• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Any thoughts on the CAM (Cambridge Autonomous Metro)?

Status
Not open for further replies.

CBlue

Member
Joined
30 Mar 2020
Messages
799
Location
East Angular
Government could reprogram the lights to stop all other traffic when a turning bus is detected, or maybe Victoria Street or Mount Pleasant could be used. This is the sort of detail which should be corrected after a central bus spine is chosen. The proposed CAM tunnel was not going to have any exit in the Huntingdon/Histon Road direction either, which suggests those services are better rerouted than others.


That bus gate has not worked because more buses use Victoria Avenue than Bridge Street. Maybe Bridge Street should be selected instead of Victoria Avenue but whichever is selected should be closed to most other traffic. Cambridge government should grow a spine and pick one central bus spine and untangle bus and car routes.


I attempted to remember but it has been some time because of recent disruption. Now looking at a route map and satellite, I think northbound past the round church does 4 pretty slow tight turns: into King Street, Manor Street, Jesus Lane and Bridge Street, and southbound does 3: at round church, into Park Street and Jesus Lane. So maybe I was not wrong or maybe we disagree about what is a slow turn?
Busway services including those operated by the 13m+ long E400 XLB 'deckers were routed via Bridge Street too - most of the bends aren't that bad although the two I mentioned upthread are definitely very tight.

Either way, heading back on topic - at some point or other there are plans to build further busway runs including south out of the city to link up the Sanger Institute and it's neighbouring science parks. Not sure if the sister project to Cambourne is still likely to happen but I'd argue both offer far better options than the now-cancelled metro ever would.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

tspaul26

Established Member
Joined
9 Jun 2016
Messages
1,530
The gate went in back in 1997, if I remember correctly, and at that point most of the bus routes from the 'north' did use Bridge Street.

About 10 years ago (?) Stagecoach decided to reroute the citi 1 and 2 buses to use Victoria Avenue instead. At the time it was fairly controversial because it meant that this side of the city centre and the Castle Hill/Chesterton Road area lost their direct bus service to the railway station and Addenbrookes.

Just this article (so it was 9 years ago, I wasn't far off when I guessed 10):

https://web.archive.org/web/2012032...uk/Home/52m-boost-for-bus-routes-23032012.htm


Magdalene Street is indeed a very nasty pinch point; nevertheless I thought this was a poor decision then in terms of where people actually want to go. Given I lived and worked in the area of Magdalene Street at the time, I suppose I wasn't entirely objective however!
There’s a copy of the old network map here if anyone wants to see how things have changed.

18 citi buses each way per hour along Bridge Street plus the Madingley Park and Ride services!

Citi 7 was every ten minutes back then as well and the citi 4 went down Grange Road before running through to Chesterton and Kings Hedges.

And two-way traffic on Emmanuel Street: always snarled up with everything trying to use only the four bus stops.
 

Dunnyrail

Member
Joined
26 Oct 2017
Messages
138
So that just about wraps it up for CAM. The new Mayor has stated that CAM will be likely be stopped, no other options proposed so presumably more Consultancy fees by a new Mayor to see what is needed to sort out the polution and traffic chaos in Cambridge. Hm talk about kicking the can down the Road.
 

camflyer

Member
Joined
13 Feb 2018
Messages
876
<waves banner>

Stop CAM! We want a tram!

:D

Even guided buses in tunnels as used in several systems around the world could realistically be part of the solution but it was the "autonomous" bit which was totally untested.

There has been talk of bus tunnels in Cambridge going back at least 15 years. While I'm pleased to see the end of CAM I just hope we don't spend another 15 years coming up with another alternative.
 

rebmcr

Established Member
Joined
15 Nov 2011
Messages
3,845
Location
St Neots
Even guided buses in tunnels as used in several systems around the world could realistically be part of the solution but it was the "autonomous" bit which was totally untested.

There has been talk of bus