Brampton Parish Council

21/08/2026

Meeting with Active Travel Team



Over 60 feedback reports were received from Brampton residents following the recent drop-in with the Active Travel (AT) team at the Lady Olivia Centre. Thank you. These have been circulated via the web site.

Having studied these responses, Councillor Liam Beckett and I met with the AT team.

The AT project is seeking to encourage more walking and cycling along Huntingdon Road and in parts of our village. The Parish Council supports this general principle, as did many of the feedback responses. Clearly, pupils at Hinchingbrooke School form a major part of existing travel on foot and cycle, though only during very compressed periods of time. AT have had discussions with users to identify snags stopping greater such movement. These have yet to be shared with the Parish Council. As a result of their discussions, they have identified a number of proposals: reduce the speed limit on Huntingdon Road from 50 mph to 40, reduce the roundabout to single lane, reduce Huntingdon Road to two lanes to create space for a wider cycle way, eliminate bus laybys and install a number of toucan crossings.

That was the basis of the information for residents at the drop-in.

Feedback from residents has not been enthusiastic. There are a few of active support (6%), many asked for alterations before proceeding (32%), but the majority were opposed (57%).
Major areas of concern were access to Bromholme Lane to avoid blocking Huntingdon Road, a preference for simply maintaining the existing ways better, worry about emergency vehicles either on their way out to incidents or returning to the hospital etc., concern about resulting queuing and value for public money.

At the meeting with AT there was agreement on the need to reduce speed on Huntingdon Road. We were also advised that any major works will take place during the summer holidays. Congestion on the current
cycle/pedestrian paths appears to be concentrated into just two 20minute periods (morning and evening) during term time only. As regards maintenance of the existing edge of the pedestrian way it was agreed that this is a maintenance expense and so not available from a capital budget such as Active Travel.

It was reported to them that the parish council would be prepared to provide a much enhanced maintenance service, keeping the footpath free of vegetation and leaves, as long as the proposal to narrow Huntingdon Road was dropped. This would save a substantial amount of public money and disruption and would provide the same level of service as when the ways were installed. I have to say this suggestion, which would deal with the majority of the concerns, was not greeted with enthusiasm. However, AT had previously agreed to model traffic movements at Bromholme Lane. Timing of this will determine how much of the increased traffic resulting from the 54 unit retirement village and caravan park will have been occupied by then.

On other matters AT agreed to put more effort into explaining to a wider public the reasons for the project and its objectives. However, they did not provide budget figures for their project. Nor did they share with us the targets they will use to determine, when once the changes are installed, whether the project has been a success and a good use of public money. The PC will make its own post project appraisal.

We await the results of the modelling of the Brampton Lane entrance/exit and shall keep you informed if anything of major interest emerges.

19/08/2026

A nessage from CCC

Cambridgeshire County Council
Footpaths Miller Way, Brampton
(Temporary Prohibition Of Use)
Order 2026-21312

NOTICE is given that Cambridgeshire County Council intends to make an Order
pursuant to the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, as amended by the Road Traffic
(Temporary Restrictions) Act 1991, the effect of which is to stop any pedestrian from
proceeding along Footpaths Miller Way, Brampton as lies between numbers 7 and 13.

Access will be maintained to properties affected by this order.
The alternative route for pedestrians will be as signed.
The proposed Order is necessary to facilitate stoptap replacement and associated
works which are being carried out on or near this highway.
It is anticipated that these works will take place between 28 October and 30 October
2026, when the restriction is expected to be in operation.
The Order will remain in force for a maximum period of 6 months from the date it
comes into effect to permit the works and any associated contingencies including
delays or phased delivery of the works.
The Order shall not apply to any persons lawfully engaged in connection with any
works for which it is made, any member of the Police Force, Fire and Rescue
Service, Ambulance Service, a vehicle being used by Special Forces during the
ex*****on of their duties or to any person acting with the permission or upon the
direction of a Police Officer in uniform.
Graeme Kane, Executive Director, Place and Sustainability, New Shire Hall,
Emery Crescent, Enterprise Campus, Alconbury Weald, Huntingdon, PE28 4

