You are in: Home » Newsletters » Newsletter 78 (June/July 2008)
Newsletter 78 (June/July 2008)
Riverside Bridge opens: Cambridge's first new crossing of the River Cam for almost 40 years
(Click on image for a larger version)
Contents:
- Co-ordinator's Comment
- Cambridge Conference
- Local election 2008 candidate survey
- Congestion charging - support shown if transport improvements in place
- A cyclist's paradise on earth
- Photomap this month: editor's pick
- Major new cycling brochures launched
- May - the 'Month of Cycling': review
- Ride to Reach Fair
- Grand Arcade Cycle Park
- Cyclists flock to park securely at Park Street Cycle Park
- Wicken Vision update
- New housing developments
- Northstowe objections
- Letters
- Cycling up and up
- Mill Road reclaimed for humans - a vision
- City centre mess
- National Bike Week 2008
- Monthly meetings menu
- Riverside Bridge to open
- Campaign Diary
- About the Campaign
- Elected Officers 2007-2008
- Contacting the Campaign
Co-ordinator's Comment
Probably our busiest ever month!
May 2008 has arguably been the Campaign’s busiest ever month, with no less than six major projects or events launching. We profile these later in this Newsletter. It was great to see these all coming to fruition, though many of us feel rather exhausted as a result!
May I take this opportunity to thank everyone who has helped with these in any way, in what we eventually billed as a ‘Month of Cycling’, and also thank our speakers at the Conference.
Cycling 2020 and
Cycling in New Developments launched at last
At long last, we launched these major new documents. They dovetail with each other, though their agendas are different. The New Developments paper deals with what should be done where there is a ‘clean sheet of paper’, whereas Cycling 2020 deals with the whole range of issues that exist around the existing (as well as new) areas of the city.
We have received nothing but positive feedback on these documents, and personally I feel they will do much to enhance the reputation that the Campaign has built up for making a professional and well-argued case for high-quality cycling conditions. Many people remain surprised that we still have no paid staff, being entirely voluntary, and working from a relatively shoestring budget and one-off grants!
On that note, I should like to give particular thanks to our donor who supported the Cycling 2020 project and who is also helping out in other ways. Having the money to do such projects has been a real weight off our shoulders, enabling us to spend the time working on real campaigning rather than obtaining grant funding.
Our next major projects are the Cycle Parking Guide (for which we have funding of £3,500, have appointed consultants, and which we should launch in August) and the hiring of a planning consultant to help us deal with the huge number of issues relating to plans for the new developments.
 |
Holland trip
Almost immediately after organising the national cycle campaigning conference, a group of us travelled to Holland – to see again how they provide for cycling. What a contrast it was with Cambridge.
The difference in mindset is staggering, and it really shows how giving genuine priority to cycling results in enormously high rates of cycling. In one notable example, a whole new bridge was being constructed basically in order to deal with a location with poor visibility.
Another real point of interest was seeing hundreds of children arrive at a primary school by bike – mostly on their own – within 10 minutes. If Councillors in this country were to prioritise road space for cycling rather than parked cars, such things might be possible in Cambridge.
Of course, Cambridge is not Holland, and there are differences in terms of space available, legislation, and motorist behaviour. However, the key difference is that politicians there don’t just vaguely try to make cycling fit in – as so often happens over here – but instead are really willing to make cycling the main form of local transport, and provide the money and mindset to make it so.
Cambridge Conference
On 10 May, Cambridge hosted around 120 cyclists and supporters of cycling from all over the UK, for the Spring 2008 CTC and CCN (Cycle Campaign Network) conference.
The conference title was “Creating a Cycling Culture — How do we respond to the challenges of the future?”
The Centre for Mathematical Studies proved to be an ideal venue for the event.
 |
The presentations
David Howarth MP welcomed delegates to Cambridge, a perfect place for a conference about cycling, as it is a city where cycling is an important, central and legitimate form of transport, for people from all walks of life. He said that ‘public authorities should do what they can to avoid creating conflict between the environmentally friendly modes of transport. For example, dual-use cycle lanes must be a last resort. ... County Councils and Transport Authorities shouldn’t take a line of least resistance of saying that they will force pedestrians and cyclists into conflict as a way of avoiding taking a hard decision about what to do about road space.’
Matt Seaton – the Guardian's former cycling correspondent – described how cycling has changed in London since the introduction of the Congestion Charge. Cycling levels have increased to the extent that there is now a definable cycling rush-hour there. He said that cycle campaign groups have tended to perceive themselves, and campaign as, a down-trodden and oppressed minority, needing to jump up and down and shout to get things done. There is a time and a place for that, but it only gets you so far. There’s a need to re-think that approach and move beyond cycling-only approaches, getting others involved to win public consent and public support.
Martin Lucas-Smith, Co-ordinator of the Campaign, launched Cycling 2020 (see later in this Newsletter) and discussed the applicability of many of the issues in it to other areas of the UK.
Tom Bogdanowicz – from London Cycling Campaign – talked about how far London had exceeded its targets for cycling growth in recent years. London has achieved 83% growth in cycling levels between 2004 and 2007: the target was 80% growth by 2010. The target has now been revised, to aim for 400% growth by 2025. This is equivalent to 5% modal share, or 1.7 million daily cycle trips in the capital, and 1 in 10 Londoners cycling regularly. During his electoral campaign, the new mayor, Boris Johnson, said that he would exceed those targets.
Simon Geller – from Sheffield Cycle Campaign – gave a talk entitled ‘Running a Successful Cycle Campaign Group’. Interestingly, they run as two partner organisations: ‘Pedal Pushers’ is the social arm, and there is a separate campaigning group. One member put a lot of effort into their website – www.pedalpushers.org.uk/ – getting it to display cycling-related news from around the world, and using ‘Wiki’ technology, i.e. allowing many (known) people to edit and add information to the website. They also run a cycle training co-operative called PedalReady (http://axelrod.plus.com/ppmw/index.php/Training) which has about 30 approved trainers.
 |
Philip Darnton – chairman of Cycling England – reviewed the history and work of this organisation, established by the Department for Transport in 2005 to replace the National Cycling Strategy Board. Its remit covers all of England except London. The initial budget was £5 million per year. After a series of increases, by January this year, the budget had risen to £140 million over 3 years. In that time they have worked with partner organisations to set up Bikeability (www.bikeability.org.uk/), the replacement for the old Cycling Proficiency Test. They have been building up the scheme nationally, and have awarded 40,000 Bikeability badges. Next year, 2009, will be ‘the year of Bikeability’, with major publicity pushes. Cycling England has also researched the economic benefits of cycling, finding that investment in cycling pays back between 3 and 4.5 times the original investment. The website – www.cyclingengland.co.uk/ – has many interesting reports. He went on to describe in the achievements of the original six Cycling Demonstration Towns. The announcement of the next set of towns (Cambridge has applied) will be made on 16 June.
Will Bramhill’s workshop session on working with the media was very informative. An experienced cycling campaigner, Will has been a local journalist for decades, and he had many useful suggestions to help organisations provide information in forms most useful to local news organisations.
James Hogben of Limelight Sports ran a workshop on publicity. Limelight Sports is working with Forster, the new PR consultants for National Bike Week. James described the steps involved in developing a successful communications strategy, using Bike Week as a case study. This year Bike Week will be sponsored by Nokia, and will run from 14 to 22 June. The focus is very much on hitting mainstream media, reaching a wide audience.
 |
Martin Lucas-Smith and Simon Nuttall demonstrated Cambridge Cycling Campaign’s online photomap and cycle journey-planning systems, and David Earl ran a membership clinic.
Finally, Chris Peck from the CTC gave a brief overview of the national picture of cycling policy. There are some major documents coming soon: a new Transport White Paper in the winter of 2008, a new Road Safety Strategy in the summer of 2009, and a new Cycling Infrastructure Design Guide also due this year.
Most of the presentations will be available on the Cambridge Cycling Campaign website by the time this Newsletter is published.
Looking back
Over the years I have attended many of the Spring and Autumn cycling conferences, and I don’t think I am being too locally biased in saying that I feel this was definitely one of the best. The quality and variety of the talks and workshop sessions were all consistently high, and informative.
It’s always a pleasure to see the reactions of cyclists from elsewhere in the UK when they see the levels of cycling in Cambridge – and the fact that cycling is a normal, every-day activity here, not requiring specialist clothing.
Huge thanks to all who made the conference happen – to the volunteers who helped on the day, or put conference guests up over night – to the CTC and CCN for help with planning the conference – the CTC for help with conference costs – and most of all to Jim Chisholm and Simon Nuttall, for having the vision to believe that we should host the conference – and for doing most of the work at this end. Very well done indeed.
Clare Macrae
Local election 2008 candidate survey
As last year, the Committee took the decision this year to see what candidates standing for election as local councillors thought about cycling (and walking) issues. We again received a good response, with over half those standing responding.
Half of each survey was based on cycling issues which affect all areas, namely cycling promotion, the vast shortage of cycle parking, and the need for enforcement against traffic offences (including those committed by rogue cyclists). A selection of the questions can be seen in the boxes below.
 |
We covered each of the 14 city wards, as well as Girton and Histon & Impington wards (both of which are in South Cambridgeshire).
