« Back to list of all 12 questions for this election

Question 3 - we asked:

Which aspects of current City Deal proposals do you support, and what additional measures which have not been officially proposed do you think should be explored?

We asked this question in all 26 divisions, namely: Abbey, Arbury, Bar Hill, Cambourne, Castle, Cherry Hinton, Chesterton, Cottenham & Willingham, Duxford, Fulbourn, Gamlingay, Hardwick, Histon & Impington, King's Hedges, Linton, Longstanton, Northstowe & Over, Market, Melbourn & Bassingbourn, Newnham, Papworth and Swavesey, Petersfield, Queen Edith's, Romsey, Sawston & Shelford, Trumpington, Waterbeach.

66 of the 112 candidates (59%) who were asked this question responded as below.

Those candidate(s) which were elected are highlighted.

(Conservative Party)

These proposals are not at present clear, and the subject of continuing workshops.

(Conservative Party)

Greenways are welcome but is isn't enough not even close. Just because Cambridge has the highest number of journeys by bike does not make us a cycling city. I want to see the development of an underground with the City Deal refocussed on transforming the additional road capacity for cycling and walking. To be clear not tickling round the edges I want to see a fundamental change in the street-scape. City Deal in partnership with other councils could introduce cycling routes to link the county - colour coded for distance and difficulty and use as tourist attraction. In 5 years time would love to see a 3 Church Challenge Kings to Peterborough to Ely.

Manas DEB
(Conservative Party)

I would support the expansion of bus station at Addenbrooke’s to reduce traffic congestion in Queen Edith’s division and as a Councillor would like to see that Park & Ride is made free for everyone so that city commuters are encouraged to leave their car in Park & Ride site and catch a bus or cycle to wherever they need to go in the City. If elected I would like to build more dedicated parking spaces for cyclist in the city.

(Conservative Party)

I am particularly supportive of the proposal for greenways. Many of ,SCambs's villages will benefit if these are taken forward.

(Conservative Party)

I am Chairman of the City Deal Assembly. I support, and have voted for, all the City Deal proposals for cycleways. I have gone on record as saying I am a great believer in segregated cycleways, and I feel we could be exploring this more in future years.

(Conservative Party)

Currently there aren't any cycle route proposals for my division. I would like to see all the villages who are relatively close to Cambridge to be connected by introducing the right infrastructure. This will help reduce congestion and pollution.

The Western Orbital has included a cycle route from Barton but ignoring the rest of the villages. This project should be working with parish councils and assessing their residents needs.

At the moment I am not very excited about City Deal proposals. I would like to see innovation and cutting edge projects. You see many other countries in Europe and across the world coming up with incredible projects and solutions to their transport issues but this is not happening here.

Shapour MEFTAH
(Conservative Party)

Chisholm Trail. Many Trumpington residents work in the Science Park. They should have a safe and convenient pathway to work, on a good quality route. For Trumpington residents, the station square area is a route, not just a destination, so the square has to let cyclists through.

If light rail goes ahead, we must insist on getting good quality cycle routes next to any new tracks, just like the Trumpington section of the Chisholm Trail.

(Conservative Party)

I welcome many of the proposals made from the city deal in particularly those related to housing as this is an area of key concern in south Cambridgeshire. I agree that congestion in Cambridge is a challenge that needs to be tackled and I believe that this requires a combination of approaches. With the Gamlingay division bordering both Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire I believe that from this areas perspective improved rail links are vital, along with improving pedestrian/cyclist routes to the stations. I believe that it is a cultural shift that is required to reduce traffic long term. If children are used to traveling in cars alone, they will then continue this practice as adults. I believe that if the city deal looked at improving cycle paths or footpaths on school routes then this would make parents more comfortable in their children cycling to school. Those children will be used to cycling/walking and the cultural shift changes from always being in a car to a mixed method of transport. I also think that part of the city deal funds could be spent on cycling classes for children in schools so that they are confident and safe while cycling.

(Conservative Party)

I have been a member of the City Deal Joint Assembly from the beginning (apart from a short break), and was vice-chairman for a time. My views are recorded in the minutes.

While I am strongly in favour of things like the Royston to Cambridge cycleway and the Chisholm Train, I am uncomfortable about spending City Deal money on cycleways when there is so much other government funding available for them, and our county council cycling team is so proficient about bidding for grants whenever they are offered. City Deal money, in my opinion, should be spent tackling the "too hard to tackle" problems that we have been putting off for too long. That said, I like the Greenways initiative, but as always the details count. See my answer to question 5.

