« Back to list of all 7 questions for this election

Question 1 - we asked:

Cambridge Cycling Campaign has created a guide to cycling best-practice called Making Space For Cycling, endorsed by all national cycling organisations. Do you fully support this guide, and if so, what one principle in it do you think could most effectively be applied in your ward?

We asked this question in all 19 wards, namely: The Abingtons, Balsham, Bar Hill, Barton, Bourn, Comberton, Cottenham, Duxford, Fowlmere & Foxton, Fulbourn, Hardwick, Histon & Impington, Milton, Orwell & Barrington, Papworth & Elsworth, Sawston, The Shelfords & Stapleford, Teversham, Willingham & Over.

36 of the 77 candidates (47%) who were asked this question responded as below.

Those candidate(s) which were elected are highlighted.

(Conservative Party)

Yes I fully support it. In Barton Ward, we're relatively (albeit not perfectly) well-served for residents being able to cycle to Cambridge for work or shopping, though Madingley is less well-served than Barton, Coton or Grantchester. What we needs is (a) better commuting links for Madingley and (b) more recreational cycling routes through our QTSQ countryside.

(Conservative Party)

I fully support the making Space for Cycling initiative especially in Hardwick where the cycle route along St Neots Road is shared with the main carriageway in both directions and is not a comfortable place to be when cycling. Additionally, part of the cycle path is shared with pedestrians which is not ideal for either group. There is a need for a segregated cycle route which all cyclists should then be encouraged to use.

Graham CONE
(Conservative Party)

Having read “Making Space for Cycling” I fully support this guide and would endeavour to refer to it when considering any new roads and residential developments or improving existing roads. I also believe that this guide would be very important when considering accessibility to local services such as schools, healthcare centres and businesses. There are many principles from this guide that could be effectively applied in the ward in which I am standing but if I had to pick one it would be the principle of having separate space for cyclists apposed to sharing pedestrian areas. I feel that this would benefit many of Fulbourn’s residents when cycling within the village and those that make a daily commute into the city or to surrounding large employers (such as Addenbrookes Hospital). From a personal perspective I often worry about colliding with a pedestrian or the dog that they may be walking which has been especially bad over the winter months with little to no lighting on the shared pavements in the evenings.

Roger HALL
(Conservative Party)

I do not know of your publication *Making Space for Cycling*. But if, on
roads particularly in Cambridge, it advocates more space for cyclists, I
would think carefully about endorsing its point of view. I
In the city, the balance of road use between cyclists and vehicular
traffic is now tilting towards cyclists, many of whom ride irresponsibly
(not only foreign students), riding a night without lights or reflective
clothing, riding through red lights and believing they have a right of road
use in excess of that of the motorist. These are often offences which carry
heavy penalties for motorists.
Provision of cycling lanes and traffic lights placed for the
convenience of cyclists and pedestrians, often hinders the free-flow of
traffic, causing pollution and other problems. Among the cycling
fraternity, there is often a lack of understanding that residents who live
outside the city often have to use their cars to get into it.

(Conservative Party)

I warmly welcome and support the Making Space for Cycling guide. Many of the guide's advice and conclusions make perfect sense and should be adopted. There is one area where
I see a need for clarification. New developments set 10, or more, miles from Cambridge will not encourage bicycle commuting and both CCC and SCDC are misguided in their attempts to build new settlements so far away from areas of employment and amenities. While cycle routes within the new developments are are fine and laudable in themselves, the new settlements proposed in the SCDC Local Plan will unfortunately substantially worsen Canmbridehgshire's traffic congestion problems as people choose to drive to work because cycle journey times are too long and the bus system is inadequte.

(Conservative Party)

I support anyone who wants to bike more often, this guide gives some serious thought to how it can be implemented better .The report makes many good suggestions however I think the un-connected housing plan would make more sense if it was connected by cycle ways between the streets then residents can have safer cul de sacs for children to play in without the through traffic of the connected plan .

(Green Party)

Walking and cycling, along with disabled access to transport, are top transport priorities for the Green Party and the details outlined in the Making Space for Cycling suggest effective ways of vastly improving travel for cyclists, while fully considering the needs of pedestrians. Further mesures such as ensuring continuity around bus stops ensures safety for both cyclists and public transport users, while the suggestion of level surfaces is important to all cyclists and pedestrians, including those who use pushchairs, mobility scooters etc. I therefore would endorse this guide.

