Erection of four dwellings, including a dropped kerb and associated infrastructure following the demolition of the existing buildings on site. | 8 Kings Hedges Road Cambridge CB4 2PA
Listed issues, most recent first:
Erection of four dwellings, including a dropped kerb and associated infrastructure following the demolition of the existing buildings on site. | 8 Kings Hedges Road Cambridge CB4 2PA
Retrospective change of use from Hotel (C1 Use) to House In Multiple Occupation (HMO) (sui-generis) | Oakley Lodge 627 - 631 Newmarket Road Cambridge Cambridgeshire CB5 8PA
The Carter Bridge is looking worse for wear in many ways.
We've had a question about who is responsible for maintenance. Network Rail and Cambridge County Council, Cambridge City Council have apparently denied responsibility and there has been a suggestion that Essex County Council may be responsible.
What do we know about responsibility and previous actions to keep the bridge maintained?
1960s roadbuilding seared through the town. Modern road planners have already provided a good toucan crossing between Wellesley Road and Crouch Street West across Southway/Lexden Road. Providing a better ramp from Wellesley Road would help facilitate this.
Essex Housing is redeveloping the Essex County Hospital site as housing. The company has agreed various cycling measures as part of this scheme. It has allocated £25,000 towards remodelling the Wellesley Road/Creffield Road/Maldon Road junction. Gwyn Owen, head of Essex Housing, has agreed that any money left over can be put towards a new, wider ramp. There may also be funds from the Local Highways Panel.
Of and relating to Essex County Council.
The response to, and effects of the coronavirus pandemic
Of and relating to Colchester Borough Council.
Policy Documents, guidance, consultations etc. from UK Government.
Goverment Review of HWC
sound+fury // 1 thread
From the previous thread:
The establishment of the new JDCC, composed of members from both South Cambridgeshire District Council and Cambridge City Council have now been completed and the previous JDCC has been dissolved...
'In terms of the remit of the new Committee, some cross boundary sites have been included that were not within the remit of the previous Committee ... both Councils have adopted Local Plans which include specific policy designations – some of which overlap the Administrative boundary of the two Councils. Whilst both Councils have created a shared planning service, this does not change the statutory position of the two Councils as distinct “local Planning Authorities” ... The additional sites include the North East Cambridge Area Action Plan areas within both City and SCDC, Cambridge Biomedical Campus/Addenbrookes site and the extension of Peterhouse Science Park/ARM on Fulbourn Road.'
Created by Rosamund Humphrey (Admin Officer) // 1 thread
Site: The Meadows Community Centre, Arbury
Erection of new community hub and 22 council rented affordable dwellings, car parking, replacement multi use games area, new vehicular access off Arbury Road and enhancements to the recreation ground and installation of substation (as part of wider proposal for the full Meadows site seeking permission for the demolition of existing community centre and the erection of a new community hub, 78 affordable dwellings, car parking, a replacement multi use games area, new play equipment, the creation of new vehicular accesses on to Arbury Road, Daisy Close and St Catharines Road, the provision of new landscaping and substation and the installation of drainage to the football pitch and associated land levelling together with land reprofiling).
Capacity improvements are currently underway to the A10/BP roundabout, required as part of the approved Lancaster Way Business Park expansion planning application.
This is a vital development to support economic growth within East Cambridgeshire and expected to generate 2,500+ jobs, 75% will be from the local area. Cambridgeshire County Council agreed to carry out a feasibility study encompassing the A10, BP and Lancaster Way roundabouts to assess the current congestion issues limiting future growth which was completed in October 2018.
This study identified that capacity improvements at the Lancaster Way roundabout would also unlock further benefits of the measures now being constructed at the BP roundabout. The County Council has started to look at what improvements could be made to the Lancaster Way roundabout and the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority and East Cambridgeshire District Council have agreed to provide funding.
The public have the chance to offer comments for consideration on the proposed design.
This consultation is to share the details with residents and receive feedback. We may share your information with our partners in this consultation (East Cambridgeshire District Council and Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority) and with the council analysis team.