We did the survey on-line so that constituents - including our members - in each ward (rather than merely our Campaign's Committee) could see what each candidate thinks. Voters could then take these views into account alongside other issues of concern to them. Naturally, we took care to contact every candidate in each ward equally, as well as notifying their agents, should letters get lost in the post.
Generalised questions
Firstly, here are a few of the more generalised questions we asked in every ward.
Cycling offers a huge opportunity to reduce motor traffic and free up road space. Do you have any suggestions for additional cycling promotion activities that the Council could do?
This question resulted in lots of good ideas. Some respondents rightly pointed out that the City Council was not often in a position to deliver such ideas, but the intent of our question was to get candidates interested and talking about these issues, and to press where relevant for their implementation with their County Council colleagues.
Do you support our view that traffic policing (including fining of cyclists without lights or using pedestrian-only pavements) should become a greater police priority?
Candidates naturally supported our stance on responsible cycling, but, in the main, felt that other crime issues were deserving of greater priority. Most seemed to give a well-balanced answer that recognised the relative seriousness of these crimes, but like us, wanted to see increased police activity to deal with irresponsible cycling.
We are seeking a trial of a new type of cycle provision in the city - 'hybrid cycle lanes', as used in Holland and Germany. These are 2-3m wide, on-road but with a degree of separation from other vehicles. They combine the best aspects of both off-road and on-road cycle lanes but without the downsides of both. The picture on our website illustrates the concept. What do you feel about this idea, and is there anywhere in your ward where you think these could be tried?
 |
A good number of candidates liked this idea, recognising the benefits for both experienced and less-experienced cyclists. However, few were able to identify potential locations, though Gilbert Road and a few other key strategic locations were mentioned. Many correctly noted, however, that these would be ideal for the New Developments which do not have the same space constraints.
In our own view, there certainly are locations around the city where these could be tried, e.g. Cherry Hinton Road, but this would require proper funding so that good-quality provision can be created. Furthermore, there could be some loss of car parking, which candidates failed in general to recognise was in many places a necessity if genuinely good-quality cycling conditions are to be achieved, with hybrid cycle lanes or otherwise.
If the County Council's proposed Congestion Charge goes ahead, it is likely that the free, up-front money that would be received from the government to support prior improvements to public transport and cycling would be of the order of some £100m a year for four years. This is roughly ten times the amount the county currently receives for transport. If the scheme goes ahead, what would be your priorities for use of this up-front money?
Some candidates used this question as an excuse to express their opposition to congestion charging rather than actually answering the question. We posed this question as we felt many candidates were likely to be simply unaware of the scale of investment proposed.
The majority of candidates gave a range of sensible uses for the money centred around better cycling facilities and public transport. Several made clear their opposition to the use of this scheme for general road building or widening, possibly referring to the (now quashed) suggestion of an Ely bypass.
Ward-specific questions
We were keen to ensure that a range of ward-specific questions were put forward. This helped to ensure that the survey dealt with local issues of relevance to each candidate. Here are a small selection.
Cambridge Cycling Campaign is promoting a new route for pedestrians and cyclists called the 'Chisholm Trail', alongside the railway, joining up many journey destinations between Addenbrooke's to the south and the Science Park to the north. This would make many journeys much quicker. Do you support this in principle?
There was a lot of support for this, and we hope to capitalise on this, following the public launch of Cycling 2020 which includes the Chisholm Trail as a key proposal.
At present, permitted car parking in cycle lanes on Gilbert Road makes cycling unpleasant and unsafe in an area through which thousands of school children travel daily. Given that virtually all houses have their own off-road car parking, would you support the replacement of the on-road parking on Gilbert Road with on-road red mandatory cycle lanes?
The one candidate in Arbury that kindly responded on this question did not support the proposition, preferring the current abysmal situation to be dealt with by widening the pavement to include a cycle path, noting that that although virtually all houses have off-road parking, there were still a few that did not.
Most of the West Chesterton candidates did answer this question. Two (including the one who was elected and is the Leader of the City Council) supported it and felt it “could be introduced relatively quickly and inexpensively”. That candidate also mentioned the possibility of the hybrid option here, which we feel is definitely worthy of consideration.
We feel the needs of cyclists and in particular children should take priority here on what is a key route that could have high-quality cycling provision rather than shared-use paths.
The full sets of questions and answers from each candidate are on our website, and we are happy to print out copies of the responses for each ward for members upon request, if you do not have internet access.
We are extremely grateful to all candidates for their time at such a busy period. The responses were fairly equally distributed across all the political parties that had representatives standing.
Cambridge Cycling Campaign is of course a non-partisan body and we did not endorse any specific political party or candidate.
Congestion charging - support shown if transport improvements in place
The County Council has issued the results of its four-month consultation on proposals for congestion charging coupled with an up-front investment in public transport and cycling of around £500m.
On 6th May 2008, the County Council hosted an event to release the findings of the consultation into proposals for tackling congestion that took place between November 2007 and March 2008. The findings were delivered directly by two market research companies responsible for collecting and collating people’s views. Each organisation produced a presentation for the event and a report. There was also a report presenting the findings from the responses received directly by the Council.
 |
The County Council will be considering the results and preparing a report for Cabinet – the main decision-making body – later this year.
Consultation results
The full reports have been published by the County Council on their website at www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/congestion.
 |
The first set of figures are those which have been leapt upon by opponents of the scheme, because they show the least support. They indicate a base-line support for the principle of congestion charging of 31%.
In our view, however, those results should not be given much prominence, because they assume no additional expenditure to improve alternatives to the car. When this taken into account, support for congestion charging actually becomes positive.
The County Council’s scheme makes clear that:
- All revenues would be spent on improving transport (as is required under law anyway)
- The charge proposed is only between 7.30 am and 9.30 am, Monday to Friday
- That massive expenditure to improve non-car transport is proposed, roughly 10 times the level of current investment
These results have been broken down into per-district figures in a supplementary report, reproduced below.
(We have chosen not to reprint the figures for East Cambs, Fenland, and Hunts in this Newsletter as these are less relevant to our readers, but the ‘All Cambridgeshire’ figure is shown, to demonstrate the lack of significant deviation from the district figures.)
 |
 |
 |
 |
Political reaction
At the 6th May meeting, several members of the audience spoke in response to a request for any questions seeking factual clarifications, though naturally that did not deter many speakers from presenting their own opinions. The general tone of the questions was one of scepticism about the County’s consultation.
The Leader of the City Council Labour group spoke. He felt that the positive support for congestion charging when key conditions were in place, as shown in the results presented by the market research companies, contrasted with a survey done by the Cambridge Evening News (CEN). The CEN survey the week before had found that 60 per cent of people rejected congestion charging. However, the (then) Leader of the County’s Cabinet, Cllr Keith Walters, pointed out that the CEN survey was a self-selecting survey of only 180 people so was hardly a more reliable source of public opinion, especially given the negative bias consistently shown by the CEN on this issue.
The CEN immediately ran headlines highlighting the baseline 31% support rather than the raised level of support for when the scenarios were in place. Reading further on into the article, however, it did admit “when asked about how they would regard congestion charging "if attractive alternatives were in place for travelling in Cambridge", 59 per cent of at-home interviewees said they would support it, with 24 per cent saying they would be opposed”.
The post-election leaflet issued by Cllr Ben Bradnack, Labour (Petersfield), reiterates opposition to the proposals, but again completely fails to state that massive up-front investment would be in place. Ironically the statement about congestion charging was next to a picture of the need to improve bus services! In these conditions, which we can assume are repeated in other political leaflets from various political parties in the City, it is hardly suprising that there remains significant opposition to a congestion charge.
The Liberal Democrats have stayed relatively quiet on this issue, but their position in the elections appears to have been one of tacit support for the proposals as long as there are discounts for residents, that there is more support for environmental objectives such as CO2 reduction, that any surplus is ring-fenced (this is required by law anyway) and that there are improvements to public transport (which clearly form part of the scheme).
 |
May's local elections saw a candidate from each of the Conservative Party and Green Party and an Independent elected to the City Council. The City Conservatives seem to be fully against the scheme. The Greens seem to support the proposals, and the Independent (John Hipkin) spoke on Radio 209 to the effect of giving support if alternatives were in place.
Upsides and downsides for cycling
Our own submission was basically our previous two Newsletter articles (see Newsletter 73 and Newsletter 76) on this topic. We broadly welcome the proposals, but have sought reassurances on various aspects. We recap these briefly here.
In general we felt key benefits included:
- General traffic reduction, creating a real opportunity for reallocation of roadspace for cycling – this is the top of the ‘hierarchy of solutions’ which is frequently difficult to achieve
- The Chisholm Trail, our long-proposed 'cycling superhighway' joining the Science Park to Addenbrookes, which is amongst the proposals, and which would cost several million pounds
- Hybrid cycle lanes, which seeks to balance the needs of different cyclists (on-road / off-road preference), are proposed, which we have pushed for.
- Dedicated, off-road bus provision could mean the elimination of the ‘Milton Road effect’ in key areas.
- Removal of the excuse for doing things ‘on the cheap’
- Fixing lots of junction problems, and cycle parking, city-wide
- Clearing the maintenance backlog
The principal downsides and areas on which we wanted reassurance were:
- There is scope for things to be done badly.
- Danger of increase in shared-use pavement cycleway provision.
