Cambridge Access Study

Transcription

1 July 2015 Cambridgeshire County Council

2

3 ITD ITN 2 B P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge.docx 27 July 2015 Cambridge Access Study July 2015 Cambridgeshire County Council Mott MacDonald, 35 Newhall Street, Birmingham, B3 3PU, United Kingdom T +44 (0) F +44 (0) W

4

5 Issue and revision record Revision Date Originator Checker Approver Description A 10 July 2015 Paul Parkhouse Carl Beet Paresh Shingadia Draft issue B 27 July 2015 Paul Parkhouse Carl Beet Paresh Shingadia First issue following client comments C 20 August 2015 Paul Parkhouse Carl Beet Paresh Shingadia Second issue following stakeholder comments Information class: Standard This document is issued for the party which commissioned it and for specific purposes connected with the above-captioned project only. It should not be relied upon by any other party or used for any other purpose. We accept no responsibility for the consequences of this document being relied upon by any other party, or being used for any other purpose, or containing any error or omission which is due to an error or omission in data supplied to us by other parties. This document contains confidential information and proprietary intellectual property. It should not be shown to other parties without consent from us and from the party which commissioned it. P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge.docx

6

7 Contents Chapter Title Page 1 Introduction Study Background Report Purpose and Approach 2 2 Demand Introduction Trip Generators Trip Attractors Overview 17 3 Connectivity Introduction Park & Ride Network Bus Network Rail Network Cycle Network Pedestrian Network Highway Network Car Parking Coach Facilities Servicing, Loading, Access and Taxis Smarter Choices 56 4 Accessibility Introduction Employment Zones Public Transport Accessibility Analysis 63 5 Travel Introduction Mode Share Modal Usage 89 6 Performance Introduction Park & Ride Network Bus Network Rail Network Cycle Network Pedestrian Network Highway Network 138 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge.docx

8 6.8 Car Parking Long Distance Bus Tourist Coach Servicing, Loading, Access and Taxis Public Realm Digital Infrastructure Smarter Choices Future Introduction Population and Employment Projections Land Use Developments City Deal Transport Schemes Other Potential Transport Schemes Future Challenges European Benchmarking Introduction European Best Practice Summary Access Audit Summary 189 Appendices 193 Appendix A. Accessibility Analysis Outputs 194 Appendix B. Council Car Park Data 209 B.1 Grand Arcade Car Park 209 B.2 Grafton East Car Park 210 B.3 Grafton West Car Park 211 B.4 Queen Anne Terrace Car Park 212 B.5 Park Street Car Park 213 Appendix C. Select Link Analysis Output 214 Appendix D. Air Quality Monitoring Results 225 D.1 AQAP Summary Table 225 D.2 Nitrogen Dioxide Emissions 227 D.3 Particulate Matter Emissions 230 D.4 Other Emissions 231 Appendix E Land Use Proposals 232 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge.docx

9 1 Introduction 1.1 Study Background Mott MacDonald has been commissioned by Cambridgeshire County Council (CCC) to deliver the Cambridge Access Strategy study. The Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire Local Plans 2014 set out the way CCC will guide development to It is predicted that by 2031 an extra 33,000 new homes will be required in the Greater Cambridge area, with 14,000 of these in Cambridge and the other 19,000 in South Cambridgeshire. The Local Plans also set out how CCC will support the forecast growth of 22,100 net additional jobs in Cambridge by 2031, and an additional 22,000 new jobs in surrounding South Cambridgeshire. This forecast growth is positive for the city region s economic prospects, but only if it can be supported by a transport system which is able to sustainably and effectively accommodate the increased demands which will be placed on it. The Local Plan aspirations are therefore supported by an updated Local Transport Plan (LTP3) which sets out both a short and longer term strategy for enhancing the transport system across the County. This strategy is outlined in more detail for Cambridge in the Transport Strategy for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire, which sets out a long list of potential schemes to support predicted growth in and around the city. In addition to this outline strategy, the Council and their partners have now secured City Deal funding to deliver the strategy. This will provide 100m of funding until 2020, with a further 400m to be released subject to specific growth targets being met. The City Deal represents a significant step change in funding and a once in a generation opportunity to significantly enhance Cambridgeshire s transport network, underpinning further long-term sustainable economic growth. The schemes to be delivered within this first tranche of funding have already been identified and are presently being developed in more detail. The remainder of the schemes to be implemented by following funding tranches is now required to be assessed and identified, while the integration of any future proposals with the first tranche of schemes will be crucial to the successful delivery of an efficient, sustainable and successful transport system for the Greater Cambridge area. This requirement therefore forms the basis of the Cambridge Access Study. As stated in the study brief, the goal of the study is to: recommend transformative improvements and interventions to considerably improve access, capacity, interoperability and movement to and within the city with general vehicular traffic levels in the city to be reduced below current levels. 1 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

10 1.2 Report Purpose and Approach In order to develop and propose solutions to meet this study brief, it is necessary to understand how the transport network for Cambridge operates and performs, both now and in the context of future growth. The purpose of this report is therefore to present an Access Audit for Cambridge so that the main strengths and opportunities of the network are identified, as well as the main threats and opportunities facing it. In order to develop this understanding across all aspects of the system which affect the end user, the following intuitive approach to investigation has been adopted: 1. Demand: Where do people want to travel from and to? 2. Connectivity: What are the connectivity options between trip-ends? 3. Accessibility: What level of accessibility does the public transport network provide? 4. Travel: How do people actually travel? 5. Performance: How do people s travel choices impact the network? 6. Future: How will these impacts be affected by future demand and supply changes? 7. Benchmarking: How does Cambridge s transport offer compare to other similar cities in Europe? The remainder of the report is structured accordingly and concludes with a summary section which identifies the main themes and recommendations emerging from the above form of investigation. Further supporting material is attached in appendices. 2 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

11 2 Demand 2.1 Introduction The demand for trips is generated by the need for travel between different land uses. The purpose of this section is therefore to consider the existing distribution of land uses in and around Cambridge in order to better understand where people and goods need to travel from and to. Key messages from this section: Cambridge s population and economy are growing Between 2001 and 2013, the city s population grew at an average rate of 1,375 people, or 1.25%, per year Between 2009 and 2013, the city s economy grew at average rate of 2,010 new jobs, or 2.4%, per year Cambridge is a net attractor of commuting trips There are about 71% (c.35k) more jobs in Cambridge than there are working residents Over two thirds of the city s employed residents work within Cambridge Just under two thirds of the city s employees travel in from outside Cambridge; a third from beyond South Cambridgeshire There are therefore over three times more people that travel into Cambridge to work than travel out of Cambridge to work Overall, two thirds of commuting trips in Cambridge start or finish outside of Cambridge But it s not just about commuting Though commuting trips represent a significant proportion of peak hour demand, around two thirds of this demand is comprised of a variety of other trip purposes, and especially education And it s also not just about the city centre Most trip attracting land use clusters are located in the city centre area, but are also found on the fringes at Histon, the Science Park and the Biomedical Campus 2.2 Trip Generators Population Growth Most trips or trip chains are generated from a place of residence. The following chart shows how, between 2001 and 2013, the population of Cambridge has grown by about 16,500 people, from a population of about 110,000 to 126,500. This equates to a growth of 15% or an average growth rate of about 1,375 people, or 1.25%, per year. 3 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

12 Population Cambridge Access Study Figure 2.1: Population of Cambridge, 2001 to , , , , , , , ONS mid-year estimates, 2001 to Residential Distribution The following two figures show residential areas in Cambridge in terms of the distribution of: 1. Economically active population (ie, not in full-time education, domestic carer, long term sick or retired) 2. Car ownership These figures show: Most of the residential areas of Cambridge are in the half of the city on the north eastern side of the A1307 (Huntingdon Road / Hills Road) axis, with the south western half being occupied primarily by University land uses. The lowest levels of economically active population are seen in the city centre, where the proportion of full-time students is high. Higher levels are seen elsewhere and particularly on the fringes of the city. Similarly, car ownership levels are lowest in the centre and highest towards the edge and in outlying villages. This is likely both a reflection of average income levels and accessibility to alternative modes of transport. 4 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

13 Figure 2.2: Distribution of economically active population in Cambridge Census P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

14 Figure 2.3: Distribution of car ownership levels in Cambridge Census P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

15 2.2.3 Residents Commuting Destinations Based on 2011 Census travel-to-work data, Figure 2.5 and Figure 2.6 below show the distribution of commute destinations for Cambridge residents. On a regional scale, this shows that residents of Cambridge commute mainly to areas within and close to Cambridge, but also further afield to outlying towns such as Peterborough, Kings Lynn and Norwich, and further still to central London. On a local scale, the city centre area, Addenbrooke s and the Science Park area stand out as primary commute destinations for Cambridge residents. The following chart summarises the distribution of commuting destinations for Cambridge residents. This confirms that: About two-thirds of Cambridge residents work in Cambridge The remaining third is evenly split between South Cambridgeshire and the rest of UK Figure 2.4: Distribution of commuting destinations for Cambridge residents 16% 16% Cambridge South Cambridgeshire Rest of UK 68% 2011 Census 7 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

16 Figure 2.5: Regional distribution of Cambridge residents commute destination (Persons per MSOA) Census P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

17 Figure 2.6: Local distribution of Cambridge residents commute destination Census P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

18 2.3 Trip Attractors Attractor Types As part of the 2007/8 Cambridgeshire TIF study, household interview surveys were undertaken across the county. The household distribution in the survey was constrained to reflect the population within and outside Cambridge. For all Cambridgeshire respondents, the following chart shows the distribution of purposes for trips which use the Cambridge transport network at some point. Results for all trips and just for peak hour trips are shown. Figure 2.7: 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Trip purpose distribution of Cambridgeshire trips which start, end or pass through Cambridge 5% 4% 17% 30% 14% GP 7% Health 31% 19% Shopping School 3% University/College 8% Work 40% 23% 0% All day Peak hour trips 2007/8 Cambridgeshire TIF Study This chart shows that: Though commuting trips account for nearly a quarter of all trips, other purposes, such as shopping and health, also generate significant numbers of trips in Cambridgeshire In the peak hour, the proportion of work-related trips increases to about 40%, but education related trips also increase to account for over 25% The following chart presents the same type of information but from the latest National Travel Survey. This data is therefore an average of all weekday trip types across the country. 10 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

19 Figure 2.8: 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Trip purpose by time of day all weekday trips, national 7% 4% 10% 18% 17% 20% 8% 13% 18% 18% 7% 3% 9% 4% 27% 18% All day Peak hours Holiday / Day trip / Other Visiting friends / entertainment / sport Other work, other escort and personal business Shopping Escort education Education Business Commuting National Travel Survey 2013 The above chart includes more trip purposes than the TIF survey, but still shows a similar pattern of work and education related trips occupying a significant proportion of peak hour demand. Nonetheless, nearly 40% of peak hour trips are for other purposes also Attractor Distribution Bearing in mind the above range of attractors which generate trips in peak hours, the following plan shows the distribution of trip attracting land uses in Cambridge (based on 2015 Addressbase data). Clusters have also been grouped into zones to allow later analysis (see Section 4). This figure shows: The main city centre office and retail core is largely defined by the triangle formed by the railway to the east, the A1307 axis to the west, and the A1303 Newmarket Road axis to the north, with the rail station, Sidney Street shopping area and Cambridge Retail Park defining the three corners. This triangle lies partly within and partly outside the radial centre of the city, potentially resulting in an uneven strain on the radial network. There is a further city centre office and retail concentration north along the A1307 and east-west along Victoria Road and Chesterton Road The main outlying clusters of office uses are at the Cambridge Science Park, the Cambridge Biomedical Campus and Vision Park in Histon As noted above, the main university land uses are found on the south western side of the city centre and surrounding areas The main industrial clusters are found at the Science Park and in Milton, on the Newmarket Road approach to the city centre, around the rail station and in Cherry Hinton 11 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

20 Figure 2.9: Distribution of trip attracting land uses Addressbase P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

21 Jobs Change No Jobs Cambridge Access Study Employment Growth The following chart shows job levels in Cambridge between 2009 and 2013, based on the Business Register & Employment Survey Figure 2.10: Cambridge jobs and population growth, 2009 to ,000 94,000 92,000 90,000 88,000 86,000 84,000 82,000 80, Business Register & Employment Survey 2013 This chart shows that, between the years shown, the number of jobs in Cambridge grew by 8,200 jobs, or 9.5%. This represents an average growth rate of 2,020 new jobs per year, or 2.4%. The following chart shows how this growth was distributed across the different economic sectors. Figure 2.11: Change in number of jobs by economic sector in Cambridge, 2009 to % 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% -10% -20% -30% -40% -50% 0% 0% -13% -37% 14% 0% 2% -6% 40% 20% 15% 7% 20% 16% -10% 8% 13% -7% Business Register & Employment Survey P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

22 This chart shows growth over a number of sectors, with growth in the accommodation and food services, ie hospitality sector, being significantly strong. The information and communications sector and the professional, scientific and technical sectors also show strong growth. The greatest shrinkage, however, is seen in the construction sector Employee Commuting Origins Based on 2011 Census travel-to-work data, Figure 2.13 and Figure 2.14 below show the distribution of commute origins for employees working in Cambridge. On a regional scale, this shows that Cambridge s in-commuting catchment is wider and denser than its outcommuting catchment shown above. It attracts commuting trips from around the region up to Peterborough, King s Lynn, Norwich, Ipswich, St Albans and Bedford. However, unlike the out-commuting catchment, Cambridge attracts few trips from London. On a local scale, the city centre area, Addenbrooke s, the Newmarket Road trading estates, Girton Road / Wellbrook Way and the Science Park area and stand out as primary commute destinations in Cambridge. The following chart summarises the distribution of commuting origins for Cambridge employees. This shows that only 40% of employees in Cambridge also live in Cambridge: nearly a third commute in from South Cambridgeshire, with the remaining third travelling in from beyond. Figure 2.12: Distribution of commuting origins for Cambridge employees 33% 40% Cambridge South Cambridgeshire Rest of UK 27% 2011 Census 14 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

23 Figure 2.13: Regional distribution of Cambridge employees commute origins (Persons per MSOA) Census P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

24 Figure 2.14: Local distribution of Cambridge employees commute origins Census P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

25 Annual Change Index (2009=100) Cambridge Access Study 2.4 Overview The above data shows Cambridge has experienced significant growth in recent years, both in terms of resident population and local jobs. The following chart summarises this growth in terms of indexed change between 2009 and Figure 2.15: Indexed growth in Cambridge population and jobs, 2009 to Jobs Population ONS mid-year estimates (population) and Business Register & Employment Survey 2013 (jobs) This shows that the growth in jobs in Cambridge has kept pace with, and narrowly exceeded, the equivalent growth in population over the same period. The above data, however, shows that there are more jobs in Cambridge than economically active residents. This is summarised in the following chart, which combines the above two pie charts, and compares the level and distribution of commuting destinations for Cambridge residents and commuting origins for Cambridge employees. This chart shows that: There are about 71% (c.35k) more jobs in Cambridge than there are working residents Over two thirds of the city s employed residents work within Cambridge Just under two thirds of the city s employees travel in from outside Cambridge; a third from beyond South Cambridgeshire There are therefore over three times more people that travel into Cambridge to work than travel out of Cambridge to work 17 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

26 Number of People Cambridge Access Study Figure 2.16: Workplace and homeplace distribution of Cambridge residents and employees respectively 90,000 80,000 70,000 33% 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 16% 17% 68% 28% 40% - Workplace of People Living in Cambridge Homeplace of People Working in Cambridge Rest of UK 7,790 27,873 South Cambridgeshire 8,272 23,367 Cambridge 33,704 33, Census travel-to-work data Cambridge is therefore a growing city which serves a significant role in the wider region as a place to live, learn and work. This means that a significant proportion of the commute trips which take place in the city either start or finish outside of the city, as shown in the following pie chart. Figure 2.17: Distribution commuting trip types in Cambridge according to trip end location Internal trips, 33,704, 33% External trips, 67,302, 67% 2011 Census This shows that a full two thirds of commuting trips in the city start or finish outside the city. This factor therefore has implications as to how traveller mode choice can be influenced. 18 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

27 3 Connectivity 3.1 Introduction The previous section reviewed the land use distribution in and around Cambridge which generates trips to, from and within the city. The purpose of this section is to review the various transport networks currently available that present options for how these trips can take place. Key messages from this section: There is a good range of connectivity options for trips within Cambridge The local bus network serves all areas of the city, with high frequency services on most radial routes and lower frequencies on more minor roads There is an extensive and well used cycle network comprising a range of cycle lane types, crossings and parking facilities Due to its size, layout and environment, Cambridge is a highly walkable city, offering frequent controlled crossing points, pedestrianised streets, urban parks and wayfinding signage The city is well connected to neighbouring trunk roads by a number of radial routes, but vehicle access to the city centre historic core is restricted There is also a good range of connectivity options for travelling to and from Cambridge Cambridge sits adjacent to the crossroads of the north-south A1(M)/M11 route and the eastwest A14 route, so is well connected to the national highway network In order to convert inter-urban car trips into intra-urban bus trips, there are five Park & Ride sites which intercept most main routes towards the city and provide a frequent bus service into the city centre Cambridge also offers a widespread inter-urban local bus network, including the unique Busway route to St Ives, though frequencies on many of the conventional bus routes can be low. Cycling is also permitted on the busway, thereby encouraging inter-urban cycle trips Cambridge is served by regular rail services which connect it directly to both local surrounding towns and to London, and also to the East Coast Mainline for longer distance national services. The station is south of the city centre core area which presents interchange challenges, but is reasonably well connected by bus, taxi, cycle routes and pedestrian routes There are also measures in place to encourage effective use of the networks Park & Ride is priced competitively against city centre parking to discourage private vehicle trips into the city centre, though this advantage was reduced last year with the introduction of a 1 parking charge Bus lanes serve many of the highest frequency bus corridors; signalised bus priority operates for the Busway; and a significant number of city bus stops are equipped with Real Time Passenger Information facilities A network of Variable Message Signs and Car Park Guidance signs allows the highway authority to influence traffic movements based on current conditions A range of Smarter Choices initiatives also exist to influence pre-trip travel choices 19 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

28 3.2 Park & Ride Network As shown in the previous section, many trips that end in Cambridge originate beyond its borders. There is therefore a bus-based Park & Ride network operating from the fringes of the city in order to encourage onward travel into the city by bus. The current network is shown in Figure 3.1 below, including existing bus lanes and which bus stops are equipped with Real Time Passenger Information (RTPI) facilities. This figure shows how the five existing sites pick up the main approach routes to the city. The following table summarises parking and service details for each Park & Ride route shown in the below figure. Table 3.1: Cambridge Park & Ride parking and service details Park & Ride site Car spaces Bicycle spaces Service times Service frequency Babraham Road Mon-Sat, 07:06-20:20 Sun, 09:00-18:15 Madingley Road Mon-Sat, 07:00-20:18 Sun, 09:00-18:00 Milton Mon-Sat, 06:21-20:01 Sun, 09:00-17:45 Newmarket Road Mon-Sat, 07:00-20:05 Sun, 08:53-18:08 Trumpington Mon-Fri, 07:00-20:10 Sat, 08:00-20:10 Sun, 09:00-17:45 Mon-Sat, 10 mins Sun, 15 mins Mon-Sat, 10 mins Sun, 15 mins Mon-Sat, 10 mins Sun, 15 mins Mon-Sat, 10 mins Sun, 15 mins Mon-Fri, 10 mins Sat, 10 mins Sun, 15 mins At all car parks, car parking costs 1 for up to 18 hours and the return bus fare to the city centre costs The bus services are run by Stagecoach and the car parks managed by CCC. 20 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

29 Figure 3.1: Cambridge bus-based Park & Ride network 21 CCC P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

30 3.3 Bus Network Bus Services Cambridge is served by a local Citibus network and a longer range inter-urban bus network, which includes the guided busway service. Figure 3.2 below shows the Citibus network and how it connects most areas of the city. The guided busway network is unique to Cambridge in the UK. This network and its associated infrastructure is shown below in Figure 3.3. Figure 3.4 and Figure 3.5 below show, at the local and inter-urban scale respectively, the extents and weekday AM peak hour frequency per direction of all bus routes in and around Cambridge. This shows: The highest frequency routes in Cambridge are: Madingley Road Milton Road Newmarket Road Hills Road East Road Chesterton Service frequency in Cambridge is more limited: Off the main radial routes On the west (university) side of the city On orbital routes, including much of the inner ring road Higher frequency services also connect the outlying areas of: Cambourne Swavesey/Longstanton/St Ives Cottenham Fulbourn Haverhill Sawston With respect to the positioning of bus lanes, Figure 3.4 shows that: Bus lanes are located mostly on the highest frequency sections of the network, except for the bus lane on Elizabeth Way High frequency sections without bus lanes are found on Madingley Road, Castle Street / Chesterton Road, Trumpington Road and Hills Road In summary, bus services are comprehensive within the city and its immediate environs. However, connections to other centres are less well provided for and some of the rural communities have infrequent services. How these services relate to actual travel time catchments is considered in Section 4 below. 22 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

31 Figure 3.2: Cambridge Citibus network 23 Stagecoach P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

32 Figure 3.3: Cambridge guided busway network 24 CCC P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

33 Figure 3.4: Frequency of bus routes serving Cambridge local network 25 TRACC P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

34 Figure 3.5: Frequency of bus routes serving Cambridge inter-urban network 26 TRACC P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

35 3.3.2 Bus Station A wide range of services is accommodated in the central area. Drummer Street bus station maintains its role as the central hub for many services, but is very constrained in size and so a number of nearby stops provide space for other services. The distribution of stops is as follows: Drummer Street bus station inter-urban services of various service frequency, including the Busway B, C and D services The Busway A stops in Regent Street Stagecoach Citi services focus on Emmanuel Street close to the bus station, although C4 stops around the corner in Drummer Street Some Stagecoach Citi services also serve a stop in the central restricted area at Christ s College (Hobson Street) Park and Ride routes use different stops Red Bus 77 in Drummer Street, Blue Bus 88 in Downing Street and Green Bus 99 in Emmanuel Street and Drummer Street X5 and other coach services use the Parkside stops St Andrew s Street provides an access point to some services that have other central stops Essentially, shorter distance services serve a number of on-street stops in or close to the centre, while longer distance services terminate at the bus station or Parkside Bus Operators Stagecoach in Cambridge (the trading name of Cambus Holdings Limited, a subsidiary of the Stagecoach Group) provides the majority of services. The main depot is in Cambridge at Cowley Road together with a number of other locations where buses are parked overnight including Ely (where some vehicle maintenance is undertaken), Haverhill, St Ives, Longstowe, Royston and Newmarket. Stagecoach in the Fens, another Stagecoach Group company, operates from Huntingdon, Fenstanton, St Neots, Ely and March. Stagecoach in Cambridge operates approximately 150 vehicles and Stagecoach in the Fens operates approximately 130 vehicles. Another prominent operator is Go Whippet (also known as Whippet Coaches), a subsidiary of Australiabased Transit Holdings, is based in Swavesey. Whippet has a fleet of over 50 vehicles. Both Stagecoach and Whippet operate services on The Busway Payments and Ticketing Each operator maintains its own pricing structure and ticketing arrangements. However, some multioperator ticketing is available in the form of MultiBus, a ticket that enables cross-county travel and costs 8 per day or 33 a week. MultiBus tickets are only available on services and cannot be pre-purchased. While Stagecoach and Whippet are included in the MultiBus initiative, these tickets are not valid on The Busway. Other products available include the Stagecoach Dayrider costing 4.10, which can be used on Park and Ride and Stagecoach Citi routes within the Dayrider zone. A weekly equivalent is sold as Megarider at 14. The Dayrider Plus, costing 6.40, allows travel throughout Cambridgeshire all day on Stagecoach services; Megarider Plus costs for seven days within the same Dayrider/Megarider zone which covers a wide area bounded by Peterborough, March, Ely, Soham Bury St Edmunds, Haverhill, Saffron Walden, Royston 27 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