I am also very enthusiastic about the Smarter Cambridge initiative, using big data to make optimum use of existing transport networks.

(Green Party)
The candidate did not enter a response for this question.
(Green Party)

I warmly support the Chisolm Trail and the Greenway cycle routes as extending the range over which people can consider cycling into the City. The Green Transport Manifesto makes clear our support for a Workforce Parking Levy as a way of reducing car traffic and generating funds for infrastructure and public transport.

(Green Party)

Of the current 'City Deals' the proposal for a ‘comprehensive network of pedestrian and cycle routes within Cambridge’ and ensuring that on ‘the main radial routes’ buses will have ‘high quality priority measures’ are closest to what I support. Investing in key routes in and out of town is important but risks the 'Hills Road effect' in which a super-cycleway is constructed for a short part of the journey and the rest of that route is left unchanged. There are many smarter options that need real attention and investment: ranging from driverless cars to congestion charging and low emission zones. The workplace levy is a Green Party proposal and this ought to be considered carefully. Engaging stakeholders is vital and above all else, I would seek to change the progamme of so-called consultation in which local residents and local experts are being overlooked for private consultants. The City Deal must be a local project - not just about local problems but approached with local people in a meaningful way. The process is as important as the solutions. The City Deal also covers housing and training of course - issues that need broader and deeper thinking too but not of direct concern here.

(Green Party)

The city deal does not go nearly far enough in providing transport infrastructure for the city. Cycling provision should always, where practical, be dedicated to cycles and not shared use. Far more needs to be done to keep commuter traffic out of Cambridge. Bus services, especially out to the villages run only once or twice per hour, providing no incentive to use them at all. Until public transport is provided as a service and not for profit this will never change. Bus and Rail services must be returned to the public sector before this will ever have a chance of working.

Eleanor CRANE
(Green Party)

The City Deal is an opportunity to create a modern, sustainable transport system for the City of Cambridge. Unfortunately, too many of its proposals so far have shown a lack of vision and have been unwelcome to local communities. Roads and streets are people’s homes and not transport ‘corridors’, and valued green spaces should not be sacrificed in the name of meeting 'strategic objectives'. The local Green Party has developed its own transport vision for Cambridgeshire (https://cambridge.greenparty.org.uk/site/Cambridge/files/Transport_Policy_2017.pdf) which I fully support. Proposals include:
- A range of measures to improve air quality. This is an important issue for cyclists as we can face particularly high exposure to air pollution. Measures include: require bus operators to provide the most modern, clean buses; introduce low emissions zones in urban areas and press for charges on diesel and high polluting vehicles.
- Push for more projects such as the Chisholm Trail and the ‘Greenways’ cycle routes scheme. Create safer protected cycle routes that keep cyclists away from heavy traffic as much as possible, as well as aiming to give cyclists priority and make junctions safer.
- Create city-wide networks for single-journey cycle hire. These would offer bikes of a good standard, equipped with all needed for safe journeys.
- Introduce better facilities for cyclists at Park-and-Rides, rail stations, bus stops and other transport hubs. These would include secure and dry bicycle storage for those who cycle to the site and also provide access to public cycle hire schemes for those who wish to cycle into Cambridge having arrived by another mode of transport.

Maximilian FRIES
(Green Party)

I support the big cycle infrastructure projects such as the Chisholm Trail and Greenways into surrounding villages, and congestion-related actions such Workforce Parking Levy. Also, I welcome the promotion of cycling in many of the projects such as for Milton and Histon Road. But as mentioned above, the flaw of the whole City Deal in my eyes is it’s remit of unlimited growth, exemplified by the schemes for major road extensions and improvements around the city (M11, A14 etc.) that eat up most of the money. Again, here, motor traffic is too often given priority, and cycling something to “add on”. As I explained above, this must change. This change would mean that many of the current proposal would fundamentally change, which can only be a good thing.
In terms of additional measure, secured and dry cycle storage at park-and-ride sites could go a long way to encourage more people to use the services (together with making parking there free). In addition to this, cycle hire schemes and changing facilities at the sites should be introduced to facilitate the transition to cycling. Moreover, I will work to ensure that all sites are connected to the city with fully-segregated cycle lanes. I am also in favour of exploring measures such as a congestion charge to reduce the traffic into the city and create revenue for better walking, cycling and public transport. The best way to do this must be determined scientifically with trials across the city, to find the best fit for Cambridgeshire.
As a party, we have formulated our vision for transport in Cambridgeshire with many more ideas: https://cambridge.greenparty.org.uk/site/Cambridge/files/Transport_Policy_2017.pdf

(Green Party)

I am concerned that we use the money available wisely with greater emphasis on cycle provision. We need to start to implement not only Cambridge wide integrated cycle provision but also much better infrastructure between the city to the villages.