- The question of whether new, on-road bus lanes could cause new problems
- An assurance that the cycling aspects would not suffer if the money received from the government turns out to be much less than is being bid for.
- The suggestion that part of the up-front money that would come with any congestion charging scheme would be used for an Ely bypass. We have received a clear statement by e-mail from a senior figure at the County Council that that is no longer proposed, as of several months before the formal consultation opened.
Why should Councillors support the proposals?
In our view, Councillors now need to get behind the proposals, because:
- If hundreds of millions of pounds are thrown away, people will look back in 10 years’ time and ask why Councillors failed to exercise a leadership role and take this money, despite the short-term pain it might have for some of their electorate.
- The amount of up-front money which the County would likely receive would be enormous. It is clear that levels of transport investment of some ten times the current amount would be available in the four or five years before any scheme comes into effect.
- The level of housing growth in the city is not going to be stopped by Councillors saying they dislike it. Assuming there is no massive economic downturn, or the Government decides that the Eastern Region shouldn’t be a growth area any longer, this housing growth IS going to happen, whether local Councillors like it or not. And this growth will cause real congestion problems.
- The hundreds of millions of pounds that would likely come forward will not be received any other way.
- Cycling is not going to be significantly improved by the current levels of money spent on it, which are tiny by continental standards. Members of the public want to be given real alternatives to the car, and poor-quality shared use paths will not achieve it. Real money is needed.
- Bus services would be massively improved, with increased frequencies. (As cyclists, many of our members would be concerned about increased numbers of buses, but the alternative to this would be increased numbers of individual vehicles, which is surely worse. With better bus provision, sometimes dedicated off-road provision, the worst effects can be mitigated.)
- Despite a long period of consultation, no Councillors have come up with any serious alternative how to solve the congestion problems of the city taking into account the new dwellings, or where the money would come from.
- Issues like road maintenance, and slow progress on implementing local crossings, disabled parking spaces, etc., all caused by current funding shortages, would all start to disappear pretty quickly.
- The scheme offers the ability to kill several birds with one stone: less congestion, money for alternatives, freeing up of road space for alternatives, money to deal with maintenance backlog and better air quality.
Councillors need to take on a leadership role, and the County needs to improve the quality of the information being given out, thus working together to demonstrate the real benefits that the up-front improvements to transport would bring. Councillors who continue to oppose the scheme must say where they would otherwise find the money for the levels of investment Cambridge needs.
Next stages
Officers at the County Council are no doubt considering whether the apparent level of public support – once key conditions are put in place – should result in taking things forward.
The County Council will be considering the results and preparing a report for Cabinet – the main decision-making body – later this year. This, we expect, will effectively decide whether the proposals for the charge plus £500m investment should be dropped, or whether the next stage – asking the Government how much they are really prepared to put forward – should continue.
If that happens, the amount pledged by the Government IF a scheme is taken forward will be key. The County would then embark on a second, more detailed consultation on the facts of the scheme, in advance of a formal decision by the County Council’s Cabinet to proceed or not proceed.
Key facts from the County Council
- Between 1999 and 2016 at least 57,400 new households are planned for the county; approximately 33,000 of these homes are still to be built, mainly in the Cambridge area.
- In the Cambridge sub-region there would be an additional 33,500 car trips per day (there are currently 273,000 car trips per day). In addition to this, there would be, on average, a 23% increase in travel time and a 16% increase in distance travelled.[presumably this is if nothing is done?]
- In the Cambridge area, there would on average be a 46% increase in total travel time and significantly more on many roads, an 11% reduction in average speeds and an 84% increase in delay at junctions.
- The British Chambers of Commerce estimates that congestion currently costs the UK economy approximately £17 billion per annum. In addition, 1.2 billion hours are lost to congestion every year.
- The County Council have submitted a bid for over £500m of transport improvements to the Transport Innovation Fund. This is a pot of money from the government to entice local authorities into trying out congestion charging schemes.
- The congestion charge itself would be a one-off charge for anyone driving into, out of, or within the congestion charge zone (basically all of Cambridge), between 7.30 and 9.30am, weekdays only. The proposed charge would be in the range of £3-5 per day and all the Park & Ride sites would be outside the zone.
- If the bid is successful, implementation of the proposed transport improvements could commence from 2008 onwards, though this timescale is now thought to have been moved back at least 6 months or so. Congestion charging would be a further three years away (at least).
- It is important to note that a decision to introduce congestion charging has not yet been made, despite the County having submitted a business case in autumn 2007. Submitting a business case to government does not commit the Council to introducing it.
 |
STOP PRESS A new website, www.unclogcambridge.com is being launched in support of the congestion charge proposals.
A cyclist's paradise on earth
 |
Former Cambridge Cycling Campaign Committee member David Hembrow organised a study tour in the "Cyclists' Paradise" of the Dutch cities of Assen and Groningen. The tour was attended by campaigners from the UK (three from Cambridge). In these places about 40-50% of urban trips are done by bicycle against a minority of trips by car. Pretty much all children cycle to school and school trips are done by bike. We witnessed a school run, where hundreds of children arrived at their primary school, either on their own bike or on a child seat on a parent's bike - they all arrived within a space of just about 10 minutes - the air was clean, the only noise came from children's voices - there was not a single car in sight.
| City | Area (km2) | Population | Density(/km2) |
| Groningen | 83.69 | 181819 | 2284 |
| Cambridge | 115.65 | 117900 | 1019 |
| Assen | 83.48 | 65131 | 780 |
Assen is cycle-friendly thanks to serious investment in cycling infrastructure. The city is growing by about 1000 new inhabitants per year and all expansion is to be kept within 7 km from the city centre. The annual budget for capital expenditure on cycling is about €2million. A network of 108 km of cycle way, most of it away from cars and wide enough to cycle in pairs, creates a safe environment free from conflicts with motorists or pedestrians. Planners clearly are cyclists planning for cyclists.
 |
On the roads we did not see anybody wearing helmets or high visability clothing - cyclists simply feel safe. Surfaces are built to a high standard, smoother than the latest installations in Cambridge. Many new crossings avoid dropped curbs, raising the surface for motorists instead. Most traffic lights offer two all-way green intervals for cyclists in every phase. "No-entry signs" invariably are for motorised transport only, excepting cyclists. A and B roads have wide cycle tracks usually segregated from the road by about 3 metres distance, but the countryside is also served by an extensive network of cycle ways. Consequently, children from villages within about a 12 mile radius cycle to school and friends.
 |
We have taken a number of pictures and can hopefully prepare a more comprehensive report in the next newsletter. We hope that political decision makers and planners, especially those working on new developments like Northstowe and the so called Eco-Towns, raise their standards to what clearly helps to reduce car use, carbon emissions, increase fitness, provide greater independence to children, ... dreaming of paradise?
At our July monthly meeting (see later in this Newsletter) we will be discussing the applicability of Assen's approach to cycling provision in Cambridge, in particular the differences in the amount of space available and the issue of off-road tracks.
Photos from our trip should be online by the time you read this at www.camcycle.org.uk/events/visits/assen/.
Klaas Brümann
Photomap this month: editor's pick
#13169: Shadow of a cyclist
For more cycling-related photos of Cambridge, or to add your own, visit www.camcycle.org.uk/map
 |
Major new cycling brochures launched
We have now formally launched our two new major brochures: Cycling 2020 and Cycling in New Developments. These two documents are arguably the most impressive and full-featured items we have ever published and we hope they will give a clear indication to decision-makers of the seriousness of our intent in seeing cycling improved in the areas of new housing which are being planned.
Copies of each have been sent to decision-makers around the city and beyond. Thanks to Shirley who kindly took on the task of distributing these. Copies of Cycling 2020 were also distributed at the national conference on 10th May.
We hope that Councillors might consider giving public support in some way to these documents and the various proposals in them. For instance, motions of in-principle support for particular proposals, e.g. the Chisholm Trail, would be useful as a way of galvanising interest and action.
Cycling 2020 is our visionary document for cycling in the city over the coming decade. The brochure contains a series of achievable but challenging plans for the delivery of an attractive cycling infrastructure.
Printed in full colour, some 2,500 copies were distributed in May, and your very own copy should accompany this Newsletter.
All Councillors have received a copy, as will a wide range of other decision-makers, influential people in Cambridge, media contacts, conference delegates, national figures, developers of the new housing settlements being planned for Cambridge, our members, and others.
Cycling 2020 was formally launched at the CCN/CTC National Conference and a range of promotional activities is planned.
Cambridge is often known as a cycling city. Its vibrant cycling culture, with probably the highest rate of cycling in the country, is an asset to a city which would otherwise be even further choked with traffic. Yet we are a long way from the sort of standards used in Holland.
Through Cycling 2020, we invite readers to share the vision of a world-class cycling city that we set out in the brochure.
Cycling 2020 can also be read online at www.camcycle.org.uk/cycling2020.
Cycling in New Developments sets out our aspirations for the new settlements being planned.
In it, we summarise our views on the best way to provide for cycling in new developments and set out how a high-quality network can result in high levels of cycling and walking. With 47,500 new dwellings by 2016 planned, it is essential that cycling rates of 30-40%+, common in Holland, can be achieved, to avoid the gridlock that would otherwise result.
