Agenda item

1. Apologies – Mike Davies.

 

2. Minutes of the last meeting Wednesday 28^th September 2016 and matters arising.

Minutes agreed.

 

DA was welcomed as the new Lib Dem representative on the Group for this municipal year.

 

MS requested that the next meeting include a presentation on regulations related to cycling on pavements.

 

3. Palmer’s Walk – update (AF)

A total of 62 responses were received following the re-consultation in September/October 2016. This was 3 times more than the original August 2015 consultation. On the question of the proposed widening, 41% of respondents supported the proposal to widen the footpath in some form, although 59% supported the option to maintain the current path width of 1.2 metres. These results were taken to East Area Committee 12^th January.

 

On the separate question of whether there should be a cycling ban on Palmer’s Walk, 59 responses were received with 46 (or 78%) supporting the proposal for a ban.

 

LW made a brief statement to the Group urging it to support the erection of a ‘no cycling’ sign on Palmer’s Walk similar to those currently in use on Christ’s Pieces and which according to LW are effective. If cycle traffic is removed she stated that there would therefore be no justification for the widening of the path and that this proposal in the view of the majority of residents should be abandoned. LW asked for an assurance that any future proposal to change the width of Palmer’s Walk footpath would be the subject of public consultation.

 

NB: Following the meeting the Chair gave this assurance.

 

MS highlighted the need for consistency in signage across all the open spaces instead of an ad hoc approach and that in his view, there was some doubt that the erection of this sign in isolation would be effective. The cost of widening the path would likely be more than the original £20,000 estimated in 2015 according to JR but a detailed estimated cost had not yet been carried out.

 

KB reported that East Area Committee Members were happy for the Group to point the way forward regarding this situation. The issue of whether cycling should be prohibited was discussed but this issue was outside the context of the consultation. MS suggested re-visiting the cycling issue again; approaching it holistically with input from ARU, whereas DA stated that he would support the widening of the path but that this should include segregation in order that cycling in a city such as Cambridge is encouraged.

 

RECOMMENDATION: The Palmer’s Walk footpath to remain unchanged to reflect the majority of views recorded by the 2016 re-consultation.

The separate issue of prohibiting cycling along the footpath to be revisited later in the year.

 

 

4. Promotion grant funding

Although the total amount being sought by applicants amounts to £27,000, the Group were informed that only £5,020 remained in the budget following the cycle parking audit and the re-printing of the City Cycle Map which is badly in need of updating.

KB stressed that the remit of the Group was to fund projects that would increase interest in walking and cycling and that due to the budget constraints, these would have to take priority over projects that would largely benefit existing users.

 

·       Historyworks.

£3,950 is being sought to fund staffing and the designing and printing of promotional material inviting local residents to 4 public events encouraging Cambridge residents to explore their local area on foot.

 

VERDICT – APPROVED. This innovative project is intended to encourage walking and in particular encourage young people to explore and appreciate their local area. Staffing costs could be higher than estimated but the number of days of activity are limited. The project could potentially be extended to other areas within the city. (£3,020 awarded)

 

·       Mayfield and Milton Road Primary Schools

£5,000 (each) is being sought to improve cycle/scooter parking provision and therefore increase sustainable travel.

 

DECISION DEFERRED.

ACTION: CR/Mike Davies to clarify whether alternative funding could be used for schools.

 

·       Cambridge Council for Voluntary Service (CCVS) - cycle parking.

£3,456 is being sought for the provision of secure cycle parking for staff and visitors to their Arbury Court offices.

 

 

There is an issue of land ownership related to this project according to CR with negotiations ongoing with the City Council’s Housing service. The applicant could also be encouraged to opt for an alternative style of cycle rack that would be less expensive and therefore require a smaller bid.

DECISION DEFERRED – subject to the outcome of current negotiations.

 

 

 

·       Cycle parking audit.

A bid from ‘ParkThatBike’ www.parkthatbike.com had already been tabled at the last meeting but at the meeting it was agreed that the Cambridge Cycling Campaign (Camcycle) should be given the opportunity to submit a proposal and this was presented at the meeting by RdB.

 

Concerns were raised by the Group regarding Camcycle’s proposal; with its final report and list of recommendations that would likely be more aspirational than practical. The need for a robust approach was emphasised.

