abbey–chesterton bridge approved · approved the abbey-chesterton cycling & walking bridge to...

Also in this issue• Dangerous Busway bollards• A428 corridor consultation• Bi-directional cycle lanes

For better, safer andmore cycling in andaround Cambridgewww.camcycle.org.uk

Newsletter 123 • December 2015 – January 2016CAMBRIDGE CYCLING CAMPAIGN

Abbey–Chesterton Bridgeapproved .

2 Cambridge Cycling Campaign Newsletter 123 • December 2015 – January 2016

Chair’s commentThe City Deal is in full swing with manypeople, myself included, complainingabout consultation fatigue. When most ofthe early consultations could havesignificant benefits for people onbicycles, each and every one of theseconsultations is important.

At this stage, most of the consultationsare around the principles of the ideasand not the details. However, inpreparation for future consultations, thisnewsletter includes a number of articlesthat go into the details which willbecome important next year. The CityDeal is all about enabling growth,building more houses, creating morejobs, and moving more people around. Itis virtually impossible to place every oneof these new residents into their ownprivate motor-vehicle and expect thatcongestion will not get worse. However,you may be surprised by how few carshave to be removed from the roads forcongestion to be significantly reduced.We also need to start considering howcycleways are constructed. One-waycycleways on both sides of the road, or abi-directional cycleway on just one side.Or a combination of both.

Of course, the details can become evermore obscure. Those who have cycleddown Huntingdon Road or Hills Roadrecently will probably have noticed thenew kerbs used to separate the bicycletraffic from the motor traffic. TheseCambridge Kerbs are very special, verybicycle-friendly, and should solve anumber of issues we have onCambridge’s narrow roads.

Some solutions tothe problems ofCambridge areprobably easier thanrebuilding wholeroads like MiltonRoad. Using Romseyas an example, perhaps we should aim toreduce through rat-running traffic,rationalise parking, and reconstruct theroads to reduce the hazards to those ofus on two wheels.

It is also winter. Gloves and coats arenow becoming necessary items of bicycleattire, as are lights. Of course, we willsoon face the prospect of cycling in thedark in the city. Street lights on mostresidential roads will be turned off, yetironically the main roads will have themkept on. It is almost as if the cars don’thave headlights that work in the dark.The problem to my mind is that thepeople who have determined the routeswhere the lights will be kept on haveonly considered the main car trafficroutes and have mostly ignored the maincycle routes throughout the city.

Part of the fun of being a member of theCampaign is that you get to go placesand talk to other people about the issueswe all face. A good example is the MiltonCountry Park Autumn Festival. However,such events can’t happen unless we havevolunteers who are willing to help for anhour or two a year. If you think you canhelp out, even if it is just for 15 minutes,then please contact us and we can workout how you could help make Cambridgea better and safer place to ride a bicycle.

Robin Heydon

If you like what you see in this newsletter, add yourvoice to those of our 1,100 members by joining theCampaign.

Membership costs are:

£3.50 Budget (no paper newsletter will normallybe provided)

£17.50 Individual£22.50 Household£100 Donor

For this, you get six newsletters a year, discounts at alarge number of bike shops, and you will be supportingour work.

Join now on-line at:www.camcycle.org.uk/membership

Cambridge Cycling Campaign was set up in 1995 tovoice the concerns of cyclists. We are not a cycling club,but a voluntary organisation promoting cycling forpublic benefit and representing the concerns of cyclistsin and around Cambridge.

Registered charity number 1138098

Our meetings, open to all, are on the first Tuesday ofeach month, 7.30pm for 8.00pm until 10.00pm at theFriends’ Meeting House, Jesus Lane, Cambridge.

Elected Committee Membersand Trustees 2014-2015

Chair (and Charity Chair) – Robin HeydonVice-Chair (and Charity Secretary) – Hester WellsTreasurer (and Charity Treasurer) – Chris DorlingEvents Officer – VacantLiaison Officer – Martin Lucas-SmithMembership Secretary – Sue EdwardsPlanning Officer – Colin RosenstielPress Officer – VacantRecruitment Officer – Tom McKeownSchools and Outreach Officer – VacantWeb Officer – Neil SpenleyCampaigners – Richard Burgess, Jim Chisholm, MonicaFrisch, John Hall, Oscar Hughes, Richard Jennings andAl Storer

Contacting the Campaign

Campaign Officer – Roxanne De Beaux

Cambridge Cycling CampaignLlandaff Chambers, 2 Regent StreetCambridge CB2 1AX

(01223) [email protected]: @camcycleFacebook: CambridgeCyclingCampaign

Newsletter Editor – Sarah Rodger

This newsletter is printed on FSC approved paper byCambridge Copy Studio

Cover picture © Lucinda Price, www.lucindaprice.comTwitter - @lucyfrog , Facebook - Lucinda Price Photography

Also in this issue

JH

Abbey–Chesterton bridge------------------------------3Abbey–Chesterton bridge campaign at ‘The Abbey’-3

Outspoken speaks out about Chisholm Trail ---------4

University Arms Hotel update--------------------------4

Cyclenation-CTC campaigners conference------------4

Smart Cambridgeshire----------------------------------5

The Copenhenganize Index----------------------------5

Bidirectional versus one-way cycle lanes ------------6

Volunteer interview: Matthew Danish-----------------8

Street lighting consultation----------------------------9

Campaign against the dangerous Busway bollards 10

A Campaign member’s bollard incident report-------11

Cambridge (compromise) Kerb-------------------------12

Reclaim Romsey - a personal manifesto--------------13

A428 Corridor consultation-----------------------------14

Public meeting asks ‘Are new bus lanes the onlyanswer?’ --------------------------------------------15

Cutting congestion easy, as is cutting pollution--16

Outspoken cycle training-------------------------------18

Campaign Diary------------------------------------------19

Milton Country Park – Autumn Festival---------20

Newsletter 123 • December 2015 – January 2016 Cambridge Cycling Campaign 3

On 17 November the Economy and Environment Committeeapproved the Abbey-Chesterton Cycling & Walking Bridge toproceed to planning application stage. The recommendationwas for a hybrid design of options 1 and 2 from the bridgeconsultations.

The Campaign submitted a petition with 1,661 signaturesurging the committee to support this crucial link in theChisholm Trail.

Artist’s impression of the new cycle and foot bridge which will run alongside the existing railway bridge. (Cambs. County Council)

At least seven members of the Committee spoke in favour ofthe bridge. A number of notes from councillors in the city andcounty councils were also submitted to the committee. Onlyone member of the Economy and Environment Committeevoted against the bridge.

The Cambridge Cycling Campaign thanks all those who signedour petition and the volunteers who assisted.

Roxanne De Beaux

Abbey–Chesterton bridge

Abbey–Chesterton bridge campaign at ‘The Abbey’The campaign for the Abbey-Chesterton foot and cycle bridgereached out to the supporters oflocal football club CambridgeUnited on Saturday 7 Novemberwhen the 'U's took on BasingstokeTown in the first round of the FACup.

Willa McDonald, Richard Burgessand I stood outside the AbbeyStadium's gate before kick-off,talking to the Amber Army andurging them to sign the petition infavour of the new bridge. Theproposed Chisholm Trail runsright past the stadium. It wouldprovide a quick, easy route forsupporters to get to matches andthen back home, avoiding the chaos and congestion thatalways follows a game. However, for supporters coming fromareas such as King’s Hedges, the route will only be reallyuseful if the new bridge over the river Cam is included.

Collecting signatures on paper proved to be quite a challenge,with hundreds of people arriving in a short space of time. For awhile a lady wearing a ‘Here to help’ T-shirt, who was dishingout free sweets to the people arriving, was also directing themto the petition - this worked really well, at times I had a smallqueue waiting to sign! We really needed more Campaignvolunteers as the most effective way was to work as a pair -one to catch the attention of the punters and the other to

Dedicated Cambridge Unitedsupporter Stefan Kaye.

supervise the signing. As kick-off drew closer, and people werein more of a hurry and less willing to stop, we were only ableto hand out the leaflets and ask people to sign the petitiononline.