You do not have to give us any personal information. We will not publish any personal details you do give us, but may publish our response, and include it in public reports, with personal details removed. Personal data will be held securely, in accordance with data protection legislation. We will only store it for 12 months after the consultation results have been analysed and the consultation report published.
Please view the consultation information prior to completing this survey, online at https://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/residents/travel-roads-and-parking/transport-projects/a10-a142-lancaster-way-roundabout(External link)
All surveys should be completed by the closing date of Friday 18 September 2020.
Your views on the project are welcomed.
It's the usual motorist-centric tripe of course, with ridiculous excuses for not building a signalised crossing ("it's rural" - nevermind that Babraham is also rural and they are doing it there).
Following Dft Phase 1 funding arising from the current Covid19 situation, designs are available for cycle lanes covering the approximate 3.2km length from the Haringey boundary to just south of North Finchley.
The design principle has been, where possible, to provide a temporary lightly segregated cycle lane, defined by wands, bolted into the carriageway surface at 4m spacings. In some cases, we have taken a cycle lane width of 2.5m. In other locations, where space permits, we have re-allocated the whole of a current running lane.
At other locations, we have needed to retain a ‘with traffic’ cycle route. In order to mitigate this, these sections of the route will be provided with carriageway cycle markings and signage as is usual, but complemented with the introduction of 20mph limits.
Monitoring of the route will take place (and indeed has already started) to assess cycle and motorised traffic volumes, as well as to assess any changes to the temporary layout that may be necessary.
In developing the design we have engaged with TfL’s cycling sponsors and have incorporated, where applicable, comments and suggestions from their design audit teams and our safety advisors. We have also obtained support from the police in respect of the 20mph limits.
The A1 route requires improvement for safer cycling to provide continuity from the A1000 cycle route in Barnet.
The A1 red route has an unprotected bike lane for the first half of the ascent, although traffic is single file until just before the lights and tends to leave room on the left for most of the climb. However, between the lights at Muswell Hill Road and Shepherds Hill the road has two congested traffic lanes leaving no space for cyclists (see photo). South of this it’s single lane with parking, then a bus lane and then cycle tracks appear at Archway gyratory. The issues south of Muswell Hill Road also affect Haringey cyclists using that road from Muswell Hill.
The A1 route has segregated bike or bus lanes up to Shepherds Hill lights, where it becomes two congested traffic lanes between there and the Muswell Hill Road lights, leaving no space for cyclists. Emergency social distancing provision has led to the left lane being fully cordoned off to provide extra pedestrian space for the shops, which squeezes cyclists into the remaining traffic lane. North of Muswell Hill Road is a fast, single lane descent with parking on the left for the first half. The Bakers Lane gyratory can be navigated to the A1000 without changing lanes, although other traffic is crossing lanes making this hazardous for cycling.
Haringey cyclists heading for Muswell Hill have the added problem of a difficult right turn off the A1 into Muswell Hill Road.
Safety concerns have been raised around Coldham's Lane - specifically, the stretch running from Coldham's Lane roundabout to the Toyota garage.
These concerns ought to help inform proposals for the CL roundabout and the Marshalls land on Coldham's Lane.
We're working towards a glossary of key terms to help members and the public.
20/02871/FUL | Erection of 1no. dwelling adjacent to No.30 Caravere Close - Resubmission of 19/0774/FUL | 30 Caravere Close Cambridge CB4 2UG.
20/02869/FUL | Conversion of single dwelling into two separate dwellings complete with additional rear extensions and loft conversion to main dwelling | 1 Silverwood Close Cambridge CB1 3HA
20/02821/FUL: Change of use from HMO (use class C4) to large HMO (8 person) (sui generis)
4 Moss Bank Cambridge CB4 1UR
Thanks to planning hiccups in the 90s and 00s, there is a missing section of the path between Rouse Way and Meander Mews that prevents it from being used as an alternative for walkers and cyclists to Cowdray Avenue, or as part of leisure routes, e.g. a riverside loop.
