Question 2

Mostly yes

No answer given

Mostly yes

I live locally to this development, and somewhere that is hard to get to from this area is Madingley Road and Eddington. There are no direct bus routes linking these two areas (the only way to get there by bus is via two buses) despite North East Cambridge being primarily residential and Madingley Road having a lot of work places. Currently, the path from Milton Road to Cambridge North Station does not feel safe to walk along alone at night, as a woman. I assume this would improve as the area becomes more developed but something to consider.

Mostly not

The Community Forum submissions to the Issues and Options consultation on this topic were as follows: Cycling. The majority of journeys within the development should be done by foot or by cycle and the amount of motor traffic travelling in and out of the development should be minimised. To do this, high-quality infrastructure must be designed in from the outset before considering road traffic etc. It should be suitable for cyclists of all ages and abilities to use. Paths and cycleways should be direct, convenient and attractive and, together with new public transport provision, ready to use before residents move in. Land-use planning should be done in a way that prioritises and encourages walking and cycling. i.e. shopping and services should be most easily accessed by active transport modes and schools should not be on busy roads. All children should be able to walk and cycle to school via safe routes that are more direct than car routes. Both actual safety and perceived safety should be considered with appropriate lighting installed and traditional-style street design with excellent permeability – rather than dead-ends, narrow alleys and cul-de-sacs. Good cycle and walking links open up a community and help create social places for all ages that can combat loneliness. Cycle routes should be well lit, unlike many new cycle routes in Cambridge. Designing a neighbourhood that is friendly for walking and cycling is not just about the cycling and walking infrastructure, it is also about the car-infrastructure and the minimisation of motor traffic travelling through the development. Keeping the majority of car storage (e.g. car barns) and travel to the edges of the development will have a positive impact on the liveability of the community and the levels of active travel. The development should also make a contribution to the improvement of nearby cycle routes throughout Cambridge, helping to create a proper network which works for every type of cyclist and cycle. This will help new residents access jobs and facilities outside the area and attract others into the development’s businesses and cultural spaces. Although one can look at good examples (Pye Bridge) there are black spots (Newmarket Road Roundabout) and really easy things which have not yet been done (Chesterton Road). A much faster rate of improvement would be very beneficial and cost effective. About 95% of the benefits of the Milton Road improvements will be due to cycle infrastructure. Excellent cycle parking and storage should be supplied across the development, for homes, businesses and community spaces. This should be easy to use, convenient and include spaces for larger and adapted cycles including tricycles and cargo bikes. Public cycle parking should be well-signed, secure and easy to access, learning lessons from the problems of previous developments such as the station Cyclepoint. Safety. If people are going to walk then the environment must not only be safe but be perceived to be so by the inhabitants. We assume that there is a body of knowledge that can be used to implement this. This will not be just about design but resources to deal with any issues that arise. There is an issue locally that the council have significantly cut the level of street lighting to save money and most people think that it is now completely inadequate. There will need to be a level of lighting that people are genuinely happy with which will need to be much more than the current council "standard". Travel within the site. There needs to be more consideration of travel within the site. Some distances, such as the distance between the station and the end of the Science Park, are too far to walk so this needs something like a shuttle bus. However, there is no mechanism for financing this at the moment. We welcome the idea of a green bridge across Milton Road although there were some concerns about the gradient leading up to the roundabout. This would enable cycle paths separated from the very unpleasant traffic junctions. The cycle paths within the Science Park also need a radical rethink to be coherently planned and continuous as they are currently fragmented. The comments above are still relevant but even though they are broadly in line with the plan some aspects do not seem to have been addressed, such as the need for quality and lighting of cycle paths. There needs to more consideration of quality as well as where routes are on a map. Although I don’t disagree with what is said about cycling it is necessary, but not nearly sufficient. The problem is that Dutch standards of cycle infrastructure are needed for the desired level of cycling, but the quality of cycling provision across Cambridge provision is highly variable. It is the quality which will encourage people to cycle. Another problem is that the culture of cycle development in the UK is just not good enough. Some highly expensive and brand new developments have turned out very poorly for cyclists, such as the main station square. Planners will say implementation is not their problem, but unless they can come up with a strategy, resources and culture to address it then they are just producing rhetoric. Another key thing is that the devil is in the detail. One strategic route goes through Mitcham’s Corner which is pretty scary for cyclists. That would rule it out as a route for many less confident cyclists. The moves to discourage car use do not go as far as originally suggested, as mentioned in another section. There are also significant operational issues with cycle use which are often not given the priority they need and there need to be undertakings to tackle this. For instance, the North station has just about the worst bike theft statistics in the country, but it is very difficult to get video of bike thefts looked at. There is also no enforcement in Cambridge of 20 mph limits which much store is made of. As mentioned elsewhere discouraging car use does not go far enough. There has been some consideration of travel within the site. However, without a green bridge Milton Road will remain as a significant divide. The latter really must be put back into the plans. Local government seems to have a serious mental block at failing to understand that walking and cycling needs to be pleasant and safe after dark, not just on a sunny day on the planning borchure. If this is not the case people will need cars for those times and then use them most of the time. The standards of street lighting have been degraded recently and are considered unsafe by many including the elderly. There seems to be a phobia about putting decent lighting on cycle paths, such as the guided busway on Kings Hedges road, which never applies to car traffic. The lack of residential use on the Science Park will mean that it will continue to lack life after dark and will not feel a safe area for pedestrians and cyclists.