It is a practical guide, aimed especially at developers of the fringe developments and those judging their proposals. It does not deal with existing problems around Cambridge but instead explains best practice when a developer has a blank sheet of paper on which to create a new settlement.
The new developments around Cambridge are effectively a blank sheet of paper. None of the usual excuses apply for cycle lanes that stop when you most need them, or lack of cycle parking, etc.,.
Shared-use paths must be avoided in the new developments. These are disliked by cyclists and pedestrians, though currently used extensively in Cambridge. Instead, space must be allocated for cycling, to enable more people to choose to cycle rather than drive.
Ignoring the need for high levels of cycling will result in 50+ years of car-dominated travel patterns in a world of rising oil prices, climate change, and epidemic obesity. Cycling is an ideal solution to all of these and a worthwhile method of transport in its own right.
The guide aims to give Councillors, officials, and developers the information they need to ensure that cycling will be the natural option in these new areas. It is attractively laid out, glossy, readable, and easy to flick through.
Cycling in New Developments is also available on our new Planning website at www.camcycle.org.uk/planning/.
May - the 'Month of Cycling': review
Shortly after the last Newsletter went to press, we launched our Month of Cycling. So many events took place during May that it seemed sensible to group them together, and this resulted in some excellent publicity in the local media. Here is what took place:
National cycling conference on Saturday 10th May
'Creating a Cycling Culture: How do we respond to the challenges of the future?'
The national conference we hosted was held on Saturday May 10th in Cambridge.
Philip Darnton, who is in charge of the government's cycling body, Cycling England, was the keynote speaker. Other speakers included David Howarth (Cambridge's MP), Matt Seaton (best known for his writing in the Guardian), our very own Martin Lucas-Smith (launching Cycling 2020) and Tom Bogdanowicz from London Cycling Campaign.
Additionally, a number of workshops were run, including a session on online cycle mapping, in advance of the launch of a national journey planner that a group of us are preparing independently of the Campaign. Furthermore, a number of leisurely rides took place as a lighter side to complement the presentations.
The venue was the stunning Centre for Mathematical Sciences, in West Cambridge.
Photos and presentations from the conference are available on our website at: www.camcycle.org.uk/events/conferences/cambridge2008/.
Cycling 2020: a vision for Cambridge's cycling future: launch
The launch of our visionary document, Cycling 2020, described in an earlier article, at the CCN/CTC National Conference was the culmination of many months of hard work. We hope that decision makers will be inspired by this document and will support its proposals. Cycling 2020 can be read online at www.camcycle.org.uk/cycling2020.
Ride to Reach Fair: Bank Holiday Monday 5th May
 |
On Bank Holiday Monday 5th May 2008, we ran big bike rides from Cambridge into the fenland countryside. Over 150 people turned up, and had a great day out.
There was a short ride to the village of Reach, stopping for the village fair, and a longer ride through Wicken Fen to Ely. Both rides started together in Cambridge. We followed the National Cycle Network Route 11.
The ride was run in association with Sustrans and Cambridge City Council. We thank them for their assistance.
More photographs from the ride are on our website at www.camcycle.org.uk/events/rides/camcycle2050/2008/.
Trip to Assen, Holland: mid-May
A delegation of local cyclists travelled in mid-May on a fact-finding tour to Assen, Holland to see how cycling and walking is catered for in that country.
 |
Holland sees extremely high levels of cycling - 40% of journeys are by bike in some areas. (By comparison, Cambridge has 25% of commuter journeys by bike.)
With the large number of new developments being planned for Cambridge, ensuring that a high quality environment that facilitates cycling and walking is created is essential if the city is to avoid gridlock. 47,500 new dwellings - equating to 125,000 new citizens - represents an enormous challenge for transport, and Holland provides a good example of how the right mindset from Local Government and developers results in people getting on their bikes.
Led by former Cambridge resident David Hembrow, we toured around Assen, and we saw how the Dutch give real priority, rather than purely lip-service, to sustainable transport.
Photos from our trip are online at: www.camcycle.org.uk/events/visits/assen/.
Launch of Cycling in New Developments - new guidance for the new developments
May, the Month of Cycling, also saw the launch and distribution of our new guide for developers and decision-makers, entitled Cycling in New Developments.
Cycling in New Developments aims to give councillors, officials and developers the information they need to ensure that cycling will be the natural option in these new areas.
Copies have been sent to decision-makers across the City and County.
Cycling in New Developments is available on our new Planning website at www.camcycle.org.uk/planning/.
Local elections - using your vote for cycling: 1st May
Also in May, cycling went to the polls!
Local elections took place place on May 1st. The Councillors that were elected are the people that will be making the decisions on planning and transport issues.
There are now a larger number of political parties represented on the City Council – Lib Dem, Labour, Conservative, Green and an Independent. However, as a non-partisan body, we naturally do not endorse any particular candidate or party.
In 2007, we created an elections website, at www.camcycle.org.uk/elections where all the candidates were invited to tell the public what they think on a range of cycling and walking issues. We updated the website for the current year’s crop of candidates and local issues.
An interesting and varied range of responses were submitted. We hope that this initiative, culminating with the May 1st elections, helped to raise awareness and aspirations.
Our elections website is at www.camcycle.org.uk/elections and candidates’ responses will stay online.
Congestion charge consultation results: how would it improve cycling?
On 6th May, the County Council announced the results of its consultation on its congestion charge proposals. They were more favourable than expected, despite the negative spin given to them by the Cambridge Evening News, who have consistently run a negative campaign on this.
By the time you read this we should have launched a series of information leaflets to help explain many key issues that sadly have not been adequately understood during the consultation phase over the last 6 months.
Cambridge Cycling Campaign has welcomed the proposals, as they provide a real opportunity to improve cycling and walking (as well as public transport) in the area, because of the likelihood of almost half a billion pounds of free, up-front money from the government in advance of any scheme going ahead.
With over 47,500 new houses to be built by 2016 around Cambridge, the prospects for gridlock are all too real. The proposals offer both a huge carrot, and a stick, approach to solving this potential problem, one for which no other realistic solutions have come forward.
Many people remain completely unaware of the positives: an enormous package of up-front investment some ten times the level of current transport spending is proposed.
Whilst a congestion charge would certainly have some losers, we believe that in the medium term, the majority of people, and the health of Cambridge as a city would both benefit greatly.
There is more information on our website at:
www.camcycle.org.uk/campaigning/issues/congestioncharge/
Friday Rides: every Friday in May
 |
Our regular and informal Friday Rides continued throughout May. Come and join us for a pleasant and very informal ride next time you fancy a break on Friday lunchtime.
These are lunchtime rides of varying speed and length, usually involving a stop at a pub on the way. Open to all who like to ride and talk about bicycles. Join the ride at your own risk.
The Friday Rides run each Friday lunchtime at 12:30pm, leaving from the Stourbridge Common side of Green Dragon Bridge.
There is more information on our website at: www.camcycle.org.uk/events/rides/fridayrides/.
Ride to Reach Fair
 |
‘That was a really wonderful day out’ said one survivor of the 50-mile ride from Midsummer Common to Ely and back. By Stourbridge Common the ride stretched out over half a mile and our official tally was 157 riders through Bottisham. The ride included very many children, their families and a lot of people we'd never seen before on our events. The back of the ride arrived in Reach at about ten to twelve in good time to catch the opening ceremony at the fair. Most riders were just there for the fair, which was swarming with people on an unusually sunny Bank Holiday.
 |
Two Maypoles
After the festive opening ceremonies, which involved some dancing around a maypole, a group of about 40 of us carried on all the way to Ely via Wicken Fen, arriving at 3:30 pm where about half got on the train home. The rest of us – about 17 – left Ely at 4:30 pm and we were back in Cambridge just before 8:30 pm and repaired to the Maypole pub (appropriately) for a celebratory drink.
Jim Chisholm led the ride back from Reach to Cambridge at 2 pm but only with about 30 people and so the balance must have decided to go home independently.
Reach out
 |
At Reach Fair the mayor and her entourage visited the Campaign stall bike and I was delighted to hear her say that she thought they ought to have cycled rather than arriving in their limousines – perhaps next year then?
 |
I must remember to take a dustpan and brush next year – at one point as lead rider I had to stop and pick up broken glass near a pub. I think we got most of it, but I did hear about some punctures at the beginning of the ride. I heard of a couple of bangs and scrapes and a grazed arm when someone fell off their bike but nothing major to worry about. One rider, who said that the most she had ever ridden before was three miles, came with us all the way to Ely and back. When she was flagging at the back we oiled her rusty chain and set the seat height and she was like a new cyclist. I also heard of several groups of people who had travelled to Cambridge from London especially for the event.
For many people, both children and adults, this was the longest ride they'd ever undertaken, and a good number said to me that they didn't know the route existed and that they were glad to discover it. Many also asked when the next ride was and I was sad to tell them that there were no organised rides planned, apart from our regular informal Friday rides. The campaign has stopped running the leisurely rides every month, choosing instead to focus energies on organising one big ride per year.
 |
I should like to thank all the volunteer marshals for helping this ride pass smoothly, Sustrans for building the route and providing liability insurance cover and Cambridge City Council for helping to promote the ride.
Simon Nuttall
Grand Arcade Cycle Park
The Grand Arcade Cycle Park is an excellent new facility on Corn Exchange Street, built to provide cycle parking for around 500 cycles, and is a new concept for shops in Cambridge. There is also a cycle shop, run by Station Cycles.
 |
What is the Grand Arcade Cycle Park?
