|
Written 08/11/05
The following comments were made by your parish council at last night's meeting:
Milton Parish Council considered this proposal at our meeting on Monday 7th November. We are concerned that despite this application having been in the planning stage for some time that we have not been consulted earlier and that we are constrained by very tight deadlines in which to make our comments. Consequently we consider that the comments below are merely our initial response and that we may wish to comment in more detail when we have had sufficient time to consider the proposals especially as they relate to Milton.
In our comments we use the words "high street" (all in lower case) to refer to the main road which changes name from Cambridge Road, to High Street, to Ely Road as it runs from south to north through the village. We also note that for historical reasons High Street turns off the high street at Pond Green, where the high street becomes Ely Road, only to re-join the high street later. This can cause some confusion.
We have noted the comments from the County Council in their letter to the developers dated 11/04/05 (Transport Appendix 1, pages 23-25) and we see little to disagree with. We wonder why the applicant has put in this application given these comments from the main landowner. We concur with the County's view that widening the A10 as proposed would be dangerous. We also appalled by the proposal to replace the Jane Coston bridge so soon after it has been opened and we will be making similar comments but in more detail to Cambridge City Council when it is proposed there.
We would also note that the possibility of making the Jane Coston bridge suitable for buses was considered and rejected during the planning phase.
Despite our fundamental disagreement with the proposal to widen the A10 we have some comments to make if it is allowed to go ahead:
- As traffic lights are proposed for the junction of the A10 with Humphries Way and Landbeach Road we would be looking for a pedestrian crossing to be incorporated into the design to make it safer for pedestrians to cross while making their way to our cemetery from Milton.
- At the Butt Lane junction we oppose the removal of the existing bridge, for which we fought hard at the time the bypass was created, on safety grounds. There is currently no easy access for young children from Butt Lane to the A10 - replacing the bridge with a ground level crossing would give them very easy access if they are playing at the end of Butt Lane on the village side. In addition this is the cycle and pedestrian route to Impington Village College.
- There is currently a bund all around the village on the bypass side which provides noise reduction. We would be looking for this bund to be extended across Butt Lane on the village side where the road is already permanently closed to form a continuous bund. [This was proposed by Vivian Williams who lives at the Butt Lane end of Coulson Close and seems an excellent idea]
- As owners of land immediately adjacent to the A10 (from Butt Lane to Humphries Way) we would want planning conditions on the application to ensure no damage to our land, which we have been managing under a policy of natural progression for a number of years and which is now starting to bear fruit. Any incursion by vehicles would be most unwelcome at this stage and we note that the applicants propose to develop right up to our boundary.
- Outside the village we note that the applicant proposes to improve the existing off road cycle path up the A10 which runs as far as the Denny End junction but have no plans for cycle provision north from there. We understand that the developers of the Research Park are already exploring extending this path as far as the Research Park. We would strongly suggest that the applicant's proposal should allow for this.
Turning to the changes proposed for Milton outlined in Transport Appendix 4 we are less than impressed that the applicant has got this far without making any attempt to consult the village or the parish council on their proposals.
We also note that this application proposes change to land (Pond Green) and structures (bus stops) which we own and that no notice has been served on Milton Parish Council.
We have the following comments to make now:
- Fundamentally we think this whole application is flawed: the changes to the A10 will put more light controlled junctions on the bypass. Drivers don't like more traffic lights and will see a diversion through Milton as the way to avoid them. The measures outlined in Transport Appendix 4 really don't address this problem - they may slow the traffic down, but they won't reduce it.
- Although we have no problem with the proposal for a constriction on the high street Ely Road section south of the northern junction with High Street we would not like to see the current constriction removed as this helps reduce "rat running" via High Street/Landbeach Road back to the bypass and it also reduces the speed of traffic in that section of High Street.
- The design appears to ignore the off road shared use cycle path on the east of the high street, for example in figure 4.1 where the pavement appears to become cobbled to pass behind the bus shelter. Cobbles are not a bike friendly surface.
- We object to the proposals to remove the bus lay bys and bus stops. We believe that there should be a public debate about the proposals for the bus service through Milton. Should there be a dedicated bus lane along the A10?
There are many points in the Transport Assessment (Appendix 4 - pages 9-10) that we are not happy with and would want further consultation.
|
