« Back to list of all 8 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 14 wards, namely: Abbey, Arbury, Castle, Cherry Hinton, Coleridge, East Chesterton, King's Hedges, Market, Newnham, Petersfield, Queen Edith's, Romsey, Trumpington, West Chesterton.

39 of the 62 candidates (63%) who were asked this question responded as below.

Those candidate(s) which were elected are highlighted.

(Conservative Party)

I fully support the guide and as you will see from my most recent campaign leaflet I want to "put walking and cycling centre stage" to solve the City's congestion problems (number one pledge). I go on to highlight the importance of the 3 network framework. If I had to pick one principle it would be "people prefer cycling away from pedestrians" I know many older people, and parents of toddlers in Newnham worry about the bikes traveling up and down Barton Road.

Manas DEB
(Conservative Party)

I support make the space for cycling in my Queen Edith ward because currently we do not have enough dedicated cycle ways. Queen Edith’s way is an important route to Addenbrooke’s and the bio medical campus. The growth of the hospital and campus will mean an increase in road traffic using this route. This route is also an important one for children travelling to and from school. Currently there is a shared-use foot and cycle way but no on road dedicated cycle lanes.

(Green Party)

I fully support 'Make Space for Cycling'. I think the key principle for West Chesterton is in the title - there needs to be space for cycling of a sufficiently quality and quantity. For example, the City Deal proposals for Milton Road suggest a cycle lane less than 2m wide, significantly less than the 2.5m recommended for a route of this type (allowing overtaking without disrupting the flow of vehicular traffic). There are better solutions which provide enough space for cyclists as well as pedestrians, vehicular traffic and plants.

(Green Party)

Making Space For Cycling is an excellent guide which I fully endorse. It is vital that the profile and needs of cycling (and pedestrian) traffic are given equivalent status and consideration as motor vehicles. Moreover, it is great to see practical and common sense being directed at policy-making and public works. The more that can be done to make, as the document suggests, cycling the 'instinctive choice' the better.

Queen Edith's, being crossed by the ring road and Hills/Babraham Road, is host to some key cycle routes, now being cemented in the upgrade to Hills Road. As a fairly 'suburban' ward, it has many quieter streets as well. However, between these two broadly positive characteristics of cycling provision lie problems.

One of the more hazardous challenges for cycling is the huge presence of parked cars in residential roads. A move towards regulated parking, however, (and perhaps a congestion charge) should help with this as a more practical measure than introducing one-way streets or point-closures. On some routes - particularly Wulfstan way - the added traffic of buses, despite being a small road, suggests that as well as 20mph zoning (which already exists) clearer cycle pathways need to be established. Indeed, establishing a priority system in residential roads for cyclists (and pedestrians), as suggested in the document, would be worth investigating for the ward.

The other problem - raised by the alterations to Hills Road - is that there can be very different cycling experiences on the same route. What really doesn't work is flagship routes where, as soon as you turn off them, you find yourself back on the pavement with pedestrians, streetlamps and uneven surfaces - which is precisely the case as you turn onto Cherry Hinton Road. The principle of maintaining infrastructure so that as smooth a ride is possible is of value here.

(Green Party)

The document “Makng Space for Cycling” is excellent and thorough piece of work and offers a very comprehensive approach for supporting any prospective councilor to be better informed about these issues. I am already aware of many of the issues raised in this document as lifelong cyclist and none driver. However there is lot of useful information on technical issues e.g. suitable parking racks and ways of thinking about solutions. The issue that this document addresses that is relevant to Trumpington is reduction in congestion. We suffer from increasing congestion due to the new developemnts in Trumpingotn in an area where congestion is already a problem making access to and from Cambridge by road for nessessary car journeys and unsafe for road cyclists it's helpful that we are well provided with cycle paths.Though the developements are far form completed with a quadrupling in the number of people living in the area by 2017 (currently we have doubled in size) cycling is an important strategy to reduce congestion on the roads as well as reducing pollution. The infrastructure in the new development and the guided busway cycle path have brought us closer to a Dutch style provision for cycling. However there are still many areas were we would benefit from a more joined up approach and I would keen to see more priority in cycle provision and new links made in the area around Porson Road and Long Road. We also need to promote cycling to local people and support them to use the provision better. I think discussing the blocks to cycling with local people and responding to their concerns in perspective, looking at making it safer to use areas without cycle paths, while improving links between badly served areas and demonstrating that cycling can be integrated with the public transport use would be a great help.

Jiameng GAO
(Green Party)

As would others, I fully support the programme. The cycling paths in Cambridge has been patchwork at best. Even in Cambridge cycling is often thought of as an after-thought, where cyclists are often relegated to very small parts of the road, and in cases of road expansions, cycle lanes are too often added on, as opposed to being a central part of the infrastructure. So in terms of principles, I would advocate, like many Greens, holistic approaches to incorporate cycling as a core part of the road network, and not to have cycle lanes added on when people have to complain about it, or when accidents happen.

