Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Agenda item
Minutes:
1. Apologies – Cllr Tim Moore
2. Minutes of the last meeting Monday
12th January 2015 and matters arising.
Minutes
agreed.
·
YHA
Cambridge. The cycle racks and lockers have now been installed.
·
Metal
bollards (Guided Busway). The Cycling and Walking Liaison Group met with the
County Officer responsible for the busway recently, Campbell Ross-Bain, and CR
raised the issue of the visibility of the bollards. The main problem is that
there is no space to add reflective strips without stopping the bollard from
being able to be dropped. The suggestion of using reflective paint is being
considered as an alternative. All agreed the situation will be improved as
increased development along the Busway will improve lighting conditions.
·
Replacement
of Grand Arcade pushchairs. Two new pushchairs have been purchased.
3. Promotion Grant fund application –
Cambridge Cycle Campaign.
(Cllr
Smart declared an interest as a member of Cambridge Cycle Campaign. Cllr
Robertson declared an interest as a subscriber.)
The
application is for the maximum award of £5000 to provide a number of cycle
repair stations around the city as part of the Campaign’s aim for better, safer
cycling and to reduce instances of abandoned cycles. QR codes on the stations
could provide access to maintenance instructions as part of a longer term
educational programme. Key locations could include the Chisholm Trail aswell as the city centre. Roxanne de Beau has been
appointed as the Campaign’s first full-time employee to co-ordinate the
project.
The
Group’s comments were as follows:
·
Location.
This is a
key issue. Some locations within the sensitive historic core of the city may
appear obtrusive or may have planning permission or health & safety
implications. The Campaign are also requested to
consider residential areas of the city such as King’s Hedges where cycle repair
shops or tools may not be as easily accessible. Central locations may also feel
more ‘public’ leading to the user feeling self-conscious. The Campaign are also asked to consider potential sites at or close to
community centres where youth groups could congregate for lessons in bike
maintenance. There could also be locations within the new developments on the
fringes of the city worth investigating.
·
Maintenance.
The Group
raised the issue of maintenance and ownership or asset control following the
initial capital cost. The Campaign proposes a partnership between the provision
of materials by Cycle Hoop and the County Council’s maintenance programme.
(According to HLHJ,
remaining grant money could be used for
maintenance within the pilot scheme although the Campaign anticipates costs to
be low.)
·
Skills and knowledge.
Although commendable
as a sustainable project, the Group expressed some scepticism as to whether
there were sufficient willingness and craft skills in the general population
for it to achieve success. If the scheme needed partnership working with local
bike shops to source replacement materials, the Group expressed the additional
concern that this project could be seen by retailers as unwelcome competition.
Instructions
on how to carry out repairs would also need to be provided on laminated sheets
for the benefit of those without Smartphones.
·
Shelter.
As
cyclists are unlikely to be willing to carry out repairs in poor weather, the
Campaign are requested to give further consideration as to whether the stations
should be covered
·
Liability
The
project should be covered by a Disclaimer informing users that the City Council
would not be liable should an accident occur following repairs.
Conclusion.
The Steering Group support this
application in principle but would like to stress that significant further work
is needed, particularly in the identification of suitable locations that would
be the basis for further discussion prior to the Group’s approval.
All agreed the level of quality of
materials would ultimately depend on the number of viable locations. The
Campaign are however advised to consider both the
level of use and abuse of these stations when deciding on that level of
quality.
ACTION: Cambridge Cycling Campaign to
produce a detailed project plan (including all costings and warranty provision)
to be presented at the next Steering Group.
4. County Team Leader Cycling Projects
(including City Deal) – Mike Davies.
·
Abbey-Chesterton
Bridge. This went to the County’s Economic and Environment Committee but was
sent back for further stakeholder consultation. An architect has been appointed
and initial sketches drawn. Land ownership is split between Gonville
& Caius College and Network Rail with funding to be from both DFT and
Section 106 (with links with the Chisholm Trail.) Cllr Blencowe stressed the
sensitivities with local residents in relation to the project.
·
Hills
Road segregated cycle lane. Progress has been slow with issues including the
method of protection surrounding utilities and limited working hours. This is
also a particularly busy area within the vicinity of the Perse
School and various private accesses. A new supervisor on site should accelerate
progress.
·
Huntingdon
Road. A new red lane has been installed.
·
2-way
cycling on 1-way streets. Signage installation is ongoing.