I support the Chisholm Trail and the potential investment in the new Greenways cycle routes into villages and areas surrounding Cambridge City.

I like and support the idea of the Workforce Parking Levy as a way of reducing commuter traffic into the city, it will raise significant money to invest in new public transport infrastructure also which could benefit the city.

I would like to see protected cycle ways from the park and ride sites into the city centre which I don't think has been explore. Also more protected, safe cycle storage at park and ride sites which would mean people could get to the sites by car or other means and travel from there into the city by bike.

As a party we have a strategic vision for transport across the region which includes many more ideas, you can read this here; https://cambridge.greenparty.org.uk/site/Cambridge/files/Transport_Policy_2017.pdf

Monica HONE
(Green Party)
The candidate did not enter a response for this question.
(Green Party)

Before I say what I support, let me state how it's possible. Something has to give, and for me that's investment in car travel. I don't believe we should invest in measures designed to allow greater flow of more traffic (though we should invest in measures to calm and reduce traffic). This change of priority would free up money to make the below actually happen.

I fully support the implementation of the Chisholm Trail and the Greenways fanning out to local villages, and would work to ensure these are developed to a high standard. I also support the Workplace Parking Levy which will raise further money to invest back into the measures I'm proposing, which in turn greatly benefits the businesses who will be paying it.

I would go further than existing plans in a number of areas, including protected cycle lanes from Park and Ride to the City Centre, more protected cycle storage (particularly at Park and Ride), more bike parking structures and provision, quicker road resurfacing with better materials, more segregated cycle lanes all over the city, better signage and marking, cycle training, support for cycle hire, and so on – I am also generally very supportive of the ideas of the Cambridge Cycle Campaign.

Read our full vision for transport in Cambridgeshire: http://bit.ly/2q2no1h

(Green Party)

I support the Chisholm Trail and the potential investment in the new Greenways cycle routes into villages and areas surrounding Cambridge City.

I like and support the idea of the Workforce Parking Levy as a way of reducing commuter traffic into the city, it will raise significant money to invest in new public transport infrastructure also which could benefit the city.

I would like to see protected cycle ways from the park and ride sites into the city centre which I don't think has been explore. Also more protected, safe cycle storage at park and ride sites which would mean people could get to the sites by car or other means and travel from there into the city by bike.

As a party we have a strategic vision for transport across the region which includes many more ideas, you can read this here; https://cambridge.greenparty.org.uk/site/Cambridge/files/Transport_Policy_2017.pdf

(Green Party)

I support the Chisholm Trail and the investment in the new Greenways cycle routes into villages and areas surrounding Cambridge City. I like and support the idea of the Workforce Parking Levy as a way of reducing commuter traffic into the city, it will raise significant money to invest in new public transport infrastructure also which could benefit the city.

I would like to see protected cycle ways from the park and ride sites into the city centre which I don't think has been explored. Also more protected, safe cycle storage at park and ride sites which would mean people could get to the sites by car or other means and travel from there into the city by bike.

South Cambs Green Party has worked closely with the other local Green Parties in the region to develop a strategic vision for transport across the region which includes many more ideas, you can read this here;


(Green Party)

Please see our green county transport manifesto which should be available on this site.

(Green Party)

I support the Chisholm Trail and the investment in the new Greenways cycle routes into villages and areas surrounding Cambridge City. I like and support the idea of the Workforce Parking Levy as a way of reducing commuter traffic into the city, it will raise significant money to invest in new public transport infrastructure also which could benefit the city.

I would like to see protected cycle ways from the park and ride sites into the city centre which I don't think has been explored. Also more protected, safe cycle storage at park and ride sites which would mean people could get to the sites by car or other means and travel from there into the city by bike.

As a party we have a strategic vision for transport across the region which includes many more ideas, you can read this here;


Alison ELCOX

I didn’t vote for the City Deal as the expectations v. the money offered were just not going to match and in order to get the next tranche of money the original spend would have to show a quantifiable economic improvement. I believed there would be too many conflicting requests for the money and it would be so easy for the Government to say ‘sorry you didn’t spend wisely, you can’t have any more’. The pressure on the City Deal executive to achieve is really quite high.