Photograph: John Collett, Colchester Civic Society
This is a consultation about Abbeygate House
Created by Rosamund Humphrey (Admin Officer) // 1 thread
19/0261/NMA1 | Non-material amendment with respect to planning permission reference 19/0261/FUL (Erection of 3 no. retail units (2 x use class A1 and 1 x use class A5), 1no. Community Centre (use class D1) and provision of 14 no. dwellings (8 flats and 6 maisonettes) following demolition of existing commercial units and flats).) The amendments sought are the introduction of additional doors to the northern elevation of Block B, and the provision of a new external cycle store to Block B. | 74-82 Akeman Street Cambridge Cambridgeshire CB4 3HG
Created by Roxanne (Cycling Campaign Officer) // 1 thread
Stretching from Swindon to Cambridgeshire and from Northamptonshire to Hertfordshire, England’s Economic Heartland brings political and business leaders together in a strategic collaborative partnership with a shared commitment to realise the region's economic potential.
We provide the region’s voice on strategic infrastructure and services. Our leadership is focused on addressing barriers to realising our potential.
• We are the Sub-national Transport Body for the region. Our overarching Transport Strategy will be a 30 year strategic vision for our transport system that puts the needs of businesses and individuals at the forefront of investment decisions
• Our work on wider strategic infrastructure is focused on making sure investment in transport, digital and utilities infrastructure is ‘joined up’
• Our work with our delivery partners is focused on identifying investment priorities, getting the funding secured and then delivering improvements to budget and on-time.
Working in collaboration with Government and partners across the Heartland, we are committed to creating places where people and business realise their potential, and are able to compete on the global stage for UK plc.
Our 5.1m population and 280,000 business together generate around £155 billion GVA. We have a 21st century economy, particularly rich in high value engineering, science, technology and research. Most of our firms are small or medium sized enterprises with many based in rural or semi-rural areas.
Overall, our economy is successful and we’re a net contributor to the exchequer. However, the National Infrastructure Commission believes our economy could double or even triple in size. But it also warns this opportunity cannot be taken for granted.
Indeed, our success already comes at a price. Economic growth combined with underinvestment in infrastructure and services means that the pressure on our transport, digital and wider infrastructure networks has grown to the point where they operate close to capacity most of the time. The resilience of our networks has dropped, affecting business productivity and making travel for individuals increasingly challenging.
Our transport system continues to be dominated by the legacy of investment that left us with a largely radial pattern of strategic networks centred on London. Travel across the Heartland – and in particular east-west – is hamstrung by poor connectivity and poor integration.
Digital connectivity remains a challenge at a time when lifestyle and business changes mean our demands and expectations of digital infrastructure continue to increase. And economic success brings with it further pressure on wider strategic infrastructure, including power and water supplies.
England’s Economic Heartland is the response of strategic political and business leaders to overcome these challenges, with investment in strategic infrastructure and services key to realising our potential."
Waterbeach Cycle Campaign has received a Zero Carbon Communities grant from SCDC for installation of some badly needed cycle racks in the village centre. We have consulted with villagers about their preferences for their location and the Parish Council has approved the installation in those locations.
We need to arrange for the installation
Demolition of no. 196 and No. 198 Green End Road and construction of 7no. Apartments (5no. 2bed, 1 3bed and 1no 1bed) and commercial space.
This map shows all issues, whether points, routes, or areas:
The most popular issues, based on the number of votes:
I have serious concerns about the safety of this portion of the bike path; arising from its recent re-design. Recently my 10 year old son was in a very close “near-miss” with a car turning off the A316 into Bicester Road; and I believe many more similar incidents are likely occurring. Eventually someone will be seriously hurt or killed on it.
However, the improvement in the track leads cyclists to feel more confident in using it – giving a false sense of security.
• The segregated track makes it particularly appealing for inexperienced and more vulnerable cyclists (such as kids).