Monica HONE
(Green Party)

I fully support any initiative that promotes and increases the safety of cycling. Cycling benefits the environment because it is a zero emissions transport, and helps to keep us fit and healthy.

(Green Party)

I fully support this proposal. Greens want to see safer, better cycling support throughout the city, making cycling an even better alternative for more people. It is most important to have cycle paths that are clear, well maintained, and properly interconnected.

Sharon KAUR
(Green Party)

I fully support this guide and saw it last year at Be the Change where I facilitated a workshop on cycling. I fully support this guide also because I have seen it in practice in Sweden and agree that it would work here. I believe having cycle lanes along Mill Road especially would make a huge difference. Mill Road is a busy road that when I have cycled have been frightened by cars and the lack of space given to feel safe cycling.

(Green Party)

Yes - Simple, direct routes (the word "complete" is implied here)

(Green Party)

I fully support and endorse this guide. Despite our reputation as a ‘cycling city’ the infrastructure does not reflect this. I grew up in Cambridge, have never owned a car and cycle everywhere. The three underlying design principles mirror my sentiments as I rarely cycle for pleasure but as a means of getting from A-to-B; I want a direct route with minimal stoppage.

Newnham is largely residential and the main routes are pretty direct, so I think the main improvements would be with convenience. Barton Road in particular can be frustrating if not cycling on the road; with frequent stops on the cycle path and the odd layout of lights by Lammas land making it awkward to cut across traffic smoothly without a long wait.

(Green Party)

Yes, I fully support this guide. 2 principles from the guide stand out the most for me, as a candidate for Market ward. There is a high volume of traffic on many of the streets in Market and often many heavy goods vehicles at certain periods during the day.

Often the high volume of traffic and the amount of HGV's makes cycling in the city centre feel intimidating and unsafe, despite some development of cycling infrastructure. I cycle through this area on personal business often and on my way to and from work so know how this feels.

I support the principle of having segregated cycle ways that have space between them and traffic. This would make cycling in the city centre feel a lot safer and stop the problem of having delivery vehicles or cars parking in cycle ways, forcing cyclists to go out in heavy traffic.

We propose having safe segregated cycle ways in our 2016 manifesto for cambridge.

I also believe the principle of safer junctions and minimizing conflict points will make cycling in market ward significantly safer. Often it seems there are well developed cycle ways that disappear once it comes to a junction where the is actually a higher chance of a collision. There are a few in Market Ward or on the edge that I can think of, and others around the city also.


The physical separation wherever possible of cyclists and motorists

Margery ABBOTT
(Labour Party)

"Making Space for Cycling" seems to be a good guide for making cycling a safer more efficient way of getting from A to B. I think separating cars. cyclists and pedestrians is a very good idea and could be used in Green End Road, especially for when the station is open and increasing amounts of traffic are expected.

(Labour Party)

As a regular cyclist and member of the Cambridge Cycling Campaign, I would fully support this guide and the principles within it. All road users benefit from well planned cycling provision - drivers and pedestrians as well as cyclists. Given the high level of development and building in Cambridge it’s important that appropriate cycling provision is incorporated within new and existing developments to encourage cycling for as many people as possible. Cycling is a great way to get around the city, is vital for making sure we keep our city moving and keeps you fit too.

Romsey is definitely a ward where all of the ‘Making Space for Cycling’ principles apply, for example on the prospective development of the Ridgeons site, which offers the chance to put these principles into practice especially given the link with the Chisholm trail. Apart from the Ridgeons site, if I needed to apply one principle to Romsey it would be ‘People want to cycle away from parked cars’. There are lots of narrow streets in Romsey, many of which have cars parked on either side for example Greville Rd, which sometimes make it difficult to navigate on a bike. This is exacerbated by Romsey’s proximity to the train station, which means many commuters park on Romsey’s streets during the day. I would like to seek residents’ views on a review of commuter parking on Romsey’s streets, particularly in roads where cars are parked on both sides.

(Labour Party)

People need space.