17/08/2026

61 Summary
The scheme hasn’t been thought through. The road works correctly now after many years of changes to get it right. Cyclists & pedestrians use this …. Path. Maintenance is needed of verge to enable access. Ambulances, police and social workers will not get through.
Two sets of traffic lights are needed – one on Thrapston Rd and another near roundabout on Huntingdon Road.
Oppose

62 Summary
I support improving facilities for cyclists and pedestrians, and I welcome the proposed reduced speed limit. However, the proposed scheme is likely to cause significant congestion and operational difficulties on the road between Brampton and Huntingdon, so it requires substantial modification for the reasons set out below.
Carriageway width reduction.
Narrowing the road to accommodate wider cycleways may appear beneficial. However, along this route it would leave insufficient space for emergency vehicles to pass, particularly at the start and end of the working day and around school drop-off and pick-up times. These periods already create static or slow-moving traffic for several hours each weekday.
Filter lane into Bromholme Lane (Map 5020752-MIL-HGN-LNK-DR-CH-0102).
Removing the right-turn filter lane into Bromholme Lane is likely to create significant eastbound tailbacks, potentially extending towards the Brampton Church Lane roundabout.
Use of Toucan crossings.
While Toucan crossings may improve pedestrian safety, the amber and red-light periods could further interrupt traffic flow when pedestrians have either not started to cross or have already completed their crossing. This is likely to increase tailbacks in both directions along the route. Conventional Zebra crossings may provide a good compromise while still supporting safer pedestrian movement.
Widening the foot/cycleway away from the road.
Overgrowth of the existing pathway by grass and weeds at ground level, and by overhanging bushes, are particular problems along the side of the existing pathways between Church Lane and Nun’s Bridge; down the west side of Church Lane between the Thrapston Road roundabout and the High Street junction; and on the south side of the Thrapston Road between the roundabout and Grove Lane. There is scope to widen the off-road pathway by reducing the width of the grass verges on either side between the Church Lane roundabout and Grove Lane without encroaching on the road width.
Much of the off-road route could be widened by cutting back vegetation and extending over existing verges rather than narrowing the roads, including over the ditch to the north of Huntingdon Road. In some locations this would probably involve significant earthworks. Although routine maintenance may fall under a different budget, combining clearance with a wider hard surface and necessary earthworks could reasonably be treated as capital improvement. Future maintenance should also be planned and funded properly.
Existing Layby and Parking Area (Map 5020752-MIL-HGN-LNK-DR-CH-0103).
The current layby, parking area and bus stop on the north side of Brampton Road by the Hinchingbrooke School wall are already heavily used, with stationary traffic tailing back from the Brampton direction, sometimes beyond the Bromholme Road junction, at either end of the school day. Reducing the carriageway width at this point is likely to worsen those tailbacks. This impact could be reduced by making the layby available for emergency and bus stop use only, supported by effective enforcement. Although that may move school pick-up parking elsewhere, it could reduce the negative impact of the carriageway width reduction here. Provision of adequate drop-off and pick-up facilities for schoolchildren could also be considered as part of the scheme, even if it may not be viewed as discouraging vehicle use.
Modify

63 I think the proposal is progressive and has the potential to encourage not only children but also adults and working people to cycle (those working locally Hospital, Police Hq, Town, adjacent villages etc,). It could help people reduce their reliance on cars and reduce their reliance on cars and save on costs such as fuel, parking, car insurance and other motoring expenses. Once implemented and brought to the wider public’s attention I believe we may come to recognise that this proposal was ahead of its time in encouraging active and sustainable travel.

