Is it legal or not to ride on either Christ's Lane or Milton's Walk ?
Listed issues, most recent first, limited to the area of Cambridge Cycling Campaign:
Is it legal or not to ride on either Christ's Lane or Milton's Walk ?
The County are going to do work on the boardwalk under the railway bridge on NCN51
The annual university societies' fair is an opportunity to suggest to the student body the existence of the campaign.
Historically we get few students joining, but it can be a useful networking opportunity.
Issues regarding sharing of space on commons in central Cambridge
The link from Barton Road to the Lammas Land car park (and the car park itself) have been closed to all use by the County Council for some development work. This is a buisy cycle route, and no effort has been put into providing a diversion. Currently most people are cycling across the grass behind the hedge beside the road (though how long this will remain possible if it rains is unclear); an alternative is to use other paths across Lammas Land, but they are narrow, not actually marked for cycling, and it's further.
According to a notice at the junction with Barton Road this work will continue to the start of December. There was and is no warning when approaching from east of the river.
Proposals are coming forward for the redevelopment of part of the Cambridge University Pres Site as a single location for Cambridge Assessment. Some public engagement will apparently start in November
At a recent BUG-WAG* meeting, the Trust reported that the council will be modifying the Long Road/Adrian way junction.
Those of you that know the area will know that the exit from Addenbrooke's is 'no right turn' with a small shaped island to direct traffic westbound onto Long Rd
plans were shown to create a cutout in the small island for bikes to exit eastbound. Presuamably with signs to indicate this too
The trust said that suggestions to the junction would be welcome in the planning of further changes to Long Rd
*BUG-WAG - the Bicycle User Group, Walking Action Group of interested parties on the Addenbrooke's campus
Dropped bike off for service at Grand Arcade and walked to get Uni4 bus from outside Pembroke at around 8.30am today. At least four separate lorries stopped on double yellow lines between Little St Mary's Lane and Fitzwilliam Museum, causing traffic chaos. This is really dangerous for cyclists since even if a cyclist has had the courage to get past the obstruction, or has right of way, drivers just don't seem to see them or think they really are only about six inches wide. This also causes massive traffic hold-ups. Congestion (where there is no mandatory or advisory cycle lane) is generally dangerous for cyclists as it tends to lead to "white lining" or squeezing through gaps. This is a busy cycle route. I'm sure Peterhouse have a back entrance for lorries for example.
Why is loading allowed on double yellow lanes on busy cycle and bus routes during the rush hours? OK, I know there's an alleged loading ban on Hills Road which is rarely, or if ever enforced, but at least there is a ban there. I've highlighted that bit of Trumpington St as road users were having to do a slalom there this morning, but this is a Cambridge-wide problem and I'm sure members can also provide evidence of other examples.
I can't quite believe that certain businesses being allowed to hold up the traffic willy-nilly is good for the Cambridge-wide economy in general.
Do we have a position on this? Should the new Police and Crime Commissioner have a position on this? Should Stagecoach (who probably find it causes them a problem, even though they're not our favourite people) have a position on this? Is there a Chamber of Commerce? What do they think about employees who are late for work or deliveries they are expecting being delayed by these sort of hold-ups?
I have lots of photos which will tell me how long I was standing at the bus stop observing these lorries, which I will unload when I have the means.
Created by Adrian Taylor // 0 threads
Fulbourn School's travel policy leaflet this year suggests that kids should cycle to school along Pierce Lane. This is also what is suggested in the documentation for the Ida Darwin planning application.
I don't particularly fancy taking my kids to school along such a busy road each day.
Wouldn't it be more sensible to recommend a nearly traffic-free route through the village making use of the path connecting Dunmowe Way and Swifts Corner. This connects straight into the school, and using Caraway Road and Cherry Orchard is low-traffic almost all the way to the new Ida Darwin redevelopment.