It is Britain's biggest free indoor city centre cycle park. It provides space for around 500 cycles, though more than half are paid-for valet parking spaces. It opened in March 2008.
Briefly, what are the benefits?
 |
- Over 200 free cycle parking spaces
- Located close to the centre of Cambridge City
- Direct access to the Grand Arcade via the lift (floor -1) or stairs
- Easy to use cycle racks suitable for securing a wide range of cycle types, including trailers
- A cycle shop
- Valet cycle parking for over 200 cycles
- Mural art (not yet implemented)
- Lockers for helmets, etc. (not yet open)
- Showers for changing (not yet open)
- CCTV coverage
I can't find it - where is it?
As there are still many bikes left in St Andrew's Street where there are few stands, we assume that many people simply haven't realised the cycle park exists or that is now open.
It is tucked away on Corn Exchange Street. From Downing Street, cycle into Corn Exchange Street, and go past (but not into) the car park entrance. You will see it on the right, with a small entranceway and sign.
Take care when using the contraflow back to Downing Street, as cars emerging could form a hazard.
What are the opening hours?
 |
At present it closes at 11pm at night, meaning that arrival in the afternoon and staying in the city centre late into the night is not possible. We are campaigning for 24-hour access, like the car park.
What about valet cycle parking?
Valet cyle parking provides extra security and the ability to leave belongs with one’s bicycle. It is being offered for a modest charge and Cambridge Cycling Campaign members can get 10% off. We understand that John Lewis and other shops plan to offer free/subsidised valet parking for their employees. We would strongly welcome this and believe it will boost take-up and awareness of this new resource.
 |
Cyclists flock to park securely at Park Street Cycle Park
When I had the job of Cycle Theft Reduction Officer at Parkside Police Station a few years ago I soon realised that the most effective use for the project money was to create as many secure cycle parking places as possible across Cambridge. The basement floor of Park Street Car Park then contained 24 car-parking places. We converted this to 51 cycle lockers and 250 Sheffield-style cycle racks.
 |
Back then I was worried that cyclists would not use the facility because it is some distance from the places where people want to be. We take car parks for granted now, but years ago when even these were a new phenomenon, people had to learn to park their car in one place and walk to another.
Cyclists seem to be learning a similar lesson at Park Street where this recent photo shows just how popular it has become. It is still some way off full capacity, but there are regularly well over 100 cycles parked here, presumably because of the better security and that bikes are under cover.
It has taken six years to become this popular, as cyclists have had to discover not only where it is but what it is and how it works (i.e. whether you have to pay - you don't!). Now that local people have a model of what a cycle park can be like the expectations are raised. Cyclists will soon be discovering how the new Grand Arcade Cycle Park works. That will also take a while to become popular but when word gets around I expect cyclists to flock there too, and then we'll want to build more.
Simon Nuttall
Wicken Vision update
 |
The first of the bridges on the new route joining Cambridge to Wicken is almost ready for use. The bridge itself is in place and complete and the new access tracks on either side are being surfaced at the moment. It should be available for cyclists and walkers to use by mid-June and there will be a formal opening in early July, by which time the signage should be in place too.
Mike Causer
New housing developments
There are a lot of plans for new housing developments in the Cambridge area, all of which have an impact for cycling as they draw in more people, all of whom will need to travel — for work, for school, for shopping, and for leisure. Ensuring they have good cycling provision, and are linked to other places, particularly Cambridge, is an important part of guaranteeing that the impact of new developments is not manifested as gridlock in Cambridge.
Map base from OpenStreetMap.org CCbySA2.0 - some rights reserved
Cambridge Cycling Campaign tries to keep up with what is being proposed – not an easy task – and to comment critically on proposals at an early enough stage to have some influence on the plans – an even harder task. We would very much welcome assistance with this task. There are the following discussion groups which you can join via the website:
- Arbury Park
- NIAB site (new)
- North-West Cambridge (new)
- South Cambridgeshire (new)
The map and accompanying text summarise the size and status of most of those developments which we know about.
Arbury Park
Location: As most people will know, this is the area to the north of King's Hedges Road.
 |
Number of Dwellings: Billboard advertises 700 prestige homes. Multiplied by 2.5 for average number of people per household gives 1,750. The South Cambridgeshire council website gives a figure of 900 of which 270 will be 'affordable'. Commercial buildings, a revised hotel plan and community facilities are to come.
Status: Already under construction
Issues: Crossings, cyclepaths.
www.scambs.gov.uk/Environment/Planning/NewDevelopments/ArburyPark.htm
www.camcycle.org.uk/campaigning/issues/arburypark/
NIAB
Location: This will cover the site that stretches from Histon Road and the old Cambridge Road across the fields to Huntingdon Road.
Number of dwellings (David Wilson Estates): 1780 dwellings, primary school, community facilities, associated infrastructure (roads and cycleways.) A park is proposed for the centre of the development.
Status: Outline planning application to be decided. There is a separate application to South Cambridgeshire District Council for an access road to the site from Histon Road.
Issues: junctions at Histon and Huntingdon Roads are, as proposed, unfriendly to cyclists, forcing cyclists onto the pavement and there are no plans for on-road facilities on Huntingdon Road or the access road. 40 mph speed limit proposed on King's Hedges Road going against local and national government advice.
www.greenissues.com/niab/updated%20masterplan.htm
www.cambridge.gov.uk/ccm/content/development-control/major-applications.en
Northwest Cambridge Area Action Plan
Location: This is land north of Madingley Road, between it and Huntingdon Road, near the Observatory and the University Farm.
Number of Dwellings: Unknown. The majority of the housing will be for University staff and students with faculty buildings and research facilities.
Status: The Area Action Plan has not been adopted yet.
Issues: The Huntingdon Road junction, which will be altered to provide a link to the NIAB development.
www-building.arct.cam.ac.uk/northwestc/index.html [This is the official website for the project.]
Southern Fringe
Location: Included within this area are Addenbrooke's, Trumpington Meadows, Bell School, Clay Farm and Glebe Farm.
Trumpington Meadows
Number of dwellings: In total 4,000 homes are planned, with community facilities such as a primary school, a secondary school, a 60 hectare country park, health centre and local shops. Application submitted by Trumpington Meadows Land Company Ltd.
Status: The Trumpington Meadows development has been granted outline planning permission by a group called the Joint Development Control Committee for the Cambridge Fringes (fairly trips off the tongue). This is made up of councillors from the County, South Cambridgeshire and City councils.
Issues: Our old friends, the shared-use path and permeability.
www.trumpingtonmeadows.com/Home/
www.camcycle.org.uk/newsletters/65/article19.html
Bell School site
Location: Land west of Babraham Road, adjacent to Bell International Language School
Dwellings: 347 plus student accommodation for 100 submitted on behalf of the Bell Education Trust.
Issues: On-site cycle routes, cycle parking, access to the site, especially the junction with Babraham Road. There is a separate application for a 3 metre-wide shared footpath/cyclepath/route for emergency vehicles.
Status: Undecided.
www.camcycle.org.uk/newsletters/75/article14.html
Clay Farm
Location: 113.32 hectares of agricultural land between Long Road and Addenbrooke’s Hospital. The proposal as described in the outline planning permission from the developer, Countryside Properties was:
Residential development of up to 2,300 new mixed-tenure dwellings and accompanying provision of education facilities, community facilities, sport and recreation facilities and landscaped open spaces including 54ha. of public open space in the green corridor, retail (A1), food and drink uses (A3, A4, A5), financial and professional services (A2), a nursery (D1), alternative health treatments (D1); and all related infrastructure including: all roads and associated infrastructure, alternative locations for Cambridgeshire Guided Bus stops, alternative location for CGB Landscape Ecological Mitigation Area, attenuation ponds including alternative location for Addenbrooke's Access Road pond, cycleways, footways and crossings of Hobson's Brook.
www.cambridge.gov.uk/ccm/content/development-control/major-applications.en#internalSection8
Glebe Farm
Location: South and west of Clay Farm site towards Trumpington.
Number of dwellings: 230.
Issues: Unknown
Status: awaiting planning application
Northstowe (New Town)
Location: Near Oakington and Longstanton.
Number of dwellings: (Gallagher and English Partnership) 9,500 homes - 24,000 people. Employment centre, community facilities (shops, casino, hotel and guest houses etc).
Issues: Progress of construction is likely to discourage people from cycling, woeful inadequacy of provision and lack of detail in the planning application.
Status: still out to consultation.
www.scambs.gov.uk/Environment/Planning/NewDevelopments/Northstowe/northstowe.htm
Marshall's Airport/Cambridge East Area Action Plan
Location: This is the land currently occupied by Marshall's Airport and the Newmarket Road Park and Ride site.
Number of dwellings:10,000-12,000 homes - 30,000 people. 80% residential.
Issues: Unknown as yet but the idea is to have a transport hierarchy that places pedestrians first, cyclists second, followed by public transport, emergency vehicles and lastly the private car.
Status: Area Action Plan adopted February 2008.It is unlikely that building work will start before 2016.