·
Cherry
Hinton High Street improvements. This is a joint project with the City Council
(S106 funded). A further round of consultation is anticipated.
5. Carter Bridge ramp.
Direct
access from the bridge to the station was part of the original outline planning
permission for the Station Area according to CR. Various options have been
considered over the years and a Section 73 application is currently due to go
before Committee in June which proposes a new ramp designed into the existing
arrangements (Ref 13/1041/S73). A route through Ravensworth
Gardens had been previously dismissed due to issues of land ownership (and is
not supported by County Council officers).
The South
Petersfield Residents’ Association representative invited the Steering Group to
re-consider the Ravensworth Gardens option, as well as alternative options that would
involve the enhancement of existing highway arrangements.
Frank Gawthrop added that there was a need for a holistic
approach to this busy junction. The reduction in the site footprint of the
Travis Perkins site on Devonshire Road and the resulting reduction in heavy
vehicle movements would make such measures more viable. According to Mr Gawthrop, the City and County Councils could work more
comprehensively to reach a satisfactory solution.
Conclusion.
The Group could not reach a consensus
regarding the advantages and disadvantage of the various options. The inclusion
of a new ramp would result in the reduction of available green space and
protected trees, but could be partially replaced by improved planting and
provide what Cllr Smart regarded as the welcome segregation of pedestrians and
cycles. Cllrs Robertson and Tucker both felt the viability of the Ravensworth Gardens route was worthy of further exploration
and was preferable to the submitted new ramp proposal. The Group noted that
although the alternative option of providing traffic management measures on
Devonshire Road could not be eliminated, they would likely involve a reduction
in residential parking that would prove unpopular with residents.
ACTION: CR to contact Circle Housing
Wherry (Housing Association) for their views on the possibility of a route
through their land.
ACTION: CR to circulate accident
statistics for the cycle ramp/Devonshire Road junction. (Although
the Group are reminded of the likely under-reporting of incidents according to
CR.)
6. City Cycling Schemes (JR)
·
Green
Dragon Bridge. Details of the consultation have not yet been agreed. Progress
will be delayed until after the election.
·
Fen
Road improvements. These are linked with wider improvements and speed
management measures. Progress needed.
·
City
Centre cycle parking. The racks issue on Guildhall Street has been resolved.
·
Queen’s
Green path. The work has been well received. Additional enhancements are now
planned.
·
Widening
of Palmers Walk path, Mill Road/East Road junction. CR is meeting with ARU
representatives to discuss funding.
·
Lammas
Land. Solar lighting has been installed on the rest of the path. This project
has been well received and may generate greater demand for solar lighting in
other areas of the city.
·
Cherry
Hinton Hall. Temporary cycle racks have been installed and CR is waiting to
hear from Friends of Cherry Hinton Hall on agreed locations of some permanent
racks. Improved cycle parking provision for the Folk Festival would be
welcomed.
·
Wyman’s
Lane/Castle Street. Project Officer (Landscape) Bana Elzein is taking this
forward with funding committed.
·
Herbert
Street/Chesterton Road. To be treated as an Environmental Improvement Project.
The poor quality of the Herbert Street footway is seen as a key concern.
·
Storey’s
Way – (update circulated by Cllr Tucker).
7. Joint Cycleways
Budget.
Details of
the City Deal cycle projects should be known within the year according to CR.
The County Council have decided to place more emphasis on funding cycle
projects outside the Cambridge area and so there is currently no match-funding
for the Cycleways budget. CR suggested that the City
budget could be used for small to medium sized schemes which do not get City
Deal funding. CR has been involved in the scoring of the different schemes
being put forward for City Deal funding and the Steering Group will be updated
at the appropriate time.
8. Any Other Business
·
Cllr
Robertson had been contacted by a member of the Walking & Cycling Liaison
Group about the role of this group and whether the two should be merged. The Walking & Cycling Liaison Group is Chaired by the County Council and is made up representatives
of local cycling, walking and disability groups and City and County officers,
brought together to evaluate local cycle and pedestrian related schemes and
cycling and walking. Provision proposed for new developments. The Liaison Group
has no Member involvement and has no links with the formal Committee
process. There has been a call for the
Liaison Group to be more focussed and CR has been tasked with re-drafting the
Terms of Reference for discussion at their next meeting. Officers will need to
look again at the Liaison Group and decide its level of effectiveness (CR).
9. Date of next meeting – Thursday 16th
July 4.30pm