Name of consultation: GCP Comberton Greenway
From: The Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP)
Format: Online survey OR download and print the Word version and send to Greater Cambridge Partnership, PO Box 1493, Mandela House, 4 Regent Street, Cambridge CB1 0YR
If you have any difficulty with the online survey, you may also e-mail email@example.com with your response directly.
Deadline: Friday 29 July
The Comberton Greenway is one of twelve proposed Greenways, which aim to make local walking, cycling and, where appropriate, horse-riding journeys easier – connecting villages along the route to each other and Cambridge.
Summary of Camcycle’s view:
We support the creation of the Greenways and believe they will help to deliver for local communities along the routes and benefit the wider Cambridge region. When considering active travel infrastructure, we need to ensure that routes are: coherent, direct, safe, comfortable and attractive. At present we believe that a number of small issues, across the entire length of the scheme, are making the route fail to meet these fundamental principles. Opportunities to resolve these issues are all simple and low cost; the GCP must continue to work with stakeholders and local experts to ensure the remaining issues are resolved. This will ensure the Greenways deliver for local communities and the wider region.
Points to make in your response:
Q4. Do you have any comments and suggestions on the proposed design and different features for Section 1? (West Street and Barton Road through Comberton village, with the junction of Long Road and Barton Road)
- The marked cycle lanes along Barton Road and the perceived narrowing of the carriageway is welcome.
- 20mph speed limits could be enforced through average speed cameras. Without this, many drivers will not abide by the speed limit.
- The cycle lanes should be extended up to the new development on West Street.
- A zebra crossing should be located further east, closer to the desire line for the school.
- The junction radii for the two school entrances should be reduced.
- Kentings Street, Harbour Avenue, Swaynes Lane and Barrons Way should be delivered with a Dutch Entrance Kerb (manufactured by Aggregate Industries) to provide a continuous footway. This arrangement has been used successfully within Waterbeach New Town.
- The footway is too narrow by numbers 40 and 54. A safe crossing should be provided by plot 40 and the footway should be terminated earlier.
- The junction with South Street and Green End looks suitable for a shared table. Tactile arrangement should be improved. Tactile width could be reduced.
- A pedestrian crossing from South Street to Green End should be provided.
- Woottens Close junction radius should be reduced, it could be delivered with a Dutch kerb solution and continuous footway.
- A pedestrian crossing is required near Harbour Avenue across Barton Road. The footway to west of Harbour Avenue could be removed as it does not connect to any properties or infrastructure.
- The layby on Barton Road between numbers 144 and 114 is wide and the footways either side are very narrow: space could be redistributed to improve the footway. A possible solution is to move parking to the north side of the carriageway.
- The transition between on-carriageway cycle lanes on Barton Road between the off-carriageway infrastructure and alongside Long Road compromises the safety of users and must be redesigned. The proposed zebra crossing needs to be replaced by a parallel crossing near the mini roundabout and the geometry improved to allow cyclists to transition smoothly and safely. Widths need to be increased on the shared sections and consideration is needed to safely transition cyclists onto any shared surface. The proposed uncontrolled pedestrian crossing on Long Road should be a parallel crossing to ensure priority is given to Greenway users.
- A staggered junction should replace the mini roundabout to improve safety.
Q5. Do you have any comments and suggestions on the proposed design and different features for Section 2? (Barton Road, east of Long Road)
- The proposed offset from the existing carriageway will be a significant improvement
- The footway could be removed between Long Road and Barton Court, allowing for a verge to be reinstated.
- Crossings should be installed to properties on south side of Barton Road between Long Road and Barton Court.
- Further detail required to show how the route will be extended across Barton Court to employment site.
Q6. Do you have any comments and suggestions on the proposed design and different features for Section 3? (Long Road)
- The proposed offset from the existing carriageway will be a significant improvement.
- The new 20mph and 40mph speed limits along Long Road are welcome.
- A number of crossings are required across Long Road to the Greenway, particularly at Harbour Avenue and Fox’s Way
- The 20mph limit should be extended to Fox’s Way.