It seems so short-sighted to place the majority of the new housing so far out of Cambridge and then try to find a sustainable way of getting those people to work. My own Residents’ Survey indicates quite strongly that currently people will not use long distance cycle routes (we’re talking 10-15 miles) to get to work. The proposed housing is in the wrong place and if placed closer to Cambridge with safe cycle routes directly into Cambridge, or to the park and rides, people would be far more likely to use them as the routes would take them where they actually want to go. Encourage people back onto their bikes first on shorter routes then the long distance routes will naturally follow.


Castle Independents support all proposals to install designated secure cycle paths, particularly on main roads.

(Labour Party)

I agree with the letter CamCycle have sent https://www.camcycle.org.uk/images/blog/design_guide_jan2017.pdf relating to overall Design Guide consultation.
I strongly support ( and would benefit myself) from the radial route proposal, but am not sure that Cambourne residents are being included as a high enough priority given the current and growing housing numbers and accompanying threats of congestion.

(Labour Party)

I like the Chisholm Trail and Greenways into surrounding villages, and the Workforce Parking Levy.
I believe that a whole new approach to transport in the City needs to be undertaken. Obviously we need as much safe cycling infra structure as possible, but other measures such as cheap and green public transport would also help reduce the number of cars, making the air cleaner and making cycling even safer. Something such as a light electric railway system that is very cheap would help.

Nick GAY
(Labour Party)

I strongly support City deal initiatives on cycling including Chisolm Trail, Greenways, Ditton meadows bridge etc.

(Labour Party)

There are three groups that need space separated from road traffic. Pedestrians, low speed cyclists and high speed cyclists. Pedestrians and low speed cyclists can share a wide pavement, but separate spaces are obviously to be preferred. Tow paths along the river could be shared by cyclists and pedestrians, but the paths could have two marked lanes and each lane marked for pedestrians or cyclists.

Kelley GREEN
(Labour Party)

I fully support the integrated transport strategy that City Deal is delivering. By looking at all aspects of travel, including buses, it will make our roads safer for cyclists.

I look forward to the introduction of the Clean Air Zone that Cambridge City Council has applied for and hope to see more partnership working between local government and the City Deal Board to help deliver it.

I am delighted with the progress of the Chisholm Trail and would like to see other similar routes developed, connecting opposite ends of the city as well as more greenway connections between residential, employment and leisure sites.

Whilst supporting the delivery of new transport infrastructure I recognise this is expensive and would hope to see sensible spending decisions throughout the life-time of the City Deal programme. This is necessary to ensure the later tranches of money, worth up to a further £400 million, are allocated to Cambridge. The successes Labour has had in other sectors such as the new Council housing we have secured, in the right locations, will help to make Cambridge fit for the future.

(Labour Party)

Bar Hill/Madingley seems to have been left out of Greenways proposal, would like to see this addressed to provide a safer cycle route.

(Labour Party)

The City Deal focuses on affordable housing and skills and both seem to me vital, given the city's/hinterland growth trajectory. Upgrading transport (rail, road, cycleway) is also urgent but the core vision must be a rebalancing of modes so that environment-friendly transport (walking, cycling, low pollution bus and rail) is prioritised and city congestion is curbed. I welcome the city's application to be a trial area for clean air zones and its rejection of discriminatory and unfair congestion charge proposals.

(Labour Party)

Fully support Cross City cycling routes, investment in segregated cycle routes and the improvement of dangerous junctions.
The Fen Causeway/ Trumpington Road/ Lensfield Road junction really needs to be radically improved as a priority.
Fully support the Chisholm Trail and would like to see a quality east/ west segregated cycleway that goes as far as Balsham in the east. The Greenway Routes are a splendid proposal I fully endorse and hope the initiative will spread across the county.
Newmarket Road roundabout needs radical changing to be made safer for cyclists, for example, change to a Dutch design similar to that proposed on Queen Edith’s Way and the existing Radegund Road/ Perne Road roundabout

(Labour Party)

Having attended most of the Local Liaison Forums conducted in my area, I am fully behind the resolutions that were passed for Milton Road and Histon Road.

In general, I would look most favourably upon any measures aimed at prioritisation of public transport, cycling, and walking. The Greenways proposals are very good. Segregated cycle lanes need to be put in wherever possible. Cycle parking facilities should be included in most public transport hubs.

