Question 2

Mostly yes

No answer given

Mostly not

The area is sandwiched by the a14/railway line/busway putting limited access ways over/under these does not really connect this area to the surrounding areas. The routes need to connect to high quality infrastructure to take you somewhere - e.g. the cycle facilities through Milton need improving. The Cowley Road cycle path is too narrow for the amount of cyclists currently using it.

Mostly yes

No answer given

Yes, completely

No answer given

Mostly yes

More bus connections from station to Science park, to Tesco Milton and to town centre.

Mostly yes

A satisfactory range of routes linking the new development with surrounding walking and cycling routes is indicated and it is essential that all of these must be provided. If the building of these is prioritised so that they are completed before the site is occupied, so truly prioritising walking and cycling, rather than providing it as an add-on at a later stage after car-based transport patterns have been established, this will be good. Experience indicates that not all these routes will be realised and those that are will be grudgingly provided, late, and at or below minimum standards. It should also be noted that this development will necessitate the upgrading of surrounding routes, eg the Cam towpath, to cope with increased demand.

Not at all

This assumes that you will actually provide the level of public transport and safe cycling networks that will be needed. I suspect this is unlikey. However even if this is the case, people will still want to use cars. We live in The UK - it is often cold and wet. Additionally as we get older it is not possible to walk or cycle.

Mostly yes

No answer given

Yes, completely

No answer given

Mostly not

1) Extra Cycle Journeys I hadn't realised that NE Cambridge will house 18,000(!) residents, many of whom will want to cycle into the city centre on a regular basis for work and leisure. Additionally, many residents across Cambridge will be cycling to the 20,000 new jobs proposed in the plan. The plan is for 75% of the additional journeys to be by foot, cycle or public transport. The only sensible cycle route is along the river: in fact a pedestrian & cycle bridge is proposed to connect the new development to the Haling Way towpath to facilitate that. That means thousands of extra daily cycle journeys can be expected a) on the Haling Way towpath, b) along Fen Road and c) over the new bridge to the path along Stourbridge Common. Routes a) and b) converge at Water Street. None of these routes is wide enough to accommodate this number of extra cyclists, nor is there any spare space to widen their pinch points. The new influx of cyclists using Water Street will be travelling either on the pavement shared with pedestrians, where space to pass is already tight, or on the road shared with fast-moving traffic. As far as I can see, the only way to safely accommodate the extra cycle journeys along this conduit into the city centre is to remove some of the motor traffic by closing the level-crossing and connecting Chesterton Fen to Milton Road with a new road bridge across the railway line alongside the proposed pedestrian & cycle bridge. 2) Moss Bank - Fen Road junction For most of the new cycle journeys between NE Cambridge and central Cambridge, the new bridge over the railway line to the Haling Way will be very much the long way round. In most cases the obvious route will be past Cambridge North and along Moss Bank. This is going to create thousands of extra cycle movements through the Moss Bank - Fen Road junction. To safely accommodate the extra cycle traffic, a formal cycle crossing should be installed. But I don't think that can safely be done if it means that road traffic approaching from Chesterton Fen ends up queuing over the level-crossing. Hence, the only safe solution again appears to be to close the level-crossing and redirect that road traffic out over a new bridge over the railway line.

Neutral

No answer given

Mostly yes

The plan demonstrates excellent connectivity to encourage walking and cycling and discourage car use.

Yes, completely

No answer given

Neutral

Facilities for pedestrians and cyclists are adequate. But I am concerned at the lack of consideration for the residents of Fen Road north of the railway line. Trains approaching and leaving the new station are causing long delays at times at the crossing. The area between the river and the railway line should be included in the area covered by the North Cambridge Area Plan and consideration should be given to provision of an alterative access road for residents on this side of the crossing. It will be too late when the development has been completed.