 

VERDICT – The cycle parking audit to be awarded to ‘ParkThat Bike’

 

·       Camcycle (RdB)

o   BUG guide (Bicycle User Group)

To work with the larger employers in Cambridge to promote cycling to work. The guide would be provided to staff to help develop small campaign groups and would include case studies, policies and information on accessing LA resources etc. (RdB confirmed that negotiations for City Deal funding were progressing.)

 

The Group questioned the effectiveness of this guide that without a champion in each firm was unlikely in the Group’s view to reach its target audience. There are also similar guides currently being provided by organisations such as www.Sustrans.org.uk etc.  VERDICT – Bid unsuccessful

 

o   Cycle Parking Guide

Intended as a guide for local businesses on how to improve cycle parking, this would build on the detailed and technical cycle parking policy and guidance provided by the City Council. First printed in 2008, the updated guide would place more emphasis on provision for non-standard and child carrying bikes. £3,500 is being sought (total estimated budget £10,000.)

 

VERDICT – APPROVED. Although Camcycle would need to be clear as to who this guide would be targeted towards (and that specifications on measurements and the use of space would need to be realistic) this guide was supported by the Group. The need for the guide to be Cambridge-specific was also emphasised. (£2,000 awarded)

 

o   Women’s Cycling Conference.

To promote, celebrate and encourage cycling among women in Cambridge. This would be a festival of events across the city involving schools etc. Phase 1 would focus on sponsorship, Phase 2 on the organisation. (£3,500 being sought for the project management, venue costs and printing/promotion costs.)

 

VERDICT – Bid unsuccessful. The Group felt that such a conference would have more of a national rather than a local relevance and would likely incur large accommodation costs. The ability of such an event to increase cycling numbers was questioned. It was therefore felt the approval for funding could not be justified.

 

 

5. Cycleways programme.

CR and JR requested steer from the Group regarding how current project should be prioritised in terms of funding.

·       Maids Causeway roundabout.  Improvement to the pedestrian and cycle crossing linking to Midsummer Common and other safety improvements that could be undertaken within budget. RETAIN.

·       Snakey Path. Although regarded as a critical route, this is currently badly overgrown and hazardous for both pedestrians and cyclists. RETAIN

·       Storey’s Way. Redesigning the pinch point for improved cycle safety. RETAIN

·       Solar lights. This has already been trialled on Lammas Land and officers are considering further provision. Responses so far to the EIP consultation have been positive according to JR although there are concerns regarding the over-urbanisation of Cambridge’s open spaces. Solar lighting is very cost-effective but tends to polarise views. Approval would be needed from the Exec Councillor. RETAIN

·       Dawes Lane. To improve the route heavily used by residents travelling to and from Netherhall School. RETAIN.

·       Tins Path. To improve surfacing and signage on this key route. RETAIN.

·       Wadloes Road to Ditton Meadows path. This is a mandatory cycle lane. RETAIN

·       Bateman Street. The use of double yellow lines to prohibit parking onto the cycle lane would need TRO funding. RETAIN.

·       Grantchester Meadows access. Located in an area beyond the adopted highway (and privately owned by St Catharine’s College), CR will need to have a dialogue with the College Bursar regarding proposed improvements. RETAIN (but as a lower priority)

·       Davey Road. Reduction in parking for an improved cycle route. The Group agreed that parking regulation in this area could be improved but that it would need dialogue with local ward Councillors. The new station to the north of the city could reduce the volume of cars parked by commuters. RETAIN (but as a lower priority)

·       Garret Hostel Lane/Senate House Passage. This is a key route between West Cambridge and the city centre. Improvements to surfacing for Garrett Hostel Lane was really a maintenance issue and could be considered as setting a precedent. Any changes to the Senate House Passage may meet opposition. RETAIN (but as a lower priority)

 

ACTION: Nuns Way Pedestrian/Cycle route to be added to the Cycleways programme. The Group would be happy to include other projects put forward either by Councillors or residents as appropriate.

 

 

6. City Cycle Schemes.

·       MS enquired as to the Arbury Road scheme and why the section nearest to Milton Road had not been included at the outset. CR stated that the issue of  residents’ parking would have caused problems regarding the deliverability of the project and for that reason this section of Arbury Road was deferred for a future scheme (currently being considered for the next tranche if City Deal funding)

·       Green End Road/Nuffield Road scheme. This is a City Deal project and the public consultation was being undertaken with an event at Brown Fields Community Centre on 14^th February.

 

 

7. Date of next meeting - 15th June 4.30pm in the Members Lounge, Guildhall.