Updated details of all the developments are on our new Planning webpages, at www.camcycle.org.uk/planning
Bev Nicolson
Northstowe objections
The Campaign sent its formal objection letter to the Northstowe planning application to South Cambridgeshire District Council at the end of March 2008. At the outset we made it clear that the new development was a blank canvas where the highest standards of sustainable transport could be achieved - equal to those in Holland and Denmark. We recommended new guidance in Manual for Streets as a starting point for effective road design.
Map base from OpenStreetMap.org CCbySA2.0 - some rights reserved
These are the main points we raised:
How could we judge the proposed infrastructure when the planning application only gave details of provision for motor vehicles but not for pedestrians and cyclists?
We had to do a lot of filling in the gaps.
So we recommended that the proposed network of off-road cycle routes within the town be a minimum of 3m wide, segregated and unobstructed; and on- and off-road cyclists should have priority at all side or minor roads over road traffic. Toucan, or other cycle, crossings should be designed as single-stage with built-in detectors. On-road cycle lanes must be red-surfaced and have a minimum of 2m width.
The internal road network should avoid guard rails, roundabouts, fast left-filter lanes and wide splays at side roads. Any on-road build-outs must have proper cycle bypasses or be designed so that cyclists have no directional deflection, with parking restrictions in the immediate area. Lay-bys should be the norm at bus stops and for car parking.
There should be 2-3 m wide ‘hybrid’ cycle lanes, rather than bi-directional off-road paths, along Runway Boulevard (the main southern access road) and on the Primary and Secondary road network.
The planning application proposed ‘a 30 mph speed limit although the majority of roads will be designed so that speeds are controlled to 20 mph’ (7.4.10 Transport Assessment or TA). We acknowledged that road design can reduce speeds, but it needed to be reinforced by a legally-defined 20 mph limit. We also supported the extensive use of Home Zones where speeds would be lower still.
Northstowe will contain many blocks of apartments and mews/terraced houses so residential cycle parking should be based on one cycle per bedroom, and be secure and easily accessible. Work, school, retail and leisure cycle parking should also be close to main entrances.
We criticised the 4000 Town Centre car parking spaces which seemed excessive for a ‘sustainable’ town of 9500 dwellings, especially if elsewhere on site, car parking would be up to South Cambs’ maximum standards. Why were there to be regular reviews of car parking (flexible multi-storey, surface and on-street to which ‘additional parking can be introduced’ (7.5.19 TA)), but none promised for cycle parking, despite being set at South Cambs’s minimum level?
We questioned the low prediction of cycle use (4.5%) when compared to that of Cambridge (28.3%) and the assumption that 5 km is the maximum distance that people are prepared to cycle when recent Travel for Work statistics show 22% of commuter cycle trips are over 5 km. The Guided Busway (CGB) maintenance track is an important part of Northstowe’s off-site cycling strategy but agreement has still not been reached on an improved surface. Without a smooth all-weather tarmac surface, particularly in the section between the B1050 and Park Lane, Histon, this route will never reach its potential as a high-quality commuter route for cyclists.
Commerce and employment must be established early on in the new town if the predicted number of residents is going to be working there. The pressure on the surrounding road network could be overwhelming if more housing and less employment were to be available in Northstowe than originally predicted.
We expressed our concern that funding for mitigating traffic impacts will be found for locations where it is at its worst, but there’ll be little left over for areas where it is harder to ‘prove’ the Northstowe effect.
The Transport Assessment made many assertions about the high standard of existing cycling provision that were just not credible: it stated that the shared-use foot/cycleway between Oakington and Girton (part of National Cycle Route 51) provides ‘a high quality cycle experience’ (4.2.34 TA), yet at between 1.4 m and 1.8 m wide it falls well below minimum guidance standards. And by suggesting an upgrade of parts of it to 1.8 m width, it would remain so.
No details are included of the Longstanton to Bar Hill off-road cycleway yet the TA states it should be a priority for the first Northstowe residents.
The other proposals for new or improved cycling infrastructure in the surrounding villages are either misguided or inadequate, especially when considered alongside increased road traffic. For example, the proposal for a substandard, shared-use foot/cycleway between Oakington and Cottenham is completely unacceptable given the very high vehicle speeds right next to it.
The early years of construction present particular difficulties: we expressed our concern, for instance, that cyclists coming from Longstanton, Willingham and further north should not have their cycling routes towards Cambridge cut off and there should be safe provision for crossing the main access roads. The proposal to build the northern section of Northstowe first would mean residents crossing a building site to access Town Centre amenities in the southern section. The effectiveness of sustainable travel plans would be severely undermined by such hostile conditions.
South Cambridgeshire District Council has issued a response, and the County Council a draft response, to the Northstowe planning application - both are highly critical and often identical in their comments. And much of what they say is in keeping with Campaign policy!
The County Council does not believe ‘the Master Plan will encourage cycling as a primary mode of transport for journeys within Northstowe’; and goes on to suggests a strategy of indirect routing for cars.
S Cambs and the County both state the need for more North-South linkages in the first few years and ‘a clear cycle strategy needs to be produced indicating how non-motorised users will have priority within the town’. There should be segregated cycle routes to all key land uses, single-stage crossings and no guard rails. The County even goes as far as proposing hybrid cycle lanes with enhanced physical segregation. They both assert that cycle parking should be based on one space per bedroom, and car parking levels should be more ‘challenging’ to deter car use. Secure cycle parking should be located at all five CGB stops in the town.
S Cambs and the County believe a 20 mph speed limit should be investigated ‘to evaluate its enforceability and practicality for Northstowe’.
S Cambs asserts that ‘prioritisation needs to be carried out on the potential value of linkages proposed’ to the surrounding area. It recommends a new cycleway along Wilson Road and a cycle bridge over the A14 to Bar Hill. It requests more details of the Hatton’s Road cycle path and questions how NCR51 will cross three 60 mph roads. It criticises the lack of detail for the proposed cycle/foot link to Willingham and the overstating of the quality of the Oakington/Girton/Histon shared-use path. If the GADG bid for a proper CGB track surface fails, then alternative funding must be found; it is far from clear in any case whether the Cycle Audit, which stresses the value of this route, includes an upgraded surface or not.
Like the Campaign, the County believes the modal share figures don’t reflect the ‘potential or ambition’ of cycling that could be achieved. The County thinks a cycling isochrones map should be produced, based on an assumed cycle speed of 25 kph, to highlight the potential for commuting for experienced faster cyclists.
The transport strategy relies heavily on an early A14 upgrade – S Cambs requires a limit on the occupation of dwellings before the completion of the upgrade if no schedule has been agreed. Both say the Transport Assessment is incomplete because key parties have not yet agreed on the trip generation methodology for multi-modal or construction traffic trips.
The County Council finds the lack of reference to climate change in Northstowe’s ‘Vision and Objectives’ (part of the Design and Access Statement) unacceptable and demands a Climate Change Strategy.
Vanessa Kelly
Letters
Puncture-resistant tyres
Following David Green's letter (Letters, Newsletter 76), I agree that Schwalbe Marathon HS 308 are good, but not against thorns. I switched to Schwalbe Marathon Plus on my utility bike, which does about 2500 miles a year. They have a thick pad of very springy rubber under the tread, but, surprisingly, still roll at least as well as the standard Marathons. They are more expensive and more difficult to fit, because the thicker rubber tends to spring out of the rims; I resolved that with a set of 4 "zip ties" to strap them on as I worked round the rim. I think they are worth the extra cost and more time-consuming fitting for peace of mind when cycling in poor conditions.
Mine came from Spa Cycles by mail order.
Jean Whitaker
Cycling up and up
 |
Cambridgeshire’s Traffic Monitoring Report for 2007 has recently been published. A recent innovation, as a mandatory requirement by the Department of Transport, is a measure of the overall change in levels of cycling.
This is being done from a baseline of the 2004 and 2005 counts, being a mixture of manual and automatic ones at 205 locations. In 2006 the figures were up by some 5.8%, and in 2007 it rose by a further 8.2%.
 |
One of the issues with cycle counts is that they may vary according to the weather, so although ‘Cam Screenline’ counts are spread over a week, a lovely fine week one year, followed by a cold and wet one the following one, can suggest a slowdown or even a fall in cycle use. The aggregation of a number of counts should reduce any such variance, but I do have concerns. Within a year or so we’ll have two additional major cycle routes away from traffic alongside the guided bus route. This is likely both to divert some trips and create others. How will such new routes be added to the sample? We’ll be asking the County about the details of this process.
Although automatic counter sites for cyclists are reported only two within Cambridge are listed. I’d heard that such counters can’t cope with the ‘shoals’ of cyclists in Cambridge, 2,314 in 24 hours at Garret Hostel Bridge, although 56 at Godmanchester might be accurate.
For years we’ve had ‘Cam Screenline’ counts made just before start of Cambridge University ‘Easter’ term, as well as a Cambridge ‘radial cordon’ count in October, but now we’ve also an ‘Inner cordon’ which should count all those entering the area bounded by the inner ring road. This again is part of a DFT requirement to count motor vehicles entering the central area. Although ‘cyclists’ are included in this figure, this cannot be a realistic estimate of cyclists entering the central area, and I suspect it only includes those on routes that also carry motor vehicles and hence could be misleading.
So are there any other ‘headline’ figures for 2007 worth quoting?
