![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Sawston Greenway consultation
I realise I'm typing large screeds of text as I respond to this consultation, and that once I hit "submit" I probably won't see them again, so I'm going to copy and paste them here. The consultation is:
https://consultcambs.uk.engagementhq.com/gcp-sawston-greenway
and Camcycle have some guidance on responding to it here:
https://www.camcycle.org.uk/blog/2022/12/gcp-sawston-greenway/
Question 3: the Long Road/Robinson Way junction:
This junction looks dreadful. It's in the wrong place - entirely the wrong side of Robinson Way for bikes/walkers wanting access Sedley Taylor Road/Luard Road, and students at the 6th form college will not use it. It would be much better if it were integrated with the junction with Robinson Way itself, or located where the existing pedestrian crossing is.
The design of the junction is also terribly confusing, requiring people on bikes to continue past one crossing in order to reach the second, and then return past the first crossing again. Routes for people on bikes and people on foot are confusing and cross over each other and this will lead to conflict.
It should be straightforward to cross, no-one should have to go out of their way, and there should be no conflict between groups of users. I imagine this will be particularly difficult for people with limited mobility and for children.
Please consult with camcycle and LTN/20 for better solutions.
Question 4: Robinson Way
The track appears to be on the wrong side of the road, and requires a further crossing of Robinson Way to be made partway along it. The track should be on the west side of the road for the whole of its length. This should hopefully make it easier to connect with the CSET proposals: though I am disappointed that those are not outlined here! Is there a fallback plan to fix that section if CSET does not go ahead?
In terms of materials, surfacing etc: bike paths should be distinguishable from footpaths by surface colour or texture and preferably by a change in height. They should be separated from the roadway where possible. The surfaces should be smooth and kept clear and wide enough: see LTN/20 for details. Lighting should be adequate so that the area is well lit at night making it safe eg for teenagers travelling home from school/college in winter, and for commuters and leisure travel later at night year round. It should be swept year round and salted/gritted in winter. Greenery and plants to improve the streetscape are always welcome provided they are well maintained and do not encroach on the path. Seating at intervals is also useful for those who need a break. Signage should be clear and visible - using the standard cycle-route blue signs makes them easy to spot, but it might be nice to have a specific greenway logo.
Question 5: DNA path (this is the big one!)
I hugely welcome to proposals to widen this route and to improve the crossing at Granham's Road, as this is currently a concern in allowing children to access the Genome path alone. I would welcome some better lighting than just solar studs, perhaps some solar downlighting attached to the fence? At the moment while we use the path at night it requires a lot more caution simply to avoid obstacles and other people, never mind the worries about attacks which have taken place here previously, and about the obstacles which have recently been seen on the section of Genome Path between Granham's Road and Chaston Road - better lighting would alleviate these concerns, and CCTV might even be worth considering given the antsocial behaviour. I don't think additional lighting will be particularly detrimental to the area considering the route runs immediately alongside the busy railway, so is not entirely of rural character anyway! If nothing else funding needs to be provided to *maintain* the solar studs, as a significant number of the current ones are not working.
As well as widening I'd also like to see some segregation for bikes/scooters from pedestrians, and for it to be wide enough for walkers to be two-abreast without having to constantly jump out of the way. Providing enough width for this, and also making it possible for equestrians to use a grass area may need more land than is currently in use. If so I'd like to see the existing planting moved/retained or replacement planting, as the trees along this route are a welcome addition. Signage should clarify whether equestrians are welcome, as at the moment it is unclear.
I think you are very optimistic in hoping to retain the existing DNA stripe art-work, as it is disintegrating significantly, and any works would be likely to cause more damage. It would be nice to see this repaired/restored or replaced with a new version.
The current path has been an enormous success, and has many more regular journeys than were ever planned for. This means at busy times it can be quite intimidating, and difficult for bikes and walkers to pass each other safely, particularly as there is no agreement as to whether it is better to walk on the left or the right of the path. This path widening is well overdue, and it should be done as well as possible to provide for the number of people who want to use the path now and in the future. Consideration should be given as to whether the East-West-Rail or Cambridge South Station changes to the width of the railway line will also impact this work, and whether they can provide any funding.
Finally, if possible, the route should remain open during the works. This may involve an agreement with the neighbouring landowner to use some of their land, as was done when the blue footbridge was installed towards the Granhams Road end of the path. If possible any temporary surface should be suitable for both walking and all types of bike. If the bridge over Hobson's Brook can be widened this would also be an improvement, and I would welcome consideration being made to the bollards here and on other sections to ensure these are properly accessible.
Question 6: Shelford Station
I approve of the proposed new route through Mill Court, and the raised junction at the station. This should be made such that traffic waiting for the level crossing does not obstruct the junction for walkers and bikes. I would welcome more improvements around the station which make is safer for people walking along Hinton Way, the current large forecourt and parking are dangerous and unwelcome. More cycle parking at the station would be welcomed. I like the Camcycle suggestion of making it clear that pedestrians should have priority when crossing Leeway Avenue.
