists and those who'd like to take up cycling for leisure or transport'

  www.cyclists.org.uk

The County Council web site has two very useful interactive online maps. One shows all 'road traffic accidents' between 1998 to 2000 in Cambridgeshire and Peterborough that resulted in 'personal injury'. It also shows 'accident cluster sites'. The other shows all work planned by Council road maintenance and utility companies for the coming six months.

  www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/sub/eandt/roadsafety/accnotes.htm
  www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/sub/stworks/stwknote.htm

Clare Macrae

^ Top

Christmas present ideas

Stuck for ideas for a Christmas present for a Cambridge cyclist? Here are some seasonal gifts for a cyclist in winter.

Track pump

Now some gifts which are not specific to winter or Christmas.

Mark Irving

^ Top

Your streets this month

Joined-up thinking, please

Image as described adjacent
Green Dragon Bridge. A new 'Cyclists Dismount' sign defeats the purpose of installing the cattle grid

New advisory signs bearing the words 'No Cycling - Cyclists Dismount' have appeared at the Green Dragon Bridge across the River Cam in Chesterton. These new signs are the result of an initiative by County Council engineers, and have been installed two years after City Council engineers constructed a cattle grid here specifically to avoid the need for cyclists to dismount and open a swing gate.

The result is to send conflicting signals to cyclists using this bridge. The City Council (which controls the commons) is helping you to stay on your bike, whilst the County Council (which controls the bridges) is telling you to dismount.

The new rectangular blue signs are advisory; the absence of circular red no-cycling signs suggests that cycling is not actually prohibited. This bridge is 2 m wide - the same width as the shared-use cycle track currently under construction on Newmarket Road, and wider than many shared-use paths elsewhere in the city.

Approved

The Cambridge Environment and Transport Area Joint Committee has reluctantly approved detailed plans for a cycle/pedestrian bridge alongside the railway bridge on Coldham's Lane, despite the narrowness of the bridge and the total inadequacy of the arrangements for access to each end of it. See article.

A traffic calming scheme for the Chesterton High Street area has also been approved by councillors. A series of raised tables at junctions along High Street, Church Street and St Andrew's Road will help slow traffic overall, but a general narrowing of the High Street to 7.2m will be bad news for cyclists. We had strongly objected to this during the consultation. Officers claim they will address our concerns during the 'safety audit' process. We shall see.


Image as described adjacent
St Andrew's Road

As part of the Chesterton traffic calming scheme, councillors have decided to advertise the closure of St Andrew's Road to motor vehicles at its junction with Elizabeth Way.

We have now seen the plans for the new toucan crossing across East Road at Norfolk Street and Burleigh Street. The proposals, which have now been approved, will do little more than legalise cyclists who ride across the existing pelican crossing. The main change is that the pavement on the Norfolk Street side is to be formally designated as shared-use, and made wider by the removal of some planting.

A number of cycle measures for Newmarket Road have been approved. These were described in Newsletter 38 . Two alternative options had been proposed for the widening of the existing shared-use pavement between Swann's Road and Ditton Lane. In the event, both officers and councillors chose the option we had preferred, which is to remove the U-turn lane and use the road space to provide a widened pavement cycleway whilst retaining the on-road cycle lane.

A series of measures in the Emmanuel Road area have been approved by councillors, including a new cycle route between Midsummer Common and King Street, and possible new pinch points on Short Street and Drummer Street. See article.

Deferred

Councillors have decided not to go ahead with the proposal, reported in Newsletter 37, to make Tennis Court Road one-way to motor vehicles at the city centre end. Although this would have increased the safety of cyclists, forcing motor vehicles to exit via Fitzwilliam Street instead would have caused problems for construction vehicles from a nearby building site, and the proposal has been deferred until at least 2003.

The approval of a short length of bus lane in Madingley Road near Conduit Head Road has been deferred by councillors because of a row over police opposition to a 30 mph limit. A separate section of bus lane by the M11 junction has been approved. See Madingley Road Bus Lane.

Proposed

There is to be a 'streetscape review' of Green End Road. The Milton Road end of this road has caused difficulties for cyclists ever since it was deliberately narrowed to 6.5 m about ten years ago as part of the original Chesterton traffic calming scheme. We will be asking for the road to be widened to a more comfortable width by reducing the size of the over-generous parking bays on the north side.

Consultations will be held on a traffic-calming scheme for the Bateman Street area. We haven't seen detailed plans yet, but the main proposal is an upgrade to the eastbound contraflow cycle route along Bateman street by removing parking and introducing a contraflow cycle lane. Westbound traffic speeds will be reduced by the introduction of speed cushions as in Grange Road, 'with islands either side to protect cyclists'. Speed cushions are also proposed for Norwich Street and a raised table is proposed for the Bateman Street/Panton Street junction.

