Removal of two dwellings to be replaced by four 4 person 2 bedroom dwellings.
14 and 16 Mill Lane, Sawston are a pair , 14 and 16, 14 , Mill Lane, SAWSTON, CB22 3HZ
Application reference : S/0030/18/FL
Listed issues, most recent first, limited to the area of Cambridge Cycling Campaign:
Removal of two dwellings to be replaced by four 4 person 2 bedroom dwellings.
14 and 16 Mill Lane, Sawston are a pair , 14 and 16, 14 , Mill Lane, SAWSTON, CB22 3HZ
Application reference : S/0030/18/FL
No cycle parking provided.
Two new detached chalet style dwellings.
Land to the rear of 142, Cottenham Road, Histon, Cambridge, CB24 9ET
Application reference : S/4544/17/FL
The Ely to Cambridge Transport Study is a wide-ranging multi-modal study which has made recommendations on the transport schemes needed to accommodate the major development planned at a new town north of Waterbeach, Cambridge Northern Fringe East (CNFE) and the Cambridge Science Park (CSP). The study has three strands:
- Strand 1 looks at the overall transport requirements on the corridor
- Strand 2 looks at the specific requirements for growth at Waterbeach
- Strand 3 looks at the specific requirements for growth at CNFE/CSP
The commission has delivered:
- An options study and Strategic Outline Business Case for the overall package of
interventions on the Ely to Cambridge corridor;
- A transport study that identifies the infrastructure package and phasing of that
package to provide for the transport demand of the development of a new town north
- A transport study supported by modelling which provides evidence for the level of
development which could be supported in the CNFE/CSP area and its phasing, in transport terms.
The scope of the study was drawn up to incorporate three separate, but interlinked issues; namely the need for a Strategic Planning Document or Area Action Plan for both Waterbeach New Town and the CNFE, hence providing a Transport Evidence Base for Plan Making as required by National Planning Practice Guidance. Early thinking was also required on the requirements of the whole corridor to inform Tranches 2 and 3 of delivering the Greater Cambridge City Deal.
The study is separate to, but links with the A10 Ely to King’s Lynn Study which was reported to the Committee in September and to the M11-A47 Extension Study which has been commissioned by the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority and is due to report in summer 2018.
Change of use from commercial to residential, following demolition of existing light industrial unit. Erection of 2no 2bed semi-detached houses (4 in total).
57 Ditton Walk Cambridge CB5 8QD
Application reference : 18/0168/FUL
Hard to tell what they are installing from the application. However, if the applicants are installing cycle parking it should be encouraged.
Cycle store to the front garden.
9 St Bedes Crescent Cambridge Cambridgeshire CB1 3TZ
Application reference : 18/0166/FUL
Demolition of a single storey garage and erection of new two-bedroom single-storey dwelling on land behind 193 Cherry Hinton Road, Cambridge.
Land Behind 193 Cherry Hinton Road Cambridge Cambridgeshire CB1 7BX
Application reference : 18/0111/FUL
My friend was knocked off her bike by a grey taxi on Milton Road on Friday Feb 2 2018 between 8:40-8:45 am. She ended up in the middle of the road and no one stopped. She went to A&E and is thankfully OK, mostly just shaken up and bruised.
She has reported the accident to the police who said they will mark it as an incident but not investigate. I've walked out to where it happened and there are cameras at the green end road/milton road intersection and at the guided busway that could help identify the taxi. Does anyone have any advice on how we could push the matter forward? It seems wrong that a taxi driver can hit someone, drive away and not even a little effort is put in to investigate?
We've been contacted by a concerned resident of the Fison Road estate:
The Freehold of the above 2 storey block of flats (part of the Fison Road Estate) is owned and managed by Cambridge City Council.
Due to a number of thefts the residents of the 3 upper flats of this particular block secure their bicycles on the first floor landing adjacent to each front door (this is a covered open air space not an enclosed stairwell).