We collected 124 signatures, enough to take the total numberof signatures past the target of 1,500 well ahead of theclosing deadline.

Richard Burgess explains the route of the proposed Chisholm trailas it passes the Abbey Stadium.

For the record, Cambridge United scraped a 1-0 win with arather unimpressive performance - but at least they won!

Stefan Kaye


Outspoken speaks outabout Chisholm TrailThe Chisholm Trail will provide long stretches ofuninterrupted, dedicated cycle paths that are not compromisedby motor vehicles, traffic signals and parked cars. This willdirectly benefit two of Outspoken's key businesses, OutspokenDelivery and Outspoken Training.

Outspoken DeliveryOutspoken Delivery specialises in sustainable urban logisticsand delivers over 10,000 items around the city each month. In2014 this equated to removing over 120,000 van journeysfrom Cambridge's roads, which saved the city from addedcongestion, saved businesses from the headache of drivinginto the centre and saved the environment an estimated 45tonnes of carbon.

The Chisholm Trail will significantly support our business byoffering a major, fast new route into Cambridge with easyaccess to different parts of the city.

University Arms HotelupdateWork is now underway on the refurbishment of this centralCambridge hotel, involving the complete demolition of the1970s extension and much reconstruction. As a result, thepath that ran along the south-eastern side had to be diverted,to allow the construction of the builders' compound. BothCambridge Cycling Campaign and the city council's CyclingOfficers were involved in discussions to ensure that thisimportant cycle and pedestrian route was maintained.

Consequently, we were a little concerned when it first openedin August to find the surface was small loose pebbles and veryuncomfortable to cycle on. It did not feel safe and we wrote totell the contractors that it was unsatisfactory. We alsosuggested other changes to improve the situation for cyclistsand pedestrians.

We had a prompt reply responding to our comments and arevery pleased to report that within a few weeks the surface waschanged and is now quite satisfactory to cycle or walk on.

We are also receiving a Community Newsletter Update fromthe contractors, R G Carter, and invitations to their monthlyforums. These, plus all the correspondence and discussion, areavailable on the Cyclescape thread athttp://camcycle.cyclescape.org/threads/1598.

Monica Frisch

Cyclenation-CTC campaignersconferenceThis year’s Cyclenation-CTC campaigners conference, held on24 October, was hosted in Liverpool by the Merseyside CyclingCampaign. There was strong Cambridge representation, withpresentations by Julian Huppert, Robin Heydon and JimChisholm, and our Campaign Officer Roxanne De Beaux alsochaired a session in her capacity as Secretary of Cyclenation.

The conference had an intense agenda and used plenarysessions and breakout workshops to give attendees the bestchance to hear about a range of topics including politicalleadership, the role of public health, cycle-friendly planningand design, inclusive cycling and effective local campaigning.There were speakers from the political, campaigning,consultancy, infrastructure, health and advocacy domains.

A review of the conference was ‘storified’ (summarised withtweets) on Twitter by Lizzie Reather and can be read athttps://storify.com/ereather/ctc-cyclenation-conference .

The presentations from the conference, including videofootage, will be posted here: http://www.cyclenation.org.uk/ .

Roxanne De Beaux

We currently work with 200 local companies, but we alsodeliver for major carriers. There is a good chance that if youorder something online today, the final mile of the parcel'sjourney could be by electric cargo bike, and that statistic willgrow if the Chisholm Trail becomes reality.

We will soon be moving to a new depot on the edge of the cityclose to the new station, which will mean we can also act as aconsolidation centre for large logistics companies.

Improved delivery times as a result of Chisholm Trail's cyclehighway will strengthen our competitive advantage overvans/lorries. Rob King, Managing Director of Outspoken

(For Outspoken Training see Roxanne’s article on page 18.)

Diagram showing how Outspoken sees hubs helping withdeliveries into Cambridge city centre.


SmartCambridgeshireOn 3 November the Greater Cambridge City Deal ExecutiveBoard agreed, in principle, to support the investment of up to£280,000 to implement a Smart Technology Platform subjectto a more detailed investment proposal in early 2016.

This will be carried out by Smart Cambridgeshire, part of theConnecting Cambridgeshire digital infrastructure programme.This project was set up initially to roll out super-fastbroadband across the county but has expanded to look at howtechnology can improve residents’ quality of life whilstaddressing the challenges arising from the unprecedentedgrowth which the region will see over the next 15 years.

Digital technology now underpins almost every aspect ofmodern living across work, travel, leisure and health.Emerging ‘smart cities’ technology uses data emerging fromthis digital infrastructure to enhance the quality andperformance of urban services and to engage more effectivelyand actively with its citizens.

So what has this got do with cycling?Probably the smartest thing a city can do is to become acycling city. In fact the Smart Cambridgeshire programmeplans to support Cambridge in becoming one of the leadingcycling cities.

It will do this by deploying sensor networks and establishing adata hub which will provide the data-sets necessary to supportinnovation and development of new technology.

There is a huge range of potential information which couldinform residents' cycling journeys, such as updates aboutcurrent congestion on road networks, accurate and localisedweather predictions and the availability of bike parking spacesat specific points.

When combined with a journey planner such as Cycle Streetseven more personalised routes can be planned. For example,if you have respiratory problems then better information onair pollution levels would allow the journey planner to routeyou away from areas with poor air quality.

The convenience and suitability of bike share schemes couldbe improved. Transport for London already uses the data itcollects from its cycle hire scheme to inform the distributionof its bicycles, so that numbers on the ground can respond tochanges in demand. Smart technology can also enable better,more efficient bike share schemes, such as bikes with locksthat can be unlocked using mobile phones and allowing start-ups such as Air Donkey, which has been described as the Uberfor Bikes.

There is even work within Europe looking at whether cyclescan talk to traffic infrastructure and cars. A trial in Helmond inthe Netherlands is looking to see whether cars and cycles canwarn each other they are about to collide… who knows whatcould be next!

Dan Clarke, Future Digital Manager, Connecting Cambridgeshire.

The CopenhenganizeIndexAs this Newsletter is going to print we are in the final stagesof preparing for the 2015 AGM and looking forward to ourguest speaker. This year we are visited by Mikael Colville-Andersen, urban mobility expert and CEO of Copenhagenize,the go-to consultancy for bicycle culture, planning, traffic andcommunications. Mikael is an internationally renownedconsultant and keynote speaker who is sure to inspire.

In addition to consulting work, Copenhagenize also producethe biannual Copenhagenize index, an inventory and rankingof bicycle friendly cities. The most recent index in 2015 listsCopenhagen, Amsterdam, Utrecht, Strasbourg and Eindhovenas the top five cities, in that order. It’s interesting to comparethe improvements that cities make over each two-year period.Unfortunately, not a single city in the UK has made it into the122 cities shortlisted for assessment for the rankings.

The 2015 Copenhagenize top 20, [indicates the position in the2013 index].

You can find out more about the index here: http://copenhagenize.eu/index/

It will be interesting to get Mikael’s opinion on Cambridgewhile he is here. As the cycling capital of the UK, are we evenclose to having what it takes to be a true cycling city on theglobal scale?

Roxanne De Beaux

1. [2] Copenhagen2. [1] Amsterdam3. [3] Utrecht4. [new] Strasbourg5. [8] Eindhoven6. [9] Malmö7. [6] Nantes8. [5] Bordeaux9. [7] Antwerp10. [4] Seville

11. [17] Barcelona12. [10] Berlin13. [new] Ljubljana14. [new] Buenos Aires15. [11] Dublin16. [new] Vienna17. [19] Paris18. [new] Minneapolis19. [20] Hamburg20. [14] Montréal

In Frederiksberg,Copenhagen clearingand salting the cyclelanes is the priority,rather than the othertraffic and parkinglanes.


Cycle track crossing of side road, with priority - Swaledale, Bracknell. ( www.cycling-embassy.org.uk )

Bidirectional versus one-way cycle lanes

Now that segregated cycle lanes arebecoming more common, both inCambridge and elsewhere in the UK, wehave examples of different ways ofincluding bikes on roads. This article willlook at the advantages and disadvantagesof bidirectional versus one-way cyclelanes on roads.

