Elections

« Back to list of all 35 questions for this election

Question 7 - we asked:

Do you believe that Dutch-quality cycle provision, with cycle tracks that are separate both from pedestrians and motor traffic and that have priority over side roads, should a) be included within all new traffic schemes and b) be considered and consulted on for all modifications to existing schemes?

We asked this question in these 15 divisions: Abbey, Arbury, Castle, Cherry Hinton, Coleridge, East Chesterton, King's Hedges, Market, Newnham, Petersfield, Queen Edith's, Romsey, Trumpington, West Chesterton, Whittlesey North.

46 of the 66 candidates (70%) who were asked this question responded as below.

Those candidate(s) which were elected are highlighted.

Tom WOODCOCK
(Cambridge Socialists)

yes

David Ian AMBROSE SMITH
(Conservative Party)

Yes

Andrew James BOWER
(Conservative Party)

Certainly considered for both new and modified schemes but bear in mind that this is the opposite concept to 'shared space', which also has merit, so no, not mandatory for all new schemes.

In my opinion the biggest threat to Romsey cyclists' safety is vehicles entering Mill Road in Petersfield from side roads without looking properly.

Martin John CURTIS
(Conservative Party)

Broadly yes. But where and if this cannot be achieved it should not be used as a stick to beat people with. Certainly we would save money in the long term if separation can be achieved for new schemes. I repeat the point that the important point is that cycling should always be an inherent part of the mobility debate for new developments. I would also like to see more buses around the County offering facilities to carry bikes.

Timothy James HAIRE
(Conservative Party)

No, not always. See my answer to question 4.

John Michael IONIDES
(Conservative Party)

Cambridgeshire is such a varied area that attempting to lift a single model from the Netherlands and apply it uniformly across the county does not seem wise to me. In addition, the question is highly leading and fails to take into consideration sophisticated approach the Dutch take to looking at all modes of transport together.

Richard Graham JEFFS
(Conservative Party)

Again, any vision to improve safety is welcome but, given Cambridge's limited space, concern must be shown as to the impact of schemes on residents and local businesses. These sorts of schemes could become disjointed if squeezed in to all addition or modification to traffic schemes. There needs to be an umbrella attitude to ensure that the city cycle network is a system in itself, rather than a large number of more expensive, smaller schemes.

Sheila LAWLOR
(Conservative Party)

6. As someone who has had near-misses before when cycling past a side-road, I agree that lanes which give cyclists priority can work well provided the rules are observed/enforced; I've argued already in my earlier answers (above) for segregated cycle lanes. In terms of integration with new and existing traffic schemes: I would prioritise the convenience of cyclists in the centre, since my policy is to reduce non-essential engine vehicle traffic in our narrow central streets. Cambridge's medieval streets were not designed for cars and heavy double decker buses or lorries, and it's high time we stopped subjecting them to heavy traffic. In the larger roads going out of town there is enough space for cars and cyclists, so there's no reason why provision of the sort you suggest couldn't also be integrated in these.

James Andrew STRACHAN
(Conservative Party)

This would be ideal and would also be a help to motorists who are, by and large, equally troubled by conflicts in road space.

It would be very difficult to give priority to cyclists at all side roads. Other road users also have rights.

Sandra BILLINGTON
(Green Party)
The candidate did not enter a response for this question.
Shaun Peter ESGATE
(Green Party)

I think these provisions and any others that purport to increase road safety should always be considered. Practical limitations governed by the physical layout of city roads mean however that a great amount of thought and debate is needed to achieve this. Lateral thinking required.

Brett Mark HUGHES
(Green Party)

I would love something along these lines. As a result I think everyone would be more accommodating to each other. I think much bitterness comes from car drivers resentment of an infringement on their territory, silly as that sounds.

Stephen Roger LAWRENCE
(Green Party)

Yes, nevertheless I think this mostly appliesto extant routes / general routes not within new build (cycle parking an exception)

Megan PARRY
(Green Party)

As a cyclist I would feel much happier on the road with this dutch style system in place. Proposals would have to be looked into to see if this is feasible in Cambridge.