Following receipt of a recent Fire Risk Assessment, the City Council have instructed the occupants of all the flats to remove all the bicycles from the landing.
Cambridge Fire & Rescue visited the property on Monday (29 January 2018) and have advised that as the bicycles are secured back to the wall/railings and do not obstruct access to the front doors of each flat then they do not pose any significant fire risk and as far as they are concerned could remain.
The City Council however have responded that it is a requirement of the Lease that all landings are to be kept clear of all items.
The City Council were asked (as Freeholder and Management Agent) to investigate the possibility of providing suitable secured cycle parking so that the bicycles don’t need to be stored on the first floor landing.
There are a small number of cycle racks on the ground floor under the concrete staircase but these only allow the front wheel to be locked, and one bicycle has been stolen in the last month from this rack.
The City Council have responded that they are “not obliged” to provide cycle storage despite the arguement that they should be encouraging sustainable transport (especially for residents of their own properties).
Suitable covered secured cycle storage would be a planning requirement of any new block of flats.
Can Camcylce suggest if there is any support or advice that may be available to persuade the City Council to either relax its position on where the bicycles are currently stored, or for them to provide suitable and reliable secured storage facilities?
The City Council have given 14 days for the bicycles to be removed (i.e. by next Thursday 8 February 2018).
Demolition of the existing buildings and redevelopment of the site to provide a replacement care home (Use Class C2) arranged over three storeys together with associated car parking, landscaping and amenity space.
Hinton Grange Nursing Home 55 Bullen Close Cambridge CB1 8YU
Application reference : 17/2196/FUL
Created by Daniel Dignam // 1 thread
I complained to the council about the recent introduction of lights on the busway at Hobson Av. They're red for cyclists/pedestrians and don't appear to be triggered by bikes. There are 2 buses per hour that use Hobson Av so it seems entirely perverse for the priority to be as it is.
In the reply justifying the priority for motor traffic it was stated that cars will soon start using this road to access a car park. Has anybody got knowledge about this, as I understood the planning consent access was going to be restricted to buses and emergency vehicles.
I do think it's an accident waiting to happen, cyclists are going to get used to there being no traffic, and will cross on red (as they're allowed to if it's safe). If it was green all the time then it would be more obvious when they did change.
Obviously a big deal for Waterbeach and surroundings. I'll restrict myself to cycling-related notes:
3.1.6 [Over 600 HGV movements per day, albeit many seem to be already occurring on-site.]
3.3.4 ... Whilst this is not considered to be a
significant issue for experienced cycle users, it must be recognised that the
A10 corridor does operate under 60mph national speed limit controls and is
used for regular large HGV journeys. Such busy high speed routes typically
do not represent an attractive cycle option for many potential cycle users
3.3.5 It is understood that longer term CCC aspirations include the delivery of a
dedicated cycle greenway route to Waterbeach village & the proposed
Waterbeach Barracks / Airfield re-development, which could include for
extensions towards the Waterbeach WMP site. Such proposals are believed
to still be at a relatively early stage.
(Site is very close to the Cambridge Research Park, which will have a cycle link built to the new Waterbeach development)
For employees and visitors they are using the same off-the-shelf Broxap cycle shelter with substandard 800mm spacing that we objected to at the Science Park.
I think that our interest would be in ensuring that they properly integrate into any surrounding cycle network that is created by the Waterbeach development and that people cycling and walking are protected from the HGVs by having separated infrastructure and not sharing space (e.g. the entrance to the site for people cycling should be separate from the entrance for HGVs).
Application for full planning permission for the construction and development of a Waste Recovery Facility (Waterbeach Waste Recovery Facility â WWRF) at Levittâs Field, Waterbeach Waste Management Park (WWMP), Ely Road, Cambridge comprising the erection and operation of an Energy from Waste Facility to treat up to 250,000 tonnes of residual waste per annum, Air Cooled Condensers and associated infrastructure: including the development of an internal access road; office/welfare accommodation; workshop; car, cycle and coach parking; perimeter fencing; electricity sub-stations; weighbridges; weighbridge office; water tank; silos; lighting; heat off-take pipe; surface water management system; hardstanding; earthworks; landscaping; and bridge crossings.