One-way cycle lanes withtrafficThis is the classic cycle lane: it can be apainted strip, or a raised lane, or a kerb-segregated lane. One-way lanes go in thesame direction as traffic, one on each sideof the road. The Hills Road andHuntingdon Road cycleways are of thiskind.

The advantage of this is that you aremaking the same kind of manoeuvres aspeople in cars, so broadly the road layoutis designed to accommodate your journey.People leaving side roads are looking inyour direction for traffic. If the cyclewaystops, or you need to turn off, you canrejoin traffic travelling in the samedirection.

Bidirectional cycle lanesThe bidirectional cycle lane has people on bikes going in twodirections on one side of a road. The Cycle City Ambition plansfor Trumpington Road include a short section of bidirectionalcycleway, next to a one-way on-road hybrid lane.

The main advantage of a bidirectional cycle lane is it uses lessspace. You only need one buffer from traffic, rather than two(even if there is no physical buffer, the full width of a cyclelane often isn’t usable owing to proximity to traffic). If travel istidal (e.g. heavy commuting flow in one direction at a time) the

layout is more flexible: the busier dir-ection can use some of space availableto the opposite direction for overtakingor cycling two abreast, while stillleaving space for someone to cycle inthe non-dominant direction. In aconventional one-way layout, both laneswould need to be wide enough toaccommodate overtaking at all times ofday.

However, bidirectional cycle lanes canbe dangerous if they cross busy side-roads. People leaving the side-roads arelooking in the direction of conventionaltraffic, and can forget to check the otherdirection for people on bikes. TorringtonPlace in London is an example of anotherwise popular and successfulsegregated bidirectional cycle lanewhere collisions have resulted in newplans to change it to two one-way

In these sample layouts the bidirectional lane uses 1.2m less space than having two one-way lanes, but there is still sufficient space for cycling in two directions. The road widthsin Cambridge mean that, sometimes, every centimetre counts.


Bi-directional cycling in rush hour on the corner of Regents Terrace and Gonville Place.

Advantages● uses less space

● can be cheaper and lessdisruptive to build

● can be used to minimise crossingside-roads on opposite side e.g.along a riverfront or next to arailway line.

Disadvantages● junctions with the rest of road

network need careful thought

● if there are side roads, can bemore dangerous.

segregated lanes. However, where the side roads have lowusage, or are for local access only, it can be acceptable asusers will be used to the layout and the chance of problems isreduced. Alternatively, the crossings of side roads can be setback from the main road by at least one car length, so peopleexiting can make two separate manoeuvres: one to check bothways for people on bikes, cross when clear, and then anotherto join the main road. This requires more space at the junction,but can be useful for long-distance rural routes, whereproviding cycle lanes on both sides of the road is moreexpensive for fewer users.

Bidirectional lanes work very well where there is no access onone side, for example along a river or a railway track. This canalso help avoid crossing side-roads on the opposite side,reducing interactions with motor traffic. The proposed LondonEmbankment Cycle Superhighway is a good example of this. Insome circumstances the bidirectional track may be catering fora particular high-volume journey, such as the TrumpingtonRoad cycleway, designed specifically to allow journeysbetween the Accordia development and the schools in the NewTown area.

Another problem with bidirectional cycleways, especially inurban environments, is that they may not be going where youare. In some circumstances you would have to cross the roadtwice to use the cycle lane for only a short section. Coldham'sLane bridge has this problem if you are trying to head southalong the length of Coldham's Lane, rather than turning intoCromwell Road. Even if you can use it for a greater length, youwill need to turn at some point, and junctions with the mainroad network are often poorly thought-through. This is aparticular problem if the cycle network is inconsistent and youhave to rejoin traffic: half the time you will be on the wrongside of the road to continue your journey easily. You aremaking a manoeuvre that drivers don’t need to, and may notbe looking for. This is not an insoluble problem, but doesrequire good intersection design.

Generally speaking, bidirectional and one-way cycle lanes onroads are both useful but in different circumstances, and arenot necessarily interchangeable proposals. Hester Wells


Volunteer interview: Matthew DanishTell us about you and your cycling journey.

I have known how to ride a bicycle since childhood but onlyrecently have I viewed it as a primary mode of transport. When Imoved to Boston, Massachusetts 7 years ago I decided to sell mycar to save money and avoid the headache of having a car in thecity. I did not have the space for a bicycle and instead relied onpublic transport and my own two feet. In May 2014 I was given asmall folding bicycle and by August I was cycling so much that Istopped renewing my monthly public transport pass. That year,instead of the usual $900, I spent less than $200 on fares.

When and why did you join Cambridge Cycling Campaign?

I became aware of the Cambridge Cycling Campaign via theInternet before I moved to the UK and so was already a memberwhen I arrived in September. I had volunteered for similarorganisations in the Boston area, advocating for better walking,public transport and cycling conditions.

I see this kind of work as a tangible way of helping make lifebetter for people around me. I believe that city infrastructureshould be designed to be inclusive of everyone, regardless ofwealth or ability. Car-oriented city infrastructure excludes andmarginalises anyone who is not riding around inside one. Theoption of cycling provides an affordable and convenient way toget around that well complements walking, public transport andan accessible, human-scale city.

What volunteer activities have you been involved in?

So far I have helped with the Campaign's stand at the Milton ParkAutumn Festival and given testimony at a Greater Cambridge CityDeal Assembly meeting regarding Histon Road.

I have also designed a new format for the Campaign's bicyclelocking survey and conducted several counts. The computerscientist in me wanted to eliminate as much ambiguity as possibleso I arranged the survey into a decision tree: when assessingsafety of bikes it might be that one is locked to an insecure polewith a good D-lock, and another is locked to a secure Sheffieldstand but with a bad cable lock. Both are insecure - just indifferent ways.

The first question: ‘Is the bicycle locked?’

● If yes, then ‘Is the stand a proper one (intended for bicyclelocking)?’

● If not proper, then ‘Is it a secure pole?’

● If yes, then ‘Is it a good lock?’

● If yes, then ‘Is it used with the correct technique?’

This may seem like a laborious procedure but in practice it is easyto skip many of the steps. I recently surveyed bikes by theSheffield stands on Hobson Street. All, save one which wasunlocked, were therefore on an appropriate stand. 42 of thebicycles achieved 'Good technique with a good lock', 5 wereclassified under 'Bad technique with a good lock', and 12 werecounted as 'Bad lock.' The whole exercise took about ten minutesand was a good excuse for a cappucino and cake at a nearby cafe.

Developing this survey appealed to me because over time I hopewe will be able to build a comparable database of behaviour, thedata from which could be used in a wide range of ways. It couldhelp inform educational and outreach campaigns, direct limitedpolice and CCTV resources by uncovering patterns related tocriminal activity as well as tell us something about the waypeople perceive the safety of different parts of the city.

What has been the best thing about volunteering with the Campaign?

I would have to say that meeting the other members and listeningto their energy, spirit and ideas has been the best thing.

What would you like to happen in the future of the Campaign andcycling in Cambridge?

I am hoping that local authorities will start to involve theCampaign earlier when proposing or designing new bicycleinfrastructure. The Histon Road and Milton Road proposals forpublic consultation show that many problems could be avoidedfrom the outset.

What would you say to others who are considering active involvementwith the Campaign?

It's a chance to make some change for the better, and whateverthe outcome, it's fun, it's interesting, and you meet lots of nicepeople along the way.

Sarah Rodger

Matthew Danish.


Street lighting consultationHow good is your front bike light? If there is no street lighting– and no bright moon – does it enable you to see hazards andobstructions on the road? Does it pinpoint the potholes? Thelitter and broken glass? The wheelie bin someone has pushedinto the carriageway? For many Cambridge cyclists this is notan issue, as most of the time they are cycling on streets withstreet lighting. But this may change.