Colin COE
(Green Party)

I am presently a member of British Cycling's Eastern Region Board and perhaps not unsurprisingly I fully support initiatives to improve the lot of cyclists.

Whilst the proposed development at Northstowe may well be designed to encourage cycling within its immediate area, I fear that it will not make like easier for cyclists in Cottenham and other surrounding villages.

(Green Party)

No, I don't fully support all of it. Completely segregated cycle ways on primary routes severely hinder emergency service vehicles if you take up part of the existing road to make them. I would prefer completely new cycle only routes being built where-ever possible. For example, if the guided busway had been built completely across Cambridge following the railway line all the way to Cambridge Railway Station, instead of ending in Milton Road, then not only would the bus journey have been uninterrupted but a cyclist would be able to cycle all the way from St Ives to Addenbrookes Hospital without having to go anywhere near a main road. The cycle ways that are currently being built on Hills Road at the moment have me a little worried as this is the main access way for ambulances to and from Addenbrookes Hospital. I'm also not convinced of "floating" bus stops where passengers, especially the elderly, frail and disabled have to cross a busy cycle path to get to and from them. I like the idea of permeability in street design. There are quite a number of cul-de-sacs in Histon/Impington and making access ways through them seems like a very good idea.

(Green Party)

Yes, I support this guide. Walking and cycling, along with disabled access to transport, are the Green Party's top transport priorities. We would ensure that pedestrians and cyclists get their fare share of road space and would spend at least £30 per head on them over every year of the Parliament. Funding should be allocated flexibly to make safe, convenient routes that address the needs of pedestrians and cyclists while reducing any risk of conflict between them.

Balsham is a largely rural ward, so the sections of the document that are aimed at urban environments are less relevant. A big issue for cyclists in the area is the fast and relatively narrow country roads that connect our villages. I think the ‘people need space’ principle is very relevant: there is a need for good quality off-road cycle routes in our area to allow cyclists to get from A to B without having to share roads with fast traffic. This could involve building new cycle paths, and in some cases improving the signage and surfacing of existing bridleways.

(Green Party)

Support 'Making Space for Cycling'. And a member of the Cambridge Cycling Campaign.

(Green Party)

I absolutely endorse this guide.

While all of its principles are important, I think that better layout of car parking is the most immediately applicable in this ward, where obstruction of routes by parking is a notable problem. (Better cycle route provision would help to reduce car dependency and therefore reduce the amount of space needed for parking.)

Better provision of road space for cyclists on safe, convenient routes is also a principle which this guide shares with the Green Party, and which is very much needed in the more rural parts of this ward, where narrow country roads are often shared with fast and heavy traffic. In these areas the provision of off-road cycle routes must be a priority. This is a County Council responsibility, but as a District Councillor I would do whatever lay in my power to support it.

(Green Party)

Yes. I am a long standing member of Cambridge Cycling Campaign, and am fully committed to CCC aims, and actions to achieve them, including those in "Making Space for Cycling", and for the purpose of this questionnaire do not wish to quibble with any of the details.

(Green Party)

I fully support this guide and feel that, especially in rural areas such as mine, it is very important to provide good quality off-road cycle routes to encourage more people to make more use of their cycles.

(Green Party)

I congratulate you on a very comprehensive, easy to understand and well illustrated document. I do fully support it.
The problem with applying the principles to existing narrow roads (particularly in the middle of villages such as Great Shelford) can be lack of space. Improvements for cyclists also cost money in the short term; and often the (real) financial gains are indirect and do not accrue to the body making the investment (eg benefits to health service of reduced accidents, fitter populace, less pollution). We need the government to restore funding to local authorities so that they can be more pro-active regarding cycling. But when money allows the principles should be followed. We are fortunate to have several dedicated cycle paths in the ward, but they could be better maintained in some cases. We also need a solution to the problem of cyclists using the footpath in front of the Spar shop in Stapleford. They should not really use it but it is much safer than using the road, where there is a busy junction.

