Whittlesford Transport Masterplan Consultation

10 months ago
CLOSED: This consultation has ended, and the discussion forum has been closed.

Thank you to everyone who took the time to share their views with us.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link
  • Kev about 1 year ago
    Even a cursory glimpse at the site and the plans tell the basic story that the current site is too small to accommodate a more functional “parkway” station with the predicted increase in use. Given this and other documentation that indicates that the Highways Depot will be sold off, it seems to me to be hard to justify not taking some (or all) of that land to bolster the capacity of this supposed transport hub. I know housing is in short supply, but turn that land to housing, and there is no going back. For instance, do we really think that increasing the car parking by less than 200 spaces is going to service the additional 250,000 customers expected over the next 15-20 years? Of course not; don’t be silly. Of course we want to encourage more use of sustainable and efficient transport, but we’re not being honest if we think these sums add up when Whittlesford station is supposed to be a “Parkway” station that pulls in travellers from both near and far. Bit the bullet and secure the Depot for station use, and give this station some chance of fitting the planned usage.
  • rjhinxton about 1 year ago
    Comments re Whittlesford Parkway Masterplan consultation
    The proposal for an improved Whittlesford Parkway Transport Hub is a step in the right direction. However, it is not comprehensive enough in terms of scope, layout and time horizon.
    How will this Masterplan fit with an envisaged proposed widening/relocation of the A505? There seems to be nothing in this regard in the current draft of the Masterplan. The A505 is at present at or over capacity, particularly at peak times. Improvement of the Whittlesford Parkway station will almost undoubtedly add to the traffic going to and from the station on the current A505 and worsen congestion significantly. A high-level assessment of potential A505 improvements was performed by WYG in 2017 and a report produced (29 January 2018), and there are indications that Cambs & Peterborough (or some other locoregional government authority) is planning to conduct a more detailed A505 corridor study. It is critical that the Whittlesford Parkway Masterplan fits into the A505 plans (and vice versa); otherwise we will end up with a piecemeal approach to locoregional planning that is very likely to be counterproductive. Indeed, the widening/realignment options for the A505 in the vicinity of Whittlesford Parkway in the WGY report could be extremely significant with regard to the design of the Masterplan.
    Other comments directed at the current station area proposal:
    1. Take the opportunity to increase the green space around Duxford Chapel and enhance its setting even more. The abutment of a bus turnaround near the Chapel is not the way to do this enhancement! (Instead move the bus turning circle further to the east or instead over to the N side of Station Road East.)
    2. Why not build the proposed multistorey carpark on the north side of Station Road East (on the Cambs Highways Depot site), rather than on the current carpark site? This would be far more strategic in terms of building schedules and costs (e.g., no need to establish a temporary carpark) and would also allow #1 above to be brought about more easily.
    3. Use the remainder of the current carpark for an attractively designed and landscaped small business park (with underground parking).
    4. The current Cambs Highways Depot site (when will it be vacated?) will be significantly brownfield. Is it feasible to build housing on such land? Or might a small business park be more appropriate?
  • chris e about 1 year ago
    Regarding pedestrian +/- cycle crossing from Duxford side of A505 to Whittlesford side to access train station.

    Concerns regarding proposed traffic light crossing:
    1. Crossing with traffic lights will slow down already congestion traffic route (A505). This may increase travel time and increase pollution to residents and motorists.
    2. Traffic will be increasingly busy with more residents accessing Whittlesford Parkway (+/- Cambridge South Station in the future)
    3. Traffic light crossing would slow down pedestrian and cycle flow. This will make people less likely to walk, cycle or use other non-car travel to access Whittlesford Parkway.
    4. This will feel less safe than a separate bridge connecting the two sides of the road and may make people less likely to walk, cycle or use other non-car travel to access Whittlesford Parkway.
    5. Crossing at road level with accompanying noise and pollution may make people less likely to walk, cycle or use other non-car travel to access Whittlesford Parkway.

    People accessing Whittlesford include those from Duxford and surrounding villages who may be likely to walk, cycle or use non-car transport if a specific, tailored crossing was provided.

    1. Separate bridge crossing.

    Elevated above traffic with view.
    Safer feeling for children, adults being separate to traffic flow.
    Reduced exposure to pollution, noise at road level alongside traffic.
    Safer feel then tunnel.
    Increased likelihood that people may choose to walk, cycle or use other non-car travel to access Whittlesford Parkway = reduced emissions, healthier lifestyle for residents, reduced traffic, greater car traffic flow with fewer cars on the road.