36 and St Neots. Megarider Xtra and Megarider Plus Xtra offer discounts for recurring monthly payments based on smart cards. Go Whippet tickets include an All Zones Day Rover including all Whippet services across the county (adult 5.50) and the City Plus Day Rover for the city and Bar Hill plus Longstanton, Hardwick and Caldecote (adult 4.00), City and Bar Hill Day Rover (adult 2.60). Other options include family tickets One + Two for either one adult and two children or three children on Whippet services across Cambridgeshire ( 6.50) and an All Zones Group Rover for up to five people (no more than four adults) priced at Another product is the Adult 10 Trip which allows ten single journeys between the same two points with a saving of 33% against standard fares Vehicles The bus fleet appears to be meeting current requirements for accessibility (low floor/step free). In addition, improvements in engine specifications have reduced emissions. Where new services have been introduced, high specification buses have been employed; notably on The Busway Digital Infrastructure Bus Priority at Signalised Junctions Bus priority hurry call technology is currently in operation at five signalised junctions on Busway junctions only. Bus Priority on the Busway route is local operation which works from the bus to the signal controller at the roadside via low band radio. The junctions are: Kings Hedges Road/Iceni Way Kings Hedges Road/Chariot Way Kings Hedges Road/Chieftain Way Kings Hedges Road/Graham Road Busway/Milton Road A map showing the locations of the Busway bus priority junctions is shown in Figure P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

37 Figure 3.6: Busway bus priority junctions Mott MacDonald Real Time Passenger Information CCC provides live bus departure information at bus stops for local bus services in Cambridgeshire. There are 304 bus shelters and flag poles equipped with LED display units to allow RTPI information to be displayed for bus services. Bus shelter displays see a 3-line LED (see Figure 3.7) unit, whilst Flag Poles see a 6-line LED display (Figure 3.8) being used. The location of RTPI stops is shown in Figure 3.9 below. Figure 3.7: 3-Line LED Display Figure 3.8: 6-Line Bus Stop Flag Pole Display 29 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

38 Figure 3.9: RTPI equipped bus stop locations 30 CCC P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

39 3.4 Rail Network Rail Services A plan of the local rail network serving Cambridge is shown in Figure 3.10 below. Cambridge station has benefitted from the addition of new platforms, overcoming problems of the unusual layout, and a range of services operates. These include fast and stopping services to London Kings Cross and London Liverpool Street which are major connections between Cambridge and London. An array of local stations is served, with longer distance services also being available, such as on the East Coast Main Line via a change at Peterborough or Stevenage Route closures in the 1960s reduced the travel options available by rail, but bus services now cover most of the places served previously. Train services from Cambridge include: Shelford, Whittlesford Parkway, Great Chesterford, Audley End, Newport, Elsenham and stations to London Liverpool Street (Abellio Greater Anglia); Foxton, Shepreth, Meldreth, Royston, Ashwell & Morden, Baldock, Letchworth Garden City, Hitchin and stations to London Kings Cross (Great Northern); Stansted Airport (Arriva Cross Country); Waterbeach, Ely, Littleport, Downham Market, Watlington, King s Lynn (Great Northern and Abellio Greater Anglia); Ely, March, Whittlesea, Peterborough for onward connections (Abellio Greater Anglia; Arriva Cross Country); Ely and stations to Norwich (Abellio Greater Anglia); and Dullingham, Newmarket, Kennett, Bury St Edmunds and stations to Ipswich (Abellio Greater Anglia). This is summarised in Figure 3.11 below, which is an extract from the Third Cambridgeshire LTP. 31 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

40 Figure 3.10: Local rail network in Cambridge 32 CCC P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

41 Figure 3.11: Cambridgeshire rail services schematic 33 Third Cambridgeshire LTP P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

42 3.4.2 Station Connectivity By Bus The nearest bus stops to Cambridge rail station are located along Station Road adjacent to the station s main entrance. Cambridge s main bus station is located 1.7 km from the rail station at Drummer Street. A number of bus routes serving Station Road connect to the bus interchange in the city centre. As a result, Cambridge city centre is easily accessible by regular bus services from the rail station The following table details all bus service which are located within a 400 metre radius of Cambridge Rail station. Table 3.2: Service number Bus Services within 400m of Cambridge rail station Route The busway A Chatteris/Ramsey/Somesham - St Ives P&R - Longstanton - Cambridge - Addenbrookes - Trumpington P&R The busway C Rail Station - Central Cambridge - Longstanton - St Ives 13/13A Cambridge - Linton - Haverhill (Kedington) 99 Milton Park and Ride - Babraham Park and Ride Citi 1 Arbury City Centre rail station Citi 3 Citi 7 Citi 8 Addenbrooke s Cherry Hinton Fulbourn Fison Road/Whitehill Estate City Centre rail station Cherry Hinton/Fulbourn Cambridge Addenbrooke s Sawston Duxford/Saffron Walden Cottenham Histon City Centre Addenbrooke s Nearest stop Road Station Road Bus Stop 9 (inbound) and Bus Stop 1 (outbound) Station Road Bus Stop 9 (inbound) and Bus Stop 1 (outbound) Station Road Bus Stop 8 (inbound) and Bus Stop 4 (outbound) Station Road Bus Stop 9 (inbound) and Bus Stop 4 (outbound) Station Road Bus Stop 7 (inbound) and Bus Stop 2 (outbound) Station Road Bus Stop 6 (inbound) and Bus Stop 2 (outbound) Station Road Bus Stop 6 (inbound) and Stop 3 (outbound) Station Road Bus Stand 7 ) and Bus Stop 3 (outbound) Distance from the Rail Station 100 metres Approx. 1 minutes 100 metres Approx. 1 minutes 100 metres Approx. 1 minutes 100 metres Approx. 1 minutes 100 metres Approx. 1 minute 100 metres Approx. 1 minute 100 metres Approx. 1 minute 100 metres Approx. 1 minute Frequency Every 15 minutes during the day. Hourly 2 Services Daily Every 10 minutes during the day Every 10 minutes during the day Every 10 minutes during the day Every 20 minutes during the day Every 20 minutes during the day Cambridgeshire County Council This table shows that eight bus services are available within 100 metres of the Cambridge Rail Station. Of these services, six terminate / originate at Emmanuel Street in the city centre. A number of locations are well served by high frequency bus routes from the station. These include Addenbrooke s, Cherry Hinton and Fulbourn. 34 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

43 The bus shelters along Station Road are all covered, modern, well lit and RTPI equipped By Cycle There are a number of cycle parking facilities available at Cambridge rail station. However, it is noted that at the time of writing a large scale redevelopment is taking place at the station on the site of the previous cycle parking facility. As a result, cycle parking has been moved to a temporary location. Cycle storage capacity at the temporary facility has been increased from 896 to 1,300 spaces, though is located further from the station. At present, the station does not provide lockers for cyclists, nor is the available cycle storage sheltered. Once the original cycle storage site has been redeveloped as part of CB1 development, a state of the art cycle park will be provided within the development and will provide storage for up to 3,000 bicycles. The new cycle storage facility will be secure, covered and monitored by security. The cycle storage will be multi storied to maximise space and will be accessible by stairs and ramps to push up bicycles. It is envisaged that a bike repair centre and shower/changing facilities will be located within the cycle park. The facility will be the biggest of its kind in the UK once operational. Cycle access to and from the station can be achieved: Along the busway from the south and west Along Station Road from the north Across the shared pedestrian/cycle bridge and through the station car park from the east The busway approach is largely traffic free, except for buses. Cyclists from the south on Hills Road cannot access it directly, but must first pass over it and then pass via Warren Close, which is mainly traffic free. Access from the pedestrian/cycle bridge is signed through the station car park and access road. There are no cycle facilities along this route and parking cars can present a hazard for cyclists. However, traffic movements and speeds in this area are relatively low. Along Station Road, there is a section of advisory cycle lane in the eastbound direction for part of its length, but no provision elsewhere. In addition, there is on-street parking on one side for much of its length which introduces potential conflicts with cyclists and reduces the remaining carriageway width to a level that can be uncomfortable for cyclists and two-way traffic. Cycling provision along this main link to the station is therefore relatively poor On Foot Cambridge Rail Station is readily accessible for pedestrians. The station is located approximately 1.7 km (20 minute walk) from Cambridge city centre. The main access route to the city centre from the rail station is via Station Road, Hills Road (A1307) and Regent Street. The footways along Station Road are wide and well lit, though the surface of the footways is uneven in places. Furthermore, there is limited way-finding pedestrian signage in place outside the station along Station Road. Due to the large-scale redevelopment of the area as part of the CB1 master plan, construction traffic and scaffolding is currently impacting on pedestrian accessibility along Station Road, but it is expected that the pedestrian environment will be enhanced overall once the development is completed. 35 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

44 The junction of Station Road and Hills Road (A1307) features a pelican crossing facility. The footways along Hills Road and Regent Street are generally wide, well lit and in a good state of repair. Dropped kerbs are in place along the majority of this route which maximises accessibility for those with visibility disabilities By Taxi There is currently a taxi rank outside the station entrance. 3.5 Cycle Network Cambridge benefits from being a compact and relatively flat city which naturally encourages people to travel by bicycle. Students are generally prohibited from owning cars and therefore cycling is a particularly popular mode of travel amongst university staff and students. Cambridge has a well-developed and extensive cycle route network, as shown in Figure 3.14 below. The existing network consists of a mixture of on-road, off-road, shared-use and segregated cycle routes. For example, along sections of the main radial routes including Histon Road, Hills Road and Milton Road, onstreet mandatory cycle lanes are provided. Through the green spaces in the city, including Parkers Piece, Coldhams Common and Jesus Green, cycling is permitted and access is available at all times of day. Several one-way streets in the city also permit contra-flow cycling. The existing cycle network therefore results in a highly permeable city where cycling is usually the quickest mode of travel through the city. Figure 3.12: Advance stop line Figure 3.13: Contra flow cycle lane MM2015 MM 2015 The below figure also shows existing cycle parking locations in the city. This consists in most cases of Sheffield stand and high/low stand type parking, but there are also secure parking at locations such as the Grand Arcade and Park Street car parks. 36 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

45 Figure 3.14: Cambridge cycle network 37 Openstreetmap & CCC data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

46 3.6 Pedestrian Network With Cambridge being a compact, historic and attractive city, walking forms an important mode of travel for short city centre trips. Walking is also an important mode of travel for school children, students, commuters and shoppers within the city. Figure 3.16 below shows key pedestrian infrastructure in and around the city centre. This shows the large number of pedestrian crossings on key routes in and around the centre. Most crossing points are signalised. There is also a network of pedestrian signage in the city centre, varying between finger post signs and totem information boards. Figure 3.15: Example of totem style information board in Cambridge MM P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

47 Figure 3.16: Cambridge city centre pedestrian facilities 39 Openstreetmap & CCC data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

48 3.7 Highway Network Connectivity Cambridge is well connected within the national and regional strategic network, as shown below in Figure The city centre is connected to this network by a number of radial routes, as shown in Figure 3.18, with speed limits as shown in Figure Use and performance of this network is reviewed in Sections and 6.7 below. 40 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

49 Figure 3.17: Cambridge within the national strategic network 41 Openstreetmap P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

50 Figure 3.18: Cambridge local highway network 42 Openstreetmap P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

51 Figure 3.19: Cambridge highway speed limits for classified roads 43 Openstreetmap P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

52 3.7.2 Digital Infrastructure The primary source for asset data is the Urban Traffic Management and Control (UTMC) Common Database (CDB) provided by Cloud Amber. This collates data from a number of external systems to provide a central point of reference. It also enables strategies to be run which can influence the management of traffic. The CDB holds data for the following assets: Traffic Signals Pedestrian Crossings Bus Priority Junctions Variable Message Signs Traffic Detectors (SCOOT) Car Parks including Park and Ride sites Data for other assets is distributed across other data sources such as spreadsheets and proprietary databases. Additional assets which are not recorded in the UTMC CDB are: Close Circuit Television (CCTV) Rising Bollards Automatic Vehicle Counters Automatic Cycle Counters Environmental Monitoring Bus Stop Locations which are RTPI specific The current Traffic Management team consists of seven members of staff where varying tasks are assigned according to the employee s role, the key roles being: Traffic Manager and IHMC and Events Manager Overall management of the Traffic Management team roles listed below RTPI Delivery Manager Management of the delivery for all aspects of RTPI for Cambridgeshire, managing the delivery of RTPI from Vix Technical and Liaison officers (x4) Management of ITS projects, real time network monitoring and response; including internal and external liaison for planned and unplanned events for Cambridgeshire Events Liaison Office Manages the Events process, including TTRO s and community liaison Figure 3.20 shows a high-level view of the current architecture of systems for Cambridgeshire, clearly showing which systems are integrated and those which are standalone. 44 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

53 Figure 3.20: Cambridgeshire technology architecture Cambridgeshire Systems linked to UTMC Fixed VMS Traffic Signals Cambridgeshire Standalone Systems Car Park Guidance VMS Pedestrian Crossings 3 rd Party Systems Highways England TIH Data PRISM VMS (for Rising Bollards) SCOOT Loops Manual Environmental Sites Automatic Vehicle Counters Automatic Environmental Sites Cycle Counters ELGIN Roadworks and Diversions UTMC Future link for Journey Time Analysis BlueTooth Journey Time Data Vix AVL for RTPI CCTV Additional Car Parks incl. On-street Car Park Occupancy Mott MacDonald Traffic signals and pedestrian crossings are ultimately monitored by the Siemens Urban Traffic Control (UTC) system at CCC. The UTMC CDB has the functionality to communicate to the UTC and influence the control of the traffic signals and pedestrian crossings. However, this function is not known to be widely used. The breakdown of the types of traffic signals and types of pedestrian crossings are shown Table 3.3. Table 3.3: Type Traffic Signal and pedestrian crossings in Cambridgeshire Quantity Junction 120 Pedestrian Crossings Pelican 111 Puffin 68 Toucan 50 Cloud Amber UTMC Within Cambridgeshire, CCC also has a total of 58 Fixed Variable Message Signs (VMS) distributed throughout the County. CCC has three types of fixed VMS units: Free-Text, Car Park Guidance and Rotating PRISM. There are 27 Free-Text LED, 19 Car Park Guidance LED and 12 Rotating PRISM signs. The free text LED signs (example shown in Figure 3.21) have the ability to display information that can direct or re-route drivers of vehicles to less congested parts of the City. The UTMC CDB has the functionality to run strategies depending on data contained within the CDB. For example, should there be congestion on Huntingdon Road inbound close to the city centre, a message can automatically be sent to the free-text VMS on Huntingdon Road advising people to divert, thus reducing further congestion. The rotating PRISM signs are dedicated to the operation of the rising bollards. 45 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

54 The Car Park Guidance (CPG) VMS (see Figure 3.22) units have the functionality to display available capacity at each car park displayed on the sign, as well as free text messages depending on the location. Figure 3.21: Free-Text LED VMS Figure 3.22: CPG with Free-Text functionality CCC CCC There are currently also 3 mobile Variable Message Signs utilised by CCC. They have the configuration of 4 lines by 16 characters and are free-text. These mobile VMS are used for major and unforeseen events to support traffic management purposes and are utilised to inform the traveling public of upcoming / current events, road restrictions and closures. They are powered by renewable energy sources with messages being set either locally or remotely. The deployment locations of the VMS are very much dependant on the size of the scheme, with the planned major maintenance schemes taking priority along with unforeseen events. The map shown in Figure 3.20 shows the location of all traffic signals and free text and car park guidance fixed VMS units in Cambridge. 46 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

55 Figure 3.23: VMS signs and traffic signals in Cambridge 47 Openstreetmap P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

56 3.8 Car Parking Off-Street There are a range of publicly available off-street car parks in Cambridge, as shown in Figure 3.24 below. Table 3.4 shows that these vary between: City Council owned multi-storey and surface car parks (mostly paid) Privately owned public car parks (mostly paid) Privately owned customer only car parks (free, but mostly time limited) For the City Council car parks, Figure 3.24 below also shows average hourly tariff data. Table 3.4: Main public access car parks in Cambridge Type Structure Payment Name Spaces Council owned public car park Multi-storey Pay-on-foot Grand Arcade 944 Council owned public car park Multi-storey Pay-on-foot Grafton West 284 Council owned public car park Multi-storey Pay-on-foot Grafton East 876 Council owned public car park Multi-storey Pay-on-foot Park Street 392 Council owned public car park Multi-storey Pay-on-foot Queen Anne Terrace 570 Council owned public car park Surface Pay and display Adam and Eve Street 38 Council owned public car park Surface Pay and display Castle Hill 112 Council owned public car park Surface Pay and display Gwydir Street 50 Council owned public car park Surface Pay and display Riverside 11 Council owned public car park Surface Free Lammas Land 100 Privately owned public car park Multi-storey Pay-on-foot Addenbrooke's Hospital (NCP) 1050 Privately owned public car park Multi-storey Pay-on-foot Addenbrooke's Hospital (APCOA) 2700 Privately owned public car park Multi-storey Pay-on-foot Addenbrooke's Hospital (Vinci) 1228 Privately owned public car park Multi-storey Pay on exit Cambridge Leisure Park 600 Privately owned public car park Surface Pay and display NCP's Cambridge Station 372 Privately owned public car park Surface Free Nuffield Health Cambridge Hospital 50 Privately owned customers only Surface Free (3 hr max) Beehive Centre (Parking Eye Ltd) 794 Privately owned customers only Surface Free (3 hr max) Retail Park (B&Q) 235 Privately owned customers only Surface Free (3 hr max) Retail Park (PC World) 241 Privately owned customers only Surface Free (3 hr max) Retail Park (Tesco) 472 Privately owned customers only Surface Free Sainsbury's 458 Privately owned customers only Surface Free Tesco (Fulbourn) 400 Privately owned customers only Surface Free Tesco (Milton) 500 Privately owned customers only Surface Free Waitrose 300 This information shows that: Most city centre off-street car parking capacity is operated by the City Council, while the customer only car parks for the retail parks are operated privately The average hourly tariff rate for city centre Council parking ranges from 1.00 to P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

57 Figure 3.24: Off-street car parks in Cambridge 49 CCC and Park-o-pedia P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

58 3.8.2 On-Street Within and around the city centre core area, on-street parking and loading is controlled by Traffic Regulation Orders. Figure 3.25 below shows data extracted from the Council s Parkmap database and shows: Pay & Display parking bays (pink Predominantly Mon-Sat, 9am-5pm or 8.30am-6.30pm) Resident permit holder only bays (yellow Predominantly Mon-Sat or Sun, 9am to 5pm) Designated free parking bays (blue) Where parking is not shown as permitted in the city centre area, 24 hour no waiting restrictions are most commonly in force. This figure shows that parking in residential areas in and around the city centre area is prioritised for residents parking during core hours. Pay & Display parking is limited within the core area but available in streets around it. Parking enforcement is decriminalised in Cambridge and undertaken by Cambridgeshire County Council under Civil Parking Enforcement powers. 50 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

59 Figure 3.25: On-street parking in Cambridge city centre 51 CCC Parkmap P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

60 3.9 Coach Facilities Long Distance Bus The majority of national long distance bus services operate from Parkside, whilst there are also drop-off points on Trumpington Road and Chesterton Road. Parkside is located approximately 400 metres (5 minutes walk) south of Drummer Street bus station and the bus interchanges located along Emmanuel Street / St Andrew Street. The following table provides an overview of the long distance bus services which operate from here. Table 3.5: Bus Services from Parkside Service number Route Operator Frequency 010 Cambridge to London National Express 16 Service Daily 727 Norwich, Cambridge to London Airports and Brighton 787 Cambridge, Luton Airport, Heathrow Airport National Express National Express 17 Service Daily (Approx. 1 per hour) 25 Service Daily (Approx. 1 per hour) N/A Cambridge Birmingham Megabus 2 Services Daily N/A Cambridge Bristol Megabus 1 Service Daily N/A Cambridge Bristol UWE Cardiff Megabus 1 Service Daily N/A Cambridge Norwich Great Yarmouth Megabus 1 Service Daily X5 Cambridge Oxford Stagecoach 20 Services Daily Cambridgeshire County Council Cycle parking is available in the form of Sheffield stands along Parkside directly opposite the bus shelters. In addition, a large supply of cycle parking is available outside the police station. Parkside is located adjacent to a number of cycle advisory routes, the nearest of which runs through Parker s Piece. These cycle routes consist of off-road shared-surface routes. Footways along Parkside are clean, wide and well lit. Parkside is accessible on foot from the city centre via Parker Street. The footways along Parker Street are made narrow by excess street furniture and they are overhung by trees/vegetation in places. Overall, the bus services along Parkside are accessible on foot and by bicycle. However, Parker Street has the poorest environment for those walking/cycling to Parkside from the city centre Tourist Coach For tourist coaches visiting the city, Figure 3.26 below shows that provision is made on Queen s Road for drop off and pick up (10 mins limited waiting, no return within 1 hour), with eight coach spaces being provided at Madingley Park & Ride site at a rate of 10 per day. 52 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

61 Figure 3.26: Cambridge tourist coach drop-off / pick-up and parking facilities 53 CCC P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

62 3.10 Servicing, Loading, Access and Taxis Figure 3.27 below shows the current city centre network characteristics in Cambridge, including: Primary road network (in yellow) The Core Traffic Scheme s rising bollard locations The central bus station Off-street parking locations Taxi rank locations Pedestrianised streets (except for authorised vehicles) One-way streets Weight restrictions Vehicular access to the central area is strictly controlled by the Core Traffic Scheme and has been successful in significantly reducing traffic flows in the centre and securing priority for pedestrians and cyclists. 54 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

63 Figure 3.27: Cambridge city centre access restrictions 55 CCC P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

64 3.11 Smarter Choices Cambridge Smarter Choices The Smarter Choices strategy aims to provide alternative sustainable travel options to private car use, with a wide range of Smarter Choices travel initiatives included in Cambridge s Local Transport Plan (LTP). In Cambridge, this is focused on Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire by: Promoting different travel options in Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire Raising awareness of the positive impacts of travel by sustainable modes. Smarter Choices is focused on key transport corridors through South Cambridgeshire into Cambridge. The seven main corridors between the city and the neighbouring ring of towns are shown in the following figure: Figure 3.28: The Transport Corridor programme areas Transport Strategy for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire (April 2014) 56 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

65 In South Cambridgeshire, the dispersed nature of the population means that car use is unavoidable for many. The approach to Smarter Choices measures is to support the use of public transport services for more trips into Cambridge, as well as encouraging more people to walk, cycle and car share CCC s Local Sustainable Transport Fund Programme (LSTF) Cambridgeshire County Council has been awarded Local Sustainable Transport Funding (LSTF) since For the period up to 31 st March 2015, the measures for the programme have included: Utilising the established Travel for Cambridgeshire Partnership (TfC) (formerly Travel for Work) to support workplace travel plans. Installation of electric vehicle charging points at Busway Park & Ride sites as well as at key employment sites Travel for Cambridgeshire Travel for Cambridgeshire (TfC) was originally established in 1997 as a not-for-profit partnership, formally Travel for Work (TfW). This scheme has been incorporated as part of the LSTF programme to support employers in Cambridgeshire and to promote sustainable and healthy travel to work with TfC initiatives having previously included the following: Walk to Work week Gold Card for Govia Thameslink rail commuters using the Travel for Cambridgeshire discount Cambridgeshire Cycle Challenge 2014 Availability of grant funding Cycle to Work Day Road Safety questionnaire TfC Grants for financing travel events and a separate grant to finance infrastructure improvements to facilitate sustainable travel options for employer sites Travel Planning Workshop As part of the first round of LSTF , TfC targets commuter journeys from settlements in two key economic corridors (A10 and A14) as shown in Figure 3.29 including: Huntingdon to Cambridge Ely to Cambridge 57 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