(Labour Party)

The City Deal has focussed almost exclusively on the A1307 corridor and will do nothing for the A1301 through Shelford and Sawston. We are lobbying County and City politicians to change this.

(Labour Party)

I approve of the improvements to cycle safety at junctions. The Dutch model for roundabouts is a good, proven method. I do not support over development of cycleways where there is little evidence of the need. All schemes need to be considered with the full participation from the beginning of residents, pedestrians, cyclists and other road users.

Jackie SCOTT
(Labour Party)

Better access is needed to Whittlesford Parkway station from Duxford and Hinxton. Crossing the A505 is
dangerous and we need a better alternative urgently.

Jocelynne SCUTT
(Labour Party)

The 'Do Optimum' for Milton Road - endorsed as Resolution 1 and incorporated in other resolutions of Milton Road Local Liaison Forum, and 'Do everything' - endorsed in the Histon Road LLF resolutions incorporate proposals for ensuring cycling and pedestrian safety along these two major roadways. As Chair of Milton Road LLF I have supported 'Do Optimum' and all the resolutions of the LLF and continue to do so. I have worked to ensure that they are taken into account and modelled by officers. I support the resolutions of Histon Road LLF and will work to have them taken into account as I have worked vis-à-vis the Milton Road resolutions.
One idea raised by a resident during canvassing and which I consider has merit is that of Park & Cycle - establishing secure parking for cycles at Park & Ride sites, so that these sites can be used by cyclists coming from villages, leaving their cycles safe and secure (say parking 'sheds' accessible by electronic access cards) and taking the bus into Cambridge and back. This is an idea worth exploring.

(Labour Party)

I support the Cross City cycle routes, the Chilsholm Trail, the proposals for segregated routes and improvements of dangerous junctions.

I'd like to see the full Greenway routes built as quickly as possible so that the danger of cycle routes starting and stopping along roads are reduced or eliminated. I'd also like to see more great routes between the villages.

I'd like the needs for different cyclists to be considered separately. What can really help residents and those living close to Cambridge? What can help visitors? What can help those who cycle as part of their work. How can we improve cycling 'literacy'? For cyclists, for pedestrians and all road users?

(Labour Party)

The Greenways routes look good and it is important that cycle routes follow the safety standards of the Netherlands model. It is lovely to be in Holland and see how life can be in a country which is connected by cycle paths safe for all the family, which connects community and public transport hubs and where there are fewer cars on the road. Cam cycle have done an excellent job in setting out proposals as part of the city deal which should be fully supported by all County Councillors.

(Labour Party)

The plans for greenways offer hope for the future. In Waterbeach these would provide additional, safe routes into Cambridge as well as connections to Cottenham and Lode.

Donald ADEY
(Liberal Democrat)

The network of routes out to the villages.brooklans

Philip ALLEN
(Liberal Democrat)

The inclusion of greenways is an important step. I have seen the value of these elsewhere, provided they are sufficiently wide to enable commuting at speeds that would be unreasonable on more confined, congested paths. I would be keen to see the inclusion of paths connecting the radial routes and again this has been a specific point raised by residents.

(Liberal Democrat)

Personally I think we things like free park and ride, and a light railway, both of which reduce the total amount of traffic. From the cyclist's perspective things like gating and road closures are mixed blessings because they can make traffic more dangerous at bottlenecks.

I would also like to see facilities for hiring bikes — notably at park and ride car parks and the station — to tip the balance further in the direction of cycling

(Liberal Democrat)

I believe that both the Greenways proposals and the Chisholm trail will help a great deal with cycling in Cambridgeshire (on a personal note, the Linton Greenway would help significantly if I were to cycle to work).

However, I have been disappointed in the consultation process for the City Deal generally. Finding details of what is proposed can be a chore, and hugely unpopular and counterproductive proposals such as the thankfully scrapped Peak-time Congestion Control Points were pursued for pursued for too long.

It is not as if Cambridge is short of community groups, from residents’ associations to groups such as Camcycle or Smarter Transport Cambridge, who are prepared to provide detailed feedback on plans and produce innovative ideas of their own. Openness to ideas and clear communication of proposals should be a priority; I would like for the City Deal proposals when put into action to be measures that the local community has been fully involved with, not ones that feel as if they have been imposed from above.

(Liberal Democrat)

I support Camcycle’s proposals for separation of vehicle lanes from cycle lanes, especially with trees and planting, as well as wherever possible, the separation of cyclists and pedestrians. I also support a minimum widths for uni- and bi-directional cycle lanes of 2.5 and 4.0 m respectively (wherever possible) on the assumption that if well-designed, they will be well-used.