    2. Separate tunnel
    As above but tunnels feel inherently less safe.
  • Rachael about 1 year ago
    A safe, controlled crossing at the A505/Moorfield Road junction is long overdue, this is my biggest concern about that area, especially as local children have to cross the A505 at the busiest time of day get to the Sixth Form Colleges in Cambridge by train. Sufficient priority has to be given to local residents needs rather than making the station more attractive to car drivers, which will compound the problems we are already seeing with traffic on the A505.
  • Steve E about 1 year ago
    Every development has down as well as upsides, and local residents are bound to be affected. Although I live several miles away the possibility of accessing the rail system by bus is a game changer. If of course you are a habitual car driver you will not appreciate the potential. And if you are a local resident who rarely uses trains then the development will seem like an imposition.
    Nevertheless, the concept of parkway stations/travel hubs is catching on. This development must be the way forward and I would urge all doubters to look at the wider picture and accept that the benefits will certainly outweigh the disadvantages.
  • Michael about 1 year ago
    I visited the Parkway yesterday to consider how the masterplan might enhance the heritage of the Chapel and Red Lion Inn. I opened the south door of the Chapel, (this door is normally closed), and the sun shone through beautifully. The chapel is shut-off along its south and east sides by a double EH chain-link and Red Lion timber palisade fence. An ugly barrier that leaves less than a metre gap in front of the historic walls, with open access at its west end. The Red Lion served me tea which I enjoyed in their attractive garden beside this fence, and I observed a number of their customers take the opportunity to enter the chapel through the south door. I spoke to one of them, who was clearly pleased to have 'discovered the Chapel'. It occurred to me that if the fence was removed and ground levels adjusted, the setting of the Chapel would be greatly improved, and if the Red Lion were to become the key holder to the Chapel, the access and number of people visiting the Chapel could rise considerably, the garden would be greatly enhanced as a unique oasis within the busy transport hub, and more customers would be drawn to the Inn, which for many years used the Chapel as a wagon store. Might this consultation enable you and EH, the Red Lion and the current keyholder to see if this serendipity can be achieved?
  • dominic about 1 year ago
    Any addition that you add,will only delay the traffic on the A 505 disastrously.
  • Brian about 1 year ago
    Has anyone thought where the residents of Station Road East fit into the plan?
    Hide Replies (5)
    • Admin Commented Sarah.Prentice about 1 year ago
      Hi Brian, some of the proposed schemes would affect residents of Station Road East in one way or another and the issues faced by those residents would be a significant consideration in developing detailed proposals for that area. We think that there would be substantial benefits to come from pedestrianising the stretch of Station Road East closest to the station, but maintaining access for residents there, and for the businesses in that area, will be very important.

      At the moment we're looking at the package of measures as a whole, rather than the detail of any particular measure, but if the GCP Executive Board makes the decision to go ahead, we will ultimately be progressing the various schemes independently or in smaller groups as appropriate, and detailed design of the relevant schemes will need to allow for access. Residents of Station Road East would be important consultees in developing that detail. Kind regards, SP
      Hide Replies (4)
      • Brian about 1 year ago
        Hi Sarah - thanks for the reply. It seems obvious that any scheme will affect the residents to a 'substantial' degree. My initial point involves the map you have produced which shows no provision for vehicle access or parking for the residents, or vehicle access to the Lion Works. Do you have any concrete suggestions on this?
        Hide Replies (3)
        • Admin Commented Sarah.Prentice about 1 year ago
          Hi Brian, Since the proposals are a high level at the moment there are no concrete plans for things like where residents’ parking would go, but that will be an important consideration when that scheme is developed in detail. We have had suggestions from people so far that include maintaining residents’ access through the pedestrianised area, making specific provision for residents’ parking in the redeveloped car park, or having it provided on a highways depot site if those do end up being built on. These are just suggestions that people have made, and there will no doubt be other options. If you have any suggestions as well we would welcome those. Hope this helps. Kind regards, SP
          Hide Replies (2)
          • Brian about 1 year ago
            Hi- I would surmise that access *through* the pedestrianised area does not mean parking spaces. If the parking is to be in the redeveloped car park, where would that possibly be located in relation to the properties and how would those spaces be reserved? Also, the highways depot site is very large- where are your initial plans on where the current residents parking will be, given that your initial map shows restricted access at the point nearest where the properties are? I suggest arranging some kind of meeting when you could talk directly to the residents would be beneficial to all. Kind regards.
            Hide reply (1)
            • Admin Commented Sarah.Prentice about 1 year ago
              Hi Brian, These are questions that will be important when we look at the detailed proposals further down the line, subject to GCP Executive Board’s approval, when it comes to developing detailed scheme proposals, but at the moment we are looking at the big picture. We would encourage anyone who is interested to come along to one of our public sessions; we will be at Whittlesford Memorial Hall on 27 June and at the station itself on 19 June and 2 and 9 July. Thanks for sending us your views which will help to inform the consultation report that will go to the Executive Board. Kind regards, SP
  • MM about 1 year ago
    Have any traffic-flow simulations been modelled to evaluate the effect of traffic lights at Station Road East or the west access route?

    I suspect that the current situation of drivers turning during natural gaps in the traffic (with the minimum concertina effect on A505 through traffic) will be made much worse by traffic lights that will stop the flow for 30-60 seconds each time a person turns into/out of an approach to the station.

    Are traffic lights likely to increase the queueing time on the single lane A505 due to magnifying the concertina effect?
    Hide Replies (2)
    • Admin Commented Sarah.Prentice about 1 year ago
      Hi MM, the proposals have been developed as a package based on consideration of what is needed to improve access to and from the station, particularly by sustainable transport such as walking, cycling or by bus. They haven't been subject to detailed traffic modelling at this stage, but it will form part of the next stages of developing the relevant schemes. Kind regards, SP
      Hide reply (1)
      • John Wakefield about 1 year ago
        As MM says traffic lights will cause tail backs on A505 and make worse the current situation at peak times with traffic backing up to M11.
        The Whittlesford Station is badly situated for access, (it was never intended to be a park and ride station) maybe it would be better to re locate the station to a more accessible location!
  • John Wakefield about 1 year ago
    Is a bus terminus really effective here? the only bus that runs anywhere near the Whittlesford rail station is the No7a but as this runs only a few times a day and does not effectively connect with trains any expenditure on a turning circle will be wasted. The bus station element would only be effective if its is served with a more frequent service, ie the Stagecoach City 7 service which would need to be extended on ALL journeys from Sawston, thus making Whittlesford Park Way the southern terminus. The junction with the A505 will need serious re modeling, but as has already been said will cause serious traffic congestion on the A505. Really a dedicated bus road needs to be built between the Parkway site and Sawston bypass