66 Figure 3.29: Locations of TfC Corridors Cambridgeshire, Travel for Work Partnership, Annual Progress Report, April 2012 March 2013 Measures to support the development and implementation of workplace travel plans across the two corridors have included: Adult Cycle Training Bicycle user groups Electric bike loan service Personal journey planning Postcode mapping of employees Promotion of car sharing (CamShare) Promotional activities and road shows providing targeted and specific information about travel options TfW discounts at bike shops TfW discounts on train tickets Travel challenges, such as Cycle Challenges In addition, CamShare is a free website that has been set up as a car sharing information tool to enable people to find potential partners (drivers or passengers) to car share in and around Cambridgeshire. It is a joint initiative between Cambridgeshire County Council and the Travel for Cambridgeshire Partnership to facilitate finding suitable car share matches for employers and their staff; the service is also available to members of the public. CamShare also operates BikeBUDi, a tool which can be used to connect experienced cyclists and to provide information on the best cycle routes. 58 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

67 Electric Vehicle Charging Points In 2014, as part of TfC, commuters and businesses in the Cambridge Science Park were given the opportunity to see and test drive the latest electric vehicles at the Travel Plan Plus (TP+) electric vehicle event. The event involved local car dealerships bringing the latest electric vehicles, providing commuters with the opportunity to learn more about electric vehicles Cambridgeshire LSTF Going Forward Cambridgeshire secured 1 million of LSTF revenue funding for the period 2015/16. The programme started on 1 st April 2015, and builds upon LSTF and Better Bus Area Fund programmes, with the aim to mainstream the LSTF approach across Cambridgeshire. This period of funding is extending the coverage of LSTF initiatives into two additional areas: Cambridge down the A10 towards the Hertfordshire border Cambridge to St Neots Funding will support businesses in these areas to raise awareness of sustainable transport options. However, there is no further grant funding available in this period for businesses; instead support will include: Providing support for businesses to develop workplace travel plans Annual travel to work survey to assess changes in staff commuting habits Discounts on rail travel for all staff Discounts at cycle shops Assistance with running events to promote sustainable transport Post code mapping of staff home locations (chargeable) Access to the TfC Newsletter The promotion of CamShare car sharing scheme Expertise and advice on how to promote alternative modes of transport For this round of funding, membership fees are being introduced for TfC. Membership is free but it enabled the funding to be managed more efficiently Wider Smarter Choices Initiatives Safer Routes to School Project The Safer Routes to School Project supports the reduction of car use for schools and encourage active travel by walking and cycling through a combination of educational and infrastructure improvements. Performance indicators show that there has been a 20% modal shift from car usage for transport to school as a result of Bike It Smart Travel Cambridgeshire Cambridgeshire County Council has ambitious targets to ensure that the area has some of the highest coverage of fibre-based broadband in the country by the end of Greater connectivity will enable more people to work from home which would reduce congestion and support accommodating housing and economic growth in the area. 59 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

68 Moreover, Cambridgeshire County Council s Personal Travel Planning project SmartTravel Cambridgeshire helps people to compare various modes of transport when planning their journey, and provides real time information (RTI) to inform travellers for well-planned journeys to minimise delays. As part of this, significant investment has been made in real time passenger information for public transport, followed by the development of a live traffic webpage. These initiatives continue to be significant in promoting sustainable travel and support customer needs and a shift towards a more digital approach. Variable Messaging Signs (VMS) and Twitter inform the user to make informed decisions about their journey which helps the network to run more efficiently. In addition, a SmartTravel Cambridgeshire journey planner is available online which can be used to navigate public transport, walking, cycling and car journeys in the area MyBusTrip CCC currently have only one smartphone app available which enables access to real time information about bus services around Cambridge and throughout the County of Cambridgeshire. MyBusTrip is published by Vix and is available on Android (Google Play) and the ios (itunes App Store). There is no support for Blackberry or Windows Mobile. Example screen shots taken from App are shown in Figure Figure 3.30: MyBusTrip App screen shots Google Play 60 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

69 4 Accessibility 4.1 Introduction The purpose of this section is to assess how the public transport connectivity reviewed in the previous section results in accessibility to the main employment zones in Cambridge. Key messages from this section: Just over half (52%) of employees for the city s main employment areas live within 45 minutes of their workplace by public transport This proportion reduces to 36% for those living within 30 minutes and 14% within 15 minutes Employee accessibility by public transport is generally highest for sites nearest to the centre and lowest for sites nearer to the city periphery The City Centre employment area returns the highest employee accessibility proportion at 65%, whereas the Newmarket Road east (Airport) site returns the lowest at 28% This pattern is not followed by the Biomedical Campus, however, which returns an employee accessibility proportion of 54% despite its peripheral location Employee accessibility by public transport is above the all-site average for the two sites with the greatest employee catchment (City Centre and Biomedical Campus) but 3 rd lowest for the 3 rd largest site (Science Park / Northern Fringe East) The proportion of employees who live within 45 minutes by public transport of the Science Park / Northern Fringe East employment site is 39% Nearby outlying villages where Cambridge employees are least served by public transport are Willingham, Cottenham, north Waterbeach, Sawston and Cambourne 4.2 Employment Zones Figure 2.9 above shows trip attracting land uses in Cambridge and a number of zones which capture prominent employment clusters. These zones are presented and labelled in Figure 4.1 below. 61 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

70 Figure 4.1: Trip attracting employment zones in Cambridge 62 MM P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

71 4.3 Public Transport Accessibility Analysis TRACC software has been used to generate weekday AM peak-hour public transport isochrones for each of the above employment zones. Isochrones have been generated from a single representative point within each zone based on the following specification: Travel time-bands are: 15, 30 and 45 minutes Travel time is door-to-door Included modes are bus and rail Unlimited interchanges are permitted but with a 7.5 minute time penalty to discourage unrealistic interchange behaviour It is noted that deriving isochrones from a single point will result in the accessibility of some parts of each zone being under or over represented. However, points have been chosen to represent the centre of gravity of the main trip attracting land uses within each zone. The results for each zone are attached in Appendix A. These plans show: Selected representative point for each zone (shown as a blue cross) Public transport isochrones bands up to 45 minutes Employment zone employee origin distribution catchment, derived from 2011 Census data These plans therefore show the level of public transport availability to the employees of each zone. The results are summarised in the following two charts, which show public transport coverage for each zone in both absolute and proportional terms. The latter data is also presented spatially on XX below. These show: Overall, the employee catchment proportion which falls within 45 minutes travel time of each site by public transport is 52% on average. Zone C (City Centre) attracts the greatest number of employees and also has the highest public transport catchment overlap at 65% Zones M (Biomedical Campus) and K (Science Park / Northern Fringe East) attract the second and third greatest numbers of employees and are located on the edges of the city. Zone M s employee public transport coverage is above average at 54%, but Zone K s coverage rate is the third lowest at 39%. Zone N (Newmarket Road east - Airport) shows the lowest public transport coverage of its employee catchment at 28%. 63 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

72 Employment Zone Employment Zone Cambridge Access Study Figure 4.2: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N Employee catchment coverage by AM peak public transport travel time isochrones absolute values 15 mins 30 mins 45 mins Beyond No Employees Figure 4.3: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N All Employee catchment distribution by AM peak public transport travel time proportional values 15 mins 30 mins 45 mins Beyond 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Proportion of Employee Catchment TRACC and 2011 Census 64 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

73 Figure 4.4: Employee catchment coverage by AM peak public transport travel time isochrones 65 TRACC and 2011 Census P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

74 Based on the above figures and the isochrone plans in Appendix A, the following table records observations for each site. Table 4.1: Zone ID Employment zone public transport accessibility observations Zone Location Total No Employees % Employees within 45 mins by PT Observations A Cattle Market 2,163 56% Office, retail and industrial uses Good PT coverage of main employee clusters, except for Hardwick and Cambourne to the west B Hills Road / CB1 6,858 54% Office, retail and university uses 4 th largest employee catchment Most employee clusters within the city fall within 30 minutes travel time Main outlying cluster areas covered within 45 minutes travel time, except for Cambourne, Willingham and parts of Cottenham and Waterbeach C City Centre 15,396 65% Office, retail and university uses Largest employee catchment and highest public transport coverage rate Most employee clusters within and around the city fall within 30 minutes travel time D West Cambridge 1,695 47% University and office uses E Shire Park 2,441 44% Office and retail uses F Mitcham s Corner 1,384 55% Office and retail uses Main outlying cluster areas covered within 45 minutes travel time, except for Over, Willingham, Sawston and part of Waterbeach Most employee clusters within the city fall within 45 minutes travel time Outlying clusters in Histon and Longstanton not covered Most employee clusters within the city fall within 30 minutes travel time, and most remaining clusters covered by 45 minute isochrone 3 rd smallest employee catchment G Grafton 3,880 55% Office and retail uses Most employee clusters within the city fall within 30 minutes travel time, and most remaining clusters covered by 45 minute isochrone Most employee clusters within the city fall within 30 minutes travel time Most outlying areas fall within 45 minute isochrone, except at Over, Willingham and parts of Waterbeach H Mill Road West 1,098 64% Office, retail and industrial uses 2 nd smallest employee catchment Most employee clusters within the city fall within 30 minutes travel time, and most remaining clusters covered by 45 minute isochrone I Mill Road East % Office, retail and industrial uses Smallest employee catchment Most employee clusters fall within 45 minute travel time 66 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

75 Zone ID J Zone Location Newmarket Road west (Coral Park / Beehive) K Science Park / Northern Fringe East Total No Employees % Employees within 45 mins by PT Observations 3,214 50% Office, retail and industrial uses 12,299 39% Office and industrial uses L Histon 2,402 37% Office and retail uses M N Biomedical Campus Newmarket Road east (Airport) Most employee clusters within the city fall within 30 minutes travel time, except Trumpington and north parts of city Most outlying clusters fall outside 45 minute isochrone 3 rd largest employee catchment but 3 rd lowest public transport coverage rate Significant clusters fall outside 45 minute isochrone, such as Cherry Hinton, Trumpington, Girton, all outlying areas to east, south and west, Willingham and parts of Cottenham 2 nd lowest public transport coverage rate Little to no public transport accessibility from east, south and west of the city, and from Willingham 12,976 54% Health, office, retail and university uses 2 nd largest employee catchment Poor accessibility from Newmarket Road east No accessibility from outlying areas to the north and west of the city 2,987 28% Office, retail and industrial uses Lowest public transport coverage rate Poor public transport accessibility from south east areas of city Little to no public transport accessibility from outlying areas on south, west and north sides of city 67 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

76 5 Travel 5.1 Introduction In the context of the above travel demand, connectivity and accessibility analysis, the purpose of this section is to explore how people and goods actually travel in Cambridge. Key messages from this section: Working from home has increased in Cambridge by about 52% between 2001 and 2011 Park & Ride use is significant but patronage has fallen since parking charge introduced Nearly 300,000 passengers carried in April 2014, but about 225,000 in April 2015 Car parks currently used to between about 30% and 60% capacity The bus mode share is low but with some evidence of slow growth Bus commuting mode share of 7%-8% in 2011, but grown from about 6% in 2001 Higher commuting mode share for trips to and from South Cambridgeshire (10%-11%) than for trips solely within Cambridge (8%) Rail s mode share is also low but steadily growing Commuting mode share of 4%-5%, but up from 3.6% in 2001 Rail mode share for Cambridge residents commuting out beyond South Cambridgeshire is 31%, and 12% for the opposite direction Cycle use in Cambridge is high and growing A third of all working Cambridge residents cycle to work, but this rises to 43% of those whose workplace is also in Cambridge. 21% also cycle to workplaces in South Cambridgeshire Cycle commuting mode share increased 4.2% between 2001 and For all trips entering city centre core area, cycle mode share increased about 12% between 2004 and 2014 Walking mode share is significant but static Nearly a quarter of Cambridge residents who work in Cambridge walk to work. This result is similar in both the 2001 and 2011 Census. The car mode share of those commuting into or out of Cambridge is two to three times higher than those who both live and work in Cambridge 84% of all commuting car trips in Cambridge start or finish outside the city Car traffic levels have dropped entering the city centre and remained steady around it, but have grown on the radial routes. LGV traffic has increased in all areas Between 2004 and 2014, car flows dropped 12% into the city centre and 2% around it, but increased about 13% on the radial routes Over the same period, LGV traffic has increased by 9% into centre and by up to 63% on radials Weekday AM peak traffic levels drop about 13% in school holidays, but only about 3% in PM peak City centre Council car parks used near to capacity on weekends and in December, but only part utilised on weekdays 68 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

77 Mode Share Cambridge Access Study 5.2 Mode Share Census Travel to Work Cambridge Residents Based on 2011 Census data, the following chart shows the average travel-to-work (main) mode distribution of all trips originating within Cambridge (left column). This result is then broken down to show average mode shares for those commuting from Cambridge to: Cambridge South Cambridgeshire Rest of UK For reference, the actual numbers of people commuting from Cambridge to each of these destination areas is presented above in Figure Figure 5.1: 100% Travel-to-work mode shares for all trips originating within Cambridge 90% 80% 70% 37% 26% 0% 8% 63% 57% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 5% 7% 33% 17% Cambridge to All Areas 43% 23% Cambridge to Cambridge 1% 10% 21% 31% 4% 5% 6% 4% Cambridge to South Cams Cambridge to Rest of UK Car, Taxi, M'cycle, Other Rail Bus Bicycle On Foot 2011 Census TTW data This chart shows: Active modes comprise half the overall share of work trips originating from Cambridge. However, the distance breakdown results show that these modes actually represent about two thirds of the trips which also destinate within Cambridge. The share for these modes then progressively drops the further out of the city the workplace is. The bus has a higher mode share for trips to South Cambridgeshire than for trips wholly within Cambridge. Given the high level of active mode use in the city, this could suggest that the bus is seen as more attractive for medium distance trips. It is noted that the Busway has opened since the P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

78 Census, so use of this mode for medium distance commuting trips is likely to have increased since then. Nearly all rail use is for destinations beyond South Cambridgeshire. A high proportion are likely to be for trips to London. The highest car mode share is for commuting trips to South Cambridgeshire. The following four figures provide further insight on the above mode share distributions for Cambridge residents by showing the distribution of workplace destinations by cycle, bus, rail and car. These show that: The cycling catchment shows that most trips by this mode are concentrated on destinations in Cambridge or on its fringes, such as towards the Science Park and Milton, but it also shows evidence of some longer distance cycle commuting and particularly to the south. The bus catchment is the most compact of the three vehicle mode catchments, reflecting the relatively local service coverage of this mode. However, the catchment broadly reflects the higher frequency service routes shown in Figure 3.5 above, with demand being served to Cambourne, Duxford and along the busway to St Ives. The rail catchment is determined by the location of stations, and is concentrated on Ely, stations in South Cams, Stansted and London, with the latter showing the greatest concentration of rail users. The car catchment shows the greatest spread and is most similar to the overall distribution shown in Figure 2.4 above. 70 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

79 Figure 5.2: Workplace destination distribution of Cambridge residents commuting by cycle CensusTTW data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

80 Figure 5.3: Workplace destination distribution of Cambridge residents commuting by bus CensusTTW data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

81 Figure 5.4: Workplace destination distribution of Cambridge residents commuting by rail CensusTTW data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

82 Figure 5.5: Workplace destination distribution of Cambridge residents commuting by car CensusTTW data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

83 Mode Share Cambridge Access Study Cambridge Employees Based on 2011 Census data, the following chart shows the average travel-to-work (main) mode share of all trips destinating within Cambridge (left column). This result is then broken down to show average mode shares for those commuting to Cambridge from: Rest of UK South Cambridgeshire Cambridge For reference and as for the above equivalent chart, the actual numbers of people commuting from Cambridge to each of these destination areas is presented above in Figure Figure 5.6: 100% Travel-to-work mode shares for all trips destinating within Cambridge 90% 80% 70% 60% 55% 77% 71% 26% 0% 8% Car, Taxi, M'cycle, Other 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 4% 8% 22% 10% All Areas to Cambridge 12% 2% 11% 7% 14% 2% 2% 2% Rest of UK to Cambridge South Cams to Cambridge 43% 23% Cambridge to Cambridge Rail Bus Bicycle On Foot 2011 Census TTW data This chart shows: The car mode share of commuters travelling into Cambridge from outside the city is significant, at a value of between 71% and 77%. This is about three times greater than the car mode share of commuters who start their journey within Cambridge. Again, nearly all rail commute trips into Cambridge originate from beyond South Cambridgeshire, while the bus mode share is highest for trips originating from South Cambridgeshire. The active mode share of trips originating from within Cambridge is high at about two-thirds, but the overall result for all in-commuting to Cambridge is dominated by the high proportion of commuters travelling by car from outside the city. These results highlight the key importance of Park & Ride interchanges for converting in-commuting car trips to bus trips for the onward leg into the city centre. 75 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

84 The following four figures provide further insight on the above mode share distributions for Cambridge employees by showing the distribution of residential origins by cycle, bus, rail and car. These show that: The cycle catchment shows the greatest concentration of trips originating from within Cambridge, as would be expected, but also from areas around the city up to a radius of about 10 miles. The bus catchment for in-commuting is broader and more comprehensive than for out-commuting, perhaps reflecting the service coverage shown Figure 3.5 above. The rail catchment for in-commuting is also more comprehensive than for out-commuting, with stations along all rail routes to the north and south used for a distance of up to about 40 miles. Noticeably, however, there is no evidence of in-commuting from London by rail. As for the out-commuting results above, the car catchment for in-commuting shows the greatest spread and is most similar to the overall distribution shown in Figure 2.13 above. 76 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

85 Figure 5.7: Residential origin distribution of Cambridge employees commuting by cycle CensusTTW data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

86 Figure 5.8: Residential origin distribution of Cambridge employees commuting by bus CensusTTW data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

87 Figure 5.9: Residential origin distribution of Cambridge employees commuting by rail CensusTTW data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

88 Figure 5.10: Residential origin distribution of Cambridge employees commuting by car CensusTTW data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

89 For the main trip attractor zones introduced in Figure 2.9 above, the following figure shows the average mode share of commuters travelling to each zone, where the size of the pie chart also reflects the number of commuters to each zone. The figure shows the P&R, bus and rail networks for reference. The purpose of this figure is to show how destination TTW mode shares vary within the city and surrounding areas, and so complements the public transport accessibility analysis for these zones presented in Section 4 above. However, it should be noted that the mode shares for each employment zone shown in the figure below are derived from Middle-level Super Output Areas (MSOA), which are also shown on the below plan and which represent the smallest area for which such data is available. The consequence of this, therefore, is that the average mode share of the MSOA may not be fully representative of the smaller employment zone. This is most apparent in the case of Zones C and D (City Centre and Cambridge West) which offer very different levels of accessibility, but return the same mode share for reason of being within the same MSOA. The results should therefore be considered with this limitation in mind. The figure shows: Walking mode shares are highest in central sites, but are quite significant in most locations Similarly, cycling mode shares are highest in city centre areas, but also quite significant in most locations Bus mode shares are highest in the city centre zones and at Addenbrooke s Rail mode shares are similarly highest in city centre zones near to the station The highest car mode share and lowest active mode use is observed in the Cambridge Retail Park destination area. This may reflect the levels of parking available in this zone. The other highest car mode shares are observed in the outlying Cambridge Science Park and Histon Vision Park zones 81 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

90 Figure 5.11: In-commuting mode shares by Cambridge employment area Zone L Zone K Zone E Zone F Zone G Zone J Zone N Zone D Zone C Zone H Zone I Zone B Zone A Zone M Census TTW data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

91 Overall Commuting Mode Use Based on the above mode shares for both Cambridge residents and employees, the following pie chart shows the overall mode share for commuting related trips in Cambridge. Figure 5.12: Overall mode share for commuting trips in Cambridge On Foot, 9% Bicycle, 20% Car, Taxi, M'cycle, Other, 56% Bus, 8% Rail, 6% 2011 Census Figure 2.17 above shows that two thirds of commuting trips in Cambridge start or finish outside the city. The following chart shows the same result but by mode, so that modal differences can be observed. Figure 5.13: Proportion of commuting trips by mode which start/finish within or outside the city 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 18% 82% 29% 71% 69% 98% 84% 31% 16% 2% On Foot Bicycle Bus Rail Car, Taxi, Motorcycle, Other External trips Internal trips 2011 Census As would be expected, most walking and cycle trips start and finish within the city, while nearly all rail trips start or finish outside the city. What may be less evident, though, is that 84% of commuting car trips within Cambridge start or finish outside the city, which has an impact on strategies to achieve mode shift. In light of the city s regional importance, this pattern is likely to also apply to some other trip purposes. 83 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

92 Change in Mode Share 2001 to 2011 Mode Share Cambridge Access Study Travel-to-Work Mode Share Change, 2001 to 2011 For the purpose of understanding how the above results may have changed over time, the following chart shows the travel-to-work mode share for Cambridge residents from the 2001 and 2011 census (where slight changes from the equivalent 2011 results shown above are to allow comparison with the 2001 data). Figure 5.14: Cambridge residents travel-to-work mode share, 2001 and % 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 15% 16% 33% 28% 5.7% 7.2% 5.5% 3.6% 47% 38% On foot Bicycle Bus Rail Car, Taxi, M'cycle, Other Census 2001 Census 2011 Census 2001 and 2011 This chart shows some encouraging trends for commuting patterns by Cambridge residents, with increases in use of all sustainable modes and a significant decrease in car/taxi/motorcycle use. The greatest increase is in cycling to work. The above changes are shown clearly in the following chart. Figure 5.15: Change in Cambridge residents travel-to-work mode share, 2001 to % 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% -2% -4% -6% -8% -10% 1.0% 4.2% 1.5% 1.9% -8.7% On foot Bicycle Bus Rail Car, Taxi, M'cycle, Other Census 2001 and P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

93 No People Cambridge Access Study Comparing the two surveys also shows an increase in the proportion of employed Cambridge residents working at home, as shown in the following chart. This change represents an increase in the proportion of employed Cambridge residents working at home from 8.6% in 2001 to 10.8% in Figure 5.16: Number of Cambridge residents working at home 7,000 6,417 6,000 5,000 4,000 4,217 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 Census 2001 Census 2011 Census 2001 and Quality of Life Survey of Cambridge Employees 2014, Cambridge Ahead A sample of Cambridge employees were surveyed in 2014 for the Cambridge Ahead Quality of Life Survey. Respondents were asked about their typical mode of transport for work purposes. The following resulting graph is extracted from the survey report. Figure 5.17: Typical main transport mode to work for Cambridge employees Quality of Life Survey of Cambridge Employees 2014, Cambridge Ahead 85 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

94 Car Mode Share Cambridge Access Study This chart suggests the following approximate average mode shares for travelling to work in Cambridge: Car: 43% Bicycle: 31% Bus: 8% Rail: 3% Walk: 13% These values are of a similar order to the Cambridge residents travel-to-work mode share detailed above in Figure 5.1. The extra detail provided by this chart, however, is the differences in mode selection by gender. The data suggests that: Females are more likely to travel by car, bus, train and on foot Males are more likely to travel by bicycle (35% vs 27%) Cambridgeshire TIF Study In this 2007 study into the social and distributional impacts of introducing road user charging to Cambridge, a household interview survey was carried out. The sample was taken from across Cambridgeshire, with the proportions of respondents within and outside Cambridge being proportional to the actual population split. Respondents were asked what mode they used for all journeys that involved use of the Cambridge network. The following chart shows the average car mode share by trip purpose and by time of day. Figure 5.18: Average Cambridgeshire car mode share for trips involving use of Cambridge network, by purpose 100% 90% 79% 80% 74% 70% 70% 65% 62% 59% 60% 60% 60% 56% 51% 50% 40% All trips 30% 22% Peak periods 21% 20% 10% 0% Cambridgeshire TIF Study, P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

