This Paper is an integrated transport scheme. Whilst many of the ideas can be used in isolation, the greatest benefit is gained by using the whole scheme.
This paper considers transport at two scales, Feeder routes and intra- region trunk routes. Extra-regional trunk routes are only dealt with in regard to where they terminate.
Intra-regional trunk routes
See Google map -
I have identified 28 “Core Hubs” being the major urban centres serving the region. I have included several places outside of Cambridgeshire as they are used by Cambridgeshire communities or are a major supplier of people to the Cambridgeshire economy.
At each of these locations a singular transport hub location shall be established that provides adequate capacity for all inter-modal needs. i.e. Sufficient car cycle etc parking, sufficient local public transport feeder services, shelter etc for comfort.
1. Peterborough (likely several as with Cambridge)
6. Market Deeping
7. Kings Lynn
11. Downham Market
15. St Ives
18. St Neots,
24. Cambridge North Station
25. Cambridge Madingley Hub (P&R)
26. Cambridge Newmarket Hub (P&R)
27. Cambridge Haverhill Hub (P&R)
28. Cambridge Trumpington Hub (P&R)
Trunk Express routes
Adequate, fast regular and comfortable public transport service are provided between the Hubs using the key existing routes. These will have (very) limited stops, maybe only those listed! to help ensure fast and reliable service.
1. Stamford-Peterborough Rail
2. Kings Lynn-Downham-Littleport-Ely-Cambridge North Rail
3. Royston-Foxton-Cambridge Rail
4. Audley End-Whittlesford-Cambridge Rail
5. Stamford-Peterborough-Huntingdon Rail
6. Peterborough-Wisbech-Kings Lynn Coach
7. Wisbech-Downham Market Train station Coach
8. March-Chatteris-Ely train station Coach
9. Alconbury-Huntingdon Train station-StIves-Northstowe-Cambridge North station Guided Bus
10. Bedford-StNeots-Cambourne-Cambridge Hub (P&R) Coach
11. Haverhill-Linton-Cambridge Hub (P&R) Coach
12. Newmarket-Cambridge Hub (P&R) Coach
13. ALL long distance coaches terminate at Hub (P&R) sites
Village and suburban communities use their most convenient Core Hub to access the trunk system. This access can take any form
1. Personal – Walk, Cycle, CitiPod or private car, parked at Hub
2. Mini-bus services that are scheduled to link to Express routes
3. Self Drive commuter minibuses. Where commuters drive community supplied minibuses to Hubs, or direct to workplaces while offering a lift to other members of the community
4. Car Share, where people use their own vehicles
5. CitiPod for necklace villages
1. The 25km/h version is legal for 14 year olds and can be used on cycle ways
2. The 50km/h version required licence, insurance etc and can be used by 16 year olds, but not on cycleways.
CitiPods can be used for more substantial journeys. E.g From the Cambridge necklace villages. Journeys of 10km with a 25km/h CitiPod or 20km in a 50km/h licenced version
See Google map
1. Rebrand Park &Ride as Multi-modal Transport Hubs.
These Hubs should be considered essential access gateways. It should be easier to get to your destination using the Hubs than driving directly to your destination. Road access to Hubs should prioritise the Hub user.
2. Fast distributor services between the larger nodes
Adequate, frequent, fast, reliable and comfortable transport between every hub and every major destination must be provided.
1. Express Buses between
1. Hubs (Park and Ride)
2. Major employment and educational centres
3. Major retail centres
2. Cycles and CitiPods
All Hubs should provide adequate secure storage for private cycles and CitiPods
All Hubs should provide on-demand cycles and CitiPods service
3. Minitaxi – Taxis that can take shared use
Where there is no alternative, Taxi services should be offered at Hubs, however they should be encouraged to allow other users to share the ride.
4. On demand mini-buses
Many urban journeys have a high level of discretion. An on-line service which registers desired journeys which then schedules a mini-bus to provide a consolidated door-to-door service
5. Cable Cars (or similar)
There are a number of routes which while short are physically constrained (e.g. River, Rail crossing. I have identified a number of routes which look to be suitable for a Cable Car service, or similar. A solution that is significantly lower cost and quicker to deliver than tunneling. Though with lower capacity.
1. Cherry Hinton - Cambridge Station - city centre or Fulbourn Cherry Hinton Cambridge station Rail shuttle
2. Newmarket Rd Hub-Ditton Fields-Cambridge North – Science park and CRC - Milton Hub (Hub (P&R)
3. Cambridge south – Addenbrookes -Babraham Hub (P&Express Buses betR)
4. Cambourne - West Cambridge - University library
5. Waterbeach new town to rail Station
6. Burwell, Swaffham Prior Cambridge North
6. Shopper/Tourist hop-on-hop-off minitrains Express Buses bet
The use of “ThemePark” like minitrains, could consolidate shopper and tourist journeys. The Hills Road and Regent Street pedestrian routes are particularly congested, unpleasant and of little interest to tourists.