• This track design leads to an increase in the cyclists speed.
• The smooth/quick nature of the track leads inexperienced cyclists to believe that THEY HAVE RIGHT OF WAY across side roads.
• There are no markings on the roads to tell drivers coming in or out of side roads that cyclists could be on the track crossing their path.
• There is a particular challenge for EASTBOUND cyclists.
To avoid stopping at every side road, when on the track travelling Eastbound (as per red arrow on photo) approaching roads such as Bicester road, the cyclist has to simultaneously
(a) check to their FRONT/LEFT side to see if a car is exiting the side road
(b) check BEHIND them on their REAR/ RIGHT hand side to see if a car is about to swing off the A316 into the side road (usually at speed) - (as per orange arrow on photo).
This is a hard combination to perform – looking 180 degrees opposite directions at the same time. If you are an inexperienced cyclist, on an apparently safe track, it is very likely that you will not realise you have to be this vigilant and not check adequately for cars.
Hence, my boy rode across Bicester road from the east and was very nearly hit by a car turning off the A316.
(Note that travelling from the west is somewhat easier as both the vehicles turning in from the A316 and those turning out from the side roads are in your front field of vision).
My suggestions for improving this situation are:
(1) Clearly mark the bike track across the side roads so cars are aware there are cyclists approaching from the side.
(2) Ideally, give cyclists priority across the side roads; so making cars slow to a halt and making it more intuitive for cyclists.
(3) To facilitate this, would require some stopping space for traffic coming on/off the A316 to after the bike track crossing
At roads such as Bicester road the bike track could be curved to the south by about 2m before crossing the side road – this curve in the track would
(a) naturally slow cyclists down as they approach the side road
(b) would provide vehicles moving onto the A316 a decent gap so they can separate the concerns of first negotiating the bike track then focus on getting on the A316;
(c) for vehicles coming off the A316 the additional space would give them space to stop and give way to cyclists.
Southern stretch of Kew road is a busy road, wide enough for cycling provision, but none is provided - southbound has protection of a bus lane for a stretch but north bound has no protection for cyclists at all. This frequently leads to pavement cycling as per the photo.
The cycle path crosses the soutbound exit from the M53 at Cheshire Oaks. The exit is light controlled for traffic as they enter the roundabout. This provides a safe time for cyclists to ride across the sliproad. However the lights are not visible to cyclist on the path and there is no light provided to advise cyclists when they can cross.
This makes it very difficult and dangerous for cyclists to know when they can safely cross. This would require no physical change to the road layout simply a new light to show cyclists when to cross.
The A41 ring road cuts across a useful quiet route north-west out of Chester, which is an alternative to the traffic-free Greenway (which is unlit, and slippery in icy conditions). Crossing the A41 during busy periods - e.g. when commuting at rush-hour - can be a slow and potentially very dangerous process, especially after dark. A better crossing for cyclists and pedestrians, or a lower speed limit on the A41 (or both), would be very helpful here.
[Original version of map was wrong; I've now updated it.]
My employer is planning to relocate from central cambridge to the Cambridge Business Park (near Waterbeach). There is currently no decent cycle (or footpath!) access to this business park which avoids riding along the A10. I am a confident cyclist but I am not looking forward to riding to work along sections of the A10.
Are there any plans for cycle route construction which the campaign can, perhaps, help accelerate?
Created by Rosie Downes // 5 threads
Transport for London's public consultation on Cycle Superhighway 1 is open from 16 February to 29 March. The LCC office has set up this thread to facilitate discussion of the proposals.
Prince St bridge is an anarchic pigs ear. I like pigs and fond of a bit of anarchy but it's getting beyond a joke. Of course it will all be sorted out properly in due course but we could live with this for years. Here's a quick fix:
1. Move south vehicle stop line back 10m behind tramlines
2. Remove all bollards unless one or two kept in line with centre of bridge with arrows right for cars
3. Widen cycle lane from bridge to Festival way turn so suitable for 2-way cycling.
4. Put in Give Way painted line at an angle running from enlarged cycle lane to centre line so southbound cyclists alerted to need to filter across traffic.