95 This chart shows that car use: Is highest for health related trips Is second highest for school related trips, but significantly lowest for university/college trips it is noted that University students are not generally permitted to own a car Is lower for shopping trips than for work trips Is not much different in peak hours compared with the average Cambridgeshire Traffic Monitoring 2015 CCC monitor multi-modal traffic levels crossing two screenlines in Cambridge: one on the outer radials and the other around the city centre core area, as shown in the following figure. Figure 5.19: CCC Radial and River Cam screenline traffic monitoring sites CCC Traffic Monitoring Report 2013 The following chart compares the traffic composition results for both screenlines in This shows a clear distinction between the two screenlines, with the outer radial screenline motor vehicle composition of 93% dropping to just 49% at the inner screenline, with the majority of the remaining 51% being comprised of active modes. 87 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

96 Change in Mode Share Mode Share Cambridge Access Study Figure 5.20: Screenline traffic composition results % 80% 79% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 22% 2% 29% 5% 1% 1% 40% 10% 6% 2% 1% 1% 1% Radial screenline River Cam screenline CCC traffic monitoring report data The following chart also shows how the above 2014 traffic composition results have changed since Figure 5.21: Change in screenline traffic composition results, 2004 to % 10% 5% 0% -5% Radial River Cam -10% -15% Pedestrians Pedal Cycles Motor Cycles Cars Light Goods Heavy Goods Buses CCC traffic monitoring report data This shows that, since 2004, the traffic composition at the radial screenline has not changed much, with the car proportion dropping about 2 points and the cycle proportion increasing by a similar amount. The River Cam screenline, however, has seen a significant shift from the car proportion to the cycling proportion of about 12 points. This reflects the similar result shown in the Census data analysis above in Section P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

97 Total Vehicles Parked in May 2015 Cambridge Access Study 5.3 Modal Usage Park & Ride Network Car Park Usage Park & Ride (P&R) car park usage data has been provided for the month of May The following chart shows the total number of vehicles parked in each car park in that month. Figure 5.22: Total number of vehicles parked in May Babraham Madingley Milton Newmarket Trumpington CCC data This shows that the demand at Trumpington is significantly the highest of the five car parks in terms of the total number of parking visits. The lowest demand level is seen at Milton. The following chart shows the average weekly demand profile at each site. 89 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

98 Proportion of Weekly Parking Total Cambridge Access Study Figure 5.23: Weekly parking demand profile, May % 20% 15% 10% 5% Babraham Madingley Milton Newmarket Trumpington 0% CCC data This chart shows: Weekday demand is lowest at all sites on a Monday Saturday demand is as high or higher than weekday demand at the Madingley, Milton and Newmarket sites, perhaps suggesting shopping demand The Babraham site shows the lowest weekend demand, perhaps suggesting this is predominantly a commuter site Sunday demand at the Trumpington site is nearly as high as weekday demand The following three charts provide some further insight into usage of each site by showing the average length of stay distributions for a weekday, Saturday and Sunday. These show: Parking durations are longest on a weekday, reflecting commuting uses, shorter on a Saturday and a little shorter still on a Sunday Weekday parking durations are greatest at the Babraham site, further suggesting that commuting is a predominant use for this site A minimum of 12% of visits at all sites are for less than one hour. This parking duration is not long enough to be associated with use of the bus service and so will be for the purpose of drop-off / pick-up trips and, in the case of Trumpington, for visiting the John Lewis centre. The latter is reflected in the high proportion of such visits on a Sunday. Parking for this duration is free. 90 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

99 Proportion of Total Parked Vehicles Proportion of Total Parked Vehicles Cambridge Access Study Figure 5.24: Average weekday parking duration distribution, May % 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 21% 31% 28% 24% 41% 4% 3% 6% 5% 5% 5% 9% 6% 6% 6% 6% 7% 8% 9% 12% 5% 8% 6% 10% 10% 12% 8% 8% 10% 11% 5% 8% 9% 9% 3% 7% 9% 3% 3% 6% 33% 24% 17% 20% 12% Babraham Madingley Milton Newmarket Trumpington > 8 hrs < 8 hrs < 7 hrs < 6 hrs < 5 hrs < 4 hrs < 3 hrs < 2 hrs < 1 hr CCC data Figure 5.25: Average Saturday parking duration distribution, May % 9% 10% 9% 11% 11% 90% 5% 5% 5% 6% 6% 80% 9% 9% 8% 9% 10% 70% 13% 14% 14% 14% 13% 60% 18% 16% 18% 50% 18% 16% 40% 16% 18% 14% 18% 17% 30% 10% 10% 20% 11% 11% 3% 10% 4% 10% 5% 3% 3% 19% 12% 12% 12% 17% 0% Babraham Madingley Milton Newmarket Trumpington > 8 hrs < 8 hrs < 7 hrs < 6 hrs < 5 hrs < 4 hrs < 3 hrs < 2 hrs < 1 hr CCC data 91 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

100 Proportion of Car Park Capacity Proportion of Total Parked Vehicles Cambridge Access Study Figure 5.26: Average Sunday parking duration distribution, May % 4% 5% 5% 5% 3% 3% 5% 4% 90% 7% 6% 6% 4% 6% 7% 7% 7% 80% 10% 6% 11% 11% 15% 6% 70% 5% 20% 18% 16% 60% 13% 21% 50% 23% 18% 40% 19% 19% 8% 30% 13% 12% 2% 54% 20% 11% 5% 3% 28% 3% 10% 16% 17% 13% 0% Babraham Madingley Milton Newmarket Trumpington > 8 hrs < 8 hrs < 7 hrs < 6 hrs < 5 hrs < 4 hrs < 3 hrs < 2 hrs < 1 hr CCC data Based on this parking usage at each site, the following last chart for this section shows the average maximum proportion of car park capacity used on each day of the week. Figure 5.27: Maximum car park occupancy reached by day 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% Babraham Madingley Milton Newmarket Trumpington 20% 10% 0% Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun CCC data 92 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

101 Average Monthly Passenger Flow Cambridge Access Study This chart shows the average maximum proportion of car park capacity reached per day of the week in May. Comparing with the total visits chart shown in Figure 5.22 above, this shows that: Though Trumpington receives significantly the most visits in total, the car park is never more than 54% full Madingley receives the second highest number of total visits and is consistently the most utilised in terms of capacity, being up to about 63% full Milton receives the least total visits in the month and is also consistently the least occupied, reaching a maximum of just 36% on a Saturday Park & Ride Bus Usage The following chart shows latest average monthly passenger flows on each of the three Park & Ride bus routes from February to April Figure 5.28: Average monthly passenger flows for Cambridge Park & Ride routes Madingley/Newmarket Milton/Babraham Trumpington CCC data This shows that the Madingley/Newmarket and Milton/Babraham routes carry similar numbers of passengers. The Trumpington route carries fewer but, as this route only serves one site compared to the two served by the other routes, this is the busiest of the routes in terms of demand per site. This is reflected in the parking demand recorded above for this site. The following chart shows the average daily demand profile for all Park & Ride services throughout 2014, where outbound refers to services leaving the site. This profile suggests some commuting uses, but the small offset between the outbound and inbound profiles and the outbound flow peaking at 10am also suggests usage for other trip purposes such as shopping. 93 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

102 Monthly Two-Way Passenger Flow Passengers per Hour Cambridge Access Study Figure 5.29: Hourly passenger flow profile for all Cambridge Park & Ride services, averaged over all days Inbound 8000 Outbound CCC data Finally for this section, the following chart shows total monthly patronage for all services from January 2014 to April Figure 5.30: Monthly two-way passenger flow totals for all Park and Ride services CCC data This shows a decline in patronage over this period, which also coincides with the introduction of parking charges at each site. This therefore suggests that loyalty to Park and Ride use is predominantly price sensitive and the option of continuing the journey by car remains attractive for some. 94 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

103 Aug-11 Sep-11 Oct-11 Nov-11 Dec-11 Jan-12 Feb-12 Mar-12 Apr-12 May-12 Jun-12 Jul-12 Aug-12 Sep-12 Oct-12 Nov-12 Dec-12 Jan-13 Feb-13 Mar-13 Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 Oct-13 Nov-13 Dec-13 Jan-14 Feb-14 Mar-14 Apr-14 May-14 Jun-14 Jul-14 Aug-14 Sep-14 Oct-14 Nov-14 Dec-14 Jan-15 Feb-15 Mar-15 Apr-15 Monthly Passenger Flows Cambridge Access Study Bus Network The 2011 Census travel-to-work data in Section above shows that the bus currently holds a 7%-8% mode share among those commuting to and from Cambridge. For Cambridge residents, Section above shows that the bus mode share for commuting trips has increased from about 6% in 2001 to 7.2% in 2011, or from about 2,550 people to 3,800. This represents an actual growth in bus commuting trips of 49% between 2001 and For Stagecoach services on the busway, the following chart shows total monthly patronage since the service began. This shows a steady growth in patronage, with average flows in 2015 over 50% higher than when the service opened. Figure 5.31: Busway monthly passenger flows, August 2011 to April Stagecoach / CCC data The following chart shows the average daily profile for busway usage, where inbound refers to services towards Cambridge city centre. This chart shows quite a different profile to that displayed by Park & Ride services, with much a greater offset between inbound and outbound trips and greatest demand in the peak hours. This suggests that commuting trips are more predominant on busway services than on Park & Ride services. 95 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

104 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 Passengers per Hour Cambridge Access Study Figure 5.32: Hourly passenger flow profile for all Stagecoach busway services, averaged over all days Inbound 8000 Outbound Stagecoach / CCC data Rail Network The Census travel-to-work data in Section above shows that rail currently holds a 4%-5% mode share among those commuting to and from Cambridge. For Cambridge residents, Section above shows that the rail mode share for commuting trips has increased from 5.8% in 2001 to 7.2% in 2011, or from about 1,620 people to 2,900. This represents an actual growth in rail commuting trips of 79% between 2001 and A similar growth level can be seen in the total number of people using Cambridge station for all purposes, as shown in the following chart. This shows a 151% growth between 1997/98 and 2013/14, which equates to a rate of about 400,000 additional users every year. Between 2000/01 and 2010/11 the growth for all purposes was about 69%, which is similar to the travel-to-work growth rate above. 96 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

105 Total station entries and exits Cambridge Access Study Figure 5.33: Number of station entries and exits 1997/98 to 2013/14 12,000,000 10,000,000 8,000,000 6,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 0 Office of Rail Regulation Pedestrian Network The Census travel-to-work data in Section above shows that currently about 17% of Cambridge residents, or about 8,400, walk to work. The proportion of Cambridge residents who work in Cambridge that walk is 23%. Section above, however, suggests that the walk mode share for all Cambridge residents commuting trips has only increased by about 1% between 2001 and This result is echoed by the Council s annual traffic monitoring screenline counts presented in Section above which shows that the traffic composition share of walking trips across the screenlines has increased by less than 1%. Nonetheless, though the share of walking has increased little in recent years, the total number of walking trips represented by these results has increased in absolute terms. This is shown in the following table. Table 5.1: Actual increases in pedestrian demand Data Source No Pedestrians Change Base Year Base +10 Persons % Census TTW, Cams residents 2001: 6, : 8,653 +1, % Radial screenline 2004: 2, : 3,746 +1, % River Cam screenline 2004: 22, : 26,478 +3, % Cycle Network The 2011 Census travel-to-work data in Section above shows that currently about 33% of Cambridge residents, or about 16,700, cycle to work. The proportion of Cambridge residents who work in Cambridge that cycle is an even more impressive 43%. Section above also shows that the cycling mode share for all Cambridge residents commuting trips has increased by about 4.2% between 2001 and P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

106 This result is echoed by the Council s annual traffic monitoring screenline counts presented in Section above which shows that the traffic composition share of cycling trips across the city centre inner core screenline has increased by about 12%. These increases are summarised in the following table. Table 5.2: Actual increases in cycling demand Data Source No Cyclists Change Base Year Base +10 Persons % Census TTW, Cams residents 2001: 12, : 17,257 +4, % Radial screenline 2004: 5, : 10,978 +5, % River Cam screenline 2004: 18, : 35, , % Cambridgeshire County Council also maintains a number of Automatic Cycle Counter (ACC) sites in Cambridge and around the County for which we have been provided with count data from: Two weeks in term time 10 th Nov 2014 to 23 rd Nov 2014 One week in half term 17 th Oct 2014 to 2 nd Nov 2014 Figure 5.34 below shows the location of all the sites. 98 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

107 Figure 5.34: Cambridgeshire automatic cycle counter sites 99 CCC P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

108 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 Proportion of Daily Total Cambridge Access Study Of these sites, we have identified a selection which broadly represent the following cordon types: City fringe Radial Inner core For these sites, an average term-time weekday flow profile has been calculated. This is shown in the following chart. Figure 5.35: Average weekday ACC count profile 20% 18% 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% Inbd Outbd CCC data from Nov 2014 This chart shows that: Weekday cycle use is dominated by peak hour travel, suggesting predominant use for commuting The afternoon peak is more spread than the morning, which likely reflects use for school travel also In both peak hours, there is also a small peak in the minor direction. This reflects certain sites, like Busway South, where flows are similar in both directions To further illustrate, Figure 5.36 and Figure 5.37 below show the distribution of peak hour flows at each site. These figures show: Flows tend to be highest on the radial and inner core sites and lowest at the city fringe sites The site with the highest single direction flow is Carter Bridge (Site per hour in AM peak) Sites with a high flow in both directions are: Garrett Hostel Lane (Site 9), Barton Road (Site 11) and Busway South (Site 12) 100 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

109 Figure 5.36: Average term time weekday cycle flows by direction AM peak hour (08:00-09:00) CCC data from Nov P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

110 Figure 5.37: Average term time weekday cycle flows by direction PM peak hour (08:00-09:00) CCC data from Oct/Nov P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

111 Average Two-Way Daily Total Cambridge Access Study The following chart shows the average weekly profile across all sites, in both term time and at half term. Figure 5.38: Average weekly ACC count profile term time and half term Termtime Halfterm Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun CCC data from Oct/Nov 2014 This chart shows that: Term time cycling levels are generally higher than the equivalent half term levels (15% higher over the week as a whole) The term time profile shows that cycling flows are highest on all the weekdays, with weekend levels being up to about 50% lower The half term profile is similar, which reflects the high proportion of commuting purposes, except Monday flows are significantly lower and Saturday flows a little higher than the term time equivalents Lastly for this section, the following chart displays annual variation in cycle flows from 2014, averaged for each cordon type. This shows: Pronounced seasonality for the City Fringe sites, with cycle levels being highest for the warmer and dryer months from March to October A seasonality for the Inner Core sites which partly reflects the weather seasons but also the university term times, with summer holiday months showing the lowest usage A profile for Radial sites which effectively is a mix of the other two profiles 103 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

112 Percentge of Annual Total Cambridge Access Study Figure 5.39: Average annual ACC count profile by cordon type, % 10% 8% 6% 4% City Fringe Radial Inner Core 2% 0% CCC data for Highway Network Traffic Flow Profiles CCC has used Automatic Traffic Counters (ATC) to collect traffic count data from a range of sites in connection with their 20 mph zone schemes. Most of these sites apply to minor roads, but the sites shown in Figure 5.40 are located on more significant roads and also return at least a full week s data. The counts at each site were returned hourly count data between the dates shown in the following table. Table 5.3: Site Selected 20 mph Zone ATC site count dates Count Dates Barton Road 9-18 Oct 2014 Chesterton Lane 27 Feb 5 Mar 2015 Hills Road 27 Feb 5 Mar 2015 Madingley Road 8-18 Oct 2014 Northampton Street 27 Feb 5 Mar 2015 Station Road 27 Feb 5 Mar 2015 Trumpington Road 9-18 Oct 2014 This count data is sufficiently detailed to provide weekly and daily traffic profile information. Figure 5.40 below therefore shows the average weekly motor vehicle flow profile for all the above sites combined. 104 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

113 Figure 5.40: Selected 20 mph Zone Study ATC site locations 105 CCC P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

114 Average Hourly Two-Way Flow Proportion of Weekly Total Flow Cambridge Access Study Figure 5.41: Average weekly flow profile over selected ATC sites 18% 16% 14% 12% 14.0% 14.6% 15.2% 15.2% 15.8% 13.7% 11.5% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun CCC ATC Data, 2014/2015 This chart shows that motor traffic levels on the main roads in Cambridge are greatest on a weekday, increasing steadily from Monday to Friday. However, total flows on Saturday are only a little less than on Monday. Total flows on Sunday are lowest. The following chart shows more detail by showing average daily flow profiles over all selected sites on an average weekday, Saturday and Sunday. Figure 5.42: Average daily flow profile over selected ATC sites Avg Weekday Saturday Sunday CCC ATC Data, 2014/ P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

115 Average Two-Way Hourly Flow Cambridge Access Study This chart shows that: The weekday profile shows the two typical peaks associated with workday traffic: one at 08:00 and the other at 17:00. The evening peak is higher and longer than the morning peak. Saturday traffic levels peak at midday and actually reach a level which sits between the two peak levels of an average weekday. The Saturday profile also shows a small evening peak which will be associated with the city centre s evening economy. The Sunday traffic profile is a smaller version of the Saturday profile, but without the evening peak. CCC has also provided us with ATC data profiles recorded at Hills Road, Huntingdon Road, Milton Road and Trumpington Road during term time and half term, in order to observe how the daily flow profile is affected by school holidays. The summary profiles from the four sites are shown in the following chart. This suggests that: The morning peak hour is more affected than the evening peak, with the half term morning peak being 13% lower than the term time equivalent, compared with just a 3% difference in the evening Total traffic flows at the four sites were overall 3% lower at half term than during term time Figure 5.43: Average daily flow profiles at four Cambridge ATC sites in term time and half term time Half term Term time CCC data More recently (May 2015), the Council has undertaken directly comparable term-time and half-term surveys for the radial and River Cam screenlines introduced above in Section above. Profile results from these are shown in the following two figures. These show the same results as for Figure 5.35 above, with half-term flows being about 11%-13% lower in the AM peak but only 2%-4% lower in the PM peak. 107 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

116 Flow per Hour Flow per Hour Cambridge Access Study Figure 5.44: Average daily flow profile across Radial screenline in term time and half term time Term-time Half-term :00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 Figure 5.45: Average daily flow profile across River Cam screenline in term time and half term time Term-time Half-term :00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 CCC data, Apr/May Traffic Flow Distribution In order to understand the geographic distribution of traffic flows during the morning and evening peak hour of an average weekday, the following two figures show traffic flow bandwidth plots extracted from the Council s CSRM 2011 traffic model. These figures show: Highest flows on the M11 and A14 trunk routes, as would be expected The highest non-trunk flows are on the A1134 Elizabeth Way section of the inner ring road; southbound in the morning and northbound in the evening. The A1134 Mowbray Road / Perne Road serves a strong orbital type function, partly relieving the eastern side of the inner ring road, including Elizabeth Way The highest radial route flows are observed on the A1307 Babraham Road. It is noted that this is the main approach route to the city from the south east quadrant The PM flow plot shows a similar distribution to the AM flow plot but usually in the reverse direction 108 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

117 Figure 5.46: Modelled traffic flows in Cambridge 2011 AM peak CSRM 2011 Model 109 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

118 Figure 5.47: Modelled traffic flows in Cambridge 2011 PM peak 110 CSRM 2011 Model P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

119 Change in Modal Flow Cambridge Access Study Change in Traffic Flows over Time In Section above, changes in traffic flow across two city cordons, as measured by CCC between 2004 and 2014, are presented in terms of the change in mode share. The following chart compares the same data but now presents it in terms of the percentage change in flow between 2004 and 2014 for the three private vehicle modes of car, LGV and HGV. This figure shows that, between 2004 and 2014: Car flows increased by 8% across the outer Radial cordon, but dropped by 12% across the inner River Cam screenline LGV flows increased by 8%-9% across both screenlines HGV flows decreased across both screenlines; a 15% drop across the Radial and a 28% drop across the River Cam Overall, motor vehicle flows increased 7% across the Radial screenline but dropped 10% across the River Cam screenline Figure 5.48: Percentage change in screenline flow by private vehicle mode, 2004 to % 25% 15% 5% -5% 8% 8% 9% 7% Radial River Cam -15% -25% -35% -12% -10% -15% -28% Cars Light Goods Heavy Goods All Motor Veh CCC traffic monitoring report data In order to deliver further insight into traffic changes in Cambridge, we have also interrogated the DfT s A- road traffic count database. This provides annual AADF flows for 161 different points in Cambridgeshire. We have processed data for 31 of these points in order to show changes between the same period of 2004 and 2014 on the: Trunk network Radial routes Inner ring road Based on these count locations, the following two figures (Figure 5.49 and Figure 5.50) show: 1. Percentage changes at each location in car traffic, LGV traffic and HGV traffic 2. Overall percentage change at each location in all motor traffic 111 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

120 Figure 5.49: Change in traffic levels by motor vehicle mode, 2004 to DfT traffic count data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

121 Figure 5.50: Overall change in motor traffic levels, 2004 to DfT traffic count data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

122 These figures show: Car traffic levels have: Increased on the A14, on Madingley Road, and on Fen s Causeway and Queen s Road (though the latter will partly be a response to the Core Traffic Scheme removing trips through the city centre) Generally dropped or changed little at most other sites, especially on Huntingdon Road, Milton Road, Elizabeth Way, Babraham Road, Barton Road and Chesterton Lane/Road By contrast, LGV levels have noticeably increased at nearly all sites and especially on the radial routes and the inner ring road, while HGV levels have similarly dropped As a result of these modal changes, Figure 5.50 shows that overall motor traffic levels have: Increased on the M11, on the A14, on Madingley Road, on Newmarket Road, on parts of Trumpington Road and on Fen s Causeway and Queen s Road Dropped on Huntingdon Road, Milton Road, Elizabeth Way, Babraham Road, Barton Road and Chesterton Lane/Road The following chart summarises the above results by road type. This shows a similar overall result to that recorded by the Council s screenline survey described above and confirms that: Car flows have dropped slightly near the city centre, but increased by 13% on the radial routes LGV flows have increased in all locations, but by over 60% on the radial routes HGV flows have dropped in all locations, but especially near the city centre Overall, motor vehicle traffic has, on average, increased slightly on the trunk network and by 17% on the radial routes, but remained constant on the inner ring road around the city centre Figure 5.51: Percentage change in traffic levels by motor vehicle mode averaged by road type, 2004 to % 63% 60% 40% 20% 0% -20% 3% 13% -2% 29% 28% -11% -11% 3% 17% 0% Trunk network Radial routes Inner ring road -40% -34% -60% -80% Cars/taxis LGVs HGVs All Motor Vehicles DfT traffic count data The following chart isolates those sites which sit upstream (where available) and downstream of P&R sites and shows the change in car traffic between 2004 and 2014, during which period the sites opened. This shows that car traffic has either grown at a lower rate downstream than upstream or has actually dropped. This is an encouraging result, but it is also noted from the above that the corresponding rise in LGV traffic over the same period is reducing some of the benefits of this reduction in car use. 114 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

123 Chaneg in Mode Share Cambridge Access Study Figure 5.52: Car traffic changes upstream and downstream of P&R sites 2004 to % 10% 5% 0% -5% -10% -15% Before P&R After P&R Before P&R After P&R After P&R Before P&R After P&R After P&R Babraham Rd Babraham Rd Madingley Rd Madingley Rd Milton Rd Newmarket Rd Newmarket Rd Trumpington Rd DfT traffic count data Traffic Composition Finally for this section, the following chart shows the average traffic composition in 2014 for the DfT ATC data introduced above but grouped according to location type. This shows that the main difference in motor vehicle composition between the three location types is the proportion of HGV traffic, which is 12% on the trunk network but down to 2% within the urban area. LGV traffic occupies a similar proportion in all three location types. Figure 5.53: Average motor vehicle traffic composition by ATC location type % 2% 2% 12% 90% 12% 14% 80% 13% 2% 2% 70% 0% 60% 50% 40% 74% 83% 81% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0% 1% 1% Trunk Radial Inner Ring HGVs LGVs Buses/coaches Cars/taxis Motorcycles DfT traffic count data, P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