Peter Harry POPE
(Green Party)

Yes.

Simon David Francis SEDGWICK-JELL
(Green Party)

Yes

John HIPKIN
(Independent)

Yes

Ian TYES
(Independent)

Yes. I believe that properly segregating cyclists and pedestrians is crucial to improving walking and cycling experience in the city. I dislike so-called 'shared-use' footpaths as the ambiguity of rights of way is SO dangerous and I have had numerous near misses with confused people, particularly where there is not even a white line and marking to indicate which side of the pavement should be used. The recent Police prosecutions for being on the wrong bit of pavement have further highlighted the absurdity of the situation and the appalling standard of markings and no doubt have had a negative impact on cycling use in the city.

John Frederick BERESFORD
(Labour & Co-operative)

Yes. It works in Holland. A 20 mph speed limit will help, but some of our streets are narrow, and may be difficult to achieve without some works provision.

Clare BLAIR
(Labour Party)

Yes, wherever possible given road layouts and the narrow width of some Cambridge roads.

Edward CARLSSON BROWNE
(Labour Party)

In principle, I’d be keen to see Dutch-quality cycle provision on main roads where it’s possible to implement it. Shared-use cycle paths are a particular bugbear of mine, both because the behaviour of pedestrians is less predictable than that of motor vehicles (a problem not easily solved unless we start fitting pedestrians with mirrors and indicators) and because the surface on most pavements is rarely conducive to cycling at a steady pace. For those people who, like me, ride elderly bikes with limited numbers of gears, the loss of momentum you get when cycling over pavements in poor condition is a real annoyance.

So for reasons of speed and safety I would like to see provision for cyclists separate from both motorists and pedestrians. Except under exceptional circumstances, I support all cycle lanes being at least two metres wide and where possible I think it would be advantageous for the cycle lane to be at a different height from both the pavement and the road in order to make clear that it is not a continuation of either.

Obviously, it’s easier to ensure this with new developments than to modify existing traffic schemes, but if 20mph limits are imposed across the city those modifications will be happening anyway in many places. I’d be in favour of consultation on Dutch-quality cycle provision whenever modifications are planned, with a presumption that they should be put in place unless there are good reasons not to.

Sandra CRAWFORD
(Labour Party)

The Dutch system certainly looks excellent in terms of safety, and should be included in new schemes. In old historic streets of Cambridge other approaches may be needed, such as new cycle routes which avoid narrow roads with motor vehicles, (designated cycle routes), or more pedestrianised streets.
When possible, cycle lanes should be added and clearly marked and signed.

Noel KAVANAGH
(Labour Party)

Yes, this would be a superb advance for the benefit of cyclists and other road users. There will be great difficulty in achieving it in some areas, given road layouts and the constraints of some very narrow Cambridge roads. If 20 mph is applied across the City there will also need to be some re-engineering of roads to make it work.

Fiona ONASANYA
(Labour Party)

Wherever possible given road layouts and the constraints of some very narrow Cambridge roads; cycle tracks that are seperate from both pedestrians and motortraffic should be considered and consulted on. If 20 mph is applied across the City there will also need to be some re-engineering of roads to make it work.

Dan RATCLIFFE
(Labour Party)

I would support this largely, on a case-specific basis and with proper consultation with local residents. If the 20mph zone does end up being extended across the city there will need to be some re-engineering of our roads to facilitate this.

Paul SALES
(Labour Party)

Yes if possible within the constraints of some city streets.

Peter SARRIS
(Labour Party)

Yes, wherever possible (given road layouts and the constraints of some very narrow Cambridge roads)

Jocelynne SCUTT
(Labour Party)

Yes. In introducing this approach, we do need to take into account the fact that Cambridge has many roads that are extremely narrow, and a sometimes idiosyncratic road layout. However, the Dutch-quality cycle provision needs to be introduced wherever possible.