- The road narrowing by Highfield Farm is only 4.5m and could be reduced further or be provided with a build out, otherwise two vehicles may try to pass at the same time.
- Where the Greenway crosses Long Road, a parallel crossing should be provided.
- The route should be more direct after crossing Long Road.
Q7. Which option would you prefer for this section of the route?
Q8. Do you have any other comments and suggestions on the proposed design and different features for Section 4? (Long Road to Hardwick)
- Further detail is required on the connections into Hardwick. The existing track will likely need to be resurfaced.
- Further detail is required to explain how the Greenway will be constructed through the woodland to the east of Hardwick.
- The route shown on sheet 25 is convoluted. A more direct route should be created, and any corners of land can be dedicated to planting and new habitat.
- A more direct route that provides greater opportunity for new habitat creation looks to be possible along the Bin Brook alignment, and this could become a catalyst for a new green corridor.
Q9. Do you have any comments and suggestions on the proposed design and different features for Section 5? (Long Road to Whitwell Way)
- The proposed alignment looks to be unnecessarily curved twice as the route turns east.
- A more direct route that provides greater opportunity for new habitat creation looks to be possible along the Bin Brook alignment, this could become a catalyst for a new green corridor.
- Road surface on Whitwell Way is in poor condition and works should include resurfacing. The carriageway should be resurfaced in red-mac (as in the design for Adams Road) to emphasise cycle priority.
- There should be more cycle symbols provided on Whitwell Way.
- If High Street is to remain as part of the Greenway, a cycle street like Adams Road or cycle lanes like Barton Road should be included.
Q10. Do you have any comments and suggestions on the proposed design and different features for Section 6? (Whitwell Way to the High Street)
- Wayfinding is required at the junction with Cambridge Road and High Street.
- High Street is a very busy vehicular route, an alternative route following Bin Brook should be explored to link into Coton playing fields.
- If High Street remains as part of the design, the carriageway should be resurfaced in red-mac to emphasise cycle priority.
- Links to the C2C active travel route need to be considered. Many people will choose to cross the M11 on the new bridge if links are provided on the west side of the M11. A route through the woodland between the Comberton Greenway and the C2C route could be provided.
Q11. Do you have any comments and suggestions on the proposed design and different features for Section 7? (High Street to West Cambridge, including M11 footbridge and Coton Path)
- The approaches to the bridge over the M11 should be realigned, widened and resurfaced. The existing route on the eastern side between the bridge and Ada Lovelace Road is of particular concern. The proposals show no improvement works and the existing track is narrow and in poor condition.
- The crossing of Ada Lovelace Road should be a parallel crossing and be direct and not doglegged.
- Existing trees along Ada Lovelace Road should be removed where they impact on the sight lines required for cycles at this junction. Additional trees should be planted nearby to compensate.
- Links to the C2C active travel route need to be considered. Many people will choose to cross the M11 on the new bridge if links are provided on the east side of the M11. The existing route between the M11 bridge and the Atlas Building should be improved.
- The university should be asked to review all existing infrastructure within the West Cambridge Campus to ensure accessibility is provided for all users. This should consider bollard gaps, kerb heights etc.
Q12. Do you have any comments and suggestions on the proposed design and different features for Section 8? (Adams Road, Grange Road, Sidgwick Avenue and Silver Street)
- The ambition to create a cycle street on Adams Road is a strong statement of intent for active travel within the city.
- The cycle priority crossing at Wilberforce Road is a welcome improvement. However, considering vehicular speeds, high friction surfacing is unnecessary. Red-mac should be continued through the Wilberforce Road junction – between Coton Path and Adams Road – to emphasise to people driving that this is a cycle priority junction.
- The S-curvature geometry of the Coton Path as it joins with Adams Road is too sharp and will be difficult for users of tandems, handcycles and other larger cycles. These curves should be eased up to make them more accessible and navigable. The proposed alignment should be straightened and visibility splays checked to ensure that drivers have the required visibility along Coton Path and Adams Road to give way to cyclists.