(Liberal Democrat)

The Chisholm Trail is a significant improvement to the cycling infrastructure around the east of Cambridge, and cutting congestion will help with improving the safety of cycling across the city. Similarly, the Greenways proposals will hopefully make East-West cycling much safer. However, I note that it doesn't include plans to improve the inner cycle route from the station into town along Lyndewode Road and Gresham Road. This route into town, and the other major cycle routes, need much clearer signage so people know they are on a ‘recommended’ cycle route and can easily follow it to get to where they need to go.

I also think the City Deal should be consulting much more widely and taking suggestions from the whole community. The way it has ‘consulted’ and communicated with residents is severely lacking, and does not inspire confidence in their ability to properly manage and deliver substantive change to Cambridge or the surrounding area.

The City Deal needs to be much more public and open in their initial proposals; this will increase community engagement with the important work the City Deal is doing and help rebuild public confidence in the projects that are being delivered.

(Liberal Democrat)

The City Deal has pledged to deliver some great projects. Focussing on cycling, an example would be the Chisholm Trail, which should provide a fantastic connection to the new train station and an alternative and highly accessible cycle route across the whole city.

However there are some considerable weaknesses in projects (for example, recent replanting of hedgerows on Arbury Road) that have been highlighted by campaigners but exacerbated by the accountability deficit of the City Deal, with key policy documents not being subject to consultation or public discussion. These situations undermine the credibility of the City Deal and often create conflict between different community groups (e.g. on the doorstep, poorly implemented cycle routes are often partly blamed on cyclists).

From my experiences, many of the best ideas (one noted above) come from the local community. Similarly the worst mistakes could often be avoided by better community engagement (especially as we are lucky to live in a city with so many highly-engaged groups).

Therefore, as a Councillor, my focus would be ensuring that City Deal continues to look for ideas from across our community and conducts meaningful consultations when finalising plans. Extending this, I also believe that any proposals should include a detailed review of opportunities to engage local children.

For example, when designing the ‘planting’ sections for Milton Road, could local schools run projects to help decide which trees and hedges should be incorporated into final designs? I think this could be a fantastic way to develop future stewardship of our area.

Peter FANE
(Liberal Democrat)

I am concerned that City Deal has not consulted on proposals which are in many cases impractical. City Deal funds need to be used to improve the experience of pedestrians and cyclists as well as bus users if we re to get people out of their cars and reduce congestion and pollution on our roads.

(Liberal Democrat)

My concern with the City Deal is that the villages north of the A14 have largely been forgotten. This disparity is particularly egregious with respect to provision for cyclists. I want to increase the emphasis on sustainability north of the city. The proposed housing developments in our villages are simply unsustainable given the current provision of public transportation and cycling options. Our villages need a stronger voice pushing for provision for cyclists.

(Liberal Democrat)

I support the City Deal’s stated aim to reduce congestion and air pollution and improve public transport and conditions for cycling and walking, but I think their refusal to consider and consult the public about congestion charging means they cannot achieve these aims to any serious extent. The evidence is clear that this option has the greatest potential to reduce car use and fund a top class public transport alternative.

I am in favour of a very high quality bus service along the A428 corridor, including the possibility of an off-road solution where appropriate. Any new transport infrastructure here or elsewhere, eg Milton Road and Histon Road, must provide high quality provision for cyclists and pedestrians. The Chisholm Trail is obviously a hugely important project and it's good that the City Deal stepped in to fund and implement it at last.

(Liberal Democrat)

I am a member of Cambourne Parish Council ando proposed the Council'services position that our residents needs will be best met through a rapid service to Cambridge, but that the route to deliver this service should be designed to minimise any negative I. Pacts on the communities through which the route will pass.

(Liberal Democrat)

1 safe cycle lanes (both ways) along Histon Road (see above)
2 safe junction at Victoria Road/Histon Road/Castle Hill/Huntingdon Road
3 safe junction at Gilbert Road/Histon Road
4 safe junction at King's Hedges Road/ Histon Road (esp in view of adjacent housing developments)
1 safe outbound cycle lane along Huntingdon Road
2 safe junction for cyclists at Girton

(Liberal Democrat)