Martin SMART
(Labour Party)

Wherever possible given road layouts and the constraints of some very narrow cambridge roads. If 20 mph is applied across the City there will also need to be some re-engineering of roads to make it work.  

Peter SNOW
(Labour Party)

Yes. Wherever possible given road layouts and the constraints of some very narrow Cambridge roads. If 20 mph is applied across the City there will also need to be some re-engineering of roads to make it work.

Ashley WALSH
(Labour Party)

Yes, absolutely. Separate cycle tracks should be, wherever possible, provided in all new traffic schemes and for modifications on existing schemes. Given the large number of narrow roads in Cambridge, it may not always be possible; but it should be a priority across the entire county.

Barbara Anne ASHWOOD
(Liberal Democrat)

The Dutch model is an admirable example of what could be achieved and I would be pleased to see it in use here for new schemes. It should certainly be considered when any modifications/improvements to existing schemes are undertaken.

William James BARTER
(Liberal Democrat)

Yes, where possible, and in consultation with local residents.

Kilian BOURKE
(Liberal Democrat)

Yes, where this is practically possible.

Belinda Margaret BROOKS-GORDON
(Liberal Democrat)

Where possible, I think these should be the default option.

Christopher John BROWN
(Liberal Democrat)

Cycle tracks that are separate from traffic and pedestrians be encouraged and where practical and viable incorporated within new traffic schemes. Both cyclist and pedestrian facilities should be considered and prioritised on road and network modifications.

Edward CEARNS
(Liberal Democrat)

I certainly agree that we should look to implement some of the principles - in particular segregated cycle tracks that is not shared with buses. However it needs to be recognised that Cambridge is based on a medieval town at its core and there is v limited space.
New developments and any new road schemes should ensure that the needs of cyclists are met but not in a competitive way with other road users.

Keith EDKINS
(Liberal Democrat)
The candidate did not enter a response for this question.
David Aubertin GRACE
(Liberal Democrat)

Wherever possible, this is the best option since it improves safety for all highway users, motorists, cyclists and (not to be forgotten) pedestrians.

Daniel Stephen LEVY
(Liberal Democrat)

I think that while these measures should be looked at in new schemes, the effect they would have on the environment, congestion and pedestrians would have to be considered very carefully. I would also support consulting on them for modifications to existing schemes where appropriate. The Liberal Democrats are already seeking to enhance local cycle routes, however it may not be possible to bring them up to the “Dutch-quality” levels described in the question.

Ian Geoffrey MANNING
(Liberal Democrat)

Yes.

Lucy Kathleen NETHSINGHA
(Liberal Democrat)

I think Dutch style cycle provision, with cycles separated from both pedestrians and cars is clearly the gold standard. However while where it is achievable this is highly desirable, I would not want to insist that all schemes would achieve this, as it might be better to get a less perfect scheme, but get it more quickly, (or in some case at all.)

Amanda Joan TAYLOR
(Liberal Democrat)

I have heard very good things about Dutch cycling provision and would like to see more cycleways in Cambridgeshire. New developments must consider the needs of cyclists as well as other forms of transport.

Neale UPSTONE
(Liberal Democrat)

Absolutely. When I was a city councillor I was distraught with the stupidity of the design of the six-lane Addenbrookes Road/Hauxton Road intersection which I believe should have featured a vehicle or pedestrian and cycle underpass. We have better facilities for crossing by foot and bike in Northfields Avenue!

Peter BURKINSHAW
(UK Independence Party)

It would be useful if a separate cycling lane were provided when new roads are planned.
Having lived and worked in Holland, giving cyclists priority at side roads is only safe if
there are separate traffic lights for cyclists at such crossings which cyclists actually obey.

Nicholas David WILSON
(UK Independence Party)
The candidate did not enter a response for this question.

Camcycle is a non-partisan body. All candidates are given an equal opportunity to submit their views. Information published by Camcycle (Cambridge Cycling Campaign), The Bike Depot, 140 Cowley Road, Cambridge, CB4 0DL.