1. “Shopper Hopper”Rail station, City-Grafton-Newmarket Rd retail-Mill Road-RailExpress Buses bet
2. “Tripper Clipper” Rail station, Trumpington rd-Backs-Chesterton Rd-Victoria Ave-Regent St-Rail
7. Guided bus Rail-Addenbrookes -Trumpington Hub (P&R)
With adequate fast and frequent services I see no justification for a Cambridge South rail station.
Road Rationing through parking control
Cambs roads have finite capacity at any particular time, road pricing or congestion charges fail in three respects.
1. It does not stop over use at peak times
2. It discriminates against the poor, even when they may have a greater need.
3. It has no impact on the rich, who just pay the charge from their “small change”
If we allocated permits to users on a fair basis, a market would then develop that would distribute the permits to maximise utility.
Road rationing would particularly impact delivery services where they would have to “buy” on the market all their permits, giving a high incentive to use the Goods Hubs.
Real-time parking permits as a proxy for congestion charging.
1. It is feasible and reasonable to identify and reference every public legal vehicle parking space in Cambridge.
2. People and companies can register their private spaces
3. A database could be managed where a particular space is allocated to a particular vehicle for a specified period.
4. The allocation of real-time parking permits would enable the traffic managers of Cambridge to control the flow of vehicles into and out of Cambridge with some precision.
5. The enforcement of parking is already well developed.
6. Abuse of the system will naturally be self-reporting as a frustrated parker will report someone using their allocated space.
7. Space allocation can be used to control traffic flows in town sectors
8. Parking permit allocation should be on a policy basis, rather than purely on a market basis.
9. Permits can be traded
10. Pick-up and Delivery vehicles can be controlled through very short (3 minutes) parking permits
11. It should be illegal for vehicles to be in Cambridge without a viable destination permit.
12. APNR can be used to check
E.g. A vehicle entering Cambridge at 0900 with a parking permit beginning within the next 30 minutes is OK. Other wise fined.
13. Consideration should be given to how private parking is administered in this scheme.
Parcel delivery is now a very significant generator of journeys in Cambridge. Providing Parcel Hubs and consolidating deliveries would make a significant impact on congestion. However the micro-management of goods is near impossible. With security, urgency, special requirements issues. Using Road Rationing might provide the incentive to goods transporters to solve this problem for at least the majority of deliveries
I feel it is pointless increasing road trunk capacity when the congestion is at the Cambridge end of the journey! e.g. Dualling the A10 would simply increase the congestion at Milton A14 junction. However there are a few junctions across Cambridgeshire that would significantly improve capacity.
1. A10 Stretham bypass
2. Quy Burwell Junction
3. Foxton rail overpass
( I am sure there are others outside my experience)
Dualling of the A47 From Peterborough to Kings Lynn and indeed on the Norwich and Yarmouth seems the only logical major scheme in Cambridgeshire.
The main cost of these proposals is the provision of the Inter-modal hubs. With the consolidation of routes, the transport services between county hubs and between the city hubs should be commercially viable without public subsidy. Especially if the Permit policies push business towards the shared services.
There is however a “risk premium” in any novel approach to a problem. The taxpayer may have to “pump-prime” some services to prove their commercial viability.
The existing commercial service providers have shown an historical reluctance to I try innovation. I believe the easiest way to trail these innovations is to set up new enterprises. I think they could be social enterprises funded by the public through bonds issued through Industrial Provident Societies. Thus we could have “Transport of Wisbech”, Transport for Chatteris and “Transport for Cambourne” social enterprises, financed, at least in part, by the residents and businesses of the area. And more importantly, controlled by the community, rather than some county-wide authority which make political compromises.
These delivery companies may deal with intra-community transport as well at Hub and Express route delivery.
There is no need for these innovation to be implemented county-wide. The ideas can be tested on selected communities and routes. With the experience gained used to help future implementation. I'd recommend:-
1. Haverhill-Cambridge, Wisbech- Downham Market and Chatteris-Ely Station express route for Cambridge and beyond
2. Northstowe CitiPod commuting along Guided bus route cycleway
3. Airport-Ditton Fields to Cambridge North- Milton Rod Hub Cable Car
4. Car Parking Rationing on Greater Addenbrookes site
Note: This paper is the work of just one person, Peter Dawe, He does not have full access or knowledge of the whole county. Thus the North West of the region is not as well considered as the South East. I'm sure that using the tools used in this paper can be applied to those areas and similar effective solutions to the transport problems of the region solved