Mostly not

Little note has been taken of the needs of the residents in the area of Fen Road north of the railway line. Fen Road is the longest cul-de-sac in Cambridge. The new station and decreased speed of trains accessing the station has resulted in the level crossing being down for much longer periods and long queues of traffic. There needs to be an alterative exit for these residents either through Cowley Road or under the A14. There are a number of cycle bridges and underpasses planned for the new development. There should also be provision for this forgotten and sidelined community.

Mostly not

Little note has been taken of the needs of the residents in the area of Fen Road north of the railway line. Fen Road is the longest cul-de-sac in Cambridge. The new station and decreased speed of trains accessing the station has resulted in the level crossing being down for much longer periods and long queues of traffic. There needs to be an alterative exit for these residents either through Cowley Road or under the A14. There are a number of cycle bridges and underpasses planned for the new development. There should also be provision for this forgotten and sidelined community.

Neutral

Existing schemes such as the Chisholm Trail, Milton Road and Waterbeach Greenway are unlikely to be sufficient for the volume of journeys generated by a new area where 75% of journeys are anticipated to be by foot, cycle or public transport. In particular towards Cambridge city centre the only sensible cycle route is along the river. That means thousands of extra daily cycle journeys can be expected a) on the Haling Way towpath, b) along Fen Road and c) over the new bridge to the path along Stourbridge Common. Routes a) and b) converge at Water Street. None of these routes is wide enough to accommodate this number of extra cyclists, nor is there any spare space to widen their pinch points. The new influx of cyclists using Water Street will be travelling either on the pavement shared with pedestrians, where space to pass is already tight, or on the road shared currently with fast-moving traffic. The only way to safely accommodate the extra cycle journeys along this conduit into the city centre, while respecting the neds of existing residents both sides of the crossing, is to remove some of the motor traffic by connecting Chesterton Fen to Milton Road with a new road bridge across the railway line alongside the proposed pedestrian & cycle bridge. and limiting vehicular access to Green End Road/Water Street/Fen Road on the basis of weight and width. This would include access to Nuffield Road (which cannot be considered separately from the NEC planning as it has a massive knock-on on Milton Road); traffic from the Nuffield Road industrial estate must be routed out via the top end of the guided busway where it meets Milton Road. For most of the new cycle journeys between NE Cambridge and central Cambridge, the new bridge over the railway line to the Haling Way will be very much the long way round. In most cases the obvious route will be past Cambridge North and along Moss Bank. This is going to create thousands of extra cycle movements through the Moss Bank - Fen Road junction; already a notorious danger zone. To safely accommodate the extra cycle traffic, a formal cycle crossing should be installed. But I don't think that can safely be done if it means that road traffic approaching from Chesterton Fen ends up queuing over the level-crossing, or vice versa. Hence, the only safe solution again appears to be to drastically limit traffic - especially heavy traffic - on Fen Road and redirect as much as possible out over a new bridge over the railway line. Improvements to the Janet Coston bridge are also essential; while the bridge itself is sound, the approaches on either side are confusing, tight, and potentially dangerous.

Neutral

No answer given

Neutral

Of course desirable to limit the impact of road traffic by alternative means of transport. However, history tells us that it will take more than a bunch of cycle tracks to discourage people using their cars. If it is the case that we expect 40k new jobs then we will become gridlocked. The Covid impact on traffic volume illustrates what would be required to achieve a comfrtable level.

