Presenting to the Cambridge Transport Commission

Here in Cambridge a Commission has been appointed to consider the issue of Traffic Congestion and whether to accept the Government's offer of £500M in return for instigating Congestion Charging in Cambridge (in a similar fashion to London). I returned a survey sent out by the Commission and have been given the opportunity to talk at an open meeting tomorrow. On the basis that it is no use complaining after the fact I decided to give it a go and have put some powerpoint together to crystallise my views.

I have also added some photographs - "A picture is worth a thousand words" to illustrate my views. Put simply:

• Given the changes ahead of us (global warming, limited supplies of fossil fuels, pollution, obesity, diabetes etc) and the addition of 57,000 new homes in the area a long-term view needs to be taken. In my opinion that view needs to be on at least a 10-year time frame, unfortunately I do not think businesses or politicians think beyond a 3 to 5 year time frame (bonuses and elections). I don't blame them, but it is an issue. (I ran a local business we used to have a 3 year plan with some thoughts extending a further 2 years.)
  
  


• The car has long been a symbol of freedom and most drivers consider themselves to be the "kings of the road" - this has to change. Cars do not justify their negative impact. I am not talking about banning cars, but I do think that they need to pay more for their impact and that more importantly other forms of transport - walking, cycling, buses and trains need to promoted from their second class status. If anything the car should be the villain of the peace. In particular it would be totally unjust if the rich carried on driving and the poor get pushed onto second class transport
  
  


• We do not want more roads - they just attract more cars, we need decent buses (currently they are cramped, noisy and unreliable) with uninterrupted bus lanes.
  
  


• We want proper, fit for purpose cycle lanes, direct, smooth, priority over other traffic. We need separate pavement for walking. I think that the cycle lane work being undertaken by Sustrans is really fantastic, but in the main it is more targeted at the leisure market not the commuter market.
  
  


• To create change in Cambridge needs leadership from the front - our political leaders need to "walk the talk".

So here are the photographs to illustrate my views. This is one of the Cambridge Guided Busway Buses - if both sides were occupied it makes for a very cramped area - why both with WI-FI? Leather seats - lipstick on the pig. In addition the bus was very noisy with limited options to control the temperature. No thought had been given to commuters carrying folding bicycles onto the bus. Ideally you want to encourage users to cycle to their local stop and provide decent cycle parking, once you start the car you might as well drive it in. The same is true for the other end. The advantage the bus has of carving through the Cambridge countryside can easily be outweighed by the problems of the transport requirements at each end.

Cambridge is often touted as a success story in terms of UK cycling - loads of cyclists, lots of cycling lanes, well in my opinion many of them are not fit for purpose. They are narrow and bumpy with regular obstructions as shown here. At best they work for tidal commuting, but they clearly put cyclist in pedestrian into conflict. Yet if you want to attract more to cycling then you need to create safe, smooth inviting cycle paths.

A common situation is shown here - pavements become shared-used. This creates conflict for pedestrians, but the onus is also placed upon the cyclist to give-way at the myriad exits and entrances. The enemy of the cyclist is losing momentum so how can this be inviting or safe. In fact a friend, who has more driving qualifications than I will ever have had an accident on this type of path. Strictly speaking it was his fault, he should have given way - but in my opinion a clear statement to motor users that cyclists and pedestrians are second class citizens.

Here is a shot of the Cambridge Guided Busway - it will have a cycle lane along its length - great. Except that the work on the cycle part will commence after the completion of the Busway. Also the cycle part will be a rough track, great for leisure, but not so great at attracting commuter cyclists - further evidence - cyclists are third class citizens here.

A few shots of the contempt that motorists view cycle facilities.

This is a shared cycle/pedestrian path - and a van driver who really cannot be bothered. Stuff those without engines.

One of my particular pet-hates - where there are sufficiently wide paths they use this system to mark junctions. Fine, except I am an experienced cyclist and in the wet I hate the way the they cause my wheels to jink unexpectedly. It is far worse at night when they are harder to see. I have wondered whether they are designed to slow cyclists down - but there is no advance warning. Is this encouraging novice cyclists?

A photograph taken on the Sustrans 51 route, by car Newmarket is 6 miles away, and by bicycle 15 miles. As I said Sustrans routes are great and scenic, but not really attractive to commuter cyclists.

I sometimes commute into London, many people do and it pulls a lot of traffic into Cambridge, where the railway station is. Given the support for cycling in Cambridge and the need to consider the transport system in an integrated way you would expect many people to cycle to and from the station. They do, but when they get there it is a huge struggle to find somewhere to park. To add insult to injury the powers that be stuck sticker over spare railings warning that cycles locked to them would be removed. What the hell do they want us to do? There is talk of redevelopment - this is being used as an excuse to do nothing as far as I can see.

This is also taken at the station, the cycle stands in the foreground are for paying cycle parkers - you can see by the way they are used that it is a great success! I am not even sure how you would get one of those stands allocated - a complete waste of space. More evidence of the way in which cyclists are treated with contempt.

More of the station, the challenge is that lots of people want to cycle to and from the station. Indeed some people will have two bikes, one at each end of the journey, whilst some people abandon cheap bikes. Unfortunately all cyclists get punished. Even worse here in Cambridge cycle theft is on the rise again, we are told to lock our bikes up. The implication is that it is the cyclists fault - yet what crappy provision for parking! yes I have had a bike stolen form the station and yes it was locked up!

Another photograph of the Sustrans 51 route - this pavement is so narrow you can only get on bike (or pedestrian) on it. Nice for staying off the road, but not a good commuter route. The other challenge on this path is that going the other way on a bike means you are directly adjacent to motorists, at night this can be blinding and during windy conditions the wind shear as a large lorry goes by can be frightening.

Yet Cambridge can do better - this is an excellent example of a pavement and cycle path alongside parts of University. It is properly segregated and lit, with ample room for pedestrians and cyclists away from conflict with cars.

The same path is also well signed. Unfortunately it does have those strange tram-lines set into the tarmac at a junction.

Finally as a reminder. I am sick of being passed with inches to spare by motorists and yes White Van drivers tend to be the worst. Frequently cars whizz past me and then me onto the other side of the road, a clear indication that I was seen at the last minute. Many drivers do overtake safely, but a cyclist is vulnerable you only need one stupid motorist to injure and yes many more than one motorist comes too close when I am out on the road.

Yet the Highway Code is quite clear - I "borrowed" this from the Highway Code, which has a very useful website. This is not the norm and look the car has barely cleared the roundabout and still leaves plenty of room and so the implication is that even at slow speeds motorists need to leave a significant gap.

Unfortunately I have only got 10 minutes so will have to think about how focus on the issues without coming across as a bicycle crank - forgive the pun.