1. Remove all bollards
2. Widen cycle lane for 2 way cycling all the way up to the traffic lights with The Grove.
3. Remove 5 bollards on each side of north bound traffic light along with the two set back
4. Paint cycle lane passing behind light and then back onto carriageway making it nice and clear that it's an option for cyclists when lights red or they can carry on (as most will, no worse than now but at least it will be clear that they can treat these as 'give way')
5. There will need to be 'give way' paint to make clear that pedestrians have right of way on the by-pass.
Yes it's muddled but less so than now and makes the desire lines easier. It's also a cheap paint based fix pending the proper job.
The Reach Fair ride takes place on the early Bank Holiday Monday (May Day) in May.
The web page for it is:
The planning overview is summarised:
I've created this issue to help plan this event.
There are several pedestrian refuges along the road particularly at the western end of the road. The refuges cause a pinch point for cyclists. The road marking confuse priorities between those using the on road cycle path and other traffic.
Cyclist coming from the river come up Friars Lane exit and have to currently route right round Richmond Green because it is one way. Many do not and simply cycle across the green. The path across the green should be formally opened up to cyclists - as a share path with pedestrian priority - or a seperate track provided along the south side of Richmond Green.
Created by JonC // 0 threads
Our club (South Herts CTC) had to cross the A505 to get back into Hertfordshire on Sunday and we took a route between Litlington and Therfield which involved 500 m along the A505 and a right turn at the roundabout west of Royston.
I was quite surprised there was no cycle route to help cyclists here. It was a Sunday so at least there were fewer heavy vehicles than normal, but the speed of some cars coming up behind made it tricky to change lanes on a bike when turning right at the roundabout.
Since then I have studied other ways of crossing the A505 (using Google Streetview) and can't find any easy crossing points near Royston. I see it is the boundary between Hertfordshire and Cambridgeshire, which complicates matters (although it looks like the A505 road is in Herts).
To the east, I've used the B1368 crossing at Flint Cross, which is also a nightmare. To the west the crossing at Slip End does at least have a central refuge. It seems little or no thought was given to cyclists when the A505 was constructed.
Sustrans route 4 coming from the canal path on its main route into Bath city centre has a high level of traffic conflict and the need to filter between two tight lanes of traffic with a large proportion of LGVs coming down the A36 Beckford Road.
The right turn from Sydney Place southbound into Great Pulteney Street is signposted as no right turn as well as being route 4, and has no refuge to turn from.
It should be possible to route the path through Sydney Gardens as the Darlington Place/Sydney Place westbound/Great Pulteney Street junction has been improved to increase pedestrian flows.
Some non-cycling residents are also concerned about cyclists using the pavement in this area too.
Martin Lucas-Smith // 1 thread
The permeability gate between Hooper Street and Kingston Street is obstructive as it only allows passage in one direction at a time.
Given the ever-increasing amount of cycling in areas like this, it's time to get this replaced with a simple bollard arrangement that would allow two-way passage whilst still enable the emergency services to unlock for access in an emergency.
Many cyclists won't cycle to Harwich International from the Ipswich direction due to the roads. There really should be a high quality cycle route for this to continue the cycle journey from The Netherlands, where you can ride of the ferry and on to quality cycle infrastructure. The fact people choose the train is not a good sign.
This issue is the overall goal, and needs to be broken down into smaller sub issues of smaller more specific projects or improvements that can work towards this goal.
Created by Rosalind Lund // 1 thread
further to the piece in newsletter 128, I wonder if any thought has been given to the difficulty of turning right into Emmanuel Street if you are coming towards the town centre from St Andrew's Street? We go fairly often to the Arts Cinema and this is the obvious way for us to go home, but it is impossible to turn right on the correct side of the bollard at present as it is designed only for left turning cycles coming out of town. There is, however, nothing to suggest that such a right turn is illegal.