Cambridgeshire County Council is consulting on proposals thatwould turn off street lights on many roads between midnightand 6am. The consultation (at www.smartsurvey.co.uk/s/CambridgeshireStreetlightConsultation ) says: ‘Streetlights on main traffic routes will not be switched off or thosewhere CCTV’s are present or in roads where there is a statutoryrequirement e.g. traffic calming features or mini roundabouts,or those which support the night time economy in Town orCity Centres’. An interactive map at http://my.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/myCambridgeshire.aspx?MapSource=CCC/AllMaps&Layers=NightLightII&tab=maps shows every streetlight andwhether it will be dimmed or turned off. The justification forthe proposals is that the county council has to makeconsiderable savings because of the reduction in funding fromcentral government and thinks it can save approximately£272,000 a year from its street lighting energy costs.

The proposals are generating quite a bit of discussion onCyclescape ( http://camcycle.cyclescape.org/threads/1939 )and as yet it is not clear that any consensus is emerging. Thefollowing are the main points made in the discussion so far.

● Street lighting is necessary for the safety of cyclists, sothey can see obstructions.

● Street lighting makes cyclists and pedestrians feel safer.

● Evidence suggests that street lighting does not reduceaccidents or prevent crime.

● If streets are not lit and people feel unsafe they are likelyto drive instead of walking or cycling.

● Cyclists (and pedestrians) need street lighting far morethan motor vehicles do.

● Main routes for cyclists are not the same as main routesfor motor traffic (which will continue to be lit).

● If we want the main routes for cyclists lit, how do wedefine them?

● Cars and other motor vehicles have powerful lights.

● Many cyclists and pedestrians are still making journeysafter midnight or need to travel before 6 am.

● If street lights are to be turned off, this should be laterthan midnight, perhaps 2am.

● The last trains arrive in Cambridge after midnight and thefirst trains leave before 6am.

● Perhaps the time street lights are turned off should bedifferent on Fridays and Saturdays as more people are outlate then.

● Too much street lighting can cause glare and affect nightvision.

● Street lighting interferes with people's sleep and affectstheir health, when it shines in through their windows.

● Street lighting wastes energy.

● Dimming ALL street lights might mean that none needturning off.

● The county should be installing the most energy-efficientmodern street lighting.

● There are different sorts of lights – incandescent,fluorescent, metal halide, LED – and how much light theyemit and how much energy they use varies.

● How about street lights that turn on – or brighten – whenthey detect an approaching cyclist or pedestrian? Thetechnology exists.

● Smart lighting that directs light where it is needed createsa balance between safety and starlight.

● It is up to cyclists to ensure their lights are good enoughfor cycling where there is no street lighting.

Please join the discussion and let us have your views. This willhelp us formulate a response to the consultation. Perhaps wecan reach agreement on what street lighting is appropriate fordifferent parts of the city and county. Monica Frisch


Campaign against the dangerous Busway bollardsIn response to more reports of serious injury followingcollisions with the Busway bollards the Campaign has decidedto push harder with our campaign against these dangerousbollards.

Previous editions of the newsletter have included descriptionsof these bollards. The most recent description is little changedover the years.

They are much shorter than the standard bollard height at onlyabout 70 cm tall. They are dull grey in colour, blending in withthe surface of the cycleway, particularly in low lightconditions. They have four sides with sharp angles that makeit easier for things like pannier bags to catch, leading to acrash and potentially serious damage. There are two bollardsin each location, placed where one would least expect them,not in the middle but in the middle of each side. This is thecyclists's desire line and causes extra confusion when thereare two cyclists approaching from opposite directions.Recently a painted diamond has been added around thebollards stretching only about 1.5m in front of the bollards,less than the length of one potentially obstructive bicycle.Some bollards have also had small patches of white or redreflective tape applied. This is at a low level, again easilyobscured by a bicycle in front.

The issues of these bollards, both their location and design,has been raised numerous times to council officers. It hasbecome apparent that the council Cycling team has noresponsibility or influence over these bollards. That responsib-ility rests squarely with the Busway team.

The Busway team has been advised about the issues a numberof times in meetings and by email by us, other cycling groups,officers, individuals who have suffered injury and no doubtnumerous others. We are now in the process of arranging aface-to-face meeting to discuss the bollards. A formal letter isalso being sent. Thus far the response has been unsatisfactory.Few changes have been made and those that have are minorat best. We've been told that the Busway lights should makethings better now, and then asked to encourage cyclists to usebetter lights to prevent crashes with the bollards. Thiscompletely ignores the fact that most collisions that we haveheard about have occurred during the day.

We've been told that other bollard types cannot be consideredas it is vital that these bollards can be dropped into the

ground by maintenance workers when that they need to accessthe track. There are many other types of bollards and traffic-stopping solutions used all over the world, including here inCambridge, so we wonder why these are the only ones that theBusway team deems suitable. These bollards cannot bepainted or have other surfaces applied as they would nolonger be able to drop into the ground.

We have also requested information from the Busway teamabout reported incidents. We have been told that fourincidents were reported and given the dates.

Those who have tried to report an incident have found theprocess difficult. Firstly, it is challenging to identify who toreport to. As the Busway paths are not public highway thepolice are not obliged to attend a crash unless it involves amotor vehicle. When contacting the council, it can be difficultto find the right person to speak to.

We also know there have been a number of claims madeagainst the council, with more in progress and even moreunder consideration. Surely the cost of these lawsuits willsoon outweigh the cost of fixing the bollards? And surely it isworth finding the funds to prevent serious injury (or worse) toa member of the public?

There are so many alternatives to these dangerous bollards.Improved signage and visibility, better design, non-bollardalternatives and even nothing at all would be an improvementto what currently exists. We believe there are at least anumber of low-cost interim measures that could be immed-iately put into place. The small, additional inconvenience onthe infrequent occasions the bollards need to be lowered islikely to be less than the inconvenience suffered by those withbroken collarbones, shoulders, wrists and bikes.

We have now started a website where we are collectinganonymous reports of Busway bollard incidents. We also havedetailed incident reports that we will present to the Buswayteam to show the impact these injuries have had on theindividuals who have suffered them. We ask readers to get intouch if they, or someone they know, has collided with abollard (even if it did not result in injury or damage). We willcontinue to hold the Busway team accountable until thebollards are fixed or removed.

Roxanne De Beaux

If you suffer a collision with a Busway bollard, you canreport to Campbell Ross-Bain, the county council's BusOperations & Facilities Manager. You can email him [email protected] .

We need help to keep up the campaign against thesebollards. Please get in touch if you can help. You canalso join the Cyclescape thread:http://camcycle.cyclescape.org/threads/873


A Campaign member’s bollard incident reportI was cycling to work about 8am on Tuesday 28 April. Therewere two cyclists in front of me as we approached the end ofthe Guided Busway as it goes under Hills Road near thestation.

The two bikes ahead were side by side as they steered right tojoin the road section; the pathway was restricted byscaffolding and so my view of the bollard was obscured. Ilooked back to check there was no bus coming and hit thepillar dead on.

I sustained a badly broken collarbone and was detained inAddenbrooke's overnight as they were concerned that it wasabout to become an open fracture, which would requireimmediate surgery.

Luckily it settled down and I was allowed home for two daysand readmitted so the specialist orthopaedic specialists couldfit a plate and screws on Friday, with another overnight stay.

I was in a sling for 8 weeks, and could not drive, cycle or washand dress myself.

I live in Whittlesford and work at the Science Park, whichproved a problem as there is no longer a local, commuter-friendly bus service. I was very fortunate that my employers,Cambridge Consultants, were so supportive. They allowed meto work around lifts to get into work, or work from home, andmade sure I had anything that could make my workingenvironment more comfortable.

Me with the offending bollard (and my precious bike which, unlikeme, was easily fixed having suffered the total damage of twoslightly bent spokes!)

I was told at Ben Hayward that they had heard of a number ofincidents involving what they described as ‘the low bollards’on the Busway. My experience in industry is that all near-misses, incidents and accidents should be reviewed and I feltthat the council had a duty of care to accept and monitorreports of injuries.

I contacted Mr Shaun Harrison Buller, Busway team leader atthe county council, and was offended by his indifference. Hesimply told me that the bollards had been reviewed and weredeemed fit for purpose. They could not be painted but nowhad paint and reflective tape around base (clearly not thateasy to see when there are pedestrians and bikes around). Healso told me that there was no need for the cyclists in front tohave steered right onto the roadway.