^ Top

About the Campaign

Please note: the most up-to-date general information about the Campaign is always in the about the Campaign section of the website.

If you like what you see in this newsletter, you can add your voice to those of our other 690 members, and join the Campaign.

Membership costs are low: £7.50 individual, £3.50 unwaged, £12 household. For this, you get six newsletters a year, discounts at a large number of bike shops, and you will be supporting our work. Please get in touch if you want to hear more.

Cambridge Cycling Campaign was set up in 1995 to voice the concerns of cyclists. We are not a cycling club but an organisation lobbying and campaigning for the rights of cyclists, and promoting cycling in and around Cambridge.

Our regular stall on Saturdays outside the Guildhall is the public face of the campaign; volunteers are always welcome to help. And don't forget our meetings, open to all, on the first Tuesday of each month, 7.30 for 8.00 pm at the Friends' Meeting House, Jesus Lane, Cambridge.

^ Top

Elected Officers

Please note: the most up-to-date Committee list is always in the Committee list section of the website.

Co-ordinator - David Dyer

Liaison Officer - Clare Macrae

Membership Secretary - Dave Earl

Newsletter Editor - Mark Irving

Treasurer - Simon Nuttall

Stall Officer - Paul Tonks phone 07870 441257

Press Officer - Sam Davies

Officers without portfolio - Jim Chisholm, Nigel Deakin, Richard Taylor, Lisa Woodburn and Wookey

^ Top

Contacting the Campaign

Please note: the most up-to-date contact details for the Campaign are always in the contacts section of the website, which includes an online feedback form.

In particular, note that our fax number is now separate from the phone number.

Grant aided by
Sustainable City logo

Cambridge Cycling Campaign
PO Box 204
Cambridge CB4 3FN

Telephone messages and fax
phone (01223) 690718

http://www.camcycle.org.uk
E-mail e-mail contact@camcycle.org.uk

^ Top

Campaign Diary

December 2001

Tue 4 7.30 pm Monthly open meeting, Friends' Meeting House, Jesus Lane, at the Park Street junction. (Tea and coffee, a chance to chat, and for us to introduce ourselves to new members for the first half-hour. The meeting itself starts at 8 pm.)
Sun 9 2 pm Leisurely ride. Meet at Brookside, near Lensfield Road. See article Leisurely social rides for details
Wed 12 8.30 am Newsletter 39 review meeting and Newsletter 40 planning, over breakfast at Tatties café.
Mon 17 7 pm Join us for a social gathering at CB2 café 5-7 Norfolk Street

January 2002

Tue 1
No monthly open meeting this month, as it falls on a bank holiday
Sat 5
Newsletter 40 deadline. Please send copy to Mark Irving
Sun 13 1 pm Leisurely Ride. Meet at Brookside, near Lensfield Road. A countryside ride, at a gentle pace, and including a stop at a tea shop or café. We are normally back in Cambridge by 6 pm. Please bring lights.
Tue 15
Bicycle Maintenance evening class - five weekly sessions. Aimed at people with little or no previous experience of bicycle maintenance who want to get started. Gives you the confidence and knowledge needed to handle the most common bike maintenance tasks. To get more information phone (01223) 712340
Mon 21 7 pm Join us for a social gathering at CB2 café 5-7 Norfolk Street
Wed 23 7.30 pm Newsletter 40 Envelope Stuffing at the Baby Milk Action offices, 23 St Andrews Street (between the Robert Sayle main and computer shop entrances, entrance next to Lunch Aid). Help very much welcomed!

February 2002

Tue 5 7.30 pm Monthly open meeting, Friends' Meeting House, Jesus Lane. See description for 4 December
Sun 10 1 pm Leisurely Ride. Meet at Brookside, near Lensfield Road. See 13 January for description
Mon 18 7 pm Join us for a social gathering at CB2 café 5-7 Norfolk Street
Tue 26
Bicycle DIY workshop evening class. NEW! - five weekly sessions. For people with some experience of bicycle maintenance. Instead of structured lessons, tackle the tasks you've been meaning to do and get help if you need it. Ideal if you want to revisit a maintenance topic at your own pace. To get more information phone (01223) 712340

Further ahead

Tue 4 June No monthly open meeting again, as we are unable to use the Friends' Meeting House on the bank holiday. We hope to plan an alternative event.
15-23 June Bike Week 2002