Question 7: Stapleford Village
I approve of the reduction in speed to 20mph on Hinton Way. Improved crossing routes from Chaston Road to Hinton Way will be welcomed, but do take into account the alternative proposals made by Camcycle.
Mingle Lane needs to be resurfaced, and some signage or road markings to remind road users to be aware of cycles would be good. The junction where Church Street meets Mingle lane can be scary, and traffic sometimes goes too fast round this corner. Enforcement of the 20mph limit may be needed.
Where Church Street meets London Road the existing crossing is simply in the wrong place for most people wanting to cross and join the shared use path. This needs to be much better joined up. And as suggested the path there needs significant widening as it is currently not fit for purpose.
I welcome the camcycle suggestion of re-routing the other end of the off-road section of path to avoid the narrow entrance onto Cambridge Road, and to better meet up with Dernford Reservoir.
Question 8: Dernford Reservoir
This is an excellent decision and should be progressed as soon as possible. Attention should be given to cycle movements where the path meets Cambridge Road, as a right-angled junction here is not ideal. Conflict with people entering/leaving the reservoir carpark should be mitigated as much as possible. It would be nice if this joined up with the track which runs a little way from Cambridge Road as mentioned above. More than 3m should be provided wherever possible, and when possible cycles and walkers should be segregated for the safety and comfort of both. I'd appreciate it if more lighting that just solar studs is provided, with some sensitivity to the area to be considered: much of the route is still along a busy railway where this should be less of a consideration.
Question 9: crossing Cambridge Road
It would be much better if this could be a single crossing to join the two existing paths, rather than crossing the two roads separately, though I welcome any phase changes which make this easier. Waiting for three phases is very slow at the moment, and especially waiting in a box between the two carriageways. Make sure that crossings are suitable for all users, that request buttons are easily reached, that waits are not excessive, and turns not too difficult.
Question 10: Sawston bypass shared use path
I'm pleased to see a new path here and I particularly like the buffer, please try and make it segregated if you can, but nice to see good lighting is considered appropriate here. However why does it just stop at Mill Lane, with no way to safely rejoin the carriageway, or cross the road and join the off-road route to Whittlesford. It would be good to have a way to safely cross into Mill Lane, and it would also be nice if the shared use path continued as far as the A505 rather than stopping here. I'm not very familiar with Mill Lane but understand it could also benefit from improvements.
Question 11: any final comments
Overall I'm really keen to see this scheme take place. Improvements to the Genome Path are well overdue, and the additional sections of path will be welcomed. More thought is needed to junctions though as always, and making sure all paths are wide enough and well lit enough,
https://consultcambs.uk.engagementhq.com/gcp-sawston-greenway
and Camcycle have some guidance on responding to it here:
https://www.camcycle.org.uk/blog/2022/12/gcp-sawston-greenway/
Question 3: the Long Road/Robinson Way junction:
This junction looks dreadful. It's in the wrong place - entirely the wrong side of Robinson Way for bikes/walkers wanting access Sedley Taylor Road/Luard Road, and students at the 6th form college will not use it. It would be much better if it were integrated with the junction with Robinson Way itself, or located where the existing pedestrian crossing is.
The design of the junction is also terribly confusing, requiring people on bikes to continue past one crossing in order to reach the second, and then return past the first crossing again. Routes for people on bikes and people on foot are confusing and cross over each other and this will lead to conflict.
It should be straightforward to cross, no-one should have to go out of their way, and there should be no conflict between groups of users. I imagine this will be particularly difficult for people with limited mobility and for children.
Please consult with camcycle and LTN/20 for better solutions.
Question 4: Robinson Way
The track appears to be on the wrong side of the road, and requires a further crossing of Robinson Way to be made partway along it. The track should be on the west side of the road for the whole of its length. This should hopefully make it easier to connect with the CSET proposals: though I am disappointed that those are not outlined here! Is there a fallback plan to fix that section if CSET does not go ahead?
In terms of materials, surfacing etc: bike paths should be distinguishable from footpaths by surface colour or texture and preferably by a change in height. They should be separated from the roadway where possible. The surfaces should be smooth and kept clear and wide enough: see LTN/20 for details. Lighting should be adequate so that the area is well lit at night making it safe eg for teenagers travelling home from school/college in winter, and for commuters and leisure travel later at night year round. It should be swept year round and salted/gritted in winter. Greenery and plants to improve the streetscape are always welcome provided they are well maintained and do not encroach on the path. Seating at intervals is also useful for those who need a break. Signage should be clear and visible - using the standard cycle-route blue signs makes them easy to spot, but it might be nice to have a specific greenway logo.
Question 5: DNA path (this is the big one!)
I hugely welcome to proposals to widen this route and to improve the crossing at Granham's Road, as this is currently a concern in allowing children to access the Genome path alone. I would welcome some better lighting than just solar studs, perhaps some solar downlighting attached to the fence? At the moment while we use the path at night it requires a lot more caution simply to avoid obstacles and other people, never mind the worries about attacks which have taken place here previously, and about the obstacles which have recently been seen on the section of Genome Path between Granham's Road and Chaston Road - better lighting would alleviate these concerns, and CCTV might even be worth considering given the antsocial behaviour. I don't think additional lighting will be particularly detrimental to the area considering the route runs immediately alongside the busy railway, so is not entirely of rural character anyway! If nothing else funding needs to be provided to *maintain* the solar studs, as a significant number of the current ones are not working.