I was told that ‘there were not many’reports of incidents. My response wasthat I was not surprised

After that I was contacted by Mr Campbell Ross-Bain and I wastold that ‘there were not many’ reports of incidents. Myresponse was that I was not surprised as Mr Harrison Bullerhad not asked for any of my details (address, age etc.) whichwould have been necessary to log a RIDDOR standard ofreport. (RIDDOR: Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and DangerousOccurrences Regulations 2013). If the severity of my injuriesdid not justify a report then it seems that someone would haveto have life-threatening injuries for the incident to beregistered.

My hobbies are cycling, mountaineering and rock-climbing andthe accident has had significant impact on all three. I was ableto return to cycling after 8 weeks but six months on thevibration still causes me pain. I do not have the OK to carry arucksack over the broken bone and, whilst I have regainedalmost the full range of arm movement, I still have significantpain so my climbing is still very limited and at 49 I may notregain that ability.

I have not yet been discharged from Addenbroke's care. Once Iam I will consider whether or not I shall take this further withthe Council. Clare Downie


Cambridge (compromise) KerbOf course all life is a compromise, especially for those of uswho strive for unattainable ideals.

The ideal as achieved on parts of Huntingdon Road is a cyclelane truly segregated by a double 100mm raised kerb, whereall but the most cautious parents would allow their competentfive-year-old to cycle. Unfortunately, there are many otherconstraints that make such segregated lanes difficult,expensive or impossible to retro-fit to all our existing urbanroads.

I’ve started so I’d better begin. The Cambridge Kerb is acompromise that helps better delimit a ‘softly’ segregatedcycle lane from that part of the carriageway designed for alltraffic. It is a concrete kerb section that has been constructedwith a slight slope over a 150mm (6”) width. This is sufficientto make it clear, especially with a well-contrasting surface tothe kerbed cycle lane, that drivers of motor vehicles shouldnot enter, yet provides little danger to those cycles who needto cross, whilst in exceptional circumstances allowing a motorvehicle to cross.

Although with ‘traditional’ Mandatory Cycle Lanes motorvehicles MUST not enter, there are exceptions, one good casebeing to permit the passage of an emergency vehicle. On HillsRoad the construction of the improved cycle lanes results inthe narrowing of the normal lanes and this is an area where atpeak times queues can exist in both directions. Hardsegregated lanes would NOT be acceptable for the emergencyservices on this stretch, as it could seriously impede theprogress of such vital traffic.

In some places ‘semi’ hard segregation is used but for those oncycles who wish to leave or join across a busy road, say from aprivate drive or minor road opposite, it can be risky. One roadin Oxford had alternate ‘kerb and no kerb’, and in the dark andwet with busy traffic it proved difficult for inexperienced ridersto negotiate the obstacle course.

I’ve long been a believer in the 3 ‘E’s of Education,Enforcement and Engineering. With the more normalMandatory Cycle Lane with a 150mm white line, bothEducation (even of police!) and Enforcement seem to fail, andthe government seems to think the extra powers, which itcould make available under the Traffic Management Act 2004,are simply a ‘War on the Motorist’.

Cambridge Kerbs look like a good engineering compromise,but only time will tell if this passive education will lead tobetter compliance. On almost the first day of operation, a two-way hard segregated cycle super-highway in London wasobstructed by a Tesco delivery vehicle!

As with all engineering the devil is in the detail. To be safeand effective the upstand between the normal carriagewayand the Cambridge Kerb must be minimal. There are standardsfor ‘flush’ and ‘dropped’ kerbs. Dropped kerbs should have anupstand of over 10mm which then enables the disabled toeasily recognise the carriageway edge. Such an upstand couldcause a tumble for someone approaching at an acute angle,especially in wet weather.

For such locations the specification should be ‘flush’ with anupstand not exceeding 3mm (the county council used to quotethat in the ‘Network Management Plan’). I think there areworkmanship issues at some locations on this new stretch.

One advantage of such soft segregated cycle facilities is thatthe construction costs are far lower that for a road widening orbus lane.

I like this approach for a section of road where hardsegregation would be difficult. The Cambridge Kerb isdifferent and should get respect from the majority of motorvehicle drivers. Perhaps the ‘Pavement Parking Bill’, soon to gobefore Parliament, needs a clause to cover such lanes?

I’m still unsure how best to deal with ‘signs and lines’ here. ATraffic Regulation Order and a 150mm line painted on thekerb would be clear to me, but to who else? I don’t haveshares in the companies that make yellow paint, otherwise Imight recommend double yellow lines with, at the least, singleunloading ‘tick’ marks. And where do you put the yellow lines?In the main carriageway, or in the cycle lane? Perhaps whenyou read this a decision will have been made.

Jim Chisholm

New cycle lane layout on Hills Road.

Part cross-section of road at the kerb (Diagrammatic only - not toscale).

Kerb

Cycle lane

Subsoil

Sub-base

Sub-baseRoadway

R u n n i n g s u r f a c e s


Reclaim Romsey - a personal manifestoPrompted by a recent tale of bullying driver behaviour, Idecided to revisit thoughts I've had before on what to do aboutRomsey, specifically north of Mill Road.

The old terraced houses form a charming warren of narrowstreets. Yet cycling through here can often be a stressfulexperience. It really doesn't have to be this way. There arethree issues.

Firstly, the road surfaces. Between crumbling tarmac anddented speed bumps, simply cycling along an empty streethere takes concentration. Beneath the surface, the old pipescarrying services are crumbling, made worse by motor vehiclespounding them, so the surface sags and breaks up. Fixing thisis a cycling issue. But it is quite expensive.

Secondly, parking. It's known anecdotally that these streetsare extensively used as free parking for the railway station. Onsome streets, parking capacity was increased years ago at theexpense of pedestrians by permitting drivers to mount thefootway. Supposedly this should leave enough footway clearfor pushchairs, wheelchairs etc - if the vehicles are kept withinthe markings. In practice this often is not the case, especiallywith vans and larger cars. Furthermore, bin day can leave thefootway entirely blocked.

Width restrictions at the junction between Fairfax Road andCromwell Road.

Poor road surface.

Legal car parking in Romsey.

So fixing this issue has two strands. First, end the disaster ofthe pavement parking. This should be very cheap. Second,create a controlled parking zone. This may be unpopular withsome residents, who'll now have to pay to store their car onthe highway - in an area where off-street parking is rare - butshould be of advantage to the majority. Car ownership is low

in this area. The properties are narrower than the length of acar, and not all the street length is available for parkinganyway. This will need political leadership from councillors,much more than was shown with the Thoday Street bikeparking issue.

Thirdly, through motor traffic. From my experience, and frommany other anecdotes, it seems that the most aggressivedriving is encountered by drivers using the Romsey streets as ashortcut between Mill Road and Coldham's Lane. The gym bythe railway bridge especially is a source of angry, impatientdrivers. The builders' merchant is another source, though thisis scheduled to be replaced by a residential developmentincorporating the Chisholm Trail.

Gwydir Street has been closed to through traffic.

A simple solution presents itself. At Fairfax Road are a numberof width restrictions, preventing large vehicles using these rat-runs. Their design suggests they were installed at the sametime as the streets in Petersfield were closed to through motortraffic. This shows what should be done. And it should beinexpensive. Residents would only be slightly affected -adding maybe half a mile to some car journeys. It wouldreduce traffic on their streets, making them more pleasantplaces to live.

So, a three-step plan. Given the costs and politics involved, I'dreverse the order. Reduce the through motor traffic. Reducethe parking. Rebuild the streets. In doing so, reclaim Romseyas a place to live, not a place to drive through and store cars.

Al Storer


A428 Corridor consultationThe consultation phase for the GreaterCity Deal's first major infrastructureproject of the Greater Cambridge CityDeal has now passed. Thecontroversially titled ‘Better BusJourneys’ was concerned with the A428Corridor from Madingley Road to Cam-bourne. The public was asked to con-sider three options for Tranche 1 whichis timetabled to be completed by 2020.