Cambridge Inner Cordon Inbound AM traffic:
Total (motor?) vehicles: 8,256, PSVs: 435, cyclists: 3,535?
Cambridge radial cordon 6,655 (up 9%)
Cam Screenline 19,894 (up 2%)
Jim Chisholm
Mill Road reclaimed for humans - a vision
Ian Jackson gives his personal vision for Mill Road. What do you think? Would it work?
Imagine Mill Road as a pleasant city street where people have space to wander, get their groceries, window shop, and socialise, and which can also form part of the city's sustainable transport network. Impossible ? Here is how it could be done:
 |
Ban motor vehicles except for access. Widen the pavements where possible, to leave a carriageway of 5 m width with centreline at 2.5 m; that is enough for oncoming cyclists to pass easily, or small cars or vans to pass with care. Paint bicycle symbols in the middle or slightly to the right of each lane; this will emphasise that it's primarily a cycle route and show where cyclists should ride; that keeps cyclists from cycling near the kerb which is bad for both the cyclist and pedestrians. We will need to add a few passing places (for vehicles much wider than 2m to pass each other) and a few delivery bays.
Reduce the speed limit to 15 mph. Remove most of the signage, and move the remaining sign poles to just by the edge of the carriageway (rather than the 0.5 m into the pavement – which is currently the official standard for poles because drivers run into them otherwise). Traffic management signage is ugly, makes a street feel like it's primarily for cars, and the poles get in the way of pedestrians. After we've done that there may even be room for an extra tree or two.
 |
Close the railway bridge to motor traffic. Its steepness and width lead to conflict between drivers and cyclists; the pavements are already too narrow; and a closure will be needed to help enforce the access restriction. With cycles as the only vehicles we can widen the pavements to leave a 4.5 m carriageway split into 2 m and 2.5 m bike lanes (a 2.5 m lane will be just wide enough to overtake a slower cyclist); we'll use an ordinary dashed white centreline rather than formal overtaking restriction, to reduce clutter. A simple set of bollards on one side of the bridge will do; the other side of the bridge can make do with a `no flying motorcycles' sign.
Abolish the pelican crossings and replace them with twice or three times as many zebras – although we can probably do away with the Belisha beacons. Abolish the traffic lights at Gwydir Street, of course. Traffic lights cause delay to everyone, and can be particularly frustrating for pedestrians and cyclists – many of both groups are tempted to ignore them. In particular, those cyclists who won't give way to pedestrians at a zebra won't stop for a light either, so pedestrians are better served by a larger number of more informal crossings.
Retain the kerbs (and the tarmac surface on the carriageway). If we intend Mill Road to retain its role as a through route for cyclists, we need to make clear to pedestrians the area where they shouldn't be walking without looking. The painted cycle symbols on the road will help cue pedestrians to look as well as listen. Kerbs also mark out the pavement as space for pedestrians, deterring encroachment by cyclists and drivers. If the pavements are wide then the kerb becomes an asset to the pedestrians, rather than a liability.
 |
Vigorous enforcement will be needed, certainly at first. We can use the CCTV to prosecute drivers who use the pavement to pass or for parking, or who rat-run, or who drive over the bridge past the prohibition sign (to get stuck at the bollards), or who collide with the repositioned poles. Taxis will have to use Gonville Place to get between the station and points north rather than rat-running; those taxi drivers who forget the new rules can get a reminder from the licensing office.
The lorries from the builders' merchants on Devonshire Road are the biggest real problem. I think there's really not much of a good solution for them given the location, which is becoming ever more part of the heart of the city. If we define the for-access zone to include their site, they at least get the choice of which way to go – although there is of course the difficulty with the way the Carter Bridge joins Devonshire Road which I know many members of the Campaign would like to see improved.
If Cambridge ever manages a tram system, there would be room enough for a line in each direction if we use continental-style trams-for-narrow-streets, rather than enormous ‘supertrams’. We can expect tram drivers to actually obey the lowered speed limit. As anyone who's been to Amsterdam will know, trams, pedestrians and cycles can mix mix remarkably well even in narrow and crowded streets.
Of course much of this is politically difficult for various reasons; it would require cooperation and approval from many officials and quite a few politicians. But I thought I'd present an idea of what a non-car-centred Mill Road might look like. We – all of society – should be looking forward to this kind of bright future.
Ian Jackson
City centre mess
 |
As you are probably aware, a lot of road works have been taking place in the centre of Cambridge as part of the Core Area traffic management scheme. Big changes came into effect on 21st May when a new one-way system for motor vehicles became operational. Be warned that provision for cyclists is not adequate, despite our efforts, and that extra care needs to be taken.
Regent Street bollards
Motor vehicles travelling towards the City Centre from the south, coming up Regent Street have to turn right into Park Terrace as there is a bollard blocking northbound traffic by Hobson House (opposite Maplins). Buses, taxis and emergency vehicles will be fitted with transponders to lower the bollard and let them through. There is a cycle bypass lane but it is badly designed and dangerous as it is curved, leading users into the path of vehicles coming through the bollard. Photographs of this are on the photomap, at www.camcycle.org.uk/map/location/13625/nearby.html.
 |
There is also, crazily, also a new bus stop outside Maplins, just at the point where conflicts are most likely, further exacerbating the problem.
Members of the Committee met on site on 20th May to discuss what measures we wanted, both immediately and in the longer term, to reduce the problems for cyclists and increase both safety and convenience. This followed earlier discussions with the County Council which have proven fruitless in terms of addressing the safety issues.
We have sent the County a formal letter outlining our concerns, and this letter will be of interest to any lawyer representing a cyclist should a collision occur, as the County have failed to address the obvious problems, despite our pointing them out over a year ago.
Emmanuel Street one-way
 |
As part of the same traffic management scheme, Emmanuel Street will become one-way and motor vehicles will not be able to turn into it from St Andrew's Street. A contraflow cycle lane enabling cyclists to travel towards Drummer Street is not in place and, to our surprise, may not be operational for several months. Buses will, as at present, be able to turn both north into the City Centre and south from Emmanuel Street.
But in the short-term it is inevitable that there will be some chaos at some times as vehicles unfamiliar with the new road layout find themselves blocked by a bollard or unable to turn and have to make awkward manoeuvres to get out. Please take care.
We shall be monitoring the situation, so we can assess scope for improvements (short of redesigning the whole city centre road network) and lobby councillors and officials about changes needed. As part of this, we would welcome your views on both the new layouts and on ways of improving them for cyclists.
Hills Road Bridge
 |
Further from the centre, there is currently a partial closure of Hills Road Bridge which will last for no less than ten and a half months while works for the Guided Bus take place.
At present there is a single lane in each direction. We asked that 'No overtaking' signs be installed, as it is unsafe for motorists to overtake cyclists in the narrow lanes. Unfortunately the contractors made things worse for a while by putting up signs that appeared to ban cyclists from using the bridge altogether. However, we are pleased to report that these were quickly removed as a result of our representations and, after some further lobbying, they have agreed to put up “Narrow lanes. Do not overtake cyclists” signs, which should be in place by the time you read this.
The police were also asked to target motorists overtaking cyclists in this unsafe situation. Unfortunately they chose instead to victimise cyclists by fining those escaping the intimidation by cycling on the pavement.
In addition some movements have been banned. Turning right out of Brooklands Avenue onto Hills Road bridge is not allowed. Nor, approaching from the south, is it permitted to turn right into Cherry Hinton Road. These restrictions apply to cyclists as well as those driving motor vehicles.
Alternative routes
 Map base from OpenStreetMap.org CCbySA2.0 - some rights reserved |
To get onto Hills Road bridge from Trumpington Street, avoid Brooklands Avenue entirely and come along Bateman Street. Then turn right onto Hills Road and continue straight on over the bridge.
To get into Cherry Hinton Road from the south, turn off Hills Road at one of the earlier right hand turns, e.g. Rathmore Road (a no-through road for cars) or Hartington Grove.
To avoid Emmanuel Street, from the south either turn right, before the bollard, into Park Terrace or continue straight on along St Andrews Street and turn right into King Street. From the city centre heading south continue past Emmanuel Street and then turn left into Park Terrace.
National Bike Week 2008
This year Bike Week is 14 to 22 June, and the emphasis is very much on getting publicity in mainstream publications.
Bike Week once again has a commercial sponsor, in the form of Nokia, and the partner charity is Sport Relief. This year, nationally, the event is challenging families to get out of their cars, step away from the TV and get on their bikes. The call to action is ‘Free the Family’, to rediscover how much fun you can have together on a bike. The aim is to get half a million people on their bikes, with the help of free Nokia Maps, and some free software for GPS-enabled Nokia phones.
To find out about events in your area, use the “Find your nearest event” link on the Bike Week website, www.bikeweek.org.uk.
Clare Macrae
Bike Week – Everyone Active
We asked Riaan Herholdt of Everyone Active to tell us about some cycling events he’s organising for Bike Week at Abbey Pools.
We are planning to promote Cycling and Exercise during June by means of cycling displays and organising a Kiddies Bicycle ride.
Firstly we will have a Spinning promotion on Friday 20 and Saturday 21 June at Coldham’s Lane Sainsbury’s. Spinning is a group exercise class which is motivated by an instructor and background music and performed on a stationary bicycle, called a Spinning Bike. We will have two demonstrations of this activity at Sainsbury’s each day. Spinning is a fantastic exercise to keep fit or to burn some extra calories!!!