124 No Spaces Cambridge Access Study Car Parking Cambridge City Council has provided us with parking occupancy data for their five city centre multi-storey car parks, as shown in Figure 3.24 above and as follows: Grand Arcade Grafton East Grafton West Queen Anne Terrace Park Street For each car park, the data applies to a single week (Monday to Sunday) in February, July, October and December 2014 as follows: 10 th Feb 16 th Feb 2014 (except Grand Arcade: 24 th Feb 2 nd Mar 2014) 21 st Jul 27 th Jul th Oct 26 th Oct th Dec 21 st Dec 2014 The following chart compares the five car parks in terms of total car parking capacity, and shows that the Grand Arcade and Grafton East car parks are the largest, with Grafton West being the smallest. The five car parks together offer a total of 3,067 car parking spaces. Figure 5.54: Car parking capacity Grand Arcade Grafton East Grafton West Queen Anne Terrace Park Street City Council data, 2014 In terms of usage, the following chart shows the average maximum occupancy recorded per day of the week. This shows: All car parks are busiest on a Saturday and Sunday Friday is the busiest weekday, but weekday occupancies are lower than weekends Grand Arcade is the most utilised car park on average Grafton East is the least utilised car park 116 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

125 Proportion of Car Park Capacity Proportion of Car Park Capacity Cambridge Access Study Figure 5.55: Average maximum recorded occupancy per car park and day of the week 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% City Council data, 2014 Grand Arcade Grafton East Grafton West Queen Anne Terrace Park Street Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Further results for each car park are attached in Appendix B. To provide an indication of seasonal variation, the following chart shows, for all five car parks combined, the maximum occupancy recorded on each day within each survey month. This shows: The highest utilisation is seen in December, where a minimum of 70% utilisation is reached on every day. This will be associated with Christmas shopping activity The lowest utilisation is seen in February. July and October utilisations are similar Utilisation is consistently high at weekends in all months Figure 5.56: Maximum car parking occupancy recorded for all car parks combined, per survey day per month 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Feb July Oct Dec Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun City Council data, P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

126 Average Parking Duration (hours) 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 Proportion of Car Park Capacity Cambridge Access Study To provide an indication of typical daily parking profiles, the following chart shows the average daily profile by day of week for all car parks and months combined. This shows: Weekday profiles all peak at around midday to 13:00. The Sunday profile peaks at 13:00 and the Saturday profile at 14:00. All weekday profiles and the Saturday profile show a small peak in the evening associated with the city s evening economy, but especially on Wednesday when late night shopping is available. The Sunday profile shows the least evening parking activity. It is also the shortest profile overall. Figure 5.57: Average daily parking profiles for all car parks and survey months, by day of week 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun City Council data, 2014 Lastly for this section, we do not have detailed data on lengths of stay at each car park, but the following chart shows the average parking duration for each car park during the 2014/15 financial year. This shows that average parking durations are greatest at Grafton West and least at Park Street. Figure 5.58: Average parking duration, Apr 2014 Apr Grand Arcade Grafton East Grafton West Queen Anne Terrace Park Street City Council data, P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

127 We do not have any data on the use of on-street parking or other off-street car parks Long Distance Bus We do not have any data on the use of long distance buses Tourist Coach We do not have any tourist coach travel data, but we understand that Cambridge is increasing in popularity as a tourist destination and that tourist coach demand is rising accordingly Taxi We do not have any data on the use of taxis in Cambridge. 119 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

128 6 Performance 6.1 Introduction The purpose of this section is to review how the Cambridge transport network performs in accommodating the travel demand and travel choices described in previous sections. Key messages from this section: Park & Ride service use affected by parking charge and peak hour congestion P&R patronage down by about 19% after introduction of parking charge Many sections of P&R bus routes affected by congestion without bus priority measures Bus use is affected by network coverage, traffic delays and coordination challenges Use increases with greater availability of mode, minimal interchange and reduced journey times Weekday PM traffic congestion currently resulting in 38% punctuality City centre spatial constraints and ticketing coordination present challenges to mode shift Strong linkage of rail station to city centre, particularly for pedestrians and cyclists, essential for accommodating future growth Good progress on cycle network schemes, but further network development and maintenance required to increase useability and address safety issues, and more city centre parking needed 60% of all traffic accidents in Cambridge between 2010 and 2014 involved a cyclist Congested city centre cycle parking facilities serves as potential deterrent to use of this mode Pedestrian environment can be improved through comprehensive and high quality wayfinding, raised entry treatments and implementation of shared space schemes in city centre Pedestrian accident rate per million population below national average but above East of England average Significant weekday peak hour highway delay on Cambridge A and B roads Delays of over two minutes per km on many sections of radial routes and inner ring road in weekday peak hours During school holidays, average delay 52% lower in AM peak and 28% lower in PM peak City Council control of the majority of off-street city centre car parking provides a valuable opportunity for managing private vehicle demand into the central core area Coordinated approach required to delivering public realm improvements which fully complement the quality of the city centre historic built environment City centre air quality improving and targets met at all sites in 2013, except for NOx emissions which are slightly over target in Parker Street, Pembroke Street and St Andrew s Street There are 25 inoperative bus priority facilities at traffic signals on radial routes in the city, most of which coincide with areas of peak hour congestion 120 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

129 6.2 Park & Ride Network Car Park Locations Existing P&R car parks are generally well located to capture traffic approaching Cambridge along main routes. However, the following observations are offered: For traffic approaching eastbound on the A14, drivers must either continue east on the A14 to the Milton P&R site or south on the M11 to the Trumpington P&R site. Either choice is a diversion. A P&R site on Huntingdon Road would serve this demand more directly. The Milton P&R site, though reasonably located for A10 traffic, would intercept more traffic if it were located on the south side of the A14. It is noted from Section that this is the least utilised of the five P&R sites Car Park Usage Figure 5.27 above shows that there is sufficient parking capacity at to more than meet existing P&R demand, but Figure 5.30 also shows a decline in P&R usage from January 2014 to April 2015, where January to April figures were 19% lower in 2015 than in It is noted that during this time a flat rate parking charge of 1 was introduced. Anecdotal reports from the internet and local press also suggest initial customer dissatisfaction with the ease of use of the ticket machines, resulting in queuing delays, though the same reports describe that the Council has since responded to these issues. Use of P&R to travel into and out of Cambridge city centre now costs a total of This is equivalent to a stay of about 2 hours in a city centre Council car park and so suggests that P&R is likely to be most competitive for P&R parking stays of 3 hours and over. This is confirmed by the length-of-stay charts in Section above Bus Service Usage The following two figures show average delay on the Cambridge P&R network in the AM and PM peak, during school term time in the 2013/14 academic year. These figures show: Greatest AM peak delay is seen inbound on Babraham Rd. Sections of bus lane help avoid this, but there are long congestion sections without bus lanes. Same applies inbound on Trumpington Road. Inbound bus lanes on Milton Rd and Newmarket Rd help avoid AM peak congestion on these routes. Greatest PM peak delay is seen outbound on Trumpington Road. Long section of bus lane helps avoid this, but long congestion sections without bus lanes. No outbound bus lanes to avoid delay on Madingley Road, Newmarket Road or Hills Road. The punctuality and reliability of P&R bus services is therefore currently affected by congestion at peak times of day. Figure 5.29 above shows that these times coincide with times of high demand for P&R travel. This disruption is likely to be reducing the potential of the service to generate mode shift from private car use into the centre of Cambridge. 121 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

130 Figure 6.1: Average journey time delay on P&R bus routes AM Peak, 2013/ Trafficmaster P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

131 Figure 6.2: Average journey time delay on P&R bus routes PM Peak, 2013/ Trafficmaster P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

132 PT Mode Share Cambridge Access Study 6.3 Bus Network Service Coverage Public transport accessibility for employees accessing main employment zones in Cambridge is considered in Section 4 above. This assessment shows that, on average, just over half of the employees for these zones live within 45 minutes of their workplace by public transport, but that this proportion is likely to be higher for central sites in Cambridge and lower for more peripheral sites. In Figure 5.11 above, the public transport mode share of employees travelling to these employment zones is presented. This allows us to compare the public transport accessibility level of each area with the actual level of public transport use, to see how accessibility influences travel. The following chart therefore plots, for each zone 1 : The 2011 Census public transport mode share (y-axis), and The proportion of employee catchment covered by a 45 minute public transport travel time (x-axis) Figure 6.3: 20% 18% 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% Relationship between PT mode share for each site and employee catchment within 45 mins by PT y = x R² = % 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% % Employee Catchment Coverage by 45 min PT TRACC and 2011 Census data For travel-to-work purposes, this chart shows a strong relationship between increasing public transport accessibility and increasing use of the mode, confirming that delivering increased access to the mode is key to delivering increased use. 1 Except Zone D, as the mode share returned for this zone is not considered to be representative see Section for more information 124 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

133 PT Mode Share Cambridge Access Study The trendline on this chart also indicates the following: If 100% of employees were covered by a 45 minute public transport isochrone (ie, if x=1 in the trendline equation), this would yield a maximum travel-to-work public transport mode share of 28% At the other extreme, if the public transport coverage is less than about 23%, the public transport mode share would be zero This latter point appears counter-intuitive, but analysis of the data suggests that it is the effect of some of the public transport coverage only being achieved through trips requiring one or more changes (ie, indirect trips). These increase the coverage as much as direct trips, but do not increase mode share to the same degree. This is because indirect trips are less attractive to potential users than direct trips. Analysis of this data suggests that the provision of a direct service is about 6 times more likely to yield use of the mode than is provision of an indirect service. The higher the proportion of employees who only have access to an indirect service, therefore, the greater the ineffective coverage, as represented by the lost 23% noted above. This point is illustrated to a degree by the following chart which shows the same data as the above scatter plot but this time comparing actual public transport mode share with the employee population living within 30 minutes by public transport. Figure 6.4: 20% Relationship between PT mode share for each site and employee catchment within 30 mins by PT 18% 16% 14% 12% y = x R² = % 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% % Employee Catchment Coverage by PT TRACC and 2011 Census data This chart shows an even stronger relationship between accessibility and mode share than does the 45 minute isochrone chart above. It also shows less lost public transport coverage, with only the first 8% of coverage yielding a mode share of zero. This is due to the 30 minute public transport isochrone being composed of proportionally less indirect journeys than the 45 minute isochrone, as the lower journey time allows less opportunity for interchange. 125 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

134 The trendline equation also shows that if 100% of employees were covered by a 30 minute public transport isochrone, this would result in a maximum public transport mode share of 33%, which is 5% higher than the above equivalent result for the 45 minute isochrone. In summary, therefore, the analysis of the relationship between 2011 Census travel-to-work public transport accessibility and mode share for key employment zones in Cambridge shows that: The travel-to-work public transport mode share increases with increased coverage of employees living within a 45 minute travel time isochrone e.g. 100% coverage would yield a theoretical public transport mode share of 28% This mode share increases further the greater the proportion of employees covered by lower journey time isochrones e.g. 100% coverage in 30 minutes would yield a theoretical public transport mode share of 33% And the mode share increases further still the more the isochrone is based on direct services rather than indirect services e.g. 100% coverage in 30 minutes by direct services only would yield an estimated theoretical public transport mode share of 43% Reliability and Delay The following two figures show average delay on the high frequency (minimum 3 buses per hour per direction) Cambridge bus network in the AM and PM peak, during school term time in the 2013/14 academic year. These figures show: Significant inbound delay on all radial routes to the city centre in AM peak. Outbound delay also on Hills Road and Trumpington Road Significant two-way delay in PM peak on the inner ring road, Madingely Road, Trumpington Road, Hills Road, Brooklands Avenue, Mill Road, Newmarket Road and on Milton Road between the Science Park and the A14 Reliable operation is therefore difficult in the city due to regular traffic congestion which is beyond the control of operators. Figures for journey reliability as measured by the Traffic Commissioners definition (up to one minute early to 5 minutes 59 seconds late averaged over origin and intermediate timing points) shows a poor performance as shown in Table 6.1. Table 6.1: Proportion of bus services operating to timetable (ie up to 5m 59s late) Time Periods Wkdays (Nov-mid Dec 2014) Saturdays (November 2014) Half term (February 2015) All time periods 69% 79% 79% 7am-9am 71% 93% 90% 9am-4pm 75% 77% 76% 4pm-6pm 38% 71% 65% CCC data A particular problem is evident on weekdays, especially between 4pm and 6pm. Getting around or out of the city is a significant challenge due to congestion which affects services for some time as late running has a knock-on effect on other services. 126 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

135 Figure 6.5: Average journey time delay on high frequency bus routes AM Peak, 2013/ Trafficmaster P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

136 Figure 6.6: Average journey time delay on high frequency bus routes PM Peak, 2013/ Trafficmaster P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

137 6.3.3 Bus Station A wide range of services is accommodated in the central area. While this gives some focus for regular users, finding the relevant stops may represent a challenge for some potential users, especially those transferring from one service to another or those with some form of mobility impairment. In addition, although Drummer Street now has a partial canopy, there are limited customer facilities such as adequate waiting space or seating. Similarly, extended dwell times at the on-street stops causes congestion on the carriageway and the footway space for waiting passengers is limited. While some service information is available at stops, there is some reliance on bus and coach users finding out in advance about stop locations and how to travel. Bus access to the city centre is also a problem. Though central in location, Drummer Street remains inadequate in size to accommodate the number of bus movements using it. Given the number of buses currently, and an expected increase in the number of services as the city grows, additional interchange points will be needed. Long distance bus services are important and currently terminate at Parkside, close to Drummer Street. Some of these vehicles are large (15 metres) and not well suited to the city s streets but do need a destination in the central area, preferably with good waiting facilities which are absent currently Vehicles It is noted in Section above that the bus fleet in Cambridge is of a reasonable standard. However, there are a number of issues to be addressed: The number of vehicle movements and the size of vehicles can result in competition for city space with pedestrians and cyclists Vehicle quality needs to be complemented continuously by customer care initiatives and training so that operating staff can respond to customer needs effectively (and to make best use of the vehicle designs) As bus designs get larger, their manoeuvrability can be compromised; for example, reversing in Drummer Street bus station and securing the substantial kerb length required for 15 metre coaches The image of buses remains poor for many people and effort is needed to overcome this fundamental problem. While vehicles on The Busway and Park & Ride services have attracted new users who would otherwise complete their journeys by car, achieving a shift from car to bus remains a challenge Ticketing Payment method and fares are a significant determinant of whether or not people choose to use buses. In and around Cambridge, the position is complicated given that there are two main operators each with their own arrangements. This is evident on The Busway services where coordination has proved to be elusive. Intending users need to know how much it will cost and, apart from day and season tickets, there is little information available on fares. There is also the coordination problem in that users would like to use any relevant service and not just a selection based on operating arrangements. A deregulated market also tends to perpetuate such problems, despite this being a barrier to use. Further difficulties arise from the complex range of products available, each with their own terms and conditions. 129 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

138 Initiatives to promote integrated ticketing present significant potential to grow the market for bus use but need to be handled carefully. A transparent and comprehensive approach would support a modal shift from car to bus. 6.4 Rail Network Station Location The station is located about 1.7 km from the geometric centre of the city, which equates to about a 20 minute walk. Clearly, this distance cannot be reduced, but it highlights the importance of excellent and pleasant walking and cycling links between the two. Presently, building works and narrow footways on Station Road and the busyness of the Catholic Church junction impact on this journey on foot. Some improvements to this route and to wayfinding facilities would improve this linkage Cycle Facilities As noted above in Section , construction work around the station has resulted in temporary bicycle parking provision which is further away from the station than the previous provision. This can result in cycles being locked to railings and poles in front of the station and wardens perform patrols aimed to prevent this practice. There have also been complaints about the poor standard of the temporary provision and the lack of lockers at the station. However, this situation will be resolved by the proposed 3,000 space covered and secure CyclePoint scheme. Station Road currently provides the main cycle route between the station and the city centre but, as noted in Section above, this currently provides a low level of cycle priority. Measures to reinforce this linkage should be considered. 6.5 Cycle Network Infrastructure Historically, cycle infrastructure within Cambridge has been typical of the infrastructure provided throughout the UK. However, more recently a step change has occurred in the quality of the cycle infrastructure that is being delivered, recognising the need to encourage more people to cycle into and within the city. CCC has invested in significant cycle infrastructure. Good examples include the Hills Road bridge cycle lane scheme implemented in This scheme features 2.1 metre wide cycle lanes on the up-slopes of the bridge which were previously occupied by two traffic lanes. On Huntingdon Road and Hills Road, raised 2.1 metre wide cycle lanes are currently being constructed using funding from the successful Cycle City Ambition grant. These schemes offer cyclists the safety of being separated from the traffic by a low kerb or a raised cycleway. The aim is for increased cycle lane visibility and that the sense of security offered by these Dutch inspired cycle lanes will encourage less confident cyclists to start cycling within the city. 130 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

139 The Cambridge guided busway shared-use path has equally been a major catalyst for increasing longer distance cycle commuting. This traffic free route provides high quality cycle connectivity to the Cambridge Science Park and locations in the north of Cambridge, as well as to Addenbrookes Hospital in the south of the city. Investment in junction improvements has also progressed in recent years. At the Hills Road/Lensfield Road junction and Castle Street/Northampton Street signal controlled junctions, cycle pre-signals are provided that permit cycles to enter the junction prior to the general traffic. The Perne Road/Radegund Road roundabout has also undergone Dutch style remodelling to encourage reduced vehicle entry speeds to improve cycle safety. However, the cycle network in Cambridge does suffer from some poor examples of cycle infrastructure and hostile junction layouts. For example, in many locations throughout the city, shared-use paths have been provided alongside the main carriageways. These provide increased safety due to the separation of cyclists from vehicles, but do not create convenient cycle routes, particularly for commuters. Shared-use paths also bring pedestrians and cyclists into conflict and the lack of priority over side roads can result in a disjointed stop/start journey. An example of a shared-use path creating a poor cycling environment is provided by the outbound route along Milton Road between Union Lane and Ramsden Square. Milton Road is an important cycle commuter route and therefore a high proportion of cyclists require a convenient and direct route. The offroad outbound cycle path crosses numerous private residential accesses and several side roads which have priority. The result is an unpopular and poor quality cycle route along a section of a key radial. Within Cambridge there are a number of relatively hostile junctions that can be intimidating to inexperienced cyclists. Examples include the large roundabouts located at the junction of Elizabeth Way / Newmarket Road and Coldhams Lane / Brooks Road. The Mitchems Corner gyratory is also a car dominated environment. Maintenance of cycle infrastructure is also required in several locations around the network, as shown in the following example photos, in order to improve rider safety and encourage further use. Figure 6.7: Infrastructure requiring maintenance Mott MacDonald 131 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

140 6.5.2 Parking A major issue for Cambridge city centre is the provision of cycle parking. Two good quality cycle parks are provided at the Grand Arcade and Park Street car parks, with the former appearing to be more popular due to its more central location within the city centre. On-street cycle parking is also provided throughout the city centre at numerous locations. This includes the provision of Sheffield stands and high/low stands. However, the demand for city centre cycle parking significantly exceeds supply. This is evidenced by onstreet cycle parking typically being full throughout the city centre and overspill parking taking place on lampposts, street signs, railings and other street furniture (see photos). Figure 6.8: Evidence of cycle parking under-supply Mott MacDonald Safety Figure 6.9 below plots all accidents in Cambridge which included cyclists between 2010 and 2014 inclusive. This shows that there is a concentration of accidents on the Hills Road axis, Mill Road, Newmarket Road and East Road. 132 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

141 Figure 6.9: Cycle accidents incl 133 CCC data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

142 Proportion of All Accidents in Category Cambridge Access Study The following table and chart summarise this data and show that: 60% of all traffic accidents in Cambridge during the period 2010 to 2014 involved cyclists. This proportion drops to 40% of all fatal accidents. 87% of cycle accidents were of slight severity; 12% serious; and 0.2% fatal. Table 6.2: Accidents involving cyclists in Cambridge Severity Accidents involving cyclists All accidents Proportion of all accidents involving cyclists Fatal % Serious % Slight % All % Figure 6.10: Accidents involving cyclists in Cambridge % 90% 80% 42% 40% 40% 70% 60% 60% 50% 40% 30% 58% 60% 60% 20% 40% 10% 0% Fatal Serious Slight All Not involving cyclists Involving cyclists CCC accident data The following table provides a breakdown of cycle accident types. This shows that 91% of reported cycle accidents involve collision with a motor vehicle. Table 6.3: Cambridge cycle accident types Accident Type No Accidents Proportion of All Cycle Accidents Cyclist alone 46 4% Cyclist & pedestrian 40 4% Cyclist & cyclist 16 1% Cyclist & vehicle % Unfortunately, we do not have cycle accident data for Cambridge in a format which allows comparison with the national average. 134 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

143 6.6 Pedestrian Network City Centre The popularity of the city-centre as the sub-regional retail hub and tourist destination results in a very busy pedestrian environment, particularly during the summer months. This high pedestrian demand results in pedestrian conflicts in the central areas. Footway capacity is a constraint in the narrow historic streets resulting in many city centre streets functioning as shared spaces with pedestrians spilling out into the carriageways. This is particularly the case in the retail centre of the city. Vehicle traffic is banned through the centre of Cambridge (Trinity Street / Market Street / Sidney Street), but cycling is permitted which can create conflicts between a very busy pedestrian and cycling environment, and especially for the visually impaired. The city centre streets could therefore benefit from the application of shared space design as the traditional segregation of footways and carriageway does not cater for the high pedestrian demands, particularly in the summer periods. Locations including Bene t Street, St Johns Street, Sidney Street could benefit from the introduction of shared space environments. Mill Road is an important local shopping area. This location functions as a local high street providing a wide range of independent shops and restaurants. The area suffers from relatively high levels of through traffic, reducing the quality of the environment for shoppers, residents and diners. Along popular pedestrian routes, such as Mill Road and Hills Road, there is the opportunity to improve pedestrian crossings, particularly across the side roads. Raised entry treatment crossings across the side roads would improve the pedestrian environment, as these would provide pedestrian crossing benefits as well as slowing vehicle movements through the junctions. In the wider network, overall there is good provision of formal and informal crossings at junctions and along key desire lines. Signal controlled junctions typically provide controlled pedestrian crossings. However, many of the city centre junctions appear to have long cycle times that encourage pedestrians to cross informally rather than waiting for the green man signals. Zebra crossing are also used within the city centre along with informal dropped kerbs. Within the city centre, wayfinding has been improved in recent years with the provision of maps on information posts. However, in the more outlying areas, including Cambridge Rail Station, wayfinding information is more lacking. Cambridge would benefit from a comprehensive approach to wayfinding similar in approach to Legible London. The Legible London posts include two plans showing a local map and a wider location map along with directional arrows to key local destinations. The implementation of a comprehensive wayfinding strategy would encourage local trips to be undertaken on foot and by bicycle. In summary, Cambridge is a compact city and therefore walking is a viable mode of travel for local residents and visitors. The city centre does suffer from pedestrian congestion issues as a result of relatively narrow footways in the historic core and the high tourist, shopping and visitor demands, particularly during the summer months. In general, the city is highly permeable on foot and well served by crossing facilities and pedestrian routes throughout the city. However, there are opportunities to improve the pedestrian environment through comprehensive and high quality wayfinding, raised entry treatments and implementation of shared space schemes. 135 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