The key concernCambridge Cycling Campaign respondedin detail to all of the presented options.The key concern was that the Cam-bourne to Cambridge corridor currentlylacks a continuous surfaced off-roadcycle route, putting it behind many otherareas of South Cambridgeshire on safecycling routes for all. A recently-pub-lished report shows the increase inactive travel and reduction in car use forthose near the northern Busway route,demonstrating the adage: ‘Build it andthey will come!’ ( http://www.ijbnpa.org/content/pdf/ s12966-015-0239-8.pdf )

Cycle ridesDo you cycle around Cambridge and fancy going a bit further? If so, why not come for a ride with CTC Cambridge? We hold upto six rides a week in the countryside around Cambridge, and know all the prettiest and quietest routes. Our rides are sociable,non-competitive and moderately-paced, and always include refreshment stops. Non-CTC members are welcome to come andtry us out. See our calendar of rides at www.ctc-cambridge.org.uk for full details. All rides are graded to give anindication of speed and distance so you should be able to find a ride which suits you. If you're unsure, our twice-monthlySaturday morning rides are a great way to start. Nigel Deakin

This is a vital cycling link, not only forCambourne, but for all the villages onthis corridor, which could be connectedto each other, as well as to Cambridge. Asafe walking and cycling route wouldallow more people to walk or cycle tolocal schools and shops. Communitygroups would be able to meet withoutneeding to drive. Children would be ableto visit friends safely without beingreliant on parents for lifts. A safe cyclingroute along this corridor would enhancethe community as well as improvinglinks to the city.

Within the cityWe objected to the addition of a buslane in the limited space of MadingleyRoad as it rules out much-neededimprovements for walking and cycling.The North West Cambridge site will add3,000 new houses and 2,000 postgraddwellings, and the West Cambridge siteintensification will increase the amountof commuting in the area. The existingwalking and cycling conditions are poor

Draft map of options in the public consultation. From Newsletter 121

shared-use facilities, disliked bypedestrians and people on bikes alike.Just as Cambourne lags behind SouthCambs, Madingley Road is behind otherparts of the city in not having a high-quality segregated cycle route to the citycentre. This is especially important forlinks to the north and east of the city,which are not served by the Coton Path.

We also drew attention to the problemsof the connections to the Coton Path.The Coton Path itself is an exemplaryfacility, but the connections to Cotonand the city centre have many problems.The city centre end of the route viaGarrett Hostel Lane is increasingly busy,and with more new journeys to comethis route will not be able to cope.

Hester Wells


Edward Leigh explains the ‘Better City Deal’.

Over the consultation period for theCambourne to Cambridge improvementsthere was increasing and widespreaddemand from City and South Cambsresidents for solutions other than thosepresented for consideration by the CityDeal.

Public meeting asks ‘Are new bus lanes the only answer?’

In response to this a public meeting washeld on 12 November. Chaired by JeanGlasberg, a Cambridge Cycling Campaignmember and local resident, the meetingprovided the opportunity to hear aboutalternative proposals. These related notonly to the Cambourne to Cambridgecorridor but more generally to futuretraffic infrastructure developmentsarising from the City Deal.

More than 200 people from the city andnearby villages attended includingDaniel Zeichner, Cambridge City MP, andCity Deal chair Lewis Herbert. Themeeting showed how interested andinvested local residents are inCambridge's transport systems, evidentboth from the attendance numberswhich left standing room only and fromthe many questions which followed thepresentations, many of which werecycling related.

The speakersRobin Pellew, of Cambridge Past,Present & Future, spoke first in responseto the consultation, followed by FrancisBurkitt of ‘Cambridge BOLD’, and finallyEdward Leigh of ‘Better City Deal’.Though the focus was not on cycling perse, each of the speakers highlighted thecritical importance of cycling in any planto move people into and around the city,

and as a fundamental part of the sol-ution of getting people out of their cars.

Robin Pellew stressed the best practiceof segregated cycle paths that meantthat City Deal proposals of shared-use

bus lanes were completelyunacceptable.

Francis Burkitt highlighted the ChisholmTrail as a key part in Cambridge's cyclingfuture, saying that a several-mile journeyto work was just the sort of thing thatmany people would relish, and wouldundertake if cycleways were improved.

Edward Leigh gave a detailedexplanation of how high-qualitypedestrian and cycle paths could bedeveloped linking with Madingley Parkand Ride, West and North WestCambridge sites, the Coton cycle path,and villages along the A428.

Next stepsThe paper consultation questionnaireproduced by the City Deal did not invitealternative proposals however therehave been assurances from the City Deal

Assembly and Board that these arewelcomed and will be considered.

It is hoped that these more imaginativeand forward-looking ideas will be givendue weight when the results of theconsultation are reviewed.

The next traffic infrastructure works onthe City Deal's list are those on MiltonRoad and Histon Road. An initial budgetestimate of £4.28 million has beenearmarked for these works andconsultations on these two projects willrun concurrently from mid-January untillate February. The proposals outlined bythe City Deal have raised real concernsover the safety of cycling provision.

There has been a suggestion thatCampaign members could form asubcommittee to help inform theCampaign's response to theseconsultations, to give bestrepresentation, fact finding andspreading the word that the consultationis underway. There have been offers ofhelp, including from one Campaignmember who is not only a local residentand cyclist but also a chartered civilengineer. If you are interested inbecoming involved in this working groupthen please get in touch with RoxanneDe Beaux via [email protected].

More information of the draft proposalsto be consulted on can be found athttp://www.gccitydeal.co.uk/citydeal/download/downloads/id/15/draft_options_report.pdf .

Sarah Rodger


I’m just old enough to remember London smogs, and the moregeneral severe fogs of the early 50s. The various Clean AirActs, firstly in London in 1954, and more generally in 1956,vastly and easily reduced these smogs and fogs, which hadcaused huge disruption to daily life and thousands of deaths.

We don’t even need Parliamentary Acts to reduce our localcongestion and pollution, just a better understanding of therelationship between FLOW and DELAY. Understand that, andthen the ways to reduce congestion, and hence much of thepollution, become clear and easy.

Research in the 1960s, almost as old as Clean Air Acts, intomotor vehicle congestion showed that in a congested network,reducing traffic flow by 5% reduced congestion by 50%, andthat reducing it by 10% reduced congestion by 90%.

Many find this an unbelievable statistic, but easily obtainablelocal evidence shows this is true in practice.

For a number of years I’ve asked small audiences, ‘How muchdoes traffic drop in the peak hours over a half-term week?’ I’llusually get some who say by more than 50%, and many whosay by more than 30%. Few would dare to suggest it was aslittle as 10%. Yet the cast-iron evidence is available via theCambridge County Council’s own Automatic Traffic Counterson several main radial roads in Cambridge.

Queuing theory is complex but the results are simple. As theflow nears capacity, delays increase exponentially. As users weclearly see, and are frustrated by, the delay and think thatwhen travelling on a road free of congestion that the flowmust be much lower. But the relationship between ‘flow’ and‘delay’ is far from linear, with a clear ‘elbow’ effect. Delays riselittle until around 80% of the road capacity is used, but thenrise rapidly as flow increases. Clearly no more than themaximum traffic can get through a junction or link, so delaysreally do then escalate!

Of course, this being Cambridge, some blame ‘cyclists’ forcongestion, and cite worse congestion on wet days, claimingthat it is those who normally cycle, but drive on wet days, whoare the cause. Again, evidence from elsewhere, and commonsense, disproves this. Congestion in places such as Sheffield,where cycling is rare, is worse on wet days. It is, in fact, thecareful driver who is to blame for reducing the capacity of theroad and hence increasing congestion. That caution in leavinga slightly larger gap lest braking be less effective is justsufficient to reduce the capacity of a road or junction.

Snow or ice is the extreme example. Queues can last for hours,not because there is suddenly more traffic but because, withgood reason, almost everyone becomes ultra-cautious, andthose who are not create even more delays!

If you thought traffic volumes needed to be reduced by 30% ormore to eliminate congestion, that would be an almostunachievable objective. But a 10% reduction should be easilyachievable. I’ve explained the cause, but what is the solution?