- The specific details of the Adams Road cycle street should be refined with stakeholders. One solution could be to provide a block paved strip in the middle with red paving either side. Parking could be marked out, and details should be given on the new width of pavement and carriageway. Taff Embankment in Cardiff is a good example of a well-functioning cycle street in the UK.
- Where on-street cycle parking is provided, a 0.5m gap should be provided between the edge of the car parking space and any red-mac to reduce risk of dooring collisions.
- The number of parking spaces along Adams Road has been significantly reduced which is welcome. However, no parking restrictions have been indicated to prevent parking on the cycle street.
- We would prefer to see a single-stage pedestrian crossing over Wilberforce Road with appropriate road narrowing.
- No details have been provided regarding works on Grange Road. The existing Grange Road traffic islands and the cycle bypasses do not meet standards set out in LTN1/20 for accessibility.
- A low-speed solution that accommodates all users is particularly important along Grange Road between its junctions with the C2C bus route and West Road due to the number of larger vehicles and restricted carriageway width.
- The proposed scheme along Sidgwick Avenue fails to provide access for disabled people due to the existing uneven and narrow footways. The only way to resolve this is to create a shared street for cycling and walking, with restricted access for vehicles between Grange Road and Ridley Hall Road. This would require a pedestrian and cycle zone except for disabled access, loading and local access (which should be reduced as much as reasonably possible). All pay and display parking should be removed from Sidgwick Avenue.
- The proposed (retained) parking bays on Sidgwick Avenue are located on the wrong side of the road. Drivers leaving these spaces will not be able to see oncoming westbound cyclists and this will sharply increase the chance of collisions. The parking bays should be removed entirely, or at least located on the north side of the road if motor vehicle flow is eastbound-only.
- To ensure accessibility standards along Sidgwick Avenue, the guidance tactile paving slabs should be provided within the existing carriageway to guide vision-impaired people along the street. The existing footways should be converted into sustainable urban drainage features.
- Silver Street traffic does not need separate left and right turn provision and the dedicated vehicular left and right turns into Silver Street from Newnham Road and Queen’s Road are also not required due to the low number of movements. This space should be reclaimed to improve the footpath width at the junction and to reduce the time required to cross the junction for pedestrians. Once this space is reclaimed, opportunities to create a safer junction for everyone can be considered.
- A “cycle turning box” for right turning cycle traffic from Queen’s Road to Sidgwick Avenue should be provided to help people position themselves in the middle of this junction.
Q13. Do you have any other comments, queries or concerns you’d like us to consider for the next stage of design?
- Further work is required in the design process to improve and resurface footpaths and footways, as well as removing footway crossfall and installing Dutch kerbs. narrower Dutch access kerbs (manufactured by Aggregate Industries) are now available and would be well suited for this project.
- Our experience with the existing Busway informs us that the lack of lighting is a problem for many people, especially those who are concerned about personal security at night.
- We also note that unlit shared-use pathways are more dangerous at night because pedestrians tend not to carry lights and even bright cycle headlights do not necessarily provide enough illumination to see unlit pedestrians with sufficient warning, not to mention any dogs being walked. Therefore, brighter lighting options should be provided along the active travel path, especially where it is reasonable to expect significant pedestrian flows.
- Within the built-up area there should be street lighting. Outside the built-up area you should consider options such as motion-sensitive lighting that comes on when there is human activity in the area. We agree with the need for permanent street lighting at all junctions, crossings and bus stops, for safety reasons.
- The active travel path should not be fenced off from the surroundings and in general you should seek to enable as much natural surveillance as possible of the active travel path from surrounding buildings, for personal security reasons. Again, the purpose is to maximise feelings of personal security along the active travel path at night by making it feel more connected to the surrounding neighbourhood. The more it is used, the safer it will feel.
Complete the GCP Comberton Greenway survey on the GCP’s consultation website by the end of Friday 29 July.