(Labour Party)

I know the Cambridge Cycling Campaign has created a guild to best-practice called Making Space For Cycling and I support this.One of the princples in the guild could be home zones where some of our streets would give priority to people over vehiclpes

(Labour Party)

Yes, I support the guide, though on balance I think it's easier to apply it in the design of new developments rather than redesigning Kings Hedges. I would like to see much more investment in providing good cycleways along the lines of the Dutch model.I would also like to see improvements in the general maintenance of pavements and road surfaces.There are far too many hazards for pedestrians and cyclists at the moment caused by the lack of maintenance and poor condition of the highways

Nick GAY
(Labour Party)

Although Cambridge is regarded as the cycling capital of the UK we should not be complacent as there is a great deal to be done to create better provision for cyclists and pedestrians. “Making Space for Cycling” is an excellent guide for improving cycling infrastructure but should not be regarded as an exclusive guide as there is much to be gained by also using the SUSTRANS “Handbook for Cycle Friendly Design” as a complementary design guide. I fully support segregated cycle ways and would like to see them introduced on the re-configured Milton Road and Histon Road. I also think “floating bus stops” are of benefit for all road users and believe they are now operating successfully on Huntingdon Road and Hills Road.

Danielle GREENE
(Labour Party)

I have read with interest "Making Space for Cycling" and found it to be a very informative guide for improving cycling infrastructure, although I believe that there is much to be gained by also using SUSTRANS “Handbook for Cycle Friendly Design” as a complementary design guide. I note the suggestion of segregated cycle ways - as a cyclist myself I do feel safest on these. I would like to see them introduced on the re-configured Milton Road and Histon Road. I also think “floating bus stops” are of benefit for all road users and believe they are now operating successfully on Huntingdon Road and Hills Road. I feel there is a great deal to be done to create better provision for cyclists and pedestrians.

(Labour Party)

I do and backed it in an amended motion I moved, and was unanimously agreed, at a meeting of the full City Council in July 2014, which committed the council to ensure all new schemes for cycle racks took the guide into account, and also for the authority to consider how best to implement the guide’s proposals and conclusions through the planning process.

Regarding a single principle of the guide that could be effectively applied in Abbey, I would want to see fewer obstructed routes. Stourbridge and Coldham’s Common, as well as Ditton Meadows, have paths that can and should be enjoyed by cyclists and pedestrians alike. (Coldham’s Common will be a major part of the Chisholm Trail, with widening the paths to the 2m standard forming part of the plans, as well as the Abbey-Chesterton bridge providing access to Ditton Meadows.) Improving the permeability of urban paths/roads with paths on common land will assist with that goal. To that end I was pleased to win £50,000 of Eastern Corridor Area funding in 2014 to improve access to Stourbridge Common from Riverside. This project is still being worked on by officers. Consultation will commence soon with implementation soon after.

(Labour Party)

As a life-time cyclist, yes, completely. In Newnham the two main principles are (1) infrastructure to maintain momentum, and (2) visibility. Existing cycle paths lack integration (for instance, where Barton Rd intersects Grantchester Rd or Grange Rd). This means confusing stopping and starting, bumping into traffic, and lack of clarity over where cycle paths continue.

(Labour Party)

I fully support your guide but I'm not sure how to answer this question because I'm not clear what you mean by 'principles'. However in Coleridge I think enforcing the new 20mph speed limits, particularly on Lichfield and Coleridge roads would make a big difference and cycle priority at the side roads along Cherry Hinton road, where the cycle lane is on the pavement, with raised (same height as the pavement) crossings for the cycle path.
If money was no object I would have a cycle lane along Cherry Hinton Rd.

(Labour Party)

The Campaign’s guide and the Sustrans handbook are both useful tools. Applying the principles in Petersfield is quite difficult on the roads which would most benefit especially Miill Road. Providing mandatory cycle lanes on Gonville Place and East Road need consideration.

(Labour Party)

Although Cambridge is regarded as the cycling capital of the UK we should not be complacent as there is a great deal to be done to create better provision for cyclists and pedestrians. “Making Space for Cycling” is an excellent guide for improving cycling infrastructure but should not be regarded as an exclusive guide as there is much to be gained by also using the SUSTRANS “Handbook for Cycle Friendly Design” as a complementary design guide.
I was instrumental in getting cycleways in Gilbert Road and support segregated cycle ways and would like to see them introduced on the re-configured Milton Road and Histon Road. I believe Chesterton Road should be treated in a similar way rather than the mixture of on road and on pavement that we have currently.

Patrick SHEIL
(Labour Party)

Yes I do support *Making Space for Cycling* and continue to promote its use. (The SUSTRANS *Handbook for Cycle-Friendly Design* is also a useful guide.) Above all, I would say that lowering speeds for motor vehicles either through design (as on p. 12) or by legal restriction is key in Castle, containing as it does a major road (Huntingdon Road) on and off of which cyclists have to turn. Cars from the A14 should go slower; cars going to the A14 should start increasing their speed at a later point and specifically after not before the turning in towards Girton College.

Another principle that could usefully be applied in Castle is the visibility principle (see p. 21). Infrastructure should be designed to allow people to see each other whatever vehicle they happen to be using. In Castle we have a number of narrow roads, roads that are poorly lit at night, and roads where there is heavy traffic by day. All these factors mean that visibility is a particular issue in the ward.

