Possibility of new busway routed close to, or even through, Coton
This page has been set up specifically to keep you abreast of the proposed developments for a busway that may well come very close to, or even through, Coton. Agreed in principle last January, it will first link Cambourne and Bourn to the Roundabout at Madingley Mulch, and then proceed, with links to the M11, West-Cambridge site and North-West Cambridge site, to Northampton Street or Grange Road. It will go ahead along one of three routes - see below for more details.
The purpose of this site is to keep you fully updated with significant developments as they happen, and to let you know what you can do to protest, if you wish to. It will inform you of forthcoming public meetings and will give advice on what to do when the consultation process begins in September. If you would like further information on any of this, please contact Helen Bradbury on or Gabriel Fox on . We are your Parish Councillors with specific responsibility for ensuring that new transport, residential and commercial developments are the least disruptive, and most beneficial, to the residents of Coton as is possible.
The proposed busway
This proposed busway scheme was agreed in principle last January, and the first tranche of Government Citydeal money (£100 million) is available to pay for it.
The general public will have the opportunity to comment on the proposals, and indicate their preferred route, as part of the official consultation process starting September. More details on that will follow, as will details of a series of public meetings that will be arranged over the summer and Autumn. It is very important that we engage with this process early on. There is strong opposition for many quarters to Option 1C (explained in full below). This the route that will also come close to, or through, Coton, but is also being opposed by many people in Newnham who want to protect the Green Belt to the East of the M11. There will be a series of public meetings arranged over the summer when these proposals will be discussed and you can have your say.
Please read the following documents for more information. As you will see, there are three possible routes being proposed, 1A, 1B and 1C.
There was a meeting of the Citydeal General Assembly on 3rd June - agenda attached. Please read item 8, and the Appendices to 8a.
Please also read the following document by clicking on ‘draft interim report’:
Madingley Road / A428 Corridor Study Interim Report:
Options 1A, 1B and 1C - further explanation
An analysis of the option 1A, 1B and 1C can be found in the SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats), Appendix 1, Item 8a in the Citydeal Agenda document above. Please read this.
The summary of the main pros and cons of each potential route is as follows:
Option 1A
Pros
It is an existing road that would just require widening.
Saves 7 minutes on the current journey on the bus from Madingley Mulch to Northampton Street.
Would cost £18 million.
Cons
There is only room for one busway into town.
There would be no cycling provision alongside.
Potential solutions:
We could have a reversible busway that ran into town in the morning and out of town in the evening. There is such as system in Houston and Siena.
The cycling track could go along the existing Coton Footpath.
Option 1B
Pros
This would be a double-lane busway with cycling provision from Madingley Mulch to the M11.
Saves 9 minutes on the current journey on the bus from Madingley Mulch to Northampton Street.
Would cost £20 million.
Cons
Would join Madingley Road at the M11 bridge and continue in single lane only, for the final mile into town, and without cycling provision.
It will be difficult to buy the land to the north of the American Cemetery because of an agreement between the British and American Governments in 1953 that specified that the land would remain in agricultural usage in perpetuity.
Option 1C
Pros
Provides a double-lane busway with cycle provision all the way from Madingley Mulch to Grange Road.
Saves 11 minutes on the current journey on the bus from Madingley Mulch to Northampton Street (4 minutes more than Option 1A).
Cons
It would require the building of a new bridge, so the scheme would cost £65 million - £47 million more than Option 1A, and £45 million more that 1B.
It would pass very near, or even through, Coton.
It would then cut through Green Belt land to the East of the M11 that has been classified several times as ‘the most sensitive on the western side of the City’.
There would be difficulties buying the land to the north of Coton because it is owned by the National Trust and would require an Act of Parliament if compulsorily purchased.
Citydeal General Assembly 3rd June 2015
Parish Councillor Helen Bradbury attended this Citydeal General Assembly meeting, and made the following representation on behalf of the village:
The question from Coton Parish Council to CityDeal Assembly, June 3rd 2015
We have read the report entitled, “A428/A1303 Madingley Road Corridor Scheme Options and Approval to Consult”, and are particularly concerned with Option 1C and the highly confusing and potentially misleading way in which it has been presented in the report.