Yes, completely

No answer given

Mostly not

The mooted wetland nature reserve in Chesterton Fen is essential. Why not make the access to Chesterton Fen into a road bridge. and replace the Fen Rd level crossing with a cycle/footway underpass? So many of the projects look good on paper, but the reality is different. Look at the scruffy concrete planters that replaced the grass verges on Hills Road (which were supposed to be retained), and for which there is no maintenance budget.

Neutral

The costly tunnel of connection 3 to the country park is superfluous. Better to improve the existing path along the river (which is too narrow) and access to Jane Coston Bridge.

Yes, completely

I cycle over the Jane Coston bridge at least twice a week and walk over it the rest of the time. I love that you're planning to improve the links on either side of this bridge. The Milton side could especially do with it since one gathers a lot of speed cycling down that bridge and there is a road immediately there which you have to brake for. Another walking/cycling route over/under the A14 is also very welcome

Mostly not

Certainly the new development must be well connected by walking and cycling. What has been completely ignored is the future use of cars and other vehicles. * It is naive to think that people will be happy to walk and cycle everywhere. * Are you proposing to prohibit car ownership and parking on the site? * Public transport rarely provides the exact connectivity people need, especially for work, so there is bound to be a significant increase on Milton Road and the A14 junction. * The future of transport will be one of electric and autonomous vehicles, so the issue of climate change ceases to be a concern with this development in 10-15 years' time.

Mostly not

Certainly the new development must be well connected by walking and cycling. What has been completely ignored is the future use of cars and other vehicles. * It is naive to think that people will be happy to walk and cycle everywhere. * Are you proposing to prohibit car ownership and parking on the site? * Public transport rarely provides the exact connectivity people need, especially for work, so there is bound to be a significant increase on Milton Road and the A14 junction. * The future of transport will be one of electric and autonomous vehicles, so the issue of climate change ceases to be a concern with this development in 10-15 years' time.

Mostly yes

No answer given

Neutral

As a cyclist and commuter who uses a bike the problem is not so much the creation of new cycle routes but rather their maintenance. The current routes are little more than dangerous: sharing with pedestrians does not work, surfaces are a good as farm-tracks, leaves are not clear, surfaces are not salted in winter, overhanging hedgerows are not cleared, encroachment of turf is not kept in check. Money would be better allocated to upkeep but then the council have just wasted £1.6M on one roundabout so trust and competence need to be rebuilt.

Mostly yes

The width and surface condition of the riverside tow path for cycling should be improved as part of this development, as the connection number 5 could be very well used and an important route serving the area but at the moment it is a narrow muddy mess much of the year.

Mostly yes

Pedestrians should have priority over cyclists. I think that there should be a lot more green space. The area looks very densely populated and the green space looks inadequate.

Mostly yes

No answer given

Mostly yes

It looks ideal for the new development, BUT it's not a good idea to suggest pedestrians and cyclists coming from Histon road turn right and take a long loop through the new development to head towards St Ives - no-one will do this, and instead will cross the busy Histon / A14 roundabout as they do now - which is unsafe and difficult to navigate.

Mostly yes

No answer given

Mostly yes

No answer given

Not at all

The area you are trying to build is too dense, and conflicts with Milton village. It will give more pollution and more crime.

Not at all

Current residents desperately need addition ROAD connections to Nuffield Road industrial estate and also to the Fen Road industrial estate. Lorries racing around the area are risking people lives. This additional connections MUST be part of your plan. As more and more trains use the line on Fen Road, the road will be closed more often leading to more racing around to get through the crossing before it closes. Make the changes and SAVE LIVES!

Neutral

No answer given

Mostly not

Milton Country Park is already too busy at weekends. There should not be additional traffic encouraged across A14. The Jane Coston Bridge is more than adequate. I don't like 3. What about buses to neighbouring villages?

Neutral

No answer given

Mostly yes

No answer given

Mostly yes

it will depend on surfaces, gradients and cambers

Mostly yes

These are all good but number 5 should be a bridge for motor vehicles, not just cyclists and pedestrians, and there should be a motor vehicle road from number 5 to number 6.

Yes, completely

No answer given

Mostly yes

Would it be useful to create cycling connections up to Milton P+R?

Mostly yes

But these must be well lit and safe, but should not exclude motor vehicles, as menu elderly rely on them.

Mostly yes

the plans set out seem to improve connectivity. I think the boarders of the new development with existing residential and commercial spaces are really important to get right. I have seen good and bad examples of this. When done badly 2 separate communities are formed that look and feel very different and unconnected. Stratford in E London is a good example of this. To maximise the benefit of the new development for all and create a cohesive integrated and inclusive community across new and old development, the design and pathways in and out of the new spaces will be important but I didnt see this topic covered.

Mostly not

No answer given