We are also planning an Open Day for all members of the public on Sunday 29 June, when there will be an outdoor Spinning class in our parking area.
Our main event will be a bike ride which is aimed at all children of all ages and parents and anybody that’s up for an easy cycle. We are hoping to go for an early morning cycle, starting at Everyone Active, cycling towards the Green Dragon pub and back again. Refreshments will be arranged at the turning point. All children and parents are welcome to join in our cycle and can make use of our swimming pool to cool down afterwards.
If you want more details regarding our Open Day Cycle Event, please contact us at Everyone Active at the Abbey Pools.
Contact details: 01223 213352
riaanherholdt@slm-ltd.co.uk
Riaan Herholdt
Monthly meetings menu
Open meetings, which everyone is welcome to attend, are held every month. The Diary section of this Newsletter and our website have the dates of forthcoming meetings, which are normally on the first Tuesday of each month at 7.30 pm for 8 pm at the Friends' Meeting House, Jesus Lane. Tea and coffee are served from around 7.30 pm.
The next meetings are on Tuesday 1st July and Tuesday 5th August 2008. All are welcome, especially members new to the Campaign.
As a result of an extraordinarily busy few months, we’ve not had time to arrange speakers for both of these meetings. If you have any ideas for future meetings we would be glad to receive them.
At the May meeting we gave members a preview launch of Cycling 2020, and initial feedback was positive. We also reviewed our Cycling in New Developments paper. Both are outlined in this Newsletter.
Tuesday 1st July 2008 – Photos and stories from Assen, Holland
Those of us who went on the Holland trip in mid-May will present our stories and photos from Assen, followed by a discussion of the applicability of approach taken in Holland to Cambridge, and what is realistic to achieve.
Riverside Bridge to open
Cambridge’s first new crossing of the River Cam for almost 40 years opens on 5th June 2008. It will join up the Chesterton and Riverside/Abbey areas very nicely, and encourage the transfer of many journeys from car to bike.
 Map base from OpenStreetMap.org CCbySA2.0 - some rights reserved |
The bridge’s design is spectacular and a real asset to the city's walking and cycling infrastructure. We congratulate the City and County Councils for their work in bringing this scheme to fruition at long last. The money has come from developer contributions in the area and a government infrastructure fund.
Committee member Clare Macrae was one of the panel who chose the winning design, and they seem to have made an excellent decision! A key aspect is that the cycling and walking halves are split in the middle, to reduce conflict between these user groups.
 |
Members of the Campaign, and many other people from around the city, took place in a vibration testing exercise on 22nd May, and it was exciting to be able to try it out for the first time.
Bollards have now been installed to keep burnt-out cars away from the entrance to the bridge. In our view, the spacing of these bollards (1.5m apart) is acceptable, though it is disappointing that such measures should be needed – it certainly wouldn’t if the bridge were in Holland!
We have requested that cycle parking be installed in the space underneath the bridge. This is an ideal location for some covered cycle parking! Such cycle parking would be useful for people visiting the area for leisure purposes, and would use an otherwise unused space.
The width of the bridge is not quite as great as might be ideal, but in practice it should work fine. The pedestrian side in particular seems a little narrow, but both groups should be able to co-exist easily. We also wait to see how well the shared-use area on the north side will work which joins the bridge to the street network.
Coronation Street
New speed cushions have been installed to slow motor traffic in the Coronation Street area. These are not full-width, giving plenty of room for cyclists. See photos 13821, 13776, 13777, 13778, and 13779 on our photomap at www.camcycle.org.uk.
Campaign Diary
Please note: the most up-to-date version of the diary of events is always in the events section of the website.
June 2008 | |
| Fri 6 12.30 pm |
Friday ride (weather permitting): A lunchtime ride of varying speed and length, usually involving a stop at a pub on the way, leaving from the Stourbridge Common side of Green Dragon Bridge. Open to all who like to ride and talk about bicycles. Join the ride at your own risk. |
| Wed 11 10 am |
Joint Development Control Committee, University Centre, Granta Place, Mill Lane. Campaign members may be interested to attend Joint Development Control Committee, which are determining the Planning Applications relating to the huge major housing development proposals for the Cambridge Sub-region. |
| Fri 13 8.30 am |
Newsletter review meeting: Tatties, corner Hobson St/Sussex St. Please note the change of date. |
| Fri 13 12.30 pm |
Friday ride (weather permitting) see 6 June for description. |
| 14–22 | Bike Week 2008. A list of events, which can be searched by location or type, is on their website: www.bikeweek.org.uk/. |
| Thu 19 7.30 pm | North Area Committee: Manor Community College, Arbury Road. Campaign members may be interested to attend City Council Area Committee meetings, which often cover walking/cycling/transport issues. |
| Fri 20 12.30 pm | Friday ride (weather permitting) see 6 June for description. |
| Fri 27 12.30 pm | Friday ride (weather permitting) see 6 June for description. |
July 2008 | |
| Tue 1 8.00 pm | Monthly General Meeting: Friends' Meeting House, Jesus Lane (with tea and coffee from 7.30pm, and a chance to chat, and for us to introduce ourselves to new members). The main item for this meeting will be illustrated reports from those who visited Assen in the Netherlands and a chance to discuss how applicable that approach is to Cambridge. |
| Thu 3 7.30 pm | South Area Committee: Queen Edith's Chapel, Wulfstan Way. Campaign members may be interested to attend City Council Area Committee meetings, which often cover walking/cycling/transport issues. |
| Fri 4 12.30 pm | Friday ride (weather permitting) see 6 June for description. |
| Sat 5 | Newsletter 79 deadline: Please send copy to Monica Frisch. Members are warmly invited to write articles (style guidelines available) and are invited to contact the Editor in the first instance. |
| Sat 5 / Sun 6 | AJC response meeting: We will get together to discuss items on the Cambridge Traffic Management Area Joint Committee (AJC) agenda and draft a response to Councillors on the AJC over this weekend. For further details, please contact us. |
| Wed 9 10 am | Joint Development Control Committee: venue to be confirmed. Campaign members may be interested to attend Joint Development Control Committee, which are determining the Planning Applications relating to the huge major housing development proposals for the Cambridge Sub-region. |
| Fri 11 12.30 pm | Friday ride (weather permitting) see 6 June for description. |
| Mon 14 2 pm | Cambridge Traffic Management Area Joint Committee (AJC) meeting: The Guildhall. Campaign members may be interested to attend AJC meetings, which cover walking/cycling/transport issues in some depth. |
| Fri 18 12.30 pm | Friday ride (weather permitting) see 6 June for description. |
| Thu 24 7.30 pm | Newsletter stuffing: Baby Milk Action offices, 34 Trumpington Street. Help very much welcomed. |
| Fri 25 12.30 pm | Friday ride (weather permitting) see 6 June for description. |
| Sun 27 | London to Cambridge Bike Ride: Raise funds for Breakthrough Breast Cancer by taking part in the annual London to Cambridge Bike Ride. The 50 mile route winds its way through beautiful countryside from Waltham Abbey to the finish at Midsummer Common in the heart of Cambridge. To enter apply online at www.bike-events.com or call 0870 755 8519. |
| Thu 31 7.30 pm | East Area Committee: Cherry Trees Day Centre, St Matthews Street. Members may be interested to attend City Council Area Committee meetings, which often cover walking/cycling/transport issues. |
August 2008 | |
| Fri 1 8.30 am | Newsletter review meeting: Tatties, corner Hobson St/Sussex St. |
| Fri 1 12.30 pm | Friday ride (weather permitting) see 6 June for description. |
| Tue 5 8.00 pm | Monthly General Meeting: Friends' Meeting House, Jesus Lane (with tea and coffee from 7.30pm, and a chance to chat, and for us to introduce ourselves to new members). |
| Thu 7 10 am | Joint Development Control Committee: University Centre, Granta Place, Mill Lane. Campaign members may be interested to attend Joint Development Control Committee, which are determining the Planning Applications relating to the huge major housing development proposals for the Cambridge Sub-region. |
| Fri 8 12.30 pm | Friday ride (weather permitting) see 6 June for description. |
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.
Add your voice to those of our 950 members by joining 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. Join now on-line at our membership page. 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 for lobbying and campaigning for the rights of cyclists, and for promoting cycling in and around Cambridge.
Don't forget our meetings, open to all, are on the first Tuesday of each month, 7.30 for 8.00pm at the Friends' Meeting House, Jesus Lane, Cambridge.
Elected Officers 2007-2008
Please note: the most up-to-date Committee list is always in the Committee list section of the website.
Co-ordinator – Martin Lucas-Smith
Liaison Officer – Jim Chisholm
Membership Secretary – David Earl
Newsletter Editor – Monica Frisch
Treasurer – Clare Macrae
Events Officer – vacant
Recruitment Officer – vacant
Press Officer – vacant
Officers without portfolio – Mike Causer, Mark Irving, Vanessa Kelly, Bev Nicolson, Simon Nuttall, Paul Robison and James Woodburn.
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.
Cambridge Cycling Campaign
PO Box 204
Cambridge CB4 3FN
Telephone and fax (01223) 690718
www.camcycle.org.uk
E-mail contact@camcycle.org.uk
Top of page