That said, the concerns raised by residents are legitimate and should not be dismissed. Developments of this nature can sometimes involve the loss or alteration of existing features, but where this happens, suitable replacement measures should be provided to address the impact and ensure the overall scheme remains beneficial to the community.
I also strongly support the provision of safe crossings. As someone who cycles to town every week for work, I believe appropriate crossing points are essential, particularly after the roundabout where traffic from both directions can be busy and fast moving. This will ensure the safety of active travellers.

Overall, I believe we should seek the best possible outcome from what is a relatively rare opportunity to significantly improve and encourage active travel in the area. The proposal has real potential and should not be lost unnecessarily. However, where legitimate safety or community concerns cannot be adequately addressed by the proposal in its current form appropriate modifications are a must.
Support

64 Bromholme Lane junction
• I do think there are some genuine safety improvements that could be made here; you’ve got traffic approaching downhill at 50mph, a surface that is often wet and covered in sediment, a slightly blind bend and the pedestrian island complicating the junction further.
• Reducing the speed limit to 40mph seems like a fairly obvious starting point.
• Increasing the radius of the turn into and out of Bromholme Lane would also make the junction considerably easier and safer to navigate.

The cycle path
• This is probably where my biggest disagreement with the current proposal lies.
• Rather than spending a huge amount of money widening the already fairly generous shared path to accommodate pedestrians plus cycle lanes in both directions, I think there is a much simpler solution: create a westbound cycle lane on the opposite side of Huntingdon Road, heading towards Brampton, and retain the existing path for eastbound cyclists and pedestrians.
• One of my concerns with the proposed three-lane path is that its success relies on pedestrians, children, dog walkers and cyclists all consistently keeping to their allocated lanes. In reality, I just don’t think that will happen.
• A cycle lane on the correct side of the road is much more intuitive. Anyone cycling towards Brampton naturally uses one side, while those heading towards Huntingdon use the existing path on the other. Depending on how it was implemented, it could potentially require little more than road markings and some targeted alterations rather than major excavation, kerb works and widening along the entire route.
• I also completely agree with your point about simply maintaining the existing path properly. Keeping the hedgerow cut back and preventing vegetation from encroaching onto the path would recover a surprising amount of usable width for a fraction of the cost.

Where people are actually travelling
• One of the arguments for the scheme seems to be that improving the cycle route will encourage people to cycle into Huntingdon rather than drive.
• That will undoubtedly apply to some journeys, but I think it overlooks the fact that a significant amount of traffic from Brampton isn’t actually travelling to Huntingdon - it’s travelling through it towards places such as St Ives, Cambridge and beyond.
• For those journeys, widening the cycle path into Huntingdon makes virtually no difference. Realistically, we’re not suddenly going to persuade large numbers of people to cycle from Brampton to Cambridge.
• Although there are alternative driving routes via Brampton Hut, the “old A14" route via Huntingdon is often the shortest and most straightforward. That inevitably funnels traffic through the bottleneck around the hospital, school, police station and railway station. I think that wider traffic movement needs to be considered when assessing what the scheme will actually achieve.

Brampton Road roundabout
• Finally, I really struggle to see how reducing the approach to the Brampton Road roundabout to a single lane is going to improve matters.
• My suspicion is that it would significantly increase queues, particularly during the school run and other peak periods.
• The good thing is that this one seems incredibly easy to test before spending any meaningful amount of money on it. Put some cones out and temporarily reduce it to one lane for a week or two. We’d very quickly have some real-world evidence of what it does to traffic rather than relying entirely on modelling.

Overall, I’m certainly not against improving cycling and pedestrian infrastructure - quite the opposite. I just think the proposed solution feels considerably more complicated and expensive than it needs to be. There seem to be several relatively inexpensive changes - reducing the speed at Bromholme Lane, improving the junction geometry, maintaining the existing path properly and creating a westbound cycle lane - that could potentially achieve the same, if not better, results without spending over £1 million or unnecessarily restricting the road network.

65 The whole thing is bo****ks.
Nobody wants this.
District Councillors should get on the case.
Will somebody or organised body stand up to it.