Cutting congestion is easy, as is cutting pollution

Commuter parking on Adams Road.

How to reduce congestionIf just one in twenty drivers were to use the bus and one intwenty were to cycle, congestion on normal days would bemanageable. Of course there is an ever-increasing demand fortravel, with more jobs and more housing in and aroundCambridge, so other measures are needed, many of which arediscussed in the Transport Strategy for Cambridge and SouthCambridgeshire published last year.

There do need to be carrots and sticks, but we could have avirtuous circle whereby reduced private motor traffic makesbuses more reliable and cycling more pleasant. How do weachieve that, and without the years of huge disruption thatwould caused by say, reconstructing Milton Road, or chargingevery motor vehicle that moves within Cambridge with somedifficult-to-collect cash?

The benefits of travelling on Park & Ride buses are significantlyundermined by current congestion.

Time period Milton Road Huntindon Road07:00-08:59 vehicles vehiclesMon-Fri Out In Out In

Mean of seventerm-time weeks 1064.0 1681.4 750.9 1671.6

Half-term week 996.2 1544.8 725.4 1654.0

Change in flow 6.4 8.1 3.4 1.1


If just one in twenty drivers were to usethe bus and one in twenty were tocycle, congestion on normal days wouldbe manageable

Restrict commuter parkingMany European cities have reduced the availability ofcommuter car parking, especially that which is free to theusers. The easy availability of parking can be directly relatedto the length of traffic queues on a typical day.

A Cambridge example would be, say, Adams Road. Overnightthere might be fewer than ten cars parked, but during the daythe figure will be around 120 (I’ve counted them). If parkingwere banned on most of this road, 100 fewer cars could enterCambridge. One hundred cars make a queue of one kilometre.So the queues into Cambridge would be shorter by thatamount. Furthermore, if people know they cannot park incertain streets they won’t drive around looking for spaces.

The above is a model, not a direct suggestion. Because of the‘churn rate’ of car trips and jobs, many of which are short-term,few individuals would be directly disadvantaged if, say, 5% offree commuter spaces were removed each year, yet the directadvantages would be great. Congestion would be reduced,buses would be more reliable, even without bus lanes, andselective removal of such free parking on minor residentialroads would make both cycling and walking more pleasant,hence encouraging these sustainable modes.

Gating or queue relocationThe idea of ‘gating’ or ‘queue relocation’ has also been raised.This, like reducing commuter car parking, will only be seen tobe a workable option if the ‘system’ of flows, delays, andqueues is well understood. As anyone who uses the CatholicChurch junction in the peak will know, this junction becomesvery inefficient because of ‘blocking back’, where queues fromadjacent junctions obstruct vehicles (even cycles) that wouldotherwise have a clear path. Urban Traffic Control Systemssuch as SCOOT have long had the ability to reduce such issues,by rationing traffic into a link so as to reduce such blocking.Gating is just an extension for a section of road with severaljunctions and links between them. Where it is simple andcost-effective at the start of an otherwise congested radial tointroduce a bus lane, it is provided. Other traffic is ‘regulated’into the otherwise congested sections, and buses can thenadvance through links and junctions without the risk of beingseriously delayed by queuing private cars on those sectionsthey share.

I hope I have shown above that the difference in the numbersof cars on our radial roads between ‘congested’ term-timeweeks and uncongested half terms means you don’t need ahuge stack of hundreds of cars to achieve this, as thedifference of flows on Milton Road over all of a two-hourperiod is only 140.

In addition, because the congested junctions do not getobstructed, traffic may well flow more smoothly, and the‘gating’ allows an increased amount of normal traffic to enter,so that without any modal shift journey times should fall.

This needs no bus lanes on narrow urban roads, and othertraffic is only ‘gated’ at all on those (fewer that 150?) dayswhen serious congestion would otherwise occur.

I haven’t talked about pollution. This has been much in thenews, with general agreement that levels are far higher thanhas been recognised, and much is caused by private cars stuckin congestion. Modern Euro 6 hybrid buses will produce lessnitrous oxide than even a small diesel car. Once theimplications of pollution caused by motor vehicles are betterunderstood, access restrictions may have more public support.

We can never remove the threat of congestion, and to reducethose days when a serious crash closes a ‘Strategic Road’around Cambridge, and causes chaos on local roads, we justneed a better standard of driving.

None of these issues of major concern can be considered inisolation. Commuter car parking, bus delays, pollution, a betterstandard of behaviour by all road users and making cycling aviable option for ordinary people are all interlinked. To solvethem at minimum cost we need to tackle them in a holisticand systematic way. Not as isolated problems.

Jim Chisholm


Outspoken cycle trainingWhen I recently mentioned to friends that I was going to takean Outspoken cycling lesson they all asked ‘Why? You alreadyknow how to ride a bike!’. Well there is knowing and there isknowing . . .

Those who remember my first article in Newsletter 120 mayrecall that I wasn't a natural when it first came to cycling. Thiswas in the late 80s in a very car centric suburb of Perth inWestern Australia. I didn't need to learn much beyondbalancing and looking left and right when I crossed the road,because I was only ever allowed to cycle on the pavement orin parks. This wasn't necessarily because my parents wereover-protective. It was because cycling on the road was just souncommon, especially for children.

It wasn't until I moved to Melbourne at the age of 23 that Iactually rode on the road for the first time. In hindsight, I canrecall some moments when my lack of knowledge orconfidence contributed to me coming off the worse for wear ina few ‘car vs Roxy’ incidents. Had I had the opportunity forBikeability training as a child or even as a ‘rusty rider’ adult Ithink I would have fared much better when I resumed cycling.

(Note: these were not incidents where I was at fault, justincidents that could have been avoided had I known betterhow to position myself to deal with poor driver behaviour.)

With these thoughts in mind I was keen to try out the CountyCouncil-subsidised training that is being provided byOutspoken to see if there were still some things I could learn(£10 for 2 hours one-to-one).

I arrived on a slightly rainy morning and was introduced to myinstructor Nikki. The first part of the lesson involved funthings like standing on one leg and looking behind me whiletouching my nose three times. This was a great way for Nikkiand me to ensure that we could communicate well, that Iknew my left from right and that I had a decent level ofcoordination.

We then checked my bike. Something I should have donealready, but it is a busy life being the Cycling CampaignOfficer. Unfortunately, my tyres were not as ‘pumped’ as theyshould have been and after a good discussion on why this isimportant, and then making me pump them up on the spot,Nikki decided that my bike, and I, were fit to go.

We then progressed to a quiet car park so that Nikki couldstart me out with some Level 1 cycling manoeuvres. Starting,stopping and so on. I was pleased to learn that I was doingthis properly. Knowing the right position for pedals and bodyis not something that has ever occurred to me. Instinctively Ido this correctly, but I wonder if this was the case when I wasless experienced. I did learn that I am a little too heavy on thefront break. Being aware of this has changed my technique forthe better over the last few weeks.

We moved on to complete some cycling with one hand,cycling while touching my nose type activities including myfavourite, ‘side-fives’ (like a high-five but to the side and whilecycling). In other words, how to teach someone to indicatewithout them realising. Nikki related a great anecdote ofasking children in Bikeability, while cycling, to put their hands

up if they couldn'tindicate. (It turnedout most of themcould).

Once we knew I wassafe for the road (arelief), Nikki and Ispent the rest of thelesson progressingfrom the basics ofLevel 1 through toLevel 3 ofBikeability. Thisincluded discussion,examples andpractice in a numberof different trafficand junctionscenarios. I foundthat I was usually quite adept at this and I attribute this tohaving learnt to drive a car. My positioning on the road wasinformed by where I would be if I was in a car. It made merealise that for younger people who have not had drivinglessons, understanding where to position themselves wouldactually be quite a challenge. Conversely, learning to cycle onthe road would be of great advantage when it comes tolearning to drive.

Our lesson ended with an analysis of what I described as anawful junction on Newmarket Road. As Nikki corrected me, nojunction is awful, it is a ‘learning opportunity’. This is thejunction where she brings the lorry drivers who takeBikeability as part of their driver training. By the end of theirtraining the drivers have usually gained a new perspective.When asked what they would want from a cyclist in thissituation, visibility, they all agree, is the most important.