(Labour Party)

For me the most important principle is to provide safety to cyclists. This includes: separation from traffic, separation from pedestrians, visibility. Recently a cycle path has been suggested for use of Impington Village College students commuting from Milton, which is both inappropriate and dangerous. It is to replace the school bus connecting Milton and IVC. I think the authorities have to have safer cycling infrastructure before putting our children at risk and cutting off bus services.

(Labour Party)

The guide is an excellent document and I fully support it.

Perhaps 'principle 4', "People want to maintain momentum" is one that could be applied better, in Fulbourn ward and on the route into Cambridge. There is good provision in places for cyclists, but it isn't as 'joined up' as it should be.

(Labour Party)

I do fully support this guide and would work with council and developers to bring a more coordinated approach to the cycle routes in Cambourne and beyond. Particular attention needs to be given for safety of children cycling to primary and secondary schools.
This must be a core condition to existing and planned development to reduce traffic congestion on routes into town.
I cycle to work in central Cambridge and so would like the following to be implemented via cooperation between wards joining Bourn Ward to Cambridge :

10. People want well-maintained infrastructure
- cycle tracks should be laid to the same quality as roads. They should be designed to facilitate easy maintenance, to avoid overgrowing vegetation and enable winter treatment.

Elizabeth HERBERT
(Labour Party)

The principle of segregating traffic, cyclists and pedestrians is the most effective in making a safer environment for all road users. I've seen this in practice in Denmark and the Netherlands and would support its implementation wherever possible. However, any schemes implemented must be carried out properly and sufficient space given to each type of road user. Where primary routes are too narrow, then alternative safe cycle and pedestrian routes should be considered. Too narrow a cycle lane beside traffic is not sufficient. In Teversham ward, Airport Way and Newmarket Road could be considered for this triple segregation.

(Labour Party)

I think that most of the guide is common sense from a cyclist's perspective and it's good to see a comprehensive guide. Space has been made with shared cycle paths between the villages and the busway but this would bear improvement in some places. The principles about space could be applied. Within the villages, effective traffic calming measure would make the roads more accessible to cyclists.

(Labour Party)

I have read the PDF version of the guide. It makes a number of sensible points. However, the majority of design principles seem to me to be most appropriate for large scale new developments. It is very difficult to see how these could be retrofitted into our existing village environment and I think that in these situations a more pragmatic, piecemeal approach is needed.
I'm a Parish Councillor in Great Shelford. Over the last year we have successfully fought to have the speed limits on our two major through routes (Cambridge Road and Hinton Way) reduced from 40mph to 30mph. I believe this will significantly enhance safety for cyclists on those roads. However, it is very difficult to see how the recommended segregated space of at least 2.1m on each side of the roads could be implemented on those two roads (especially Hinton Way). I would encourage Cambridge Cycling Campaign to engage with their Parish Councils in South Cambs to identify concrete improvements which can be made (I see little evidence of this happening at the moment).

(Labour Party)

Yes I think the guide is really well thought out and makes complete sense.
People are motivated to cycle because it is faster than being stuck in a traffic jam, journey times are highly predictable, and it is a fun and social way to travel, providing an easy way to introduce healthy exercise into a daily routine. Only by providing proper cycling infrastructure can these benefits be achieved.

(Labour Party)

I support the principles outlined in the Making space for Cycling report. A particular area of engagement should be the continuation and expansion of "facilitating short cuts". Of which the current cycle routes and in particular the area between Stapleford and Great Shelford which connects to the 10,000 national cycle way DNA cycle way between Great Shelford and Cambridge needs to be extended. The current route presents numerous road obstacles for cyclists as high lighted in the "making space" report and a short cut would be instrumental in addressing these issues.

Alison WOOD
(Labour Party)

1. People need space for cycling.

The main road through Milton is atrocious:

+ not wide enough for two directions of traffice plus the 'cycle lanes' either side
+ not clear enough cycle lane markings anyway and it's badly surfaced
+ the road narrows at pedestrian crossings making it even more dangerous for cyclists
+ traffic speeds through particularly when avoiding hold-ups on the A10
+ will get worse as more homes built at Waterbeach

(Liberal Democrat)

I fully support this guide.

(Liberal Democrat)

Making Space For Cycling looks really good. If only it had been written when Bar Hill was being designed! It would not have taken much to create a really good set of cycle links that would make cycling more attractive that driving a car for trips around the village. Indeed, in many places this would be possible now if some barriers were removed. For example, there are almost no safe cycle routes across Tesco’s car park.