14/08/2026

This is what you told us following the Active Travel drop-in at the Lady Olivia.

51 Agree with the new crossings being put in.
New crossing at Bromholme Lane.
There will be a lot more congestion due to the taking away of the slip road turning into Bromholme Lane.
Agree with the safety aspect but not with the congestion that is likely to occur
Drivers are likely to become more frustrated at accidents likely to occur.
Modify

52 We strongly oppose this scheme on the following grounds:
A Additional traffic lights and single lanes would inevitably cause delays to
Emergency vehicles with potentially serious and fatal repercussion
B Delays to traffic would lead to increased pollution. The large number of lorries
to and from Bromholme Lane and those taking a short cut between the A1307
at the railway station and the Brampton Hut roundabout are already a major
contributor to pollution and this would become worse.
C At certain times of day traffic already queues near the Huntingdon Road
Roundabout, and lower the quality of driving through frustration.
D There’s a danger that too easy a journey would encourage complacency about
travel. There are plenty of cases of serious injury or death caused by lack of
attention to other road users and to trains, and the proposed changes to the
cycle path risk increasing lack of awareness.
E The cycle path between Brampton and Huntingdon appears to be perfectly
adequate, provided the vegetation doesn’t encroach onto the pavement.
What we would like the parish council to do: Oppose the proposal.
Oppose

53 What is the problem they are trying to solve?
-I asked about current accident statistics, there aren’t any
Removing bus stops will cause further delay + possible accidents/ near misses on a narrow road
Single carriageway roundabout removes opportunity to change direction in the event of temporary lights (for example)
Removal of filter lane for Bromholme Lane will cause delay – has access to new Park Home been considered?
Shared use facility by terraced houses on the roundabout is a non-starter. Where will the residents park their cars
Have any meaningful traffic/cycle use surveys been carried out?
I submit that this proposal will slow down traffic but increase pollution and risk of accidents/near misses.
- Maintain existing cycleway properly
- Cut back foliage
- I suggest the reduction of speed limit on Huntingdon Road to 40 mph
Oppose

54 Seriously concerned about the buildup of traffic that will be caused by reducing the width of the road to the station.
Parish Council to pay for tweaks to Brampton Village Roads.
Really think car drivers will be disadvantaged while pedestrians and cyclist numbers will not increase in proportion.
Oppose/Modify

55 - Money to be used elsewhere
- Footpath/cycleway (existing already ok)
- Cut back hedges /trees to widen footpath/cycleway already there
- Accidents! How will emergency services get past!
- Dangerous Huntingdon Road already busy,
- This adds to this, not improve
- Traffic build up on Thrapston rd will be bad.
Oppose

56 I Welcome anything that will improve the safety of those walking & cycling alongside the road and am particularly concerned about scooters/ e- scooters/cyclists who come unexpectedly & suddenly up to (often elderly) pedestrians, who then become reluctant/scared to use the footpath.
I think the PC should be supporting the proposal in principle, but modifying it in so far at the right turn into Bromholme Lane is concerned.
Support

57 Negative.
See comments sent from Hinchingbrooke Residents Association
Oppose

58 Any narrowing of the present road will cause more traffic congestion than already exists at certain times of day. The middle lane turning to Bromholme should remain as hold ups here would happen at busy times
There is a good footpath & cycling from Brampton to Nunns Bridge which needs to be kept clear of greenery and debris encroaching on to footpath and cycle way.
The scheme is a waste of money, money that should be spent on maintaining what is already there, though I expect it would be from a different pot.
Oppose

59 There does not appear to be a problem with the current road layout – when traffic is diverted via sat nav when the A1/A14 becomes blocked, the road into H’don becomes gridlocked – if the scheme were to go ahead, the narrowing of the road would further restrict emergency vehicular traffic.
In short, “if it ain’t broke then don’t waste good money fixing it” -find a more worthy cause.
Oppose

60 (from) ALBRAM My concern with the Active Travel Proposal is the travelling time it will take along the road to go to and pick up patients from the hospital.
As it stands at the moment there is also an Aqua Park opening in Hinchingbrooke Park that will generate more cars turning into the park to park up for the Aqua Park. I think the entrance and exit is near where I believe they are going to stop right entry.
It’s bad enough now trying to get up and down the road when school traffic is bad, let alone when the Aqua Park opens and they make all the other plans.
Why change something that works well? Also I have never seen any issues with the cycle path as it is now, so why change it.