The map showing Option 1C is worryingly inaccurate in its representation of Coton, ignoring the significant portions of the village extending northwards on both sides of Cambridge Road and eastwards towards the M11 along The Footpath. As far as can be deduced though, it seems to show the route cutting right through the centre of the village, for more than a mile of its path.
However, the SWOT analysis suggests the route perhaps sweeps to the north of the village, mentioning only ‘nearby Coton', and that ‘the route runs mainly through non-built up land’.
We would therefore like to ask for clarification of the route of Option 1C as it passes, or passes through, the village of Coton and crosses the M11; a detailed description of any interactions between the route and any residential areas of Coton and any of the roads in or serving Coton, including Cambridge Road, High Street, Whitwell Way and The Footpath; and clarification of whether the "new crossing over the M11” is intended to incorporate or replace the current pedestrian bridge over the M11 at the end of The Footpath.
If the route does slice indeed though the village, could the committee explain why, as it is the only built-up area between Madingley Road and Barton Road and is surrounded by fields on all sides?
Furthermore, has the £65 million costing taken account of certain house demolitions that would have to take place along the route in order to sufficiently widen it to make the scheme viable? Or if this is not being considered, have the improved journey times taken account of the already congested roads through a village of winding roads full of parked cars?
Similarly misleading is the map and SWOT analysis once the route has ‘somehow’ crossed the M11. Where precisely will it diagonally slice through green belt land deemed by the High Court ruling in 2008 as ‘the most sensitive to the western side of the city in terms of their impact on the historic part of the city’? Why does the SWOT not mention this sensitivity?
In view of the misleading information in the map, will the Assembly undertake to revise the map, and update the SWOT analysis to reflect the true implications of this planned route?
The responses made by the councillors at the meeting, and in follow-up conversations afterwards, indicate that whilst routing the busway directly through the village is not a preferred option, it was not being ruled out as a possibility. Any line drawn on the map during the consultation process will be ‘indicative’ only.
We are working hard to lobby Councillors for a more satisfactory answer to our concerns.
Option 1C - further information
There seem to be three possible routes for Option 1C.
** Please note: we will probably not know which route Option 1C would take before the consultation. Were it to the preferred option following the consultation process, only then will the route be decided. We might therefore have to respond on the assumption it will come through the village for a mile of its journey.**
There seem to be three main possibilities for the route of 1C:
1C possible route 1 - black line
This route turns south at the Madingley Mulch Roundabout and follows a path across the fields until it reaches Cambridge Road. It would then proceed diagonally, at the back of the allotments and the gardens of The Footpath, to a new motorway bridge built south of the current footbridge.
This is probably the least disruptive option for the village as whole, although there are farms and some residents in the Parish that would be adversely affected. There will also be problems buying land to the north of the village since some fields are owned by the National Trust, and they would need an Act of Parliament to allow a bus route through. This might make routes closer to the village more likely.
1C possible route 2 - black line
This route turns west at Madingley Mulch Roundabout and follows a path down Long Road. It would then turn East and follow Whitwell Way until just before the school, where it would divert north, and flow a path very close to the village all the way to the new motorway bridge.
Although this route does not cut through the village past the school and the Recreation Ground, it will certainly be visible at the western end of the village, and audible throughout.
1C possible route 3 - black line
This route would be the same as Route 2 but would continue straight through the village, along Whitwell Way, The High Street and The Footpath until it reached the new bridge.
**This is clearly a highly damaging prospect for our village and must be vigorously resisted.**
The West Fields
Route 1c, after crossing the M11, would then cut through the West Fields, green belt land on the far side of the bridge. Many people are very concerned about this, and I attach the following letter from Stephen Coates, leader of ‘Keep Cambridge a Green and Historic City’.
Please see his letter below.
There will be a series of public meetings over the summer - more details will follow. It is important we take united action to try to prevent 1C from becoming the preferred option.
1