Peter FANE
(Liberal Democrat)

Yes, I fully support this approach. Motorists should recognise that ensuring safe routes for cyclists, preferably segregated from car traffic, will take up some roads space but this will be more than offset by the reduction in congestion resulting from increased uptake of cycling.

Richard GYMER
(Liberal Democrat)

A lot of thought has gone into the guide and it has many good ideas. Segregation from motor vehicles is the ideal, and have seen increasing use of the cycle path between Cottenham and Histon, we have an opportunity to build good cycleways to access Northstowe from nearby villages.

(Liberal Democrat)

I’ve read it and I have no hesitation in giving it my full support. I think the principle that could most effectively be applied is that of Home Zones in residential areas, away from primary and secondary routes. My own area of Over is a great example of where this could be applied – it’s an area of cul-de-sacs with some permeability to other areas and it is highly used by school children cycling to Swavesey Village College, usually moving in the opposite direction to the local residents. While I’m not aware of any major comings together of cyclists, motorists or pedestrians, I have witnessed numerous near-misses. Ensuring that motor traffic moves more slowly and cautiously while giving them plenty of warning of other oncoming road users would reduce the chance of those near-misses turning into accidents. Perhaps we could look at some 20 mph zones coupled with some convex mirrors placed strategically on lampposts.

If you were to give me a second choice I would like to look at separation of cycle traffic along some of our primary routes particularly between Willingham and Over. While it is a relatively quiet rural road, it is quite fast, relatively narrow and has enough curves and crests in it to make walking and cycling along it quite an un-nerving experience at times. And it’s not easy being behind the wheel at times either. I tend to avoid cycling on this stretch of road and I know that others do too. I would be interested whether there was support for separated cycling and walking along here – I would certainly use it more if there were. I’m open minded about how it could be achieved – there is land on either side that potentially could be used, for example, but also there is a footpath from Fen End to Willingham which perhaps could be upgraded for cyclists.

(Liberal Democrat)

Yes I support a guide to Cycling best - practice. I want priority to be given to pedestrian and cycle movements and have a proper layout routes for cyclists.

(Liberal Democrat)

I do fully support the guide. The creation/improvement of routes between the village, other villages and the city is significant

(Liberal Democrat)

Making Space For Cycling is a marvellously clear framework for designing cycling into new developments, and I fully support it. Even in the best of the new areas of Cambridge, many of the principles that it proposes are not implemented at all well, as I consistently argue on the JDCC.

There might well be a new housing estate of 220 houses built soon in the ward. If it is passed, I will argue for Making Space For Cycling to be applied.

(Liberal Democrat)

Yes. Patchy cycle routes are an issue in Fulbourn and the Beechwoods, particularly effected by the quality and maintenance of the routes. People want space and level surfaces, but too many of the routes designed especially for cycling from Fulbourn into Cambridge do not meet these requirements, including the shared cycle footpath going into Cherry Hinton, just before the Robin Hood pub.

This has a real problem with roots and exemplifies why South Cambridgeshire District Council needs to make sure it works closely with Cambridge City to get clear and safe routes into town and Addenbrookes.

(Liberal Democrat)

I wholeheartedly endorse the document you have produced, Making Space For Cycling.

It makes the excellent point that direct, separated routes between settlements should be available for cyclists. Some recent work of this sort has been done along the A505 nearby. But similar routes along rural roads between villages could be transformative. For example, a safe route from Great Chesterford through Ickleton and Duxford to Whittlesford would enable people to get between houses, schools, train stations and places of employment like the Genome Campus.

(UK Independence Party)

I had a quick look through that report and three things struck me. Firstly, the pictures of urban areas mostly showed roads and streets much much wider than are to be found in Cambridge City or in most of the surrounding villages. Secondly, much of it had to do with design for new developments - all very sensible but not hugely relevant to the problems faced by cyclists in this area now. Thirdly, I didn't notice any reference to the costs of the provisions recommended.

Sadly, none of it seemed to me to be particularly applicable to Hardwick.

(UK Independence Party)

I confirm my full support for this initiative. To me, the one guiding principle is keeping fit within an environment of fewer vehicles.

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.