Mostly yes

The cycle connectivity looks fine, and great to have more connections to Milton Country Park. We cycle a lot and will be great to get from Moss Bank to various places for recreation. As the access way to Cambridge North, it would help our road to have other ways of accessing Cambridge North station so that we aren't the only way there. A cycle route from Bramblefields or nearby to the station would be gratefully received. I feel very strongly that there should be a motor connection between Chesterton Fen and Milton Road and/or the A14. There are industrial units down Chesterton Fen that put much too big vehicles through the 20mph area of east chesterton, plus a lot of tradesmen who use that area and bring their vans through Fen road. Often the speed limit is not adhered to. While I wouldn't want to wish the antisocial driving onto this new cycle-designed development, the Chesterton Fen area NEEDS a motorised outlet, and it would be shortsighted not to consider this problem in this development. If the Chesterton level crossing needs to be closed at some point, they will need another way out. But even without the level crossing closing, having another option would relieve pressure on the level crossing and improve safety for those using Fen road, and cyclists going from the Chisolm trail bridge to Cambridge North. It is currently unsafe, with vehicles using the level crossing as a speed ramp and going too fast as the pass Moss Bank - this is not safe for cyclists turning down Moss Bank to the station, or our children! Enabling heavy goods vehicles to get to Milton Road and the A14 without having to go through residential areas would the gold star option, but it needs to be a route they will actually use - be a shorter route than they currently have. Also, Ridgeons etc on Nuffield road send their very heavy vehicles along Nuffield road by the school and doctors surgery, and have no qualms doing so at drop off and pick up times. If there could be a section of the guided busway that they could share just to get a short cut up to Milton road, and put bollards up to stop them going via the doctors surgery/school on Nuffield road, then our children would be a lot safer. In conclusion, yes we need lots of cycle routes for the ordinary family and worker in the area, but businesses will always be there and they have to use large vehicles - so we need to consider where they are and how to separate them from the quiet residential roads.

Mostly yes

Generally the walking and cycling routes seem to match the desire lines, which is very important. A good, safe walking / cycling connection to the large Tesco superstore on the edge of Milton should also be considered. Upgrading of the riverside cycle path should also be considered.

Not at all

Your plan relies on people being able to walk or cycle to work. It pre-supposes that everyone living there will be young and active and remain that way. Healthy communities are a mixture of alI incomes, ages and abilities, but this development does not appear to cater for all of them. The council's drive to abolish cars in the city does not recognise the needs of the older population and appears to be based on dogma rather than need. Every excuse is used, without consultation, to limit access to the city. The recent closure of Mill Road railway bridge is a good example and leaves residents with little trust in our councillors. Whilst I can cycle, my wife cannot and so is become more and more restricted. You state the desire for a mixed community but are obstructing access for one component.

Mostly yes

I think the connections are in the right locations, but I suggest that rather then placing bridges and tunnels under/over Milton road, the whole of Milton road goes underground and the area is converted into a large park.

Mostly not

There do not seem to be sufficient additional walking and cycling paths to meet the needs of the high level of additional inhabitants. The current footpaths, cycle paths and bridges are already heavily used.

Mostly not

Walking and cycling connections are already underway with the Chisholm Trail and the Waterbeach Greenway. The Chisholm Trail is taking years to build, particularly the new bridge across the river in Ditton Meadows, forcing cyclists onto Newmarket Road, rather than cycling along the Cam into town. Not everyone can walk or cycle, so it would appear that you are only expecting young and non-disabled people to live in this area. Will they be expected to move out if they grow older or become incapable of cycling? Would you be providing safe, lockable bicycle storage lockers for each property on the development, or would they be expected to carry their bicycles up several stories to be kept safe inside their apartments?

Mostly yes

If the map is indicating there will be pedestrian and cycle access to Green End Road via Nuffield Road, or something close to this alignment, then that is good. If this is not the intention, it should be. The cycle/pedestrian route through Orchard Park should connect into Darwin Green with a safe crossing of the B1049, and one which gives pedestrians and cyclists comparable (or better) priority to that given to motor vehicles. This might be an answer to question 9 but I'm not sure where to make the point. There also needs to be buses regularly going along the route Edington-Darwin Green-Orchard Park-Science Park-NECAAP east-Cambridge North Station

Mostly yes

No answer given

Not at all

Very angry that there is no mention of equestrian provision alongside cycling and walking. This scheme could be a fantastic opportunity to better link Fen Ditton to Milton Park and on to Waterbeach by opening the Chisholm Trail and the Cam towpath to horses, giving us safe, off-road riding routes for exercise and recreation. Every path that is open to cyclists here should also be open to horse-riders too.

Mostly yes

No answer given

Mostly yes

No answer given