As well as widening I'd also like to see some segregation for bikes/scooters from pedestrians, and for it to be wide enough for walkers to be two-abreast without having to constantly jump out of the way. Providing enough width for this, and also making it possible for equestrians to use a grass area may need more land than is currently in use. If so I'd like to see the existing planting moved/retained or replacement planting, as the trees along this route are a welcome addition. Signage should clarify whether equestrians are welcome, as at the moment it is unclear.
I think you are very optimistic in hoping to retain the existing DNA stripe art-work, as it is disintegrating significantly, and any works would be likely to cause more damage. It would be nice to see this repaired/restored or replaced with a new version.
The current path has been an enormous success, and has many more regular journeys than were ever planned for. This means at busy times it can be quite intimidating, and difficult for bikes and walkers to pass each other safely, particularly as there is no agreement as to whether it is better to walk on the left or the right of the path. This path widening is well overdue, and it should be done as well as possible to provide for the number of people who want to use the path now and in the future. Consideration should be given as to whether the East-West-Rail or Cambridge South Station changes to the width of the railway line will also impact this work, and whether they can provide any funding.
Finally, if possible, the route should remain open during the works. This may involve an agreement with the neighbouring landowner to use some of their land, as was done when the blue footbridge was installed towards the Granhams Road end of the path. If possible any temporary surface should be suitable for both walking and all types of bike. If the bridge over Hobson's Brook can be widened this would also be an improvement, and I would welcome consideration being made to the bollards here and on other sections to ensure these are properly accessible.
Question 6: Shelford Station
I approve of the proposed new route through Mill Court, and the raised junction at the station. This should be made such that traffic waiting for the level crossing does not obstruct the junction for walkers and bikes. I would welcome more improvements around the station which make is safer for people walking along Hinton Way, the current large forecourt and parking are dangerous and unwelcome. More cycle parking at the station would be welcomed. I like the Camcycle suggestion of making it clear that pedestrians should have priority when crossing Leeway Avenue.
Question 7: Stapleford Village
I approve of the reduction in speed to 20mph on Hinton Way. Improved crossing routes from Chaston Road to Hinton Way will be welcomed, but do take into account the alternative proposals made by Camcycle.
Mingle Lane needs to be resurfaced, and some signage or road markings to remind road users to be aware of cycles would be good. The junction where Church Street meets Mingle lane can be scary, and traffic sometimes goes too fast round this corner. Enforcement of the 20mph limit may be needed.
Where Church Street meets London Road the existing crossing is simply in the wrong place for most people wanting to cross and join the shared use path. This needs to be much better joined up. And as suggested the path there needs significant widening as it is currently not fit for purpose.
I welcome the camcycle suggestion of re-routing the other end of the off-road section of path to avoid the narrow entrance onto Cambridge Road, and to better meet up with Dernford Reservoir.
Question 8: Dernford Reservoir
This is an excellent decision and should be progressed as soon as possible. Attention should be given to cycle movements where the path meets Cambridge Road, as a right-angled junction here is not ideal. Conflict with people entering/leaving the reservoir carpark should be mitigated as much as possible. It would be nice if this joined up with the track which runs a little way from Cambridge Road as mentioned above. More than 3m should be provided wherever possible, and when possible cycles and walkers should be segregated for the safety and comfort of both. I'd appreciate it if more lighting that just solar studs is provided, with some sensitivity to the area to be considered: much of the route is still along a busy railway where this should be less of a consideration.
Question 9: crossing Cambridge Road
It would be much better if this could be a single crossing to join the two existing paths, rather than crossing the two roads separately, though I welcome any phase changes which make this easier. Waiting for three phases is very slow at the moment, and especially waiting in a box between the two carriageways. Make sure that crossings are suitable for all users, that request buttons are easily reached, that waits are not excessive, and turns not too difficult.
Question 10: Sawston bypass shared use path
I'm pleased to see a new path here and I particularly like the buffer, please try and make it segregated if you can, but nice to see good lighting is considered appropriate here. However why does it just stop at Mill Lane, with no way to safely rejoin the carriageway, or cross the road and join the off-road route to Whittlesford. It would be good to have a way to safely cross into Mill Lane, and it would also be nice if the shared use path continued as far as the A505 rather than stopping here. I'm not very familiar with Mill Lane but understand it could also benefit from improvements.
Question 11: any final comments
Overall I'm really keen to see this scheme take place. Improvements to the Genome Path are well overdue, and the additional sections of path will be welcomed. More thought is needed to junctions though as always, and making sure all paths are wide enough and well lit enough,
no subject
no subject
https://www.camcycle.org.uk/blog/2022/11/consultation-guide-gcp-sustainable-travel-zone/