Agenda item

To consider the preferred option preliminary design for Milton Road along with the strategic outline business case as a basis for public consultation to facilitate the final preliminary design and outline business case.

The Executive Board:

1)    AGREED to support the preferred option design shown in Plans 1-3 as a basis for public consultation and further detailed design work, including preparation of the business case.

2)    NOTED the new cost estimate of £16M in capital costs for delivery of this scheme.

3)    AGREED to consider a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) in respect of parking on verges in Milton Road as part of the consultation on the scheme.

Councillor Jocelynne Scutt, Chair of the Milton Road Local Liaison Forum (LLF), was invited to address the Executive Board and made the following points:

·         The Milton Road LLF was generally pleased with the plans coming forward for Milton Road. Councillor Scutt paid tribute to the residents, residents’ associations, the GCP and County Council officers and consultants for their work on the scheme.

·         General appreciation was expressed for the plans and the importance of consultation with local residents was emphasised.

·         Tribute was paid to Cambridge City Council’s tree specialists in relation to the landscaping of Milton Road. Councillor Scutt said that it was clear that their intention was that any trees planted could cope with the conditions and would be properly looked after.

·         The following concerns were raised:

o   Concern regarding crossings; there was a wish for a crossing at Downham’s Lane.

o   The length of bus lanes.

o   Issues with the positioning of bus stops, particularly the bus stop at Union Road.

o   Issues with the style of bus stops, particularly of floating bus stops. Features to ensure the safety of cyclists and those getting on and off the buses needed to be implemented in relation to these. Concern was raised regarding the size of platforms, which had to accommodate wheelchairs.

o   Something should be put in place on the approach to floating bus stops and dual use paths, to alert cyclists that they were approaching an area where there would be pedestrians. A rise in the road was suggested to alert cyclists that they were approaching a floating bus stop.

o   The protection of verges was a concern; the LLF wanted to work closely with GCP officers on residents’ parking.

o   Concern was raised over the dual use stretch of footpath between Gilbert Road and the roundabout, and the dual use of this should be considered during public consultation.

o   Attention needed to be paid at the Gilbert Road corner to where cyclists came around the corner and had the potential to run into people waiting to cross the road. It was important to ensure that cyclists were alerted that they were approaching an area where there were likely to be pedestrians.

o   There was concern about Mitcham’s Corner, which was a key part of Milton Road. It was urged that attention be paid to this.

Erik de Visser, Barbara Taylor, Anne Hamill, Maureen Mace and Richard Cushing were invited to ask their questions. Details of these and a summary of the responses are provided in Appendix A to the minutes.

The GCP Transport Director presented the report, which set out the preferred option design for Milton Road. There were significant improvements to cycling proposed in the plans, including segregated cycle paths, which were balanced with improvements to public transport.  The proposals met the original objectives of the scheme and took into account the considerable public engagement that had taken place. Assurance was provided that there would be grass verges. The Executive Board was informed that the City Council’s tree specialists had proposed the size of the girth of the trees; the size was considered by them to give the best chance for trees to establish themselves. In response to Richard Cushing’s question, the Strategic Outline Business Case which provided the basis for the benefits to cost ratio, would be made available online. The Transport Director emphasised that the proposals tried to draw a balance between improvements to cycling and public transport, in a constrained environment. He explained that floating bus stops tried to ensure priority was given to cyclists so they did not have to stop at each bus stop section. The County Council had done a lot of work with stakeholder groups regarding the design. The proposals would go out to public consultation.

The GCP had been working with City Council officers on Mitcham’s Corner and the Transport Director had met with the Friends of Mitcham’s Corner, to discuss this. An update on Mitcham’s Corner would be included in the final report on this project.

The Executive Board discussed the report:

·         The Executive Board was informed that the lessons learned from Hills Road were being applied to the proposals for Milton Road.

·         The Executive Board was informed that all proposed crossings in the plans, were signalised. There were four proposed pedestrian crossings away from junctions, with another crossing being looked at at Downham’s Lane. All junctions had signalised crossings; there were eight of these crossings.

·         The Executive Board was informed that in order to deliver the scheme on Milton Road, there would be a removal of on street parking. This would be made clear in the public consultation.

·         It was emphasised that verge parking needed to be managed. The Joint Assembly’s discussion proposing Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs), was referred to in relation to this.

·         The Chairperson queried whether tree size could be specified and whether a commitment to girth size of 15-18cm could be made. The Chairperson was keen that the GCP looked at trees with girth sizes of 15cm or more. In response to this the Transport Director advised that the tree specialists would make these decisions to ensure the best scheme possible.

·         Councillor Bates suggested the term ‘safety bus stops’ be used instead of ‘floating bus stops’. He encouraged the LLF to look at the bus stops on Huntingdon Road. 

·         Councillor Bates suggested that signs be put up on dual use paths reminding people of mutual respect for all users of the paths.

·         Councillor Bates suggested the size of tree girth should be left for the tree specialists to decide.

·         The Executive Board was informed that officers had undertaken work to improve floating bus stops and they were very aware of the issues people had with these. Officers were looking at ways to address the issues people had with crossing the cycleways; it was felt that there was not enough to slow cyclists down. Officers were looking at solutions to address this.

·         It was noted that the cost of the scheme was estimated at £16 million; the original budget was £23 million.

·         The Chairperson confirmed that the GCP would look again at Mitcham’s Corner as part of the next phase of GCP projects, which would link to planning policy work being undertaken by the City Council.

Councillor Bates proposed an amendment to the recommendations, to incorporate the following additional recommendation:

·         That the Executive Board considers a TRO  in respect of parking on verges in Milton Road as part of the consultation on the scheme.

The Executive Board voted unanimously in favour of the amendment.

The Executive Board:

1)    AGREED unanimously to support the preferred option design shown in Plans 1-3 as a basis for public consultation and further detailed design work, including preparation of the business case.

2)    NOTED the new cost estimate of £16M in capital costs for delivery of this scheme.

3)    AGREED unanimously to consider a TRO in respect of parking on verges in Milton Road as part of the consultation on the scheme.