Total visibility, indeed, should be the aim in all the new developments (i.e. Darwin Green etc.) - so no fences or hedges going right up to corners for example (as we currently have in places on Histon Road).

Donald ADEY
(Liberal Democrat)

Yes.... Trumpington Rd needs off road cycle paths throughout.

(Liberal Democrat)

Cambridge lends itself to cycling, as usually the most convenient and easiest way to get around and is something to encourage. But the needs of cyclists have to be held in balance with the needs of other road users.

(Liberal Democrat)

I find it a very useful way of bringing good practice into one place. Very helpful.
In my ward I'd pick out the principle that "people want to cycle away from parked cars" as pretty important as it is a major hazard in the city centre. I have recently sponsored a successful highways improvement bid to turn the cycle lane in East Road into a mandatory lane with double yellow lines emphasising prohibition on parking 24/7. There are other similar opportunities.

(Liberal Democrat)

I do support the guide produced, I think it provides a well-researched and credible document that should help city planners in their considerations. For me, I think the first principle “People need space for cycling” is most relevant to Cherry Hinton; our two main routes Cherry Hinton Road and Queen Edith’s Way both lack space for cyclists which lead to conflicts with both pedestrians and motorists.

(Liberal Democrat)

The guide is very useful and I hope it's already having an influence, not only on the county and city councils (and the City Deal) but on developers. Of your three principles Directness, Convenience and Speed, I think many residents in West Chesterton value Convenience very highly, for example in meeting the need for children and older/less mobile people to move around the local community, to and from school, shops, library etc. Some main routes like Milton Road also need to provide for cyclists who need fast, direct routes, so an appropriate balance has to be found.

Daniel LEVY
(Liberal Democrat)

I support the guide, and think that developers in the city as well as county councillors and members of planning committees should take its contents into consideration. I think that convenience is the principle most relevant to Petersfield. In particular, the provision of even, well maintained surfaces and removal of obstructions where possible.

(Liberal Democrat)

I fully endorse Making Space for Cycling. Having lived in Cambridge for almost 9 years now and moved from towing my youngest child in a trailer, thorough teaching all my 3 children road safety, and now having competent independent young people, I think having cycle routes which are wide enough and away from the traffic would be my top priority.

Shahida RAHMAN
(Liberal Democrat)

I fully support the guide. Space for cycles, cars and pedestrians can be applied to the top of Green End Road to allow everyone to have space. We are working towards the ‘Green Up Green End Road Scheme’ to benefit all – with an aim of properly segregated pedestrian paths, cycle paths and parking/road space. As shown on the primary and secondary streets diagram.

(Liberal Democrat)

This is a well-researched and credible document that should influence city planners in their considerations. In Abbey I have been fully in support of the Chisolm Trail plans which will help to connect Abbey to both the main Cambridge Station and the new Chesterton Station. The ‘Space for Cycling’ is a key issue in Abbey with a real need for appropriate cycle paths on Newmarket Road, I feel it is inappropriate to share the bus lane with cycles, as I know I don’t feel safe using that option if I can avoid it. It often means longer journeys to go via an off-road route, especially when cycling with my children.

Catherine SMART
(Liberal Democrat)

Making Space for Cycling is an exceptionally useful guide particularly for deciding planning applications in the new communities. As to using it in Romsey - the clue is in the sub-heading - "A Guide for new developments and street renewals".

The street renewal scheme which will soon be coming to Romsey is part of the Chisholm Trail. I would want the principles of Making Space for Cycling be enacted as far as possible when doing that. It will be particularly important to use it for the new crossing over Coldhams Lane - but the whole route should follow it where-ever possible.

(Liberal Democrat)

I support the guide in principle, but note that in practice it will sometimes be necessary to seek an appropriate balance between its principles and other conflicting priorities for limited space. There are limited opportunities to apply the principles in Arbury, as there is very little land in the ward that is open for redevelopment. However the principles of the guide can and should be applied whenever road schemes are proposed, for example the Arbury Road scheme, which is probably largely positive for cyclists, and the Histon Road scheme, which has some serious negative aspects.

(UK Independence Party)

It's good that you want to avoid mixing cyclists with pedestrians. In East Chesterton we are plagued with cuclists illegally riding on footpaths. Several of our residents have had narrow escapes with cyclists racing past the doors

Richard JEFFS
(UK Independence Party)

I do not fully support the guide as I feel that there are more pressing issues for local authorities to address and space is already limited, especially in the city centre. Despite investment only being around £20 per head per year in Cambridge, the death-trap "floating" bus stops and overly generous new cycle lanes do not really help in an already congested city. I do agree that cyclists and motor vehicles should only mix at low traffic speeds and volumes.

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.