Levittâs Field, Waterbeach Waste Management Park, Ely Road,, Waterbeach, Cambridge, CB25 9PQ
Application reference : S/3372/17/CW
The intended operation of the toucan crossing by the University Arms is fundamentally broken. The crossing sequence starts with cyclists from Parkers Piece being given a green filter to go both left and right onto Regent Street, followed by the left filter going red and pedestrians being given the green light to cross. Except of course literally 100% of pedestrians see the high level green filters, ignore their street level red and start crossing just as bikes turn left into them. How did anyone ever think this would work?
Created by Matthew // 1 thread
The Broxap 'Cambridge' Cycle Shelter (BXMW/CA/1) is intended and marketed to fit 24 cycle spaces provided by two rows of six Sheffield stands. The shelter is 5,000 mm long, which means that the spacing between Sheffield stands is only 800 mm, with 500 mm spaces on either side of the row:
500 + 800 + 800 + 800 + 800 + 800 + 500 = 5,000
The Cambridge Local Plan (2006) specifies that spacing between Sheffield stands should be 900 mm and newer advice suggests 1,000 mm.
Should we write to the manufacturer and ask that they revise their design, especially if they intend to market this as a 'Cambridge' cycle shelter?
Proposal to demolish existing 24-space cycle parking (and a variety of other things) and renovate, including 3 new Broxap BXMW/CA/1 'Cambridge' Cycle Shelters with claimed 72 cycle parking spaces total. SCambs requirement seems to be 76 spaces, so slightly short.
More alarmingly, it appears that the Broxamp 'Cambridge' Cycle Shelters are specified from the manufacturer to fit two rows of six Sheffield stands at 800mm centre-to-centre spacing, significantly below requirements!
The applicants are simply installing what they believe are industry standard cycle shelters, but it seems that Broxap does not comply with typical cycle parking standards.
Two storey entrance extension. External repairs to existing hard and soft landscaping. Erection of bin store and cycle shelter. Internal and external alterations.
Unit 306,Cambridge Science Park, Milton Road, Cambridge, CB4 0WG
Application reference : S/4537/17/FL
12 space ground floor cycle parking room accessible from rear entrance with direct stairwell access to maisonettes. There are 7 bedrooms in the proposed maisonettes and some number of existing rooms to let up front (maybe 4 or 6? not clearly indicated).
Prior related and approved NMA app shows dimensions in cycle parking area as 2m-long spaces separated by a 1.2 m aisle and doorways being 1.2m.
For residential purposes this appears to meet the standards quite well by the standards of Mill Road. Unclear whether this will suffice for employee cycle parking as well. And we would prefer some inclusive cycle parking provision but that's not currently required by the local plan.
Erection of three maisonettes above the rear of the restaurant at 44 Mill Road and change of use of part of rear restaurant to bin and cycle store.
44 Mill Road Cambridge CB1 2AS
Application reference : 18/0098/FUL
Martin Lucas-Smith // 1 thread
The start of the Coton Path cycleway at Adams Road has a very awkward double right-angle bend. This junction needs to favour the majority direction, rather than the historical road layout.
Rightmost two cycle parking spaces appear to be unusable. Don't meet Appendix D standards.
Building (and existing building) protrudes into footway enough that County Highways is unhappy with the proposed subpar footway.
Visitor parking proposed to be 2 wall hooks on frontage, though it is unclear where such hooks could possibly be placed.
Erection of a residential development containing ten flats comprising of three 2+bed units, six 1+bed units and one studio unit along with one car parking space and cycle parking following demolition of existing buildings on site.