No changes are required; the route is already good enough. However, removal of the bollards between Cherry Orchard and Caraway Road would allow cycle trailers through, and a few more dropped kerbs would help here and there.
Are members aware that this bill would prevent us from virtually any activity at all during the 12 months before each and every election in the UK?
Details can be found at various sources online, but there is a summary on Youtube at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDtFoPWBoLc
If this bill isn't defeated (or amended beyond all recognition) it will effectively stop us - and any similar group - from functioning at all.
Martin Lucas-Smith // 1 thread
The County Council are proposing to move to a model where both the car parking and the bus element of park and ride are charged for. Effectively this is presumably aimed at stopping park and cycle, which seems counter-productive in transport strategy terms.
Martin Lucas-Smith // 4 threads
The cycle lanes here are a mish-mash of narrow legacy infrastructure, and are often awkward to use.
Greater Anglia has just issued a consultation on cycles at stations and on trains
A citywide (and indeed beyond) problem is poor consideration given to the needs of cyclists and pedestrians during road works- eg "cylist dismount" sign use
The Hills Road / Regent Street axis of the Catholic Church junction was resurfaced overnight (28-29 August) as part of the junction upgrade.
Many of the damaged iron works (manhole covers, etc) have not been changed. Some are in a bad state and quite dangerous because they have worn smooth, sunk or tilted.
I have contacted the Traffic Signals team at CCC, as they seem to be responsible for the works, and they should be getting back to me.
If anyone else fancies having a go at finding out what is going on and whether anything can now be done, it would be very welcome.
Changes to car parking in the Kite are proposed.
Cycle parking is not being included.
Planning application for flats near the Busway Cycleway
Hello, I'm wondering how many other Cambridge cyclists have shared the experience I've had (about once per month now) regarding a particular elderly lady who insists that bikes are not allowed on the "footpath" adjacent to the Trumpington allotments, between Shelford Rd & the new busway in CB2. This path seems clearly demarcated as a shared pedestrian-cycle path on the cycle maps provided at the council link (below). However, it is not clearly labeled as such on the path itself, leading her to become quite angry with any cyclist who gets near her & her dog while they're out walking (and obstructing the path to underscore her point). "It's a footpath" she yells, and storms away.
So my questions are 1) am I correct in interpreting the council map (below) as permitting bikes on this path and 2) how might one go about requesting proper signage, clearly saying bikes & pedestrians are both welcome?
Thanks for any feedback, Robert
According to the Cambridgeshire Road works register, Pembroke Street is going to be closed for a long period starting September 2 by the museum of Zoology. Not clear what, if any, the impact on cycles would be, but the hole will be a dramatic 10m deep, so the works will presumably be quite extensive. Also, Tennis Court Road closed for one day on August 9 to prepare.
I have just watched a police car over-run the advanced stop lines twice on Gilbert road, once at the Carlton Way cross roads and then again at the Milton Road T-junction. Both times the police car was approaching an already red light, so they had ample time to stop before the line. The second time they filled at least half of the box. If the police in Cambridge can't be relied on to respect the advanced stop line, how can we expect the general public to do so? Does anyone have similar stories or any suggestions on what to do about it? I didn't get the number plate unfortunately, because I thought turning round and photographing a police car on my phone might be more trouble than it's worth!
Martin Lucas-Smith // 1 thread
The Cambridge News reports that new traffic calming is to be installed on Fen Road.
Cyclists' views ought to be included so the opportunity is taken to improve things for cycling rather than make things worse.
Contractor's safety fencing for some of the work going on adjacent to Addenbrookes has been put up on the adjacent cycle path, presumably because it's easier to to that than put it up in the building site itself. Unfortunately this obstructs about a third of the path.
Whoever did this obviously realised that this was problematic, since they have painted the path side of all the bases yellow. Unfortunately this doesn't help in the dark.
I can't see any obvious contact details for the contractors, apart from 'Tamdown' on an attached 'Danger - Deep Excavation' sign. Anyone any idea how to get this addressed?