144 Proportion of All Accidents in Category Cambridge Access Study Safety Figure 6.12 below shows all accidents in Cambridge between 2010 and 2014 inclusive which included pedestrians. The following table and chart summarise this data and show that: There is a concentration of accidents on the Hills Road axis, Mill Road and East Road 12% of all traffic accidents in Cambridge during the period 2010 to 2014 involved pedestrians. This proportion increases to 40% of all fatal accidents 78% of pedestrian accidents were of slight severity; 21% serious; and 0.9% fatal Table 6.4: Accidents involving pedestrians in Cambridge Severity Accidents involving pedestrians All accidents Proportion of all accidents involving pedestrians Fatal % Serious % Slight % All % Figure 6.11: Accidents involving pedestrians in Cambridge % 90% 80% 70% 60% 60% 81% 50% 89% 88% 40% 30% 20% 40% 10% 19% 0% 11% 12% Fatal Serious Slight All Not involving pedestrians Involving pedestrians CCC accident data The following table provides a breakdown of pedestrian accident types. This shows that 82% of reported pedestrian accidents involved collision with a motor vehicle, but 18% involved collision with a cyclist. Table 6.5: Cambridge pedestrian accident types Accident Type No Accidents Proportion of All Cycle Accidents Pedestrian and cyclist 40 18% Pedestrian and vehicle % In 2013, the pedestrian accident rate for Cambridge was 300 accidents per million population. This is lower than the national average of 394, but a little higher than the East of England average of P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

145 Figure 6.12: Pedestrian accidents incl 137 CCC data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

146 Delay per km (s) Delay per KM (s) Cambridge Access Study 6.7 Highway Network Journey Time Delay Based on the most recent complete year of Trafficmaster journey time data, Figure 6.15 to Figure 6.20 below show average journey time delay per km (measured relative to free-flow journey times) for: Weekday time periods of 08:00-09:00 (AM peak), 15:00-16:00 (school leaving peak) and 17:00-18:00 (PM peak) Averaged for all school term time and school holiday periods separately From September 2013 to August 2014 inclusive These results are summarised by road type in the following two charts. Figure 6.13: Average delay per km (seconds) by weekday time period and road type School term time, 2013/ :00-09:00 15:00-16:00 17:00-18: Motorway A Road B Road Minor Road Local Street All roads Figure 6.14: Average delay per km (seconds) by weekday time period and road type School holiday, 2013/ :00-09:00 15:00-16:00 17:00-18: Motorway A Road B Road Minor Road Local Street All roads 138 Trafficmaster data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

147 Figure 6.15: Average journey time delay School term-time AM Peak, 2013/ Trafficmaster data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

148 Figure 6.16: Average journey time delay School holidays AM Peak, 2013/ Trafficmaster data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

149 Figure 6.17: Average journey time delay School term-time 15:00-16:00, 2013/ Trafficmaster data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

150 Figure 6.18: Average journey time delay School holidays 15:00-16:00, 2013/ Trafficmaster data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

151 Figure 6.19: Average journey time delay School term-time PM Peak, 2013/ Trafficmaster data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

152 Figure 6.20: Average journey time delay School holidays PM Peak, 2013/ Trafficmaster data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

153 Change in Delay per km (%) Cambridge Access Study These figures and charts show that: Overall delay is greatest and most widespread during the school term-time AM peak, particularly affecting most inbound radial routes, some outbound routes and the south side of the inner ring road. Delay in the term-time mid-afternoon period is mostly focussed on the south east side of the city centre. Delay in the term-time evening peak is less widespread than in the morning peak, but more intense on the inner ring road and the radial routes around the south side of the city centre, affecting traffic in both directions. Congestion is also noticeable between the Science Park and the A14. The worst delay in all three term-time periods is seen on A-roads and tends to correspond with traffic signalled sections. During school holiday times, delay is noticeably less for all three time periods, but particularly for the AM period which becomes the least congested overall of the three at these times. The following chart shows, by road type, the percentage change in delay in the school holiday periods compared to the equivalent school term-time periods. This shows that: Delay drops for all periods and road types, except on the motorway during the afternoon and evening periods. However, the latter increases are small in real terms (4 and 3 seconds respectively) On average, delay drops in the AM peak by 52% across all road types. For the afternoon and evening periods the reduction is less but still significant at 23% and 28% respectively. This result corresponds with the term-time / holiday traffic profile discussed in Section above which shows greater differences in the AM peak than during the rest of the day. Figure 6.21: Percentage change in delay in school holiday period 150% 100% 50% 0% 08:00-09:00 15:00-16:00 17:00-18:00-50% -100% Motorway A Road B Road Minor Road Local Street All roads Trafficmaster data Traffic Routeing With respect to the delay plots shown above, it is useful to understand the routeing of traffic in the city to see where there are through trips which could potentially be diverted around the centre. We have therefore 145 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

154 derived select-link analysis results from the 2011 Base CSRM model for the links shown in Figure 6.22 below. These links were selected to represent the main radial routes and two cross-river inner ring road locations. Weekday AM peak hour results are mapped and attached in Appendix C. Outputs for the PM peak have not been included as they show very similar results. The results show, for each traffic direction, the origins and destinations of traffic passing through the selected link and so provides a useful depiction of the routeing function of the link within the wider network. The volume of traffic in the images is represented by the thickness of the purple and green flow lines. Observations from these results for each select link location are presented in Table 6.6 below. Table 6.6: Select link analysis traffic routeing observations Link ID Link Name Traffic Routeing Observations 1 Elizabeth Way Predominantly linking Milton Road to south east parts of city. Also some movements between Madingley Rd / Huntingdon Rd and east of city 2 The Fen Causeway Pressured link connecting radials from A14 and M11 with south east side of city, but also evidence of through-traffic between Barton Rd and A14 jn 35 3 Barton Road Main purpose to connect M11 jn 12 to south of city, but also evidence of crosscity traffic from/to Cambridge Road to north and east sides of city 4 Madingley Road Predominantly linking the A428 and M11 south with the north side of the city 5 Huntingdon Road Mainly linking A14 north with city centre and surrounding areas. Also provides link between Girton and M11 south, via Madingley Road 6 Histon Road Predominantly linking A14 east with north and western sides of the city 7 Milton Road Provides strong link between trunk network and Science Park. Also connects A14 to north and east side of city 8 Newmarket Road Connects A14 to east and south sides of city. Some evidence of cross city traffic between A14 jn 35 and Cambridge Road 9 Babraham Road A pressured link as the main connection between the south east and the rest of the city. Strong linkage with traffic using Brooks Road to avoid city centre 10 Trumpington Road Evidence of linking jns 11 and 12 of the M11 with the south and eastern parts of the city, but also potential through traffic between the A10 and Milton/Histon 146 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

155 Figure 6.22: Selected CSRM select link analysis locations Base CSRM model (Atkins) P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

156 Proportion of All Accidents in Category Cambridge Access Study Road Safety Figure 6.24 below shows all accidents in Cambridge between 2010 and 2014 inclusive which involved vehicles. The following table and chart summarise this data and show that: There is a concentration of accidents on Hills Road, Mill Road, Newmarket Road and East Road 95% of all traffic accidents in Cambridge during the period 2010 to 2014 involved motor vehicles. This proportion increases to 100% of all fatal accidents. 87% of vehicle accidents were of slight severity; 12% serious; and 0.3% fatal. Table 6.7: Accidents involving vehicles in Cambridge Severity Accidents involving vehicles All accidents Proportion of all accidents involving vehicles Fatal % Serious % Slight % All % Figure 6.23: Accidents involving vehicles in Cambridge % 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0% 9% 5% 5% 100% 91% 95% 95% Fatal Serious Slight All Not involving vehicles Involving vehicles CCC accident data The following table provides a breakdown of vehicle accident types. This shows that only a third of reported vehicle accidents involve collision with another motor vehicle. The remaining two thirds involve collision with a cyclist or pedestrian, with cyclists forming the majority proportion. Table 6.8: Cambridge vehicle accident types Accident Type No Accidents Proportion of All Vehicle Accidents Vehicle and vehicle % Vehicle and cyclist % Vehicle and pedestrian % In 2013, the vehicle accident rate for Cambridge was 2,641 accidents per million population. This is a little higher than the national average of 2,295, but this is an average which includes both rural and urban environments. Accident rates in urban environments can be over twice as high as in rural environments. 148 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

157 Figure 6.24: All vehicle accidents incl 149 Trafficmaster data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

158 6.8 Car Parking Off-Street Parking The Council s city centre off-street multi-storey car parks currently offer about 3,000 car parking spaces. Figure 5.56 above shows that this supply is only used close to effective capacity at weekends and during the Christmas shopping period. The daily parking profile and average durations of stay shown in Figure 5.57 and Figure 5.58 also suggest that these car parks mainly serve short-to-medium stay trips rather than commuting trips. However, we understand that car parks such as Grand Arcade and Park Street suffer access queueing delays at peak parking times, which should be resolved using appropriate mitigation methods. The City Council have the advantage over some other UK town centres that they are able to control the majority of off-street parking in the town centre. This provides the local authority with the capacity to adjust the parking offer to achieve city centre demand management objectives. However, this needs to be balanced against the economic needs of the town and parking income implications for the local authority On-Street Parking Figure 3.25 above shows areas of on-street parking in and around the city centre, where most of the remaining areas shown are controlled by no waiting restrictions. This combination allows on-street parking to be managed effectively in the core zone, but we do not have information on parking compliance and enforcement in these areas, or on overspill parking outside of them. If parking is not being effectively enforced, this can result in overstaying which in turn increases parking search traffic and inappropriate parking which can cause traffic congestion. Similarly, if overspill parking is taking place in residential areas outside of the town centre, this can cause conflicts with residents and reduces the effectiveness of an important demand management measure for controlling town centre traffic. If either of these elements is not working effectively, they will need addressing in order to ensure efficient and appropriate use of the available streetspace. 6.9 Long Distance Bus We do not have any data on the performance of long distance buses to and from Cambridge. However, the observations presented above in Section 6.3 with respect to congestion and bus station management apply also to this mode Tourist Coach As noted above in Section 3.9.2, parking for coaches is available at the Madingley Road Park and Ride site ( 10 per day) but visitors are likely to be dropped off and picked up on Queen s Road. Coaches are an important source of business for the city and provision for coach parking is necessary to encourage this business and to enable drivers to take their statutory break at a suitable location (although the parking fee may deter potential users). Suitable information should also be available on the County Council and City Council web sites. 150 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

159 6.11 Servicing, Loading, Access and Taxis We do not have any data on the performance of servicing, loading, access and taxis in the city centre Public Realm For the purpose of context, Figure 6.25 below shows: The city s listed buildings The city s Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) Key development-related land allocations 151 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

160 Figure 6.25: Listed buildings, AQMA and development areas 152 CCC P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

161 Public Realm Overview The centre of Cambridge is small in relation to its outskirts and in many aspects conforms to the ideal of the 'walkable' city - the whole central area can be crossed on foot. However, there is a wide variation in the character and quality of the public realm in Cambridge. The centre of the city has a strong and individual urban character and many buildings of unique architectural and historic importance. The outskirts of the city, especially to the north and east, lack local distinctiveness and the urban realm of Newmarket Road and Milton Road, for example, which are main routes out of the city, is dominated by traffic and retail uses. A ring road runs around the centre, with a short stretch of dual carriageway north and east along Elizabeth Way and East Road. This can create severance for pedestrians and is inhospitable for cyclists; crossing points are spaced far apart and, to cross the roundabout, pedestrians and cyclists must use a pedestrian underpass at the Elizabeth Way roundabout. Figure 6.26: The East Road/Newmarket Road roundabout: pedestrians use the underpass to cross this wide junction. Mott MacDonald 2015 The urban form of the centre of Cambridge is unusual because of the large blocks of land occupied by the colleges and departments of the University. They are effectively gated developments and reduce permeability for pedestrians and cyclists, concentrating them on the routes that cross the city centre. Permeability is also reduced by the river and railway line so that pedestrians and cyclists are effectively channelled, with vehicles, onto the small number of roads leading out of the city. The character of Cambridge has changed over the last thirty years from that of a quiet market town, dominated by the University, with mainly independent shops serving the local area, to a bustling small city. The population has risen from around 99,000 in 1971, to around 124,000 in the census of 2011 and this is reflected in the new areas of housing built in and on the outskirts of the city. Improvements to the rail connection to King s Cross enable tourists to visit the city for the day and workers to commute daily to London. Low levels of unemployment and the high proportion of relatively well paid jobs in the academic, 153 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

162 scientific and technology sectors has resulted in greater prosperity in the city, supporting high shop rents and the replacement of small local shops with chain stores. The introduction of Sunday trading has contributed to the popularity of the city for shopping seven days a week. The shops draw in people from the wider area around Cambridge, which has also seen fast population growth. Figure 6.27: The market square: vehicles must leave the square by AM MM 2015 The rapid growth in the population living in the city and in visitor numbers has an impact on the quality of the public realm. The streets of the city centre are narrow and must serve delivery and maintenance vehicles in the early morning and evening and pedestrians and cyclists during the day, when through traffic is largely excluded. This has resulted in a plethora of bollards and signs which exclude or guide drivers and cyclists in what they can and cannot do. Streets are further cluttered with cycle racks, litter bins, benches, lighting and other street furniture. Surfaces are paved in a variety of materials including brick, York stone and concrete slabs. There are many different styles of bollards and lights in use. Much of the public realm is in poor condition with pot holes, uneven surfaces, broken paving slabs, and stained pavements around litter bins. As noted above, cycles chained to racks, railings, signposts and leaning against walls are a feature of the city centre, taking up a substantial area of the public realm in streets such as St Andrew's Street which are packed with pedestrians at weekends and lunchtimes. 154 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

163 Figure 6.28: St Andrew s Street: cycle parking occupies the already narrow paving. The area is closed to most traffic during the day. MM Public Realm Conflict Examples The public realm has been improved in the city in the last thirty years through closing roads in the centre to almost all traffic during the day and closing 'rat runs' in residential areas. It is also noted that Policy 9 of the emerging Cambridge Local Plan sets out a strategy for delivering further improvements in future. However, the sheer volume of traffic and visitors currently reduces the quality of life for many residents. Residential development lines most main roads into Cambridge and residents suffer from noise and poor air quality from commuter traffic queueing to get onto the city. There are long car queues along Downing Street, Tennis Court Road and Jesus Lane on Saturdays and Sundays for car parks. The difficulties of managing traffic in Cambridge have led to a number of unwelcome impacts on the public realm. Some of these impacts are illustrated listed below with examples: Mitcham s Corner and Chesterton Road This neighbourhood centre is affected by through traffic. Classified by Cambridge City Council as an Opportunity Area, the Council is keen to reduce the dominance of traffic using the gyratory linking Milton Road, Victoria Road and Chesterton Road. Though providing an important and effective traffic function, the gyratory causes severance between housing to the north and the city centre and reduces the viability of the local shops at Mitcham s Corner. The multi-lane junctions require extensive signage to guide traffic and the only open space is effectively in the middle of the gyratory. Cyclists have to cycle between two traffic lanes at the Chesterton Road/Victoria Road junction, which is potentially hazardous for young and inexperienced cyclists. 155 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

164 Figure 6.29: Mitcham s Corner: busy, wide road severs northern Cambridge from the city centre. MM Tennis Court Road and Downing Street Cars queueing to get into the Grand Arcade/Lion Yard car parks (especially at weekends) dominate what would otherwise be a quiet street. This is a reasonably permeable area for pedestrians and cyclists, with otherwise little through traffic. The University plans to improve permeability of the New Museums Site, off Downing Street; the draft Local Plan highlights the Old Press/Mill Lane area as an Opportunity Area; and the existing public realm contains many valuable assets. This part of the city centre therefore has the potential to have a very high quality of public realm Hills Road from Addenbrookes Hospital Roundabout to Catholic Church A series of major junctions with multiple lane changes and a complicated cycle route makes this road daunting for cyclists and pedestrians alike. Again, signage and road markings which are required to help road users choose the right lane add to street clutter. The junction at the Catholic Church (Lensfield Road) and the railway bridge have been recently redesigned but they are still difficult to cross and occupy a large area of what could otherwise be public realm. Pavements are often too narrow such as at the corner of Regent s Street and Lensfield Road. 156 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

165 Figure 6.30: The Junction of the A1307 and Lensfield Road: wide expanse of road but narrow pavements MM Queen s Road This is a tree lined road along one of the most beautiful parts of Cambridge the gardens side of the colleges, known as the Backs. The view of King s College Chapel from here is featured in Simon Jenkins s book England s 100 Best Views (Profile Books, 2013). Heavy traffic along what is effectively an inner ring road reduces the quality of the pedestrian experience. It causes severance between two parts of the university the library and West Cambridge site and the colleges. Figure 6.31: Queen s Road and the Backs MM P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

166 The City Centre The rising population of Cambridge, increasing numbers of tourists and the attractiveness of Cambridge for shopping, puts enormous pressure on the small city centre. This has resulted in a decline in the fabric of the public realm and increasing use of signage, barriers, bollards and other street furniture to control traffic and pedestrians. Litter bins, cycle racks and seating have dual uses: for their primary function, but also to exclude traffic. They have the unwanted effect of adding to street clutter and reducing the space available for pedestrians. The setting of buildings of national and international importance such as King s College Chapel and the Senate House are adversely affected by the condition of the streets. Figure 6.32: Senate House Hill on King s Parade: litter bins, benches, unmatched bollards and light columns exclude traffic from the paved area in front of Great St Mary s but add to impression of a cluttered public realm MM Air Quality As shown in Figure 6.25 above, there is an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) in Cambridge city centre. Table 6.9 shows the national air quality objectives required to be met by the AQMA. Table 6.9: Pollutant Air Quality Objectives included in Regulations for the purpose of LAQM in England Air Quality Objective Concentration Measured as Benzene µg/m3 Running annual mean 5.00 µg/m3 Annual mean 1,3-Butadiene 2.25 µg/m3 Running annual mean Carbon monoxide 10 mg/m3 Running 8-hour mean Lead 0.50 µg/m3 Annual mean 0.25 µg/m3 Annual mean Nitrogen dioxide 200 µg/m3 not to be exceeded more than 18 times a year 1-hour mean 40 µg/m3 Annual mean 158 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

167 Pollutant Particulate Matter (PM10) (gravimetric) Air Quality Objective Concentration Measured as 50 µg/m3, not to be exceeded more than 35 times a year 24-hour mean 40 µg/m3 Annual mean Sulphur dioxide 350 µg/m3, not to be exceeded more than 24 times a year 1-hour mean 125 µg/m3, not to be exceeded more than 3 times a year 24-hour mean 266 µg/m3, not to be exceeded more than 35 times a year 15-minute mean Details on progress against each of these objectives is provided in Appendix D. The overall results are that the current NOx levels within the AQMA are in decline and below the target at all sites, except for slight exceedances at Parker Street, Pembroke Street and St Andrew s Street. Current PM land Benzene levels fall well below the national objective and are not considered to be problem Digital Infrastructure RTPI Bus Stops As can be seen in Figure 3.2 above, many of the bus stops in Cambridge are now equipped with RTPI functionality, but there are also still substantial sections of the network without this equipment Bus Priority It is noted in Section above that there are currently some bus priority signals operating as part of the Busway. However, throughout the city, there are 25 additional junctions where bus priority equipment is installed but which have not become operational and are not planned to be switched on in the near future. The reason for not turning on bus priority is due to the fact that the bus operators are changing the method of communication for Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL), so instead of using additional equipment on buses, it will all be run from their on-board ticket machine. The effect of doing this, however, means that the ticket machine will not be capable of triggering the Traffic Light Priority (TLP). The 25 junctions are shown in Figure 3.16 below. It is noted from Figure 6.5 and Figure 6.6 above that many of these locations coincide with sections of the bus network which currently experience significant peak hour delays. 159 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

168 Figure 6.33: Non-operational bus priority locations 160 Mott MacDonald P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

169 Journey Time Monitoring Current Situation Journey time data pertaining to traffic congestion is currently not collated effectively and utilised within CCC. The UTMC CDB supplied by Cloud Amber at CCC has the ability to integrate journey time data from a number of sources: SatNav Data (e.g.: TomTom) Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) for buses equipped with RTPI equipment SCOOT from UTC Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) Previously, CCC were utilising TomTom congestion data for a majority of the Cambridgeshire region but, because of contractual issues with CCC being not able to publish the data to the public, the decision to withdraw the processing of TomTom data within the UTMC CDB was undertaken. Currently, the UTMC CDB holds all remaining TomTom network links which are now redundant (owing to data not being populated) as shown in Figure It is recommended that the supplier of the UTMC CDB removes all the redundant TomTom data links on behalf of CCC. Figure 6.34: Redundant TomTom data links in UTMC CDB Mott MacDonald 161 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

170 ANPR Cameras were also previously used to collate Journey Time data which was then incorporated into the UTMC CDB via the Journey Times Engine (used to calculate journey times from a number of disparate data sources). However, the ANPR cameras and the associated back office system have now been removed in favour of the Bluetooth solution mentioned below, primarily as the cost of ANPR cameras was very expensive. Journey time data from Real Time equipped buses within Cambridge is another useful dataset which is currently being imported into the UTMC CDB. However, as with data from UTC, discussions held with CCC have raised the concerns with the consistency of the data and therefore potentially does not give an accurate picture of journey times within the City. This can be down to a number of factors, such as failure of the UTMC adaptor that collects the data through to network issues between the UTC and UTMC systems. Data from SCOOT loops via the UTC system is currently being imported to the UTMC CDB, which is then used by the CDB in Journey Time calculations. However, an initial analysis of the data in the UTMC CDB for SCOOT loops has identified that the flow rates are not coming through for all classifications such as Class 1 vehicles. Within the UTMC CDB, there are 320 SCOOT transport links which incorporate SCOOT data. However, the CDB is only registering 18 SCOOT loops via the UTC adaptor. A detailed analysis of why this is the case would be key to identifying issues with links between UTC and UTMC, thus giving further evidence to the consistency of the data for use in journey time calculation Bluetooth Detectors CCC are about to implement a programme of installing Bluetooth detector devices across key strategic routes in Cambridgeshire. Previously, ANPR cameras were used to capture journey time information, but the high cost involved negated the benefit of obtaining the Journey Time data. The ANPR cameras which were used are owned by the Police and hence remain in situ, however, CCC paid for the maintenance of the cameras as part of agreement to obtain the data used in Journey Time calculations. There are 41 locations identified for Bluetooth devices, all of which will be installed by the end of the year (2015) listed below The system will be supplied by SSL (Simulation Systems Ltd) and is called Bluetruth. It is a cloud based solution providing a web based interface; therefore no server hardware will be required by CCC. The system will be able to provide CCC with Origin Destination journey tracking, average speed/journey time, route discover and journey trend data. In addition, data from the system can also be fed into the UTMC CDB as per ANPR systems, thus enabling CCC to integrate journey time data to help develop traffic management strategies in the UTMC system. The map in Figure 6.35 shows the Bluetooth device locations. 162 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

171 Figure 6.35: Proposed Bluetooth detector locations 163 Mott MacDonald P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