11/08/2026

09/08/2026

Active Travel Feedback Sheets 41-50
Next wadge Friday

This is what you told us
41 Main concern is the design of the roundabout, Church St/Huntingdon Rd, reduced width of lanes presents a new hazard to vehicular traffic. The improved positioning of the Toucan crossings is welcomed. Thirdly, a survey of the volume of traffic turning right into Bromholme Llane needs to be completed to answer.
Measures to improve road safety for all users are welcomed however there will be an impact on potential congestion, which could result in deteriorating driver
Performances. Please ensure that any risk analysis includes this.
Modify

42 Ridiculous, Traffic at peak times currently takes 40 mins from Grove Lane to Huntingdon & Peak times Difficulty getting out of residential premises. Busses stopping in already narrowed lanes. Not taking extra mobile homes at Bromholme Lane into account.
Resurface existing cycle lanes and Church Rd look at the approved plans for building works on Thrapston Road and Bromholme Lane
Oppose

43 Safer travel for children biking at their journey times (8:15 -8:45 & 3pm- 3:45).
50 mph road has given us anxiety and this gives us reassurance.
The route from Brampton Park to the roundabout now needs to be improved.
Help support improvement Brampton Park to Roundabout
Support

44 The expert told us that he has been doing this stuff for 30 years in Cambridge.
He doesn’t realise that Brampton is a growing village not a city.
Add proper crossings, cut back the overgrown vegetation on the current cycle path. Educate the schoolchildren on cycling safely.
Modify

45 There are some welcome elements but traffic will be severely affected, inconveniencing people trying to get to work, hospital, town
Remove the narrowing
Remove taking away the filter lane at Bromholme Lane
There are better uses for this money
Modify

46 a. No indication of the problem that need to be solved
b. The proposed reduction to single lanes at the B1514 Brampton roundabout is
likely to cause major traffic congestion at peak times
c. The removal of the bus laybys is also likely to result in traffic queues
d. The removal of the turn at Bromholme Lane is also likely to result in traffic
congestion, particularly in the light of Park Homes development down
Bromholme Lane
Properly maintained existing cycling ways by cutting back to hedge, etc, and properly enforce their use.
Happy to support reduction in speed limit to 40 mph
Oppose

47 One of the main objectives appears to be to encourage schoolchildren to be more active and cycle to school. The cycle path apparently should be widened to facilitate this. Support of the objective. But any path
Needs to be kept clear of vegetation. Also there needs to be sensible connections to cycle paths going to St Neots Abbots Ripton Etc.
Don’t see need to narrow access to Brampton Roundabout not access to Bromholme Lane. Cycle path could be narrowed slightly at those points.
Modify

48 Feeder turning to Bromholme Lane should be retained.
Active travel funds spent on improving pedestrian crossing at Bromholme Lane and fixing the drainage to stop flooding on the route.
Keep the proposed changes to the crossing points to make them safe.
Don’t reduce the roundabout to single lane on either side.
The path was widened a few years ago and this additional widening will simply enable more parking for the residents that live on the roundabout.
Request funding to assist maintaining the existing cycle a nd footpaths repainting the markings and cutting back the overgrown hedgerows & trees
Modify

49 Is it really needed? How much will it cost? What problem are you trying to solve?
Concern about loss of turning at Bromholme 40mph a good plan though! Anything that slows Hdon station access is not a good thing!