I support the need for substantial investment in sorting out the issues in Cambridge and therefore welcome the funding. I also support the imaginative proposals coming from nearly everyone EXCEPT the City Deal itself. The entire City Deal system is undemocratic, generally working with ideas out of date in the 80s and utterly contemptuous of residents and communities. If the CD has its way we will end up with another series of vanity projects costing millions which will be money (from us, the taxpayer, by the way) that could be far better used to deliver better and more relevant infrastructure. The refusal of the CD Board to even contemplate option 6 for Cambourne - City until shamed into it is a classic example of how badly it's going - ignored simply because it was an idea that didn't cost millions and didn't come from any of the politicians involved. Presumably the same unimaginative approach is being taken on the other Cambridge radial routes. It doesn't take much sorting either - put funding into removal of pinchpoints (eg the bridge on Barton Rd Bridge Haslingfield costed at £40k in 2013) and immediately you open up a cycling route. Put funding into connecting villages adequately and the call on road space drops. The list is long......

Cecilia LISZKA
(Liberal Democrat)

I support the measures already touched upon later in this survey, notably the Greenways Proposal and Chisholm Trail, although I do not think that the City Deal has gone far enough to encourage a modal shift in the direction of more sustainable transport in general. In particular, the Histon and Milton Road schemes have not adequately dealt with cycling and walking, and as a result are prioritising bus and car traffic. I would like to see these reconsidered and would push for this.

I do not believe there was adequate consultation on the proposals and, therefore feel that it will not benefit from public support once activity commences. For this to be a project that provides benefit long into the future, it has to be much more ambitious in considering the growth in population in and around the city in years to come, and to plan ahead to cope with the demands on transport that will inevitably follow. In particular, Tranche 1 activity has to lay the foundations on which later tranches can build, rather than closing off opportunities too early in, simply to spend the money quickly. One idea that I would like to see explored a lot more seriously is the light railway.

(Liberal Democrat)

Overall the City Deal should be being far more radical. I have been pushing for it to use experimental techniques, modelled on the New York experience – since getting a motion through the County Council several years ago.

Experimental schemes should be the default, not the exception.

This would allow for far better, and more transparent, consultation. It would allow for more ideas to be tested. I do not accept that the City Deal needs to tow the line in order to reatain future money – it is only by taking residents with us and delivering quality that will see us get the remaining money allocated.

The City Deal should be trying out extra revenue generating measures to subsidise the bus network before physical changes such as closing roads permanently.

Finally, the City Deal should embrace (as it has begun to) SMART traffic management - ie demand led measures that can be altered as that demand changes.

(Liberal Democrat)

I think the key issue is connectivity between rural areas and City. P&R charge should be abolished.

(Liberal Democrat)

I mentioned the Greenways which we would fully support, and really like the idea of extending cycle paths alongside railway lines. We note that Sustrans has leased the "spare track" land south of Shelford station with a view to a foot and cycle path to the bridge on London Road (A1301)
We would also like to explore the possibility of reopening the Haverhill Rail Line, if (not yet) for a light rail / tram-train service, at least for an alternative route cycle way, under the railway bridge, all the way to Granta Park, at least to service the proposed new houses and football stadium on the East of Sawston.
There also ought to be much improved cycle access to the Station at Whittlesford, especially from Sawston, where a diversion would make a much shorter, safer journey.

(Liberal Democrat)

Chisholm Trial is excellent, I am very worried about the possible implications of proposals for the A428 on provision on Madingley Road, and will fight hard to maintain and improve cycle facilities in this area.

(Liberal Democrat)

I am very much in favour of the City Deal's aim of reducing congestion in Cambridge, and of course fully support plans to help encourage people to cycle instead of drive. I am worried, however, about proposals to widen carriageways for the use of buses, or building dedicated bus lanes, if that means the removal of many trees (as on Milton Road), or the creation of potentially dangerous situations where cycle lanes, or even just cyclists on roads, have to deal with two streams of traffic - ordinary cars but also buses moving in different flows.

Overall i support the City Deal's plan to reduce emissions in Cambridge, but the Liberal Democrats worry that their thinking on this is too long-term, when we need action sooner. One thing we have pressed for is a national scrappage scheme to assist people in getting rid of older, more polluting vehicles - but law regarding this needs to be implemented at national level, and the conservative government as so far been unwilling to act.

(Liberal Democrat)

I support the proposal to route the light rail line between Bedford and Cambridge close to Cambourne, Bourn and other villages along the A428 corridor. Stations along this line should be provided with *adequate* cycle racks that are monitored by staff and/or CCTV.
I would expect this line to have a parallel cycle path for its full length. The cycle path should, of course, have safe barriers or other protection to keep cyclists and trains apart.
I do not favour another busway, whether guided or not. It would just disgorge more buses into the city centre in the same way as the existing busway.
As a sidebar discussion, light rail should use environmentally sustainable electric power, not diesel.