172 6.14 Smarter Choices Travel for Cambridgeshire The work of TfC is described in Section above. The success of TfC is supported by the following table, which shows the modal shift for the period based on core employees who have taken part in the travel survey each year (Core employees include Cambridge City Council, GO-East, Marshall Group of Companies, South Cambridgeshire District Council, University of Cambridge, Cambridgeshire County Council and Huntingdonshire District Council). Table 6.10: Travel for Cambridgeshire Group Survey Results Table 2012/13 Mode Oct 2001 Oct 2002 Oct 2003 Oct 2004 Oct 2005 Bicycle 22.1% 26.1% 23.4% 22.5% 23.3% 25.5% 24.3% 24.6% 24.8% 26.5% 26.0% 27.2% Car Share 11.3% 11.4% 12.2% 11.1% 10.8% 10.8% 9.6% 10.7% 9.7% 10.4% 10.1% 10.4% Drive (alone) Home - working Oct 2006 Oct 2007 Oct 2008 Oct 2009 Oct 2010 Oct 2011 Oct % 41.2% 44.4% 45.0% 41.2% 40.0% 41.9% 38.9% 40.6% 37.7% 39.0% 38.5% % 1.8% 1.6% 1.9% 2.2% 2.0% 2.0% 2.6% 2.6% Motorbike 1.5% 2.0% 1.7% 1.3% 1.8% 1.6% 1.6% 1.8% 1.1% 1.2% 1.4% 1.0% Other % 1.8% 0.2% 0.4% 0.2% 1.5% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% Other Workplace % 1.9% 1.8% 2.0% 2.1% 1.9% 1.9% 2.3% 2.1% Public Bus 6.6% 7.8% 6.2% 6.6% 6.5% 7.7% 7.7% 7.8% 7.0% 7.4% 7.0% 7.3% Staff Bus 1.1% 0.9% 0.5% 0.8% 0.8% 0.9% 0.6% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% Train 2.3% 2.2% 2.6% 2.7% 2.8% 3.0% 3.5% 3.6% 3.0% 4.3% 3.8% 4.1% Walk 6.6% 7.0% 6.7% 6.2% 7.2% 6.9% 6.6% 7.7% 8.0% 8.1% 7.4% 6.6% Respondents: 8,509 (2012) Cambridgeshire Travel for Work Partnership, Annual Progress Report April 2012 to March % of TfC commuters cycled to work in comparison to 3% nationally and 5% regionally. The average distance travelled to work by respondents in 2012 was 14km (8 miles) Travel Apps In Section above, the MyBusTrip app is described. However, owing to data sharing agreements, CCC is not able to release data to the outside world to allow App developers who specialise in developing Apps to promote innovation and high usage of Council data. Back in 2013, CCC ICT had also procured the development of a mobile application which would have been platform independent of Windows, Apple ios, Blackberry and Android. The prime purpose was to disseminate transport specific data across all such as CCTV, roadworks and incidents. However, this project was cancelled owing to data sharing agreements not being in place. Example screen shots of what the mobile application may have looked like are shown in Figure P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

173 Figure 6.36: Mobile application platform independent Cloud Amber/CCC There is therefore potential for some further development of travel apps for Cambridge. 165 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

174 7 Future 7.1 Introduction In light of the above performance review of the existing transport network in Cambridge, the purpose of this section is to review future land use developments and transport schemes in order to understand the additional impacts the transport network will need to address in coming years. Key messages from this section: Cambridge faces significant population and employment growth over the next 15 years The Draft Local Plan for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire predicts that, by 2031, the population of Cambridge will be 21% greater than it was in 2011 and that there will also be a 25% growth in Cambridge jobs Development areas on the fringes of the city will potentially exacerbate congestion and road safety issues on some radial routes and the inner ring road Development areas within the city are to be focussed on North West Cambridge, East Cambridge, South Cambridge and the City Centre Tranche One City Deal transport schemes will help prioritise bus movements on some radial routes and provide improved cycle routes for some journeys However, congestion, bus reliability and cycle safety issues will likely remain on most radial routes Other future potential transport schemes will introduce improved rail accessibility through new routes and stations, and improved bus accessibility through new orbital links and further radial route treatments The orbital links, if appropriately implemented, have the potential to relieve sufficient pressure on the radial routes and inner ring road to allow road space reallocation to bus and cycle New rail stations to the north and south could also relieve pressure on the city centre and radial routes For city centre traffic levels to remain at 2011 levels in the face of population and employment growth to 2031, a significant mode shift from car will be required For all commuting trips in Cambridge, it is estimated the overall car mode share will need to reduce from 56% to 45% Since two-thirds of Cambridge commuting trips start or finish outside the city, much of this mode shift will need to be accommodated by rail, bus and Park & Ride. For trips within the city, the cycling and bus mode share will need to increase Delivering efficiency and safety of movement by public transport and cycle modes to, within and from Cambridge is therefore key to the future transport direction of the city 166 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

175 Population Cambridge Access Study 7.2 Population and Employment Projections ONS Population Projections The current population growth in Cambridge is expected to continue over the next two decades, reaching over 136,000 in 2037; an 8.5% increase based on the 2012 population. Figure 2.1 shows that, after a small dip in 2013, Cambridge s population is expected to grow year on year. Figure 7.1: Cambridge population projection, , , , , , , , , , , ,000 Year NOMIS Table 7.1 summarises these figures. Table 7.1: Cambridge population projection Year Population , , , , , , , , ,700 ONS 167 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

176 Population Cambridge Access Study Similarly, the population of Greater Cambridge is expected to rise year on year until The region is anticipating a 16% rise in population between 2012 and 2037, taking it to 750,100 by 2037 (see Figure 7.2). Figure 7.2: Cambridgeshire population projection, , , , , , , , , , , ,000 Year ONS Local Plan Population Projections The Local Plan projections for population in Cambridge for 2031 are higher than the ONS forecasts: 150,000 compared to 133,100). The housing and employment targets included in the Draft Plan reflect this higher projection. Table 7.2 outlines the Local Plan population forecast. Table 7.2: Year Local Plan population projections for Cambridge Population , ,000 Draft Local Plan for Cambridge (2014) Employment Projections Table 7.3 sets out the employment targets for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire from the Draft Local Plan. The table shows that there are 44,100 new jobs planned for the region to meet the needs of the 168 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

177 expected population growth. To accommodate this growth in jobs, there is a need for extra hectares of employment land in Cambridge and 43 3 extra hectares in South Cambridgeshire. Table 7.3: Location Employment Targets Jobs target Cambridge 22,100 South Cambridgeshire 22,000 Examination into the Soundness of the Cambridge Local Plan and South Cambridgeshire Local Plan (2014) Joint Matter 4 Employment and Retail Housing Projections Table 7.4 sets out the housing targets for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire from the Draft Local Plan. The table shows that 33,000 new houses are planned for the region to meet the needs of the expected population growth. It is anticipated that 36,389 dwellings will be delivered between 2011 and 2031 with a 10% surplus remaining which provides flexibility to respond to changing conditions. Table 7.4: Location Housing Targets Housing target Cambridge 14,000 South Cambridgeshire 19,000 Examination into the Soundness of the Cambridge Local Plan and South Cambridgeshire Local Plan (2015). Matter 8 Housing Land Supply and Delivery Figure 7.3 provides an overview of the key employment and housing sites planned for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire. 2 Cambridge Local Plan 2014: Proposed Submission (p134) 3 South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2013: Proposed Submission (p25) P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

178 Figure 7.3: Planned developments in Cambridge/South Cambridgeshire The Greater Cambridge City Deal (2015) 7.3 Land Use Developments The Draft Local Plan for Cambridge (2014) sets out the policies that will guide how Cambridge meets its development needs to The land-use proposals that will support this development can be grouped under the following headings: Cambridge City Centre Sites covered by existing area action plans (AAPs) Area of major change (AOMCs) Opportunity areas Site specific proposals The sites that have been considered suitable to contribute towards Cambridge s needs to 2031 are attached in Appendix E. Figure 7.4 provides an illustration of these sites in relation to the Greater Cambridge area. 170 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

179 Figure 7.4: Cambridge Local Plan 2014 Proposed Submission Policies Map Cambridge City Council 171 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

180 7.3.1 Potential Transport Effects of Land Use Developments The schemes that are planned in Cambridge are likely to impact upon the whole city, but may particularly affect the areas and modes discussed in the following text North-West Cambridge The schemes that form part of the North West Area Action Plan, such as a 66.9 ha mixed use development and other major developments, will largely be accessed from Huntingdon Road and Histon Road. This will therefore increase demand for trips on these two radial routes. Currently in the weekday AM peak hour, Figure 6.13 above shows that Huntingdon Road experiences significant delay along half its length in the inbound direction, while Histon Road experiences significant delays along its full length. The situation is improved in the weekday PM peak, with short sections of outbound delay on Histon Road only. Increased development on these links is likely to cause a deterioration of this situation unless suitable mitigation is applied. It is also noted that access between Huntingdon Road and the adjacent trunk network is limited, with direct connection possible with the A14 (north) but not with the A14 (east), M11 (south) or A428 (west). Access to: A14 (east) requires use of Histon Road to reach junction 32 of the A14 M11 (south) requires use of Madingley Road to reach junction 13 of the M11 A428 (west) requires use of Madingley Road or The Avenue through Madingley In all three of these cases, traffic must first be drawn towards the city centre before heading out on a busy radial route, which increases pressure on sensitive areas of the network. In terms of existing public transport provision, Figure 3.4 above shows that weekday peak hour bus frequencies on Huntingdon Road and Histon Road are in the range of 6 to 9 services per hour in each direction. These corridors are therefore well served by bus. However, there are no bus priority measures on either route, so these services will be vulnerable to congestion disruption at peak times. In terms of cycle provision, Figure 3.14 above shows that there are on-road cycle lanes along Huntingdon Road and Histon Road. However, Figure 6.10 above shows clusters of cycle accidents on Histon Road, including one fatality. Cycle safety should therefore be addressed on this corridor to ensure that new development in this area does not result in either an increase in cycle accidents or a deterrence to use East Cambridge The schemes that form part of the Cambridge East Area Action Plan, resulting in up to 1,500 new houses, will be primarily accessed from Newmarket Road. This will therefore increase demand for trips on this key radial route from the east, as well as on east and south elements of the outer ring road. Currently in the weekday AM peak hour, Figure 6.13 above shows that Newmarket Road experiences significant inbound delay towards the city centre, while the junction of Newmarket Road and Ditton Lane results in significant delays on the Ditton Road arm. In the weekday PM peak, there is significant outbound 172 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

181 delay on Newmarket Road. Increased development on these links is likely to cause a deterioration of this situation unless suitable mitigation is applied. In terms of existing public transport provision, Figure 3.4 above shows that weekday peak hour bus frequencies on Newmarket Road are in the range of 6 to 9 services per hour in each direction, including Park & Ride services, and that there are two way bus lanes to help avoid some of the congestion sections. Without P&R, however, the frequency of buses is half hourly in each direction. This service frequency would require improvement to accommodate the new development. In terms of cycle provision, Figure 3.14 above shows that there are on-road cycle lanes along Newmarket Road. However, Figure 6.10 above shows clusters of cycle accidents along Newmarket Road between the airport and the city centre, including several severe accidents. Cycle safety should therefore be addressed on this corridor to ensure that new development in this area does not result in either an increase in cycle accidents or a deterrence to use South Cambridge A number of new developments are planned for the south of Cambridge, around the Trumpington area. The planned schemes include a 68.2 ha medical service and biomedical research centre, a 60.7 ha residential development with 2,250 new dwellings, and a number of smaller housing developments providing over 1,000 new homes. This development will increase demand for trips on the key radial routes of Trumpington Road and Hills Road, as well as on south and east elements of the outer ring road. Currently in the weekday AM peak hour, Figure 6.13 above shows significant inbound delay in Trumpington and on Babraham Road / Hills Road from the P&R site to the city centre. In the weekday PM peak, there is significant outbound delay along the length of Trumpington Road and on part of Hills Road, as well as inbound delay on both routes closer to the city centre. Increased development on these links is likely to cause a deterioration of this situation unless suitable mitigation is applied. In terms of existing public transport provision, Figure 3.4 above shows that weekday peak hour bus frequencies on Trumpington Road and Hills Road are a minimum of 6 services per hour in each direction, providing regular links to the city centre. There is also one outbound bus lane on Trumpington Road and some inbound bus lanes on Hills Road, but not enough to avoid all areas of delay experienced by these routes. The busway between Trumpington, Addenbrooke s and the station does provide a traffic free route for buses and cyclists between these destinations, but improving priority on the radial routes will also be important for promoting sustainable travel from the new developments. In terms of cycle provision, Figure 3.14 above shows that there are cycleways and on-road cycle lanes along Trumpington Road and Hills Road and along the south and east sections of the outer ring road. There is also a traffic free cycle route along the busway. However, Figure 6.10 above shows clusters of cycle accidents along the length of Hills Road and on sections of Trumpington Road, including several severe accidents. Cycle safety should therefore be addressed on these corridors to ensure that new development in this area does not result in either an increase in cycle accidents or a deterrence to use City Centre The centre of Cambridge has a number of new developments planned over the coming years, particularly around the railway station and the River Cam. The planned schemes include a 9.4 ha mixed use 173 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

182 development (housing and commercial use) opposite the main railway station, 156 new dwellings on Hills Road and over 200 new dwellings close to Mill Road. These developments will result in an increase in residents in the city centre. Whilst this may reduce car dependency, it will also increase the number of trips by walking and cycling, placing increasing pressure on cycle parking within the central area. It is therefore important that cycle facilities are upgraded in the city centre so that they can meet the potential growth in demand to ensure that all who wish to cycle can do so. In addition to this, the city centre will experience increased trip demand from the new developments described above which will exert pressure on the radial approach routes, the inner ring road and the inner core area street space. This will need to be carefully managed to maintain the health and vitality of the central core of the city. 7.4 City Deal Transport Schemes The Greater Cambridge region will receive 100m of City Deal funding during the first tranche of the programme between 2015 and The committed transport schemes under the City Deal for this period, outlined in Table 7.5, add up to m including local contributions such as S106 funding. Table 7.5: Scheme Committed City Deal schemes Cost ( m) Milton Road bus priority 23.0 Madingley Road bus priority 34.6 Histon Road bus priority 4.3 A428 to M11 segregated bus route / A428 corridor Park & Ride 24.5 City centre capacity improvements / cross-city cycle improvements 22.7 A1307 corridor to include bus priority / A1307 additional Park & Ride 39.0 Chisholm Trail cycle links / Chisholm Trail bridge 8.4 TOTAL The programme is focused on delivering those schemes which maximize economic and network benefits through transforming the area s transport network. The programme has four main focuses: 1. Improving and enhancing sustainable transport capacity in the city centre using innovative and creative solutions 2. Transforming sustainable transport movements from the north to the south of the city, and on towards Haverhill 3. Supporting early housing growth along the A428 corridor with links to Cambridge Biomedical Campus 4. Bus priority and cycle and pedestrian improvements on the key radial routes to improve accessibility by sustainable alternative means of travel to the key employment areas and new developments Figure 7.5 provides an illustration of the committed schemes in the first tranche of the City Deal programme. 174 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

183 Figure 7.5: Committed City Deal Transport Schemes 175 Mott MacDonald P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

184 7.4.1 Potential Transport Effects of City Deal Schemes The City Deal transport schemes may help to alleviate some pressure on the transport network associated with the land use impacts discussed in the previous section. The following text provides an outline of the possible impact of the City Deal transport schemes North-West Cambridge As part of the first tranche of City Deal schemes, the schemes which could benefit North West Cambridge are: Bus priority measures for both the Histon Road and Madingley Road corridors It is noted above that Histon Road currently experiences significant peak hour delays but has no measures to allow buses to avoid the congestion. The proposed bus priority measures for this route will therefore improve bus access to and from the proposed new development in this area and thereby encourage alternatives to private car use. If these measures also involve increased priority for cyclists, then this would also help resolve the existing cycle safety problem along this route. The Madingley Road bus priority measures could benefit any areas of new development along Huntingdon Road which have access to this neighbouring route. However, with these schemes in place, the following above noted problems for new development in this area will potentially remain: Limited connections from Huntingdon Road to the trunk network Congestion on Histon Road and Huntingdon Road Bus delays on Huntingdon Road Some cycle safety issues on Histon Road and Huntingdon Road East Cambridge As part of the first tranche of City Deal schemes, the scheme which could benefit East Cambridge is: The Chisolm Trail cycle link between Addenbrooke s and the Science Park This will cross Newmarket Road and so will provide improved orbital cycle accessibility to and from the new developments on this radial route. However, with this scheme in place, the following above noted problems for new development in this area will potentially remain: Congestion and bus delay on Newmarket Road Low bus frequency beyond P&R site Cycle safety issues on Newmarket Road 176 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

185 South Cambridge As part of the first tranche of City Deal schemes, the schemes which will benefit South Cambridge are: The Chisolm Trail cycle link between Addenbrooke s and the Science Park Bus priority measures on the A1307 Babraham Road The Chisolm Trail cycle route will improve orbital cycle access to the north of the city and especially to the employment areas on Newmarket Road and the Science Park. This will allow some cyclists to avoid the safety issues noted on Hills Road and Newmarket Road, and also on East Road and Milton Road. The bus priority measures on Babraham Road could resolve some of the existing congestion issues on this route for buses, but this depends on how far towards the city centre these measures extend. With these schemes in place, the following above noted problems for new development in this area will potentially remain: Congestion and bus delay on Trumpington Road and Hills Road Cycle safety issues on Trumpington Road and Hills Road City Centre As part of the first tranche of City Deal schemes, the schemes which could benefit the City Centre are: City centre cycle/walking network and cycle parking improvements This will encourage continuing and increasing use of cycles and walking to access and pass through the city centre and so will help discourage an increase in car trips in this sensitive area. The bus priority measures proposed for Madingley Road, Histon Road and Milton Road will also improve bus access to the city centre along these radial routes. However, this increases the importance of ensuring that buses can access and interchange effectively once they reach the inner ring road and historic central core Other Areas As part of the first tranche of City Deal schemes and not covered by the above, it is also proposed to introduce bus priority measures to Milton Road. This will help improve P&R and bus service reliability along this important radial route which serves both the city centre from the A10 approach and the Science Park. 7.5 Other Potential Transport Schemes The transport projects that are being funded through the first tranche of the City Deal programme form just part of the solution to improve transport infrastructure in Greater Cambridge. A number of other schemes are in the pipeline and discussed in the subsequent text. 177 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

186 7.5.1 Other Projects The A14 Up to 1.5 billion of investment has been committed by the Government to improve the A14 between Cambridge and Huntingdon. The A14 is a strategically important route which connects the Midlands to the East Coast, with nearly 85,000 vehicles per day using some sections of the route in Cambridgeshire. 4 The stretch of road between Cambridge and Huntington is a key route for both commuters and freight traffic and the upgrades will help to relieve congestion, release growth and help to connect communities in Cambridge and Huntington to boost the economy and unlock local housing developments. The proposed schemes will provide a much needed capacity increase on the 22 mile route, including a new 12 mile bypass around Huntingdon. Construction is due to start in late 2016 and be completed by 2019/20. Figure 7.6 provides an illustration of the proposed improvements on the route. Figure 7.6: A14 improvements site details Highways England Cambridge Science Park Station A new railway station serving north Cambridge is planned for the Chesterton area of Cambridge. The station will be located approximately 2 miles north east of the city centre on the Ely to Cambridge line, providing improved access to the northern business and research parks of the City; particularly for people travelling from South Cambridgeshire and Ely. 4 Peterborough City Council 178 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

187 The rail station will comprise the following: Approximately 450sqm building (passenger waiting facilities; toilets; ticket office; retail; amenity space; rail staff accommodation and facilities) Two main line platforms One terminating bay platform Pedestrian / cycle bridge linking station building and platforms over the main line Operational times 05:30-01:00 daily The Interchange Facility will comprise the following: New pedestrian and cycle links to surrounding area including; Discovery Way, Pippin Drive, Ribston Way, Long Reach Road, through Bramblefields Local Nature Reserve and Nuffield Road Industrial Estate Approximately 1000 space cycle parking Extension of the Cambridgeshire Guided Busway into the site Multi-modal interchange for cars, buses, trains, cyclists, pedestrians and heavy rail Highway access from Cowley Road Approximately 450 space car park 5 The plans for the station also include excellent bus and cycling links to maximise the potential to reduce car use East-West Rail The Government has committed to the reopening of the western section of the closed Oxford Cambridge railway line to improve rail services between East Anglia, Central and Southern England. The scheme involves upgrading and re-constructing underused and disused sections of the former railway between Bedford and Oxford, Milton Keynes and Aylesbury. The scheme is being funded by the Department for Transport and the East West Rail Consortium and is being delivered by Network Rail within the railway funding control period. 6 Plans for the Central section of the railway (between Bedford and Cambridge) lines are not as well developed as the Western section and have therefore not received a funding commitment. However, the Government has said that it will work with the East West Rail Consortium to examine options for the Central section and accelerate the delivery of an option if there is a robust case to do so. 7 Figure 7.7 provides an illustration of the proposed East West Rail route. 5 Cambridgeshire County Council (2013) Cambridge Science Park Station Interchange Transport Assessment. 6 EastWestRail (2014) 7 The Greater Cambridge City Deal (2015) P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

188 Figure 7.7: The proposed East West Rail route East West Rail Future City Deal Schemes Under the first tranche of the City Deal, 100m has been committed to deliver seven transport schemes outlined in the section above. In addition to these schemes, there a number of other transport schemes seeking funding in subsequent phases of the City Deal fund. Table 7.6 provides a summary of these potential schemes. Table 7.6: Potential City Deal Transport Schemes Scheme Deliverables Cost Timeframe A10 corridor north of Cambridge 360m A428 corridor west of Cambridge 66m Major capacity improvements on the A10 45M Mid to late 2020s Major capacity improvements on the A10/A14 Milton interchange 40M Mid to late 2020s Relocated and enlarged Waterbeach Station 25M Mid to late 2020s 1,000 space Park and Ride site on A10 north of Waterbeach Busway between Waterbeach barracks and north Cambridge Busway/high quality bus priority. West Cambourne to Queens Road 8M Mid to late 2020s 32M Mid to late 2020s 53m By 2020/21 1,000 space Park and Ride on A423 in the Bourn Airfield/Cambourne area 8M By 2016/ P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

189 Scheme Deliverables Cost Timeframe A10 corridor south of Cambridge 65m Cambridge City package 321m 1,500 space Park and Ride site, Hauxton 12M By March 2021 Busway, Hauxton Park and Ride to Trumpington Park and Ride Bridge or underpass to replace level crossing on the A10 at Foxton Interchange improvements at Foxton Station Orbital bus corridor. West Cambridge to Addenbrooke's Orbital bus corridor, Cambridge Science Park to Addenbrooke's 11M By March M 40M - Tbc By March 2025 Radial bus corridors 43M By March 2022 Figure 7.8 illustrates these schemes in the wider Cambridge/City Deal context. Figure 7.8: Other Potential Transport Schemes Cambridge News 181 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

190 7.5.3 Potential Transport Effects of Other Potential Transport Schemes The programme of potential transport schemes identified above will go some way towards mitigating the growth in travel demand predicted as a result of increased population and employment growth. The following text provides an outline of the potential impact of these schemes North West Cambridge Of the above additional potential transport schemes, the ones which could benefit developments in North West Cambridge are: Improvements to A14 between Cambridge and Huntingdon Cambourne P&R and A428 bus priority West Cambridge to Addenbrooke s orbital bus corridor The A14 improvements will improve strategic access to and from the North West of Cambridge, but could potentially add more pressure to the Huntingdon Road radial route into the city centre. The proposed orbital bus corridor would open up a link between the Busway, Histon Road, Huntingdon Road and Madingley Road. This would significantly improve the bus assessibility of this area and would also open up new links for cycles. However, if this link were to also serve general traffic movements, with sufficient bus priority provided, it could provide a valuable relief link for the city centre, taking a proportion of traffic off the north side of the inner ring road as well as the connecting radial routes, and improving the accessibility of Huntingdon Road to the trunk network. With these additional schemes in place, the following above noted problems for new development in this area will potentially remain: Congestion on Histon Road and Huntingdon Road Bus delays on Huntingdon Road Some cycle safety issues on Histon Road and Huntingdon Road East Cambridge Of the above additional potential transport schemes, the ones which could benefit developments in East Cambridge are: High Quality bus route on Newmarket Road New P&R site on Newmarket Road Orbital bus route from Science Park to Addenbrooke s New Science Park rail station A High Quality bus route on Newmarket Road will improve bus accessibility for new developments in this area, as long as it includes bus priority measures to improve bus reliability and journey times along this radial route. An new orbital bus link to the Science Park will further increase the bus accessibility of East Cambridge and will provide valuable public transport and cycling connections to the north of the city and to the new Science Park station. 182 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

