The views expressed in this page do not represent those of the Planning Inspectorate. This page consists of content submitted to the Planning Inspectorate by the public and other interested parties, giving their views of this proposal.

A428 Black Cat to Caxton Gibbet Road Improvement scheme

Received 09 June 2021
From Charlotte Ditchburn


I wish to record my OBJECTION to the Development Consent Order as submitted because of the failure to include opportunities for equestrians which I believe has occurred due to the lack of consultation with equestrians unlike the consultation with cyclists. I would like to have the opportunity to explain my views to the Inspector due to the failure to accommodate the needs of equestrians contrary to National and Local Policies. For example: • The failure to provide for equestrian usage of the new bridge over the A421 at Roxton compounds an omission made when the A421 was built. The Society accepts that this current bridge is rarely used by horses because local riders consider it to be too dangerous. But there is a demand for it to be equestrian safe in order to create some riding circuits in an area has a shortage of bridleways. Further, the bridge will be used by a significantly higher number of HGVs than is currently the case making the need to segregate horses from the carriageway even greater. The Society considers it wholly unacceptable, and contrary to policy, that the proposed cycleway is not a bridleway in order to protect the safety of horse riders. • Caxton Gibbet roundabout. Needs safe and segregated NMU access for all users including equestrians. Failure to provide this facility will be disadvantage equestrians in perpetuity from accessing any A428 NMU provision. Opportunities to link to the new peripheral bridleway at Cambourne West have been ignored. • Bridleway 74/6 - could be provided no must be included in the project • New foot cycleway Cambourne to St. Ives – needs to be NMU • Minutes of NMU Meetings with CCC. Need for new NMU path alongside de trunked A428 was recorded as was path alongside new A428 • 4.4 NMU data survey – no equestrian activity bears no reflection on suppressed demand where facilities are inadequate. Huge changes since 2017 • 2.21.2 Data from Jacobs survey in no way captures the suppressed demand from all three users arising from the lack of facilities. How was this information captured? Massive changes in demand since lockdown. Building for the future not the past. • 2.15.1 Equality Act – females not mentioned. • Wintringham. The proposals made in the WCHAR only provide for cycling and walking whereas the existing footpaths are all to be upgraded to bridleways. This information was provided by the BHS but clearly has been ignored. • Constant reference throughout the document for the need to provide shared cycling and pedestrian access which is contrary to the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Local Transport Plan requirement for Active Travel provision i.e. pedestrians, cyclists and equestrians. • The provision of NMU access is not a ‘nicety’ ‘if money allows’ but of high importance in terms of health and wellbeing. Any route should be designed to be safe, enjoyable and welcoming to use for all NMU’s and not simply something squeezed on to the edge of the carriageway. Identification of funds and their source should be part of the Planning Inspectorate approval.