What I enjoyed about this final lesson is that Nikki was nottelling me what to do in this situation. Nikki was asking mewhat I would do. I presented three different ways that I wouldfeel safe to navigate the junction, and all of them weredeemed suitable. And this is the point of the lesson. Ensuringthat I have the knowledge and skills to react and determinesafe strategies to deal with the multitude of situations thatcyclists face.

As experienced cyclists, it can be hard to realise how muchthere is to learn when we start cycling on the road. But really,the hesitation of potential cyclists is easy to understand. Notonly is there a period of adjustment as the body learns how tocycle and coordinate our limbs for starting, stopping,indicating, balancing and turning, there is also learning how todeal with roads, traffic and many far from ideal environments.It can simply be too overwhelming.

Whether new to cycling or experienced I strongly recommendundertaking some training with Bikeability. After two hours Ihad learnt a few things and I had more confidence about thethings I was already doing correctly. And, it was fun!

Roxanne De Beaux

Roxanne and Nikki.


Campaign Diary .

Cambridge Cycling Campaign reserves the right to decline topromote events or activities where helmets or high-visibilityclothing are required or implied.

Monthly meetingsThe Campaign's monthly general meeting is held in theFriends' Meeting House, Jesus Lane on the first Tuesday ofeach month. Business starts at 8.00pm, with tea and coffeefrom 7.30pm, and a chance to chat, and for us to introduceourselves to new members. The agenda includesopportunities to discuss current issues and planning matters.Sometimes there is a speaker.

Next meetings: 1 December - the Annual General Meeting; 5January; 2 February

Mill Road Winter FairSaturday 5 December 10.30 am- 4.30pm Visit the Campaign'sstall in front of Urban Larder on Mill Road for a chat or tolend a hand.

Seasonal SocialMonday 14 December 7.30 at The Grain and Hop Store,Regent Terrace. For details, including booking and foodordering, please see the notice on the back cover.

Newsletter datesThere are several opportunities for members to help with theNewsletter. One is by writing articles, taking photos andproviding other illustrations. There is advice about this andstyle guidelines on our website http://www.camcycle.org.uk/newsletters/guidelines.html .

Copy deadline for Newsletter 124 February - March 2016:Sunday 27 December

The copy deadline is now ten days before the precedingmonthly meeting, so we can be more confident of gettingnewsletters distributed before the start of the month.

Volunteers are also needed to help put newsletters intoenvelopes and then to deliver them. If you might be able toassist, please contact Lisa Woodburn (via [email protected] ) who co-ordinates this. Stuffing of the newsletter isusually on the last Tuesday or Wednesday of the monthbefore the newsletter appears.

Newsletter meetings: These are held every two months,shortly after the newsletter has appeared, to discuss the mostrecent issue and plan the next one. They are held at 5.45pmin Grads Café on the 3rd floor of the University Centre, MillLane. All welcome. Details will be on Cyclescape thread#979.

City and County Council committeesCampaign members may be interested in attending PlanningCommittee and Area Committee meetings, which ofteninclude cycling and walking issues. Development ControlForum and Joint Development Control Committee meetings,which determine the Planning Applications relating to themajor housing development proposals for the Cambridgesub-region, are also open to the public. The DevelopmentPlan Scrutiny Sub-committee meetings also often coverwalking/cycling/transport issues.

Information on dates and venues is on www.cambridge.gov.uk/democracy/ and minutes of meetings are also available.Agendas are usually online there about a week in advance.Please check the website in case meetings have beencancelled or times or venues changed.

Cambridge City Joint Area Committee administered byCambridgeshire County Council. No forthcoming meetingslisted at http://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/info/20146/council_meetings .

Development Control Forum: usually on a Wednesday at10.00am in Committee Room 1 & 2 - Guildhall. Nextmeetings: 9 December, 13 January.

Development Plan Scrutiny Sub-committee: usually on aTuesday at 4.30pm in Room 1 & 2 - Guildhall. Next meeting:8 December.

East Area Committee: usually a Thursday at 7.00pm in theMeeting Room - Cherry Trees Day Centre. Next meeting: 28January.

Greater Cambridge City Deal Executive Board administeredby South Cambridgeshire District Council. Meets at 2pm inThe Guildhall, Cambridge. Next meetings: 3 December, 15January.

Greater Cambridge City Deal Joint Assembly administered bySouth Cambridgeshire District Council. Next meetings: 17December, 12 February.

Joint Development Control Committee - Cambridge Fringes:usually a Wednesday at 10.30am in Committee Room 1 & 2 -Guildhall. Next meetings: 16 December, 20 January.

Joint Strategic Transport and Spatial Planning Group: Nextmeeting: 14 March at 9:30am at South Cambridgeshire Hall,Cambourne, CB 23 6EA.

North Area Committee: usually a Thursday at 6.30pm. Nextmeeting: 20 January.

Planning Committee: usually a Wednesday at 10.00am inCommittee Room 1 & 2 - Guildhall. Next meetings:2 December, 6 January, 3 February.

South Area Committee: usually a Monday at 7.00pm. Nextmeeting: 14 December, Meeting Room, Cherry Hinton VillageLeisure Centre, Colville Road, Cherry Hinton, Cambridge, CB19EJ.

West Central Area Committee: usually a Wednesday at7.00pm. Next meetings: 3 December, 11 February.

#CamRideHome#CamRideHome rides start at 6pm on the last Friday of themonth from outside The Mill pub on Mill Lane. Seehttp://benhaywardcycles.tumblr.com/


Milton Country Park – Autumn Festival

On Sunday 27 September I took the Campaign’s stall bike tothe Milton Country Park Autumn Festival. It's the second timethis event has been run and the first at which the Campaignhas had a presence. The organisers had arranged for a lovelysunny day, very welcome so late into the year. The festival is awonderful mix of street food, community and craft stalls. Areal highlight for families is the hay fight at the centre of thefestival.

Our stall became part of a bike-themed area, withYouCanBikeToo setting out their all-ability adaptive bikes onone side and Outspoken drawing in crowds with their bike-powered jukebox on the other. I had many positiveconversations - introducing people to the Campaign and ourrecent focuses, notably the Milton Road protected cyclewayspetition. A few just wanted to whinge about bad cyclists; theywere quickly shown the educational literature we produce onsafer cycling and weren’t numerous enough to spoil a goodday.

Events like these are a great opportunity to raise awareness ofand get new members into the Campaign. Increasedmembership in turn strengthens our collective voice whencampaigning. However, the success of these events really doesrely on enthusiastic volunteers helping out on the day. Theydon't require a huge time commitment and when you aren’t onthe stall there is usually a vibrant and exciting event toexplore. They’re a great opportunity to meet and chat withlike-minded individuals, and you’ll always be supported by amember of the committee to help with the rare anti-cyclingwhinger!

Our next big event is the Mill Road Winter Fair on Saturday5 December. If you’d like to help with this, please get in touchon [email protected] or via the Winter Fair Cyclescapethread ( http://camcycle.cyclescape.org/threads/2067 ).

Tom McKeown

Hundreds enjoying the Milton Country Park Autumn Festival. Photo: Sarah Harris

Tom and Matthew at the Campaign's stall in amongst lots ofcycling fun. Photo: Vicki Blamford, Photographvie.co.uk

Seasonal SocialDecember is here and we are planning ourtraditional seasonal social. It is a chance tomeet and chat to other members whilstcelebrating another great year’s campaigning.

Monday 14 December 7.30 at The Grain andHop Store, Regent Terrace.

If you are interested in the festive menu it is£12.50 for 2 courses and £16.00 for threecourses and needs to be ordered in advance.

Details of the menu, and much more, can befound on this threadwww.camcycle.cyclescape.org/threads/ 469

It would be very helpful to have an idea ofnumbers so if you would like to join us thenplease email [email protected] orcontribute to the above thread.

Special thanks to Richard Burgess fororganising this.

abbey–chesterton bridge approved · approved the abbey-chesterton cycling & walking bridge to...

Documents