50 Generally OK, but not convinced on reducing roundabout to one lane.
Improved crossings are great.
- Cycle path take priority over traffic
- Retain funding for maintenance foliage
- Most of road from Brampton – Huntingdon is wide enough for narrowing.
- Sort drainage so road doesn’t flood
Modify

06/08/2026

Active Travel Feeback Sheets

This is what you told us. Next wadge Monday.

31 Only positive is crossings
Losing the lane at the r/about will cause extra tailback
Bromholme lane (slip being removed) dangerous esp as 40 mobile houses being expected – will cause issues turning /holding up traffic.
Massive amount of cars parking at/outside R/B school accident waiting to happen.
Existing cycleway is one of the best I have ever used – just needs to be maintained cleared of overgrowth regularly
Massive spend for very little benefit. It will not incourage more cyclist esp as many get stolen at train St.
Complete waste of money
Oppose

32 What are children going to do while the work is happening.
What about emergency vehicles needing to use the road at school pick up times
Talking to Huntingdon Council last night it seems decided but they have to seem to go through the motions at consultation
More info

33 Completely unnecessary + disproportionate .
Brampton + H’don will gridlock
Only 3% of population cycle each day.
£5 million complete waste of money
Oppose

34 Cut back hedges etc to make what is already there more useable.
Is this the best use of money?
Problems with access to hospital & station -anticipate extreme delays in getting anywhere.
Modify

35 This scheme needs to take into account the proposed park & ride into Huntingdon which will also use this road!!!
This is not necessary & a total waste of public money.
Oppose

36 I support the proposal in its intention to make travel safer.
There may be drawbacks, such as Bromholme Lane turning, but traffic may be slower.
Support

37 That there has not been enough data and consideration taken about the effect this will have on the increase in traffic and how it will impede access in and out for emergency services buses, carers, community transport, the school, hospital, fire and police.
Its already busy at peak time and the village/area will continue to increase.
Improve the existing paths and roads in Brampton not create more
Oppose

38 Don’t see the need to widen the cycle/footpathways-better & more regular maintenance of the existing pathway & tree and bush lining. This will significantly result in delay s into and out of Huntingdon – even more backing up of traffic trying to obtain access the hospital and railway station
Need to think about rectifying speed limit along main road.
Can’t agree with removing the right hand turn lane into Brampton Mill & queues into Huntingdon + impact on Hospital access + railway station
Modify

39 The roundabout is key. Reducing the lanes will restrict traffic to the emergency services.
3 toucan crossings = 3 sets of traffic lights.
Right hand Bromholme Lane must be maintained
The impact whilst it is being constructed is unimaginable chaos – and no benefit
The bushes at the side of the current cycle path are not maintained – so what will
Happen in the future? Maintenance is key.
Spending allocated money on something we do not need and use money to fund things we do need.
Oppose

40 For those of us who live beside and cycle/walk on the footpath this is probably the worst, ill thought out plan imaginable. The most worrying aspect for me is the unhealthy aspect, with the traffic backing up and then stop/stating will increase the fumes with impact on the quality for the worse – affecting ALL users of the path and especially those who live along the route (Most especially those living beside the roundabout.
Basic Headings
• Unhealthy fumes due to crawling & start/stop traffic.(not forgetting when heavy lorries are diverted when there’s work on the A14).
• Traffic stopping when buses wait ON THE ROAD until official departure time
• Tailbacks at roundabout as only one tract slows those going to H’don and those going to Thrapston (or going to Buckden or Thrapston)
• The pelican/Toucan crossing beeping will greatly affect our enjoyment of sitting in our garden and trying to sleep with open windows.
• Devaluation of our home
• Tailbacks by removing the feed lane to Bromholme Lane.
• Maintaining & cutting back the foliage/branches would solve much of width issue.
• I feel that the proposed scheme will impact those living in Brampton very badly – those trying to catch a train, those trying to get to appointments at the hospital. Also the emergency service. Mainly for the Hinch School students x 2 daily.
Oppose