Martin Lucas-Smith // 1 thread
There's a very poor dogleg right-angle with barriers at the entrance/exit from the West Cambridge site to Clerk Maxwell Road.
This should be turned into a wide splay with good visibility.
The A5117 at this point has some sections of non-protected cycle lane, but they are not continuous, and they disappear at a number of pinch points. The road carries a lot of very fast moving heavy traffic, and is dangerous and unpleasant to cycle on. It would be a useful route for people travelling by bike to or from Stanlow Refinery, Cheshire Oaks, the University of Chester at Thornton Science Park, and Ince & Elton villages, but is currently only used by a tiny number of very brave and confident cyclists. This situation could be improved by making the cycle lane continuous along the whole route.
Over the past couple of years of regularly cycling between Waterbeach and Cambridge on NCN11 I have noticed that the path between Waterbeach and Baits Bite Lock is in really bad repair and is getting gradually worse. I have been in touch with the council to ask them to repair it, and they told me that as far as they are concerned the path is only a footpath, and they have no obligation to maintain it to a standard suitable for bikes. Sustrans tells me they have no responsibility for maintaining that section of the route, and that the council should be responsible for it.
It seems absurd to allow the path to fall into total disrepair, but at the moment it doesn't seem like anyone recognises any obligation for its upkeep.
I am happy to go out occasionally with some secateurs and chop off the more annoying bits of greenery, but the path needs resurfacing and that feels a bit beyond me!
Does anyone have any experience with this sort of problem? Have they come across it on other sections of the NCN?
Created by Paul James // 0 threads
All the sideroads between Richmond Circus and Manor Circus are a danger to cyclists on the cycleway.
There is no warning to motorists that there will be crossing cyclists and the building angles make it hard to see if anything is coming.
Turning traffic from the A316 can have an obscured view of the cycleway due to foliage.
Decrease corner radii.
Make road hump more pronounced.
Make cycle surface colour continuous across roadway.
Add markings across roadway.
Add warning signage.
Move give way lines back to before cycleway or add additional give way lines.
Holywells Park has a section of cycle route 51 running through it, linking South East Ipswich to the centre with a pleasant and safe route down to the waterfront.
During Winter, the park is closed at dusk, sometimes as early as 4, meaning that just when the roads are most dangerous (dark and wet) cyclists are forced onto steep and busy routes either along Cliff Lane or up Bishops Hill.
The closures are largely at the request of the Park Friends group. I've spoken to them, and their concerns seem to be largely about what might go on after dark. It's not clear that there is any evidence for this, nor that the current situation of locking the main gates but leaving others would do anything to deter misbehaviour.
Keeping it open as a cycle route would ensure a legitimate presence in the park, and help provide less confident cyclists in the area with a safe route to and from town.
I'd propose either locking later, or for a trial period leaving the park unlocked.
Martin Lucas-Smith // 10 threads
Major planning application here - c. 10,000 homes
Meeting with Leeds City Council to discuss possible remedial works due to high casualty rates.
I watch in wonder and amazement as the new cycle lane alongside the A41 from Mostyn lights to the zoo is completed - with lamposts in th emiddle of the path - not to mention a three legged road sign which I am sure will make passage impossible.
I will investigate more and take photos....
The (draft / emerging) 1Core Strategy seems to hint at a bus loop (Policy UC7) and a motor vehicle "ring road" (Policy UC9) too. It mentions pedestrian routes but there's no mention of cycle routes. See attached photo. (I didn't mark up the map, as it might become a tad too messy)
The "ring road" is just like Scott / esde84 described before http://newcycling.org/space4cycling/part2 (in comments)
The photo in the attachment is from "Newcastle Proposals Map" listed here http://onecorestrategyng-consult.limehouse.co.uk/portal/examination_library (not sure how long thi link will stay live, link rot may happen)
Created by chdot // 1 thread
Longstanding issue about 'optimum' design, particularly to reduce conflict caused by vehicles turning from Teviot Pl due to signal phases.