63 New Street Cambridge CB1 2QT
Application reference : 18/0090/FUL
They promise a 1:1 cycle parking:dwelling unit ratio for the flats. The 10 flats will have cycle parking in a shared shed that appears to be approximately 3.5m wide and 2.5m deep, so it is unimaginable that 10 cycles could fit in there.
The remaining houses all have 'cycle storage in rear gardens with hard landscaped paths to access it' but not shown in diagrams.
Reserved Matters application for 72 residential dwellings, includin Parking, Public Open Space, Local Equipped Area for Play, Pumping Station, Swale, Landscaping and associated infrastructure, pursuant to outline planning application S/2833/15/OL. This is not EIA development.
Land off Rockmill End & Meadow Road, Willingham, Cambridgeshire, CB24 5HY
Application reference : S/0122/18/RM
Erection of two detached, three storey, four bedroom family homes with single storey elements to the front and rear following demolition of existing detached house and garage.
45 Nightingale Avenue Cambridge CB1 8SG
Application reference : 17/2261/FUL
A group of teenagers has been harassing people on the southern busway and DNA path sporadically. This escalated on 4 January when a Sanger institute postdoc was attacked viciously while traveling north:
A scientist was left with blood dripping from his head after being attacked by a gang of youths as he cycled home.
Johan Henriksson was heading along the Guided Busway cycle path in Cambridge when he was confronted by the group of teenagers on bikes.
The gang blocked the 33-year-old's path, spat at him and tried to push him off his bike before knocking him to the ground.
Violent kicks left Mr Henriksson with a large gash to his forehead that required hospital treatment.
Cambridgeshire police are investigating the incident, which Mr Henriksson fears is part of a series of attacks by the gang.
Mr Henriksson, who is completing post-doctoral studies at the Sanger Institute, had been to the gym and was heading back to his home near Cambridge station on January 4.
At around 5pm he was heading north along the cycle path connecting the station to Addenbrooke's Hospital when he saw a group of teenagers he estimated were 16 to 18 years old wearing dark clothing.
"Four to five of them were just blocking the route," he said. "They were just looking for trouble from whoever.
"I slowed down, they had no lights on and they were blocking the path. We had a discussion. One of the guys was spitting at me."
Another member of the public cycled up to the group and supported Mr Henriksson's efforts to ride past.
Both men were eventually allowed to carry on their journeys, but while the other cyclist carried on towards Addenbrooke's, Mr Henriksson was followed.
"We were just cycling away, but these people were still following me and driving into my bike," he explained.
"They were pushing me around and I was close to hitting some people on the path.
"At some point things escalated. I don’t really remember what happened. One guy tried to take me down.
"Somehow I fell over. I might have run into the fence.
"I recall being surrounded by them. They were kicking me. They most likely went toward the station after that."
The attack left Mr Henriksson, who is originally from Sweden, with a cut head and swollen hand. His glasses and bike were also broken.
"I’m not that easy to scare. I’ve never seen that much blood in my life coming out of me," he said.
Since sharing his experience on Facebook, Mr Henriksson says he has been contacted by several people about other incidents involving a gang of youths on the route that connects Great Shelford and Cambridge and elsewhere in the city. He hopes that by telling his story more victims will come forward.
He said: "Given they have probably been there for a few weeks, they are clearly amateurs. If something like this happens you don’t do more crime in the same area.
"They just go there to see how far they can push you but this time it just escalated."
Cambridgeshire police confirmed they were investigating the attack on Mr Henriksson.
A spokesman said: "We have had no reports of other incidents if there have been any."
Anyone with information should call police on 101 quoting CF0008590118
This has been discussed in a path-specific non-Camcycle Facebook group but I will make an issue here for reference.
This one is interesting because it has documents from November including a design drawing for the upcoming Green End Road scheme with protected cycleway, and the house in question marked off.
It is certainly possible to build a dropped kerb here that does not impinge on the cycleway design (e.g. with a Cambridge kerb), and the applicant seems to show some awareness of the ongoing scheme, so hopefully it will all work out. The verge protection here would have been narrow anyway, it appears that there would have been a parking bay.