05/08/2026

A message from BPC

🌟 WE NEED YOU! 🌟
Could you inspire, support and have fun with young people in our village?
Brampton Parish Council is looking for a friendly, enthusiastic and reliable Youth Club Leader to run our popular Youth Club on Monday evenings.
🗓 Mondays
🕕 6:00pm – 8:30pm
📍 The Memorial Centre, Brampton
📅 Starting in September
No need to worry if you've never led a youth club before – a full handover and training will be provided.
This is a fantastic opportunity to make a real difference in the lives of local young people, helping them build confidence, friendships and new experiences in a safe and welcoming environment.
If you enjoy working with young people and would like to find out more, we'd love to hear from you!
📞 Brampton Village Hub: 07746 965171
📧 [email protected]
Please like, share and tag someone who you think would be perfect for this role. Together, we can continue providing a fantastic youth club for our village. 💙

03/08/2026

Active Travel Feedback

Active Travel Feeback forms 11 - 20

11 Not convinced it will encourage more active lifestyle.

Will just make more congestion.

Oppose



12 Kids en masse use the cycle path after school for 20 mins only during term time, say just 200 days a year. Similar for start of day, but that only makes 40 mins day. The rest of the time existing paths are more than adequate to deal with casual users.

Ingrowing hedge forces one lane to blend in with the other

Snag for 40 mins a day for just 200 days a year.

This solution proposes a million quid on digging up Huntingdon Road.

WHAT A WASTE OF PUBLIC MONEY!!

Much, much cheaper to deal with the vegetation.

Use the money on something else that does need sorting.

The weight of traffic into and out of BL, if controlled by lights will materially delay emergency services.

Modify



13 Scheme includes the narrowing of lines into the roundabout at Brampton which

will likely result in congestion of traffic and (word unreadable) of emergency vehicles. No reason appears available for this.

Similarly, road narrowing may impact emergency services. Other areas could be better considered for improvement for cycles, eg. Ermine St.

Modify



14 Although different budget maintain existing less of a problem.

Removal of filter lane is DANGEROUS

Consider emergency vehicles when A14 is shut and HGVs ignore weight limits.

Where shared path can be extended on verge side do so but don’t narrow lanes

Fight, Fight, Fight!

Work on maintenance of existing

Insist on consultation with Bromholme Lane occupants and users

Better alternative use Centenary Way to Lenton lakes

Modify



15 Seems inordinately expensive to achieve very little on unproven statistical gains or encouragement of stated aims.

Serious concerns about retained links from and to Hospital for E vehicles and fire service from Huntingdon to Brampton

Surely better things to spend substantial expenditure on

More info



16 Money to be used elsewhere

Footpath/cycleway (existing already ok)

Cut back hedges/trees to widen footpath/ cycleway excellent already there

Accidents! How will emergency services get past! Dangerous.

Huntingdon Rd already busy. This adds to this, not improve

Oppose



17 Oppose the proposal



18 The turn right into Bromholme Lane needs to be retained.

I see no issue with the cycle/pedestrian path.

Oppose



19 Congestion cars issue for emergency services

This is a nightmare idea

Oppose



20 The cost of the proposal totally outweighs the number of people that are likely to use it. The path is already good and just needs maintaining better. Plus narrowing the road will slow traffic and there will be an impact on the emergency services.

If it is to go ahead consider solution (unreadable word) cycleway is same level as road so cyclists are not inclined to use road or buy land and make it wider this way.

With the Bromholme houses (60) replacing the caravans, the old RAF flood light area having 26 houses proposed plus potential houses on Thrapston Road and light vehicles from the Newlands logistics park we do not need a road narrowing scheme.

Narrowing the road will also reduce ability of emergency services getting to the A1 or A14 in elsewhere on top of the traffic problems already on Hinchingbrooke park Road.

Spend money or repairing potholes

Oppose



Next tranche, 21-30, on Friday.



Any questions Mike Shellens 01480 456 555