Issue - meetings

A petition has been received containing over 50 valid signatures stating the following:

‘We are aware that Cambridge City Council is currently inviting comment from local stakeholder groups about access for pedestrian and cyclists in the Petersfield area. As residents, we consider that cycle traffic on the Palmer’s Walk footpath presents risks for pedestrians, particularly the occupants of Petersfield Mansions. We therefore request Cambridge City Council to include the option to ban cycling on the footpath as part of any new consultation exercise.’

The petition organiser will present the petition at the meeting and the petition will then be discussed by Councillors. The Committee will then decide how to respond to the petition.

Ms Wheeler made a presentation about the petition she had submitted regarding the cycling on the footpath near Petersfield Mansions. Ms Wheeler made the following points:

“In August last year, Cambridge City Council sent information to residents of Petersfield asking for comment on a proposal to widen the ‘Palmer’s Walk’ footpath. At the time, their main objective seemed to be to cater for increased usage of the path by cyclists following the expansion of ARU.*[1]  No alternative options were offered and, despite a majority of respondents opposing the scheme, councilors voted to proceed. This decision gave rise to a formal complaint, which was subsequently referred to an Independent Complaints Investigator. He identified maladministration by the council and asked for a proper local consultation that allowed more than one option to be considered.

Since then, Petersfield residents have made several attempts to persuade council officers of the risks to pedestrians from fast moving cyclists. The footpath passes right in front of the exits from flats in Petersfield Mansions and we believe that widening the path by a metre will encourage more cyclists to use it, probably in both directions at once. It will also destroy about 140 square metres of green space in a conservation area in the Petersfield ward, which already has less public open space than any other ward in Cambridge.*[2] The Cambridge Cycling Campaign - an independent body that promotes safe, legal cycling – considers that even if the path was widened by a metre it would still not be suitable for safe shared use between cyclists and pedestrians, and that there are better routes for cyclists heading to ARU.*[3] Both their safety concerns and their offer to advise on improving access routes to ARU have been ignored by the officers involved, whose attention continues to focus on the single issue of whether ‘Palmer’s Walk’ should be widened or not.

By August this year, the repeated refusal of council officers to address safety issues caused residents to seek other ways to raise their concerns. A survey of the hundred or so dwellings closest to the footpath*[4] showed that a cycling ban is widely supported, and 76 people signed the petition that is under consideration here. This was presented to a site meeting on Petersfield Green in July, but the consultation leader told residents the issue should be referred to Cambridgeshire County council not the City.*[5] Subsequent contact with the County Highways department showed this information to be inaccurate as both Petersfield Green and the footpath belong to the City council, who can both impose and enforce a cycling ban if they choose to do so. It required the intervention of the Democratic Services team before it was agreed that a question about a cycling ban could be included in the consultation document but this document continues to be amended and, as of yesterday, revisions were still being made.

I therefore request the committee to agree that the action requested by petitioners can, and will, be carried out.”

Ms Wheeler said the following in response to Members’ questions:

       i.          She had seen a version of the consultation document dated 3 October 2016. She understood there had been amendments to the consultation document since 3 October, but had not seen the latest version.

     ii.          She had asked for the petition to be included on the Community Services Scrutiny Committee agenda as a mechanism to ensure the wording/question she requested was included in the consultation.

The Senior Asset Development Officer said the following in response to Members’ questions:

       i.          The footpath near Petersfield Mansions was 1.2m wide. It was used by cyclists and pedestrians, although it was a footpath.

Councillor Gillespie said that cyclists should not ride on the footpath. People used the route to access Anglia Ruskin University. This required better planning in future as bike usage was expected to rise due to the Chisholm Trail.

     ii.          City Officers liaised with other organisations to get intelligence to help decision making. For example, City Deal proposals.

   iii.          There had been various minor amendments to the consultation document since 3 October to reflect feedback from stakeholders. It was a live document.

   iv.          The consultation was focussed on a separate local issue to the petition. The wording Ms Wheeler’s petition had requested was included in the consultation document.