Martin Lucas-Smith // 1 thread
Cherry Hinton Road is currently mainly typical 'blue sign on a pavement' provision, despite having the edge-to-edge width in places for proper cycle provision. A longer-term objective should be to upgrade this.
This afternoon the guidedbusway was closed from Cambridge Regional College to Histon. There was a security guard in a car who provided information on the closure and diversion. However, there was no diversion signage for cyclists or pedestrians.
When I returned home I checked cambridgeshire roadworks for further information but drew a blank.
Is anyone aware if works on the busway is covered by any public notification system?
Saturday afternoon is not a bad time for maintenance, but I imagine commuters would appreciate notice of works which affect their journeys.
Temporary traffic lights for building works between High Cross and Charles Babbage Road.
I have received the following from our building facilities manager as these lights affect access to our building, and two others.
"1. With effect from Monday 22 July there will be 3-way traffic lights positioned between the existing Charles Babbage Road and new CBR. This will last for 1 week. The lights will be installed on Friday ready for operation on Monday. These lights will have an operator to monitor traffic flow during peak periods (8.30am – 9.30am and 4.30pm to 5.30pm). Outside of these times the lights will operate on sensor detection for queued vehicles to avoid unnecessary queuing, and will automatically sequence between the roads when no traffic is present. Unfortunately the lights will not detect and activate for cyclists and cyclists will need to wait for the lights to operate on the normal sequenced rotation.
2. Following the initial works and as work progresses along CBR, the traffic management will become 2 way light operation along the High Cross Access Road the CBR and this is expected to commence from Monday 29 July for a further 2 weeks.
3. During the above the New CBR and Access Road to Schlumberger are being prepared and tarmacked – kerbs are being installed etc. Surfacing is to be complete by 12 August ready to opened for use by all to access via the New CBR after 12th August.
4. Also after 12 August works will commence on finalising the junction at AVEVA/New Data Centre access and this will have 3 way traffic management and is expected to take 3 weeks.
5. Finally the access road into site via High Cross will close from week commence 19 August and this will be for approximately 7 weeks. This closure will be fully diversion signed from Madingley Road and around the site with diversion management (sighs) taking us via JJ Thompson Road and round to AVEVA from there. However there will be a trial closure of the High Cross Road entrance on the Thursday/Friday 15th & 16th August prior to the work starting on 19th, just to ensure all the signage is correct and easily followed. "
I am interpreting this as at least 6 weeks of temporary traffic lights which will not detect people on bikes.
I suspect cycle detection was only mentioned because I had specifically asked this question when the issue of temporary traffic lights first came up.
I have sent a message back to our facilities manager saying that I don't think this is acceptable as:
1) Cycle usage is nearly as high has car usage here in summer
2) I also see people using this as a through-route for Coton
3) We are on a side road off a through-route for buses, so I suspect the lights on their normal sequence will not be at all favourable for a person on a bike trying to get out, as the normal sequence will not want to disrupt bus flow too much.
4) I fear that the complete lack of provision will lead to some people breaking the rules, which could be dangerous.
However, she is merely relaying these details to us and is not responsible for it. She can contact the site project managers about any issues, which I hope she will do.
Any other ideas?
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:
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]
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 (2016) to discuss congestion on Mill Road and have asked us to send a representative. What ideas do we have to for Mill Road?
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.
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
Plans are emerging for development on the Coldham's Lane site with implications for the surrounding area including links with Cherry Hinton.
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.
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?
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.
Martin Lucas-Smith // 1 thread
This junction is currently very poor. Cyclists end up doing awkward manoeuvres and visibility is not good.
It is possible this could be improved as part of the Chisholm Trail.
How could this junction be redesigned to make it best practice?
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?
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)
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.
Huawei plans to develop R & D superhub at the 550-acre Spicer's Site in Sawston.
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.