191 If this new link to the Science Park were to also serve general traffic movements, with sufficient bus priority provided, it would help to ease congestion on Newmarket Road and Milton Road and remove a proportion of traffic from the inner ring road. This would also potentially enable greater road space reallocation to cycle and bus on these radial routes. With these additional schemes in place, the above noted problems for new development in this area will potentially be largely resolved South Cambridge Of the above additional potential transport schemes, the ones which could benefit developments in South Cambridge are: New P&R at Hauxton and busway to Trumpington Orbital bus route from Addenbrooke s to North West Cambridge Orbital bus route from Addenbrooke s to Science Park High Quality bus route on Hills Road, between rail station and city centre The proposed orbital bus routes would significantly improve the bus accessibility of new developments in South Cambridge. These routes would allow buses from South Cambridge to reach employment destinations in the north and the busway to St Ives without having to pass through the city centre. High Quality bus measures on Hills Road would potentially assist bus reliability on this congested radial, but only if the measures involve bus priority. It is also not clear how much of Hills Road will be treated. With these additional schemes in place, the above noted problems for new development in this area will potentially remain: Congestion and bus delay on Trumpington Road and Hills Road Cycle safety issues on Trumpington Road and Hills Road City Centre Of the above measures, the city centre will particularly benefit from: The proposed orbital bus routes The Science Park rail station Both these proposals will reduce routeing pressures on the city centre and therefore allow for greater road space reallocation to buses, cycles and pedestrians Other Areas The Science Park rail station and orbital bus route from Addenbrooke s, together with the Chisolme Trail, bus priority on Milton Road and capacity improvements to the A14/Milton Road interchange will significantly improve the accessibility of the Science Park by sustainable modes. 183 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

192 7.6 Future Challenges As summarised above, the Draft Local Plan for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire predicts that, by 2031, the population of Cambridge will be 21% greater than it was in 2011 and that there will also be a 25% growth in Cambridge jobs. As noted in Section 2.4, about two-thirds of Cambridge s economically active residents work in the city, but about a third work elsewhere. Similarly, about two-thirds of the city s employees travel in from outside Cambridge. Figure 2.17 therefore shows that about two-thirds of all commuting trips in Cambridge either start or finish outside the city, while Figure 5.13 shows that this proportion rises to 84% of all commuting trips by car. Given that Cambridge is a centre of wider regional importance, it is expected that this pattern would be reflected to varying degrees in other trips purposes also, such as education, shopping and health trips. This high external trip factor among car drivers presents a particular challenge for effectively managing the city s road space in the face of future growth, particularly as much of the growth is expected to occur on the city s fringes and beyond. The Council s aspirations are that city centre traffic levels in 2031 be no greater, and preferably lower, than 2011 traffic levels. This is a sensible aspiration as increased congestion would exacerbate the cycle whereby declining bus reliability leads to increasing car use. However, to achieve this zero increase in traffic levels in the face of projected growth forecasts will require the opposite cycle to be delivered: a significant mode shift from car use. How this is achieved will need to differ depending on where trips are coming from. As noted above, 84% of commuting car trips start or finish outside the city. For non-cambridge residents travelling into the city, converting these trips to rail at journey source or to Park & Ride at the city fringes is therefore essential, which requires the onward journey by these modes to be efficient and competitively priced. For Cambridge residents travelling out, however, converting the journey en-route is not possible, in which case cycle, bus and rail options must be attractive at source. Cambridge residents travelling within the city must be encouraged to walk, cycle or use the bus for as many journeys as possible. Based on this broad outlook, we have estimated a future 2031 commuting mode share based on the following matrix of target behaviour: Table 7.7: Target 2031 commuting mode share behaviour compared to 2011 Mode Target 2031 Change in Mode Share Compared to 2011 Rest of UK to Cambridge South Cams to Cambridge Cambridge to Cambridge Cambridge to South Cams Cambridge to Rest of UK On Foot No change No change Increase No change No change Bicycle No change Increase Increase Increase No change Bus No change No change Increase Increase Increase P&R Increase Increase NA NA NA Rail Increase Increase Increase Increase Increase Car etc Decrease (zero trip growth) Decrease (zero trip growth) Decrease (zero trip growth) Decrease (zero trip growth) Decrease (zero trip growth) 184 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

193 No Additonal Commuting Trips Proportion of Additional Commuting Trips No 2-Way Commuting Trips per Day Cambridge Access Study Based on these parameters, we estimate the following mode share change would be required for commuting trips in Cambridge in order to maintain 2011 traffic levels in the city (note that the increase in bus use includes all increase in Park & Ride use). Figure 7.9: Estimated 2031 Cambridge commuting mode share to maintain zero car trip growth % % 20% 8% 6% 23% 12% 10% 56% 45% On Foot Bicycle Bus Rail Car, Taxi, M'cycle, Other Census, MM estimation To achieve this commuting mode share in 2031, each mode would be required to accommodate, compared to 2011 levels, the additional daily two-way commuting trips shown in the following chart: Figure 7.10: Estimated additional commuting trips per mode to deliver target 2031 target mode share On Foot Bicycle Bus P&R Rail Car, Taxi, M'cycle, Other Trips Mode Share 11% 36% 11% 17% 26% 0% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% MM calculation based on 2011 Census data Achieving this level of trip growth per mode for commuting presents some challenges. When applied across all peak hour trip purposes, however, it is clear that a strong policy direction will be required. 185 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

194 8 European Benchmarking 8.1 Introduction The purpose of this section is to provide a summary review of European best practice examples of policy measures that have helped to manage car use in cities comparable to Cambridge. Key messages from this section: There are a number of European cities with policies and schemes which are relevant to Cambridge Interventions range from: Advanced smartcard ticketing (Plzen, Czech Republic) Big Data dissemination to users (Aarhus, Denmark) Free public transport provision (Talinn, Estonia) Superblock city centre access controls (Vitoria-Gasteaiz, Spain) Blanket 20mph zones and cycle streets (various) For many of these schemes, ongoing revenue funding is as important as up-front capital funding 8.2 European Best Practice Table 8.1 below presents a summary of relevant best practice examples from other European cities. The example locations were chosen broadly using the following criteria: Population around 200,000 University city Reasonable level of cycling and public transport use Managed/managing to respond to growth without increase in car trips, or managing to increase sustainable mode share The table provides an indication of where Cambridge sits compared to similar cities in Europe in terms of cycling, car and public transport use, and some examples of measures that can help to guide Cambridge s future policy making. Table 8.1: European best practice examples City Population Uni Key industries Mode share Key fact Key measures Cambridge, UK 124,000 Research & development, software consultancy, high value engineering, creative industries, pharmaceuticals and tourism. Cycling: 43% Walk: 23% Car: 26% PT: 8% Cambridge is the innovation capital of the country, with more patents per 100,000 population than the next six cities combined. Guided busway Park & Ride Cycling infrastructure Restrictions on car parking 186 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

195 City Population Uni Key industries Mode share Key fact Key measures Plzen, Czech Republic 170,000 Academic, business, manufacturing, automotive. Cycling: 4% Walk: 20% Car: 29% PT: 46% Plzen has the most advanced smartcard ticketing in the country Advanced smartcard ticketing Core tram routes and trolleybus routes covering majority of trips/mileage Controlled parking zone in the city centre Aarhus, Denmark 260,000 Academic, service sector, trade & transportation. Cycling: 16% Walk: 20% Car: 52% PT: 10% City keen to explore options to increase the performance of its transport system but current focus is on quick-and-easy access to data BLIP (Bluetooth Local Infotainment Point) system Data gathered on roads to provide a picture of each road user Information warns traffic engineers about delays Tallinn, Estonia 435,200 Finance, business, information technology, tourism, logistics, energy. Historically, ticket sales only covered 33% of the costs of running the transit network Zero fare public transport for residents and contactless travel cards Traffic congestion was down 15% in the centre in the first quarter Public transport use increased by 12.6% and car use reduced by 9% Freiburg, Germany Münster, Germany 219,665 Environmental economy, green industries. 278,000 (55,000 students) Service sector, retail, insurance, public services, banking. Cycling: 27% Walk: 22% Cycling: 35% 420km (261mi) of cycling paths in the city, equating to about 2 metres per person. Germany s bicycle capital 71% of the region s population live within 7km of the city centre. Member of the national Healthy Cities Network. 90% of streets with car traffic have a speed limit of 30km/h (19mph) Cycling streets New residential developments subject to strict planning guidelines Residential streets are deliberately circuitous Through traffic is diverted around the centre by two circular bypasses Vitoria- Gasteaiz, Spain 242,000 Manufacturing, service sector, technology Medieval town experiencing rapid urban development and increase in daily commuting trips. Administrative capital of the Basque Region. European Green Capital Superblocks scheme areas of city where access is only granted to resident cars, emergency vehicles and freight vehicles When all superblocks implemented, 71% of public space will be allocated to pedestrians/bicycles Haarlem, The Netherlands 155,000 Flower bulb exports, tourism, beer brewing. Cycling: 26% Cycling is popular due to high fuel costs, limited parking and a high density population. Bicycle Street: the bicycle is the main user and the car is a guest Cyclists have priority: they don t need to move aside to allow a car behind them to overtake Rotterdam Delft, The Netherlands Rotterdam: 610,000 Delft: 96,100 Shipping, consumer goods, research & education Rotterdam: Cycling: % The historic city centre of Delft has a low accessibility for cars and large student population giving it a high potential for bicycle use. Interurban Bicycle Highway The 10 km route is mostly an off road bicycle track Few intersections and no traffic lights 187 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

196 8.3 Summary As the examples above show, there are a range of policy and scheme options implemented across Europe that could be relevant and applicable to Cambridge city centre. Demand management measures, such as the superblocks scheme in Vitoria-Gasteaiz, are good examples of how innovative solutions to reducing car use and redistribute public space to pedestrians and cyclists can be delivered in a historic and economically vibrant city. It is important to note that a number of the measures delivered in the European examples e.g. free public transport, smart ticketing and smart mobility schemes, require on-going revenue support as well as upfront capital investment. This will be an important consideration when generating options to improve transport conditions in and around the city. Figure 8.1: European best practice examples MM P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

197 9 Access Audit Summary Cambridge is a city with a rich history and a bright future. As a historic market town, it sits in the centre of a network of radial routes which make it a natural focal point for the wider region. And as one of the country s earliest centres of academic excellence, it is as attractive to businesses as it is to residents and students. Cambridge is therefore a growing city. But the same heritage which positions Cambridge well for the future is one which also makes that future potentially difficult to accommodate in transport terms. Due to the historic fabric of the city centre, road space is limited and the potential for expansion minimal. And because of the high proportion of city centre land uses occupied by the University, new development must be located in less central areas which are typically harder to serve by sustainable transport modes. Through the implementation of a package of forward-thinking measures by the local authorities, traffic levels in Cambridge have remained stable over the last decade or so, despite a city population growth of about 15% over the same period 8. The key interventions which have contributed towards this are the: Core Traffic Scheme in the city centre Bus-based Park & Ride network Introduction of Guided Busway services Improvement of radial bus corridors Ongoing improvement of cycle network The steady increase in fuel prices and the 2008 economic downturn will also have contributed to the stabilisation of traffic levels during this period. Despite these very real successes, however, a number of transport issues remain which, if not addressed, will not only affect the vitality of the city today but could potentially prevent the city from growing at the pace it should. The main performance issues identified by this Access Audit study are as follows: Road space congestion The volume of vehicles overwhelms available highway capacity at peak times, particularly on inbound radial routes in the weekday morning peak and on city centre and outbound radial routes in the weekday afternoon and evening peaks. This impacts on: Journey time reliability for all users, and particularly for time-sensitive users such as public transport, emergency services and freight Air quality and visual impact in historic areas Interchange congestion Constrained and relatively dispersed city centre bus interchange facilities can result in delays to services and user confusion Insufficient cycle parking in city centre and at key destinations results in inappropriate cycle parking and streetscape clutter, as well as a potential deterrent to use Insufficient facilities and accommodation for visiting tourist coaches could deter economically important visits to the city to 2013, as per ONS mid-year population estimates see Section P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

198 User conflict Narrow streets and footways in city centre can result in conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles/cyclists 60% of all reported highway accidents in Cambridge involve cyclists, which is a potential deterrent to use of the mode Unless these problem areas are addressed, they will either deteriorate further as the city grows or potentially even restrict the growth rate itself. The Council s aspiration is therefore that the past trend of zero traffic growth in the city centre should be continued as the city expands to 2031, or even turned to negative growth. This is a necessary aspiration for the city, but a very challenging one: as discussed in Section 7.6 above, for commuting trips alone this target will require a mode shift from private car use of at least 9%. This will be made more challenging still as new development is implemented, by necessity, on the city s fringes and beyond. In the next stage of this study, measures will be developed, assessed and filtered in order to arrive at an Access Strategy for Cambridge which fulfills this study s Vision Statement of delivering: An exemplar transport system for Cambridge that unlocks the city s significant potential for growth while also enhancing its reputation as a unique and attractive place to live, learn and work In order to achieve this, the Access Strategy will need to propose a package of measures which both address the above existing performance issues and lead to significant increases in the use of Park & Ride, bus, rail, cycling and walking modes to sustainably accommodate the projected growth. The Strategy will therefore need to propose measures which will: 1. Secure journey time reliability for bus services This is the top priority for the Access Strategy. As 84% of all commuting car trips in the city start or finish outside the city, being able to convert those car trips into bus trips through Park and Ride is essential for achieving mode shift. However, if the bus then has to sit in the same delays as the car, then the appeal of this mode is compromised. The same is true for conventional bus services. However, securing bus priority along congested radial routes, which offer limited space and little to no room for expansion, presents a particular challenge for Cambridge and various options will be explored to achieve this. At this stage, the following points are noted: Any unnecessary delay for all traffic should be resolved where possible through optimised signal timings and strategies. It is noted from the congestion mapping in Section above that many of the most acute delay sections are along signalised corridors There are currently a number of signalised junctions on radial routes which are equipped with bus priority technology but which are inactive (see Figure 6.33 above). Many of these junctions experience significant peak hour delays. Bus journey times could therefore potentially be improved by either reactivating this equipment or installing new equipment and systems where beneficial Improving and/or revising the current city centre interchange facilities could help improve journey time reliability New orbital bus links are proposed as part of future City Deal schemes (see Figure 7.5 above). These would improve the reliability of certain bus routes by allowing them to avoid more congested radial routes. However, if these routes were also available to general traffic, with sufficient bus priority 190 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

199 provided, it would further free up capacity on the radial routes to allow greater reallocation of road space to buses and cyclists 2. Ensure an accessible and attractive bus network It is demonstrated in Section above that bus mode share is likely to increase the more that potential users can access direct journeys for where they want to go. The bus network should therefore be reviewed to ensure that existing and potential market is being served in the most efficient manner and that the requirements of new developments are also fully taken into account. Improvements in ticketing and interchange integration, as well as the location and quality of interchanges, will also help to increase the overall mode share of the bus, including Park & Ride. The impact of the recently introduced Park & Ride parking charge is a reminder of how sensitive the travel market is to differential pricing within the overall transport offer, so strategies will be explored which are able to harness this sensitivity to deliver overall increases in bus mode share instead. 3. Provide city-wide ease of access to and from rail stations As noted in Section above, use of rail to and from Cambridge is steadily growing. This growth rate should increase further as new stations are opened at the Science Park and the Biomedical Campus. However, most journeys involving rail continue beyond the station itself, so onward travel links and connectivity is an important part of a rail trip to Cambridge; especially as the main station is about 1.7 km from the historic core. In order to maximise use of this mode in future, measures will therefore need to be considered which ensure that rail use to Cambridge is seen as convenient for travelling to all parts of the city. 4. Expand an efficient, safe and attractive cycle network As covered above, Cambridge offers an extensive cycle network compared to most other UK cities and enjoys unusually high levels of cycle use. This therefore represents an excellent platform from which to develop cycling to be the mode of choice for all short to medium range trips in and around the city. The Access Strategy will therefore identify and assess measures which: Increase capacity and priority for cyclists along key desire lines, building on innovative measures such as the new cycle lane on Hills Road and adapting the best of measures from other comparable European cities Increase the quantity and quality of cycle parking at popular destinations Increase cycle hire opportunities across the city, such as at Park and Ride sites Directly address cycle accident blackspots and improve network maintenance 5. Improve pedestrian provision and priority along key desire lines Priority for pedestrian movements has steadily increased in the city centre historic core area, particularly with the implementation and expansion of the Core Traffic Scheme restrictions. However, there are still areas of conflict and poor public realm for pedestrians within the centre, while outside the centre movements on foot can be hindered by narrow or obstructed footways, lack of side road crossing priority and long signal cycle times. 191 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

200 Most journeys, and particularly public transport journeys, involve an element of walking. In order for the mode share of journeys which involve walking to be increased, measures will be explored which enhance the provision and priority for pedestrians along key desire lines and linkages to transport nodes. 6. Deliver a smarter network for smarter users Cambridge already has the basis of a smart transport network, with VMS and Car Park Guidance information signs, RTPI equipped bus stops, traffic and cycle counters, CCTV and UTC systems, and bluetooth journey time monitoring. However, with increased coordination and optimisation of existing systems and the expansion of new systems, the city s transport networks can be made to operate smarter and more efficiently. The Access Strategy will explore the best digital infrastructure measures to achieve this and also to equip the network user with the real time information needed to make informed and appropriate travel decisions. 7. Address the growth in LGV traffic It is noted in Section above that the last decade has seen a decrease in HGV traffic in Cambridge but a significant increase in LGV traffic. This reflects a number of changes in the delivery and logistics field, such as the introduction of the Working Time Directive for HGV drivers and the rise of internet shopping. However, unless this growth is addressed in the city, efforts to suppress peak hour traffic growth through targetting the private car could be undermined. The above evidence is that this is already happening on certain links. As part of the Access Strategy, therefore, measures will be considered to increase the efficiency of deliveries and servicing of businesses in the city, such as freight consolidation centres and last mile delivery schemes. 8. Continue to directly challenge car ownership and use And, lastly, in order to deliver continuing mode shift from the private vehicle in Cambridge, it will be necessary to continue directly challenging the need for car ownership and use. Potential measures to be considered for this are: Car club schemes Selective road space reallocation to prioritise bus and cycle, as noted above Increased destination parking controls / charging / rationing Fiscal measures, such as road user charging and workplace parking charging 192 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

201 Appendices Appendix A. Accessibility Analysis Outputs 194 Appendix B. Council Car Park Data 209 Appendix C. Select Link Analysis Output 214 Appendix D. Air Quality Monitoring Results 225 Appendix E Land Use Proposals P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

202 Appendix A. Accessibility Analysis Outputs 194 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

203 Figure A.1: Public Transport travel time and employee origin catchment - Zone A 195 TRACC and 2011 Census P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

204 Figure A.2: Public Transport travel time and employee origin catchment - Zone B 196 TRACC and 2011 Census P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

205 Figure A.3: Public Transport travel time and employee origin catchment - Zone C 197 TRACC and 2011 Census P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

206 Figure A.4: Public Transport travel time and employee origin catchment - Zone D 198 TRACC and 2011 Census P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

207 Figure A.5: Public Transport travel time and employee origin catchment - Zone E 199 TRACC and 2011 Census P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

208 Figure A.6: Public Transport travel time and employee origin catchment - Zone F 200 TRACC and 2011 Census P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

209 Figure A.7: Public Transport travel time and employee origin catchment - Zone G 201 TRACC and 2011 Census P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

210 Figure A.8: Public Transport travel time and employee origin catchment - Zone H 202 TRACC and 2011 Census P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

211 Figure A.9: Public Transport travel time and employee origin catchment - Zone I 203 TRACC and 2011 Census P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

212 Figure A.10: Public Transport travel time and employee origin catchment - Zone J 204 TRACC and 2011 Census P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

213 Figure A.11: Public Transport travel time and employee origin catchment - Zone K 205 TRACC and 2011 Census P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

214 Figure A.12: Public Transport travel time and employee origin catchment - Zone L 206 TRACC and 2011 Census P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

215 Figure A.13: Public Transport travel time and employee origin catchment - Zone M 207 TRACC and 2011 Census P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

216 Figure A.14: Public Transport travel time and employee origin catchment - Zone N 208 TRACC and 2011 Census P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

217 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 Proportion of Car Park Capacity Proportion of Car Park Capacity Cambridge Access Study Appendix B. Council Car Park Data B.1 Grand Arcade Car Park The following chart shows the maximum vehicle parking occupancy recorded at Grand Arcade on each day of each month surveyed in Figure B.1: Maximum car parking occupancy recorded on each survey day 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Feb July Oct Dec Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun CCC data The following chart shows the average parking profile for Grand Arcade by day of the week. Figure B.2: Average daily car parking profile 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun 209 CCC data P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

218 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 Proportion of Car Park Capacity Proportion of Car Park Capacity Cambridge Access Study B.2 Grafton East Car Park The following chart shows the maximum vehicle parking occupancy recorded at Grafton East on each day of each month surveyed in Figure B.3: Maximum car parking occupancy recorded on each survey day 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Feb July Oct Dec Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun CCC data The following chart shows the average parking profile for Grafton East by day of the week. Figure B.4: Average daily car parking profile 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun CCC data 210 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

219 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 Proportion of Car Park Capacity Proportion of Car Park Capacity Cambridge Access Study B.3 Grafton West Car Park The following chart shows the maximum vehicle parking occupancy recorded at Grafton West on each day of each month surveyed in Figure B.5: Maximum car parking occupancy recorded on each survey day 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Feb July Oct Dec Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun CCC data The following chart shows the average parking profile for Grafton West by day of the week. Figure B.6: Average daily car parking profile 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun CCC data 211 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

220 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 Proportion of Car Park Capacity Proportion of Car Park Capacity Cambridge Access Study B.4 Queen Anne Terrace Car Park The following chart shows the maximum vehicle parking occupancy recorded at Queen Anne Terrace on each day of each month surveyed in Figure B.7: Maximum car parking occupancy recorded on each survey day 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Feb July Oct Dec Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun CCC data The following chart shows the average parking profile for Queen Anne Terrace by day of the week. Figure B.8: Average daily car parking profile 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun CCC data 212 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

221 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 Proportion of Car Park Capacity Proportion of Car Park Capacity Cambridge Access Study B.5 Park Street Car Park The following chart shows the maximum vehicle parking occupancy recorded at Park Street on each day of each month surveyed in Figure B.9: Maximum car parking occupancy recorded on each survey day 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Feb July Oct Dec Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun CCC data The following chart shows the average parking profile for Park Street by day of the week. Figure B.10: Average daily car parking profile 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun CCC data 213 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

222 Appendix C. Select Link Analysis Output 214 P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

223 Figure C.1: 2011 AM peak hour select link analysis results Link No Base CSRM AM Peak model P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

224 Figure C.2: 2011 AM peak hour select link analysis results Link No Base CSRM AM Peak model P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

225 Figure C.3: 2011 AM peak hour select link analysis results Link No Base CSRM AM Peak model P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

226 Figure C.4: 2011 AM peak hour select link analysis results Link No Base CSRM AM Peak model P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

227 Figure C.5: 2011 AM peak hour select link analysis results Link No Base CSRM AM Peak model P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

228 Figure C.6: 2011 AM peak hour select link analysis results Link No Base CSRM AM Peak model P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit

229 Figure C.7: 2011 AM peak hour select link analysis results Link No Base CSRM AM Peak model P:\Birmingham\ITB\ Cambridge Access Study\1.4 Reporting\\Cambridge Access Audit