(Liberal Democrat)

I am optimistic that the Chisholm Trail will have a really positive impact on cycling in Abbey. The Abbey to Chesterton bridge is something that myself and other Lib Dem campaigners and Councillors have consistently supported. It’s an essential part of the north-south cycle route and will provide a safe and pleasant journey, away from main roads.

Pedestrians, cyclists and drivers all regularly ask me to campaign for segregated cycle lanes on Newmarket Rd, which seem like they would be safer for everyone. With the current arrangement, it’s hard to see why anyone would want to cycle into the City from Abbey.

I have been very disappointed in the lack of consultation and public involvement in the City Deal so far. I would work to see this changed.

(Liberal Democrat)

The Chisholm Trail will be a great enhancement for cyclists and walkers

Improvements to bus services are welcome, although they are predicated on reduced congestion and may not be deliverable.

The Park & Ride expansion is good, but should not be at the expense of ordinary bus services, which serve everybody, including those without cars. At present, the Park & Ride sites are half empty, due to the Conservative-imposed parking charges, which have displaced vehicles to residential streets.

The workplace levy should be used carefully so that it does not disadvantage those without alternative means of transport. The City deal Board should consider exemptions for key workers, eg NHS staff and teacher

The City Deal has got off to a bad start by failing to engage effectively with local residents, and by disregarding local opinions and preferences when it does consult. Much more consideration needs to be given to people who live in an area rather than just to those travelling through, and to the specific needs of different users: for example, if a cycle route is catering for children, it should be designed differently from one for adult commuters.

(Liberal Democrat)

City Deal should strike quick wins by boldly fostering a fundamental travel culture change and introducing a South Cambs-wide cycle network of the highest standard. We know that cycle infrastructure is far less expensive that roads and busways. South Cambs already has a high proportion of cycling to work; many short distance journeys on generally flat terrain makes this an ideal geography to introduce a serious cycle network. With child and adult obesity and lack of physical activity being an over-riding public health concern, with traffic congestion a problem within villages and into Cambridge and Royston making journey times unreliable, and with home to school transport costs a massive expense, investing now in a comprehensive cycle network would serve many positive purposes. Dept for Transport has strongly recognized health dividends of cycling so we should run with this.

City Deal should be embracing the opportunity to bring the Cambridge-Royston scheme to fruition, by seeing through the final Melbourn-Royston link - in this it needs to take a leadership role rather than be reactive. This should include also spurs to places like Fowlmere, improved connection between Harston and Hauxton, speed limit issues on all anomalous sections between 50 MPH A10 and 30 MPH villages.

Journeys don't stop at county borders; great cycle commuting potential exists between Bassingbourn and Whaddon and Royston, Meldreth and Melbourn. Royston Industrial Site and other Royston business centres see much travel to work from South Cambs villages, as do Meldreth and Royston Stations and Melbourn Science Park. These journeys are hampered by lack of safe routes, over A505 in particular. Opportunities will never be maximized for what are a very short distance commutes unless this area is examined and made cycle-friendly. The A10 Corridor Cycling Campaign has long been keen to see the Ivy Farm Bridge opened, recognizing the need for multiple A505 crossing points. Whaddon-Meldreth should have an off-road link for very easy journeys to Meldreth Station.

Many sub-issues require urgent attention: junctions, solar stud lighting, rights of way, information and signage to maximize usage of advantageous routs. Greenways could open up new opportunities but need to link villages to one another - linking exclusively in and out of Cambridge will leave out many potential regular cyclists.

Camcycle's papers on Tackling Cambridge Congestion, Greenways with aspiration for higher standards, and Chisholm Trail are all relevant to Melbourn and Bassingbourn Division which is home to many Cambridge commuters who will be looking to multi-modal transport opportunities. The quest to set highest standards from the outset is critical, as in Camcycle response to City Deal Design Guide.

(Liberal Democrat)

We need to separate cycling from pedestrians as well as motorised traffic. Given the City road space this needs to take communities with it. The Abbey/Chesterton Bridge shows what can be achieved it you consult, consult, consult with all stakeholders.

Adrian DENT
(UK Independence Party)

I have been opposed to the city deal for being to City centric, whilst the East of the county is very deprived those of us in the SOuth of the county are treated like poor cousins

Helene GREEN
(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.