SICS Full Response to A141 & St Ives Improvements Scheme

Overview by Chair SICS (St Ives Civic Society):

The deferment of decision taking on HDCs Local Plan leaves a considerable vacuum in provision of public information on the details and the timings of local proposals in industrial & retail development and in housing. For instance, there is no indication if there is a preference for smaller developments scattered across the villages or for large developments, either of which would significantly affect the volume of traffic and water management needs of St Ives in different ways.

The Civic Society can’t therefore comment with any particular insights. Our position is there should be no more housing or industrial development until the road water management and sewerage infrastructure is improved, particularly in high flood risk areas.

Highway flooding, whether from rivers rising, heavy rainwater build-up or the incapacity of St Ives drainage and sewerage systems is a cause for concern. We call for effective cooperation between the Environment Agency, Anglia Water and CC to ensure regular maintenance of roads and gulleys is undertaken, to alleviate future flooding.

Discussions about a third river crossing to divert traffic and reduce congestion around St Ives and Huntingdon have taken place over many years but have never been progressed. The reasons for not approving this are not understood. We propose the Council reconsiders developing a raised causeway from the Needingworth A1123 roundabout to Mill Rd, Fen Drayton to join the A1307 near Banolds Supplies & Services, similar to the elevated section of Harrison Way.

The proposed bus route extensions are commendable and will be popular with, and increase the quality of life of, many residents of currently under-served villages. From that point of view the Civic Society wholeheartedly supports the proposals, however, we query whether these are feasible, given that present providers of existing services struggle to attract sufficient staff to drive the buses and coaches, or to run their routes profitably.

Theme A Active Travel

National Cycle Route 51 is a great resource for cyclists between Cambridge and St Ives and also reduces the volume of traffic on the road. However, the area between St Ives and Swavesey regularly floods. Providing boardwalks on this stretch of route similar to those used elsewhere in the county would alleviate this and would encourage more cyclists to use the route. It would be practical to raise a short section of the A1123 from Earith to the end of the Bedford Level to form a causeway to overcome the flooding regularly experienced now.

Theme C Road: This is desirable to allow Alconbury Weald to develop fully. Its crossing of the railway line will also allow Wyton to be further developed. However, the route does not interchange at any point with the A14 into Cambridge. Locally, traffic management would be required to disperse the two-way congestion that will occur at the junction of Sawtry Way with Houghton Hill. More generally, cycle paths which alternate from one side of the road to the other are highly dangerous both to cyclists and oncoming traffic and should be avoided.

Theme B Public Transport

PR3 Giffords Farm P&R: we deem this P&R site to be unnecessary. Drivers would not choose to park there if they were intending to shop in St Ives as any bus route into town would be caught up in the congestion surrounding the town, the buses not having the benefits of guided bus rails, thereby delaying their journey, making it more likely they would drive into town instead. The bus route 3 to Godmanchester was proposed in the CHUMMS Report in 2002/03. The Civic Society supports this extension but notes that the routine congestion on London Road at peak times might be detrimental to its usage.

Route E, A1123

For this long-proposed extension to be viable it should connect St Ives with the existing cycle routes from Earith and Bluntisham. It should be suitable to use during the winter months so should be raised above flood water level. Clarity is needed about where and how it will it be widened, whether adjacent land will be purchased for the widening or is the plan to condense the cycleway into the existing space as has happened at Milton Way in Cambridge? This latter option is considered unacceptable. We understand Aldi has been required to instal a toucan crossing as part of its development proposal, but this has been delayed due to CCC wanting to include it within its single road redevelopment plan for Morrison’s roundabout. Inevitably, such road narrowing will cause congestion each side of the roundabout, creating tailbacks or potential ‘black patches’ for accidents between cyclists and vehicles.