« Back to list of all 35 questions for this election

Question 8 - we asked:

What are your aspirations for the major new developments in the Cambridge area? Do you agree that Dutch-quality cycle provision, separate from pedestrians, is a standard to which the planning authorities should be holding developers?

We asked this question in these 10 divisions: Castle, Fulbourn, Norman Cross, Queen Edith's, Roman Bank and Peckover, Sawston, The Hemingfords and Fenstanton, Trumpington, Waterbeach, Whittlesey North.

25 of the 48 candidates (52%) who were asked this question responded as below.

Those candidate(s) which were elected are highlighted.

Martin John CURTIS
(Conservative Party)

Wherever possible and practical, yes. But equally as important is to use S106 to improve existing junctions that will see more cyclists use them as a result of new developments

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)

Yes, the city has been short-changed by developers in the past, sometimes due to missed deadlines for funding caused by dilly-dallying indecision within the council. We need to be more firm with developers.

(Conservative Party)

In my view there are two serious issues with cycleways in Cambridgeshire.

In some instances there is an excellent section of cycleway, then a gap or really poor provision, and then another good section of cycleway. One example is the cycleway from Hinxton to the 'Sawston' roudabout on the A505, then virtually no cycleway provision, until a short section near the northern end of the Sawston bypass then nothing until we suddenly get to the Great Shelford - Addenbrookes cycleway.

There needs to be better continuous high quality cycleways. The other big improvement that could be made is a separation of cyclists and pedestrians. This would be a significant improvement.

(Conservative Party)

Rather than having "aspirations" about future planning developments I prefer to listen to what people what during consultations. Each area is different and has different requirements and challenges. I think being overly prescriptive in advance is counter-productive.

Eleanor Ruth CRANE
(Green Party)

I believe that providing accessible local services is an essential step towards creating sustainable new communities which people want to live in. Services like schools and doctors should be easy and affordable to reach by public transport, and where possible within walking or cycling distance of where people live.

To encourage walking and cycling for shorter journeys and improve road safety I would look to
implement 20mph speed limits in built-up areas, including villages. I would support mixed-use developments where shops, housing and businesses are closely located and connected by pavements and cycleways.

Recognising that not everybody is willing or able to cycle, I strongly support the provision of affordable, accessible local transport. I believe the Council should invest in buses and subsidise some routes.

(Green Party)

Yes, I believe that they should.

(Green Party)

Yes, the Dutch system looks ideal.

From our national manifesto (repeat of Q6):
• Services (like schools and doctors) must be accessible. This means they must be easy and affordable to reach by public transport – and within walking distance in urban areas.
• To encourage walking and cycling for shorter journeys and improve road safety we would:
• Reduce speed limits (e.g. to 20mph in built-up areas, including villages).
• Make streets safe; make them public spaces again. Plan for mixed-use developments where shops, housing and businesses are closely located and connected by pavements and cycleways.
• Introduce a maximum speed limit of 55mph on motorways and trunk roads, and 40mph on rural roads, to make them safer for all road users.
• Introduce schemes such as Home Zones, Safe Routes to School and pedestrianisation.
• Ensure that at least 10% of transport spending is on securing a shift to more active travel like walking and cycling. Reallocate the £30 billion the Government has earmarked for road-building over the next 10 years. Spend the money on a programme of investment in public transport over the Parliament.
• Provide affordable, cheaper local transport that is accessible to those with disabilities by investing in buses and subsidising some routes. Make public transport public.
• Reregulate bus services nationally.
• Assist businesses with green workplace travel plans.
• Give higher priority to railways and plan for a growing railway network.
• Open additional stations on existing routes.
• Invest in new Light Rapid Transit systems (using appropriate technologies).
• Simplify fares for all public transport, with discounted fares for off-peak journeys and for those with low incomes.
• Support free local transport for pensioners.
• Return the railways, tube system and other light railway systems, including both track and operations, to public ownership.
• We would make the cost of private cars more effectively mirror their environmental cost to wider society:
• Abolish car tax and replace it with a purchase tax on new cars that reflects their emissions. That way we would affect the types of car chosen at the time that matters, when they are bought new.
• Prioritise public transport, then if necessary work towards the introduction of road pricing schemes like the London congestion charge.



John Frederick BERESFORD
(Labour & Co-operative)

I would hope that new developments provide exclusive as well as shared spaces for cyclists. Again, a 20 mph limit may help.

(Labour Party)

I’ve largely answered this in my answer to the previous question. For new developments I believe the aim should be to ensure that cycling is fast, easy and convenient and Dutch-style arrangements may often be the most appropriate way of accomplishing this.

Adrian John FRENCH
(Labour Party)

I strongly believe that we should not be constrained by a single approach to the provision of safe efficient cycling provision.

(Labour Party)

It's unlikely that the current development program can be stopped; beyond that I think it is unacceptable to continue large scale developments in the Cambridge area - the infrastructure simply won't support it and we are blighting green belt land.
I think within any new development high quality cycle ways should be included and those should be retrofitted into the current environment.

Peter SNOW
(Labour Party)

Yes, the separation of different types of road users is the ideal. if there is room.

Barbara Anne ASHWOOD
(Liberal Democrat)

The Chisholm Trail and Bridge are vital to the success of the new Chesterton station and would encourage more people to ride rather than drive. Without this feature, the impact of the extra traffic would be horrendous in an area already struggling to cope. A lot of work will hopefully be done on the new housing developments to ensure safe, easy cycling (see Q 11) but we need to ensure that once cyclists leave the developments they can continue in safety - it's not just the developers who need to hold to standards, the County Council must do its bit. Pedestrians and cyclists do not make an ideal marriage, so separate provision would be the ideal.

Belinda Margaret BROOKS-GORDON
(Liberal Democrat)

There is an attempt, with the NWSite development to go some way towards this with the planned 'Ridgeway' cycle route. I would go much further, for example, the supermarket on the NWSite. At present the University is planning to have electric delivery vehicles, but I see no reason why a cycle delivery service shouldn't be the default option here. Also, I am pushing for the supermarket to be the greenest ever with trolleys that clip onto the bike to take home a whole week's shop. It seems daft that I am able take two toddlers to school in trailer behind my bike yet supermarket trolleys have not evolved to take home a week's shop on a bike.

Michael Thomas KILPATRICK
(Liberal Democrat)

Yes. My beliefs go further: that all developments should be accompanied by green verges separating footpaths from roadways as well as Dutch-quality cycle provisions.

Maurice Leonard LEEKE
(Liberal Democrat)

I think that would be a tremendous improvement on so many, no all, of the developments that we see going up at the moment.

(Liberal Democrat)

I do believe in dutch quality cycle provision,separate from pedestrians,financed by developers,but we have to keep it cost effective for the private sector,we do not want to scare them off.We should really work with developers in keeping the price for these cycle routes as low as possible.These should not just be for Cambridge,but all of cambridgeshire.

(Liberal Democrat)

Yes, we can learn alot from Dutch towns & cities. But I cannot see us being ble to introduce a tram service though.

Amanda Joan TAYLOR
(Liberal Democrat)

Please see previous answers to questions 4 and 6.

John George WILLIAMS
(Liberal Democrat)

I have always been an admirer of the Dutch system of segegation. Unfortunately highway standards in the UK have always been poor and there needs to be legistlation to support planning on this.

Richard GLOVER
(UK Independence Party)
The candidate did not enter a response for this question.
Alan LAY
(UK Independence Party)

I have been lucky to have visited some of Holland. As a visitor you have to know the rules as to who has priority.

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.