16 Green End Road Cambridge CB4 1RX
Application reference : 17/1930/FUL
Prior application was refused. Previous thread: https://camcycle.cyclescape.org/threads/2580
Mixed use development comprising a Day Nursery at ground floor and 37 self-contained 1xbed student rooms at the rear and on the upper floors along with a vehicle drop-off zone, disabled car parking space, cycle parking and associated landscaping.
48 cycle parking spaces in basement provided by Sheffield stands, at least 3 of which suffer from being too close to a wall. Access is by stairs with a wheeling ramp on one side, similar issues as described last year, although a different placement of the stairwell.
Romsey Labour Club Mill Road Cambridge CB1 3NL
Application reference : 18/0002/FUL
The latest in the government's insatiable thirst for blowing money on roads (induced demand, what's that?) might have a silver lining as one of the objectives is 'support all road users'. I think we should submit a response. Basic outline: they should apply IAN 195/16 on this proposed Major Road Network.
Regarding Cambridge, the most immediately affected road would be the A10 north of the A14, and possibly south of Trumpington. The 'Major Road Network' in the vicinity of is the A14, M11, A11, A505 and the A10.
Single storey extension and alterations to existing annexe to allow change of use to seperate dwelling, with provision of bin and cycle store for both properties.
Annexe 29 Garden Walk Cambridge Cambridgeshire CB4 3EW
Application reference : 17/2198/FUL
Erection of 1.5 Storey dwelling with frontage onto Cromwell Road and the retention of parking for 150 Coldhams Lane
150 Coldhams Lane Cambridge Cambridgeshire CB1 3HH
Application reference : 17/2156/FUL
This map shows all issues, whether points, routes, or areas:
The most popular issues, based on the number of votes:
What to do about disgraceful decisions like this:
Clearly, the magistrate erred seriously in matters of both fact and law - all the prosecution had to prove was that the way he drives falls below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver.
Equally clearly, it did - nobody who could possibly be described as "competent and careful" would run over something the size of a cyclist without even being aware of it. He even admitted that he was talking on the phone at the time.
It staggers the mind to think what on earth the magistrates were thinking - or what with. Maybe they slept through the case, so didn't hear the prosecution, but were woken up for the defence (how there can be any defence for that is beyond me). Maybe they are dangerous drivers themselves, so sympathise with others of the same ilk instead of adequately discharging the responsibilities they are charged with? Mark Tyler also deserves complete contempt for not pleading guilty, and so preventing this gross miscarriage of justice. He should have been thanking his lucky stars that the police and CPS are so incompetent as not to pursue Dangerous driving, which it equally clearly was.
How can we get rid of incompetent idiots like Phil King (the lead magistrate in this case) who asserted that "there were “significant gaps” in the evidence". It is obvious to me that this dangerous idiot is perverting the course of justice by remaining in his position.
Presumably his colleagues on the bench conspired with him in this perversion - they could (and should) have over-ruled him unless they were parties to the conspiracy, surely?
The evidence was all there - there was a cyclist in front of him - whether the cyclist was upright or on the ground is irrelevant. Mark Tyler drove over him. Neither of those facts were in dispute. That is not the action of a competent and careful driver, and it should be beyond question that a person being in front of the vehicle is something which the driver should be expected to be aware of, which means the test in s3ZA of the Road Traffic Act is satisfied, and the accused is guilty.
The evidence also meets the test in s2A (Meaning of dangerous driving) so there is no excuse whatsoever for clearing him of even the lesser offence of careless driving. With driving like that, it is clear, beyond reasonable doubt, that he should not be in possession of a driving license, and the magistrates failed in their duty to relieve him of it.
As long as dangerous criminals like Phil King are allowed on the bench, the roads will never be safe for anyone.
As a footnote, from the report is appears that this dangerous character commutes from Whitchurch, Hampshire to Clifton Way, Cambridge. What length does that make his effective working day?
It's about 120 miles each way, so at least 4 hours driving (considerably more if in the "rush hour") on top of a full workday. It's utterly moronic to make a commute like that - when I worked anywhere near that far away, I commuted weekly. But this happened on a Wednesday.
Noticed this a couple of weeks ago. As you will see the sign is incomplete and misleading given that the place to see all the details is the end of Ferry Lane waiting to join High Street. High Street at this point is both Route 51 and Route 11.
Left turn to go to Impington on Route 51 - I think not.
Abbey and Fen Ditton to the left when you could just go back across Green Dragon bridge.
No directions to Histon, Milton, Waterbeach probably others.
Also the lack of any idea where route 11 goes to the right.
This appears to be one of a number of new signs that have recently appeared. If anyone has seen any more let's get the info out there and try to get them fixed.
Ever since Tesco opened their new shop on East Road, there has been poor unloading practice.
The company is unloading always from the front of the store with a large lorry which:
- Is stopped in the (advisory) cycle lane.
- The tail of the lorry is opened into the carriageway without a banksman, with the corner of it at the same height as a cyclist having to merge round the lorry - there is real potential for a head injury because of the relative invisibility of this
- Causing traffic to be reduced to one effective lane (or two, just squeezing through, if no large vehicles), causing delays for a half an hour period.
They have stopped using the zig-zag lines.
This photo shows the danger that is created:
Created by jennifer Kirner // 1 thread
I am bringing up the problem that cyclists and pedestrians have crossing East Road to get to ARU and the neighbouring residential area. It would be helpful have a discussion about how to create safe routes in this area and how to get them implemented.
When I am cycling, I find it dangerous and difficult to cross East Road from Petersfield or Bradmore Street and I resort to using the pedestrian crossings with my bike because it is.
This area that really needs addressing for improvements to safe cycling and I don’t understand why given the expansion of ARU this has not been addressed.
The junction of Mill Road/East Road is also pretty scary for cyclists and pedestrians. The crossing at the slip road at the corner of Petersfield is difficult for pedestrians because it has no traffic controls and cars come quickly round this corner making it dangerous for anyone who is not alert , who is not tall enough to see, or who can't move quickly. This includes the young, the old, someone in a wheelchair. I wouldn't fancy pushing a child in a buggy across either.
Basically, it seems to me that the Junction and East road are designed for motor vehicles and traffic flow not for pedestrians and cyclists. Can we try and address this?
Martin Lucas-Smith // 2 threads
I am writing to point your attention to a "danger spot" on the Barton Road cycle route.
I and many others cycle this route every day and really appreciate how safe it is. However, there have been a number of near accidents at the sliproad from the M11 southbound onto the Barton roundabout. The problem is that the cycle path means that all cyclists must cross the road leading onto the roundabout. This is fine when the traffic is not busy. However, during rush hour the left lane going onto the roundabout is always queued up. This means that, to cross the the road, a cyclist needs to wait for a car to let them out. However, the problem lies with the right lane going onto the roundabout. If there is a queue in the left lane, you are unable to see into the right lane and so quite a few cyclists are nearly knocked off at this point
The problem is that:
a. The right lane is too short and so cyclists are unable to get out of the way in time if a car does not does turn onto it. It seems to me that there shouldn't be a right lane as it's too short to be of any use and poses more of a danger to cyclists.
b. Cars tends to (understandably) be going quite fast as they've just come off the M11 and also are usually looking onto the roundabout rather than the road in front of them. This has meant that I've seen lots of cars having to break very heavily having only seen a bike crossing in front of them at the very last minute.
I, and the other cyclists that routinely use this otherwise very safe route, would hugely appreciate it if this problem could be looked at.
[RL; sent by post, 27th June 2015]
Martin Lucas-Smith // 1 thread
The Eastern Gate proposals are a strategic attempt by the City Council to rework the Newmarket Road roundabout area towards a standard crossing, and create a welcoming entrance into this very run-down looking part of the city.
It is supposed to be being paid for by Section 106 moneys from developments, yet proposal after proposal is coming forward but nothing is happening.
Martin Lucas-Smith // 1 thread
Fulbourn/Cherry Hinton Eastern Access is one of the five City Deal 'cross-city improvements' schemes.
"The growth of housing and employment sites in the Cherry Hinton and Fulbourn Road area, such as the expansion of the ARM headquarters will put further pressure on local roads. Improving the cycleways on Fulbourn Road would enhance cycle access to the city centre and contribute to the completion of the cycleway network in this part of south-east Cambridge."
The Mill Road traders are planning a meeting to discuss congestion on Mill Road and have asked us to send a representative. What ideas do we have to for Mill Road?
Created by Anna Langley // 2 threads
This intersection needs a right turn light for bikes turning from St Andrew's Street into the Downing Street contraflow lane.
Doing so feels unsafe with buses coming up from behind, and little opportunity to get across the intersection.
I'm considering setting up a 38 Degrees petition on the matter, but wanted to see if this issue had been campaigned on before.
Created by Ben Brierton // 1 thread
The new road layout here means that eastbound cyclists travelling straight-on find themselves in the left-turn lane, stopped by a Red light, and blocking traffic turning left into the Park and Ride who have a Green left turn filter.
The road markings seem to expect cyclists in this lane to go straight ahead, even though it's the left turn lane, because it is guided into the onward eastbound cycle lane. Just feels wrong and leaves cyclists vulnerable to the left turning traffic.
There should be a 'redmac' cycle lane between the left turn lane and the right hand lane. The road markings should guide cyclists from this lane into the eastbound cycle lane instead of from the left turn lane.
Martin Lucas-Smith // 2 threads
Demolition of ancillary buildings and removal of 1930's facade at the grade II listed Cambridge Union Society. Construction of replacement facade, reinstatement and refurbishment of historic features and internal and external access and refurbishment works including enlargement of existing cafe (use class A3) and re-opening of 'footlight's' entertainment space (sui generis). Demolition of squash courts and un-listed 3-5 Round Church Street in the conservation area. Construction of new link building for access and ancillary uses for the Union Society. Construction of adjacent new building with ground floor restaurant (use class A3) with 41 room post-graduate student accommodation above (use class C2) together with basement storage and services.
Cambridge Union Society 9A Bridge Street Cambridge Cambridgeshire CB2 1UB
Application reference : 16/0673/FUL
Also a Listing Building Consent application: 16/0674/LBC Demolition of ancillary buildings and removal of 1930's facade at the grade II listed Cambridge Union Society
This morning I noticed that two new concrete bollards have been installed at the North end of the Carter Cycle Bridge. These seem to be completely unnecessary and the position will probably cause accidents to cyclists descending into Devonshire Road.
Were the Campaign aware of this and can we do anything to get them removed?
Plans are emerging for development on the Coldham's Lane site with implications for the surrounding area including links with Cherry Hinton.
Created by Stephen Lawrence // 1 thread
Some people are especially sensitive to lights, including flashing lights, and lights which point directly into their eyes. Both these two situations can result in migraines for the unfortunate observer.I am glad to read that German law mandates downward-focussed lights. We should do the same.
Flashing lights used to be illegal (i.e. when incandescant lights were the norm) but the law was changed to specifically allow them. However, for the reason above, and also because judging the speed (and to some extent the position) of a bicycle is impossible when the light is flashing could actually make flashing lights less safe. Batteries have improved and LEDs are more efficient, and the battery life even on 'steady' mode is way more than in the 'days of yore' hat some of us knew.
Created by Al Storer // 1 thread
Cycling and Walking provision at Cambridge Science Park is poor. Lets try and get it fixed
If it is not bad enough in a cycle city that the Great Northern Road, the new road to Cambridge's main train station and cycle parking, does not have a segregated and safe cycle paths, the new development is now being proposed which will prevent a segregated cycleway from access to the Station a Devonshire road.
Does anyone agree that there should be a segregated cycle access to the country's largest cycle park?
Created by Paul Bearpark // 1 thread
Objections to U&Cs outline planning application need to be submitted by 10 April. There seem to be some interesting ideas for improving cycling infrastructure but a lot that could be improved upon.
I've noticed a few of these around Cambridge where there's a "no through road" sign but it's a through road for cyclists and pedestrians. As there's a post already, if the council had a ready-made stock of plates saying "except cycles", "except pedestrians", a single operative could affix the plate below the sign to made it correct. It is highly deceptive and not serving those using non-motorised transport if they go the long way round not realising they can get through a quicker route.
Complete separation of cyclists and cars can't always be achieved. To make sharing of the road safer I would like to propose using rumble strips instead of flat paint to separate the bike lane from the rest of the road. It would act as a physical reminder for car-drivers that they are encroaching the bike lane. This happens particularly near pinch points like road bends or crossroads. So even just a selective application of rumble strips could have a very positive effect, I believe. What's the view of the cycling community? Has it been tested?
Created by Phil Wigglesworth // 1 thread
I cycle past this junction a lot, and sometimes the lights are red so I wait and look at the lanes and wonder why they're like this.
Created by Gingineer // 1 thread
I work near the station and the area out the front of the new building has short term cycle spaces for the shops there. These spaces are specifically for the retail units (ratios of this is in the planning application I understand). so the racks have to be installed and wont be policed by the retail units (such as the ones by Microsoft which are for employees) yet they fill with commuters who should be using the cycle park.
I have been thinking that Cambridge CC needs to agree a system (bye law?) to create short term racks. The colour should be different and signage provided but for racks that need controlling like this it is essential to stop antisocial cyclists piling up bikes.
Of course its difficult to police, and a heavy handed approach should be avoided but I see a growing issue across the city where racks for specific short term purposes are created but then filled with long term cyclists who should accept if they are parked all day that the extra 2 minutes walk for them to a proper cycle park is reasonable to expect. Otherwise this puts people off cycling the short distances as they fear they wont get a rack or will spend a lot of time scrambling for a spot.
Cyclists could be stickered and if caught again then fined. Or clamped to the rack with a fee to unlock (yes I know that sounds like it defeats the object but it should work after a while).
Created by GG // 1 thread
For a long time I have wondered about a crowd-sourced cycleability map.
In this, people cycle along a link (accepting the first question of how to define the beginning and end of this) then give it a thumbs up or down. After enough people do this, then others can see how popular it is.
Some people wonder about subjectivity but I think this should be less of a problem with more voters.
The reason I am asking is because this method could apply to a potential commercial project for a Council which wants to drive around 100km of rural roads and use a panel of 4 experts to grade meaningful segments on a 1 to 7 scale according to their suitability for HGV movements.
Any views on whether this is already done within an app I am not aware of, or could be it done by anyone as an add-on to something else, or is it something CamCycle could offer as a commercial package (there may well be more than one local authority looking for this sort of thing)
Created by wookey // 2 threads
Out of the A1307 Linton Greenway consultation has come a plan for the section between Addenbrooke's roundabout and the Babraham P&R, which the county/GCP are keen to move forward. There was an initial invite-only consultation event on Thur 31st Jan for local residents/residents associations to comment.
Created by Roxanne (Cycling Campaign Officer) // 1 thread
Huawei plans to develop R & D superhub at the 550-acre Spicer's Site in Sawston.
Created by Jon Warbrick // 1 thread
The County Council have a consultation running on "improvements along Cherry Hinton Road, Cambridge, to make it safer and more attractive for walking and cycling" between Hills road and Perne Road.
The consultation runs until Tuesday 18 June. There are two consultation events at Rock Road Library, 69 Rock Road, Cambridge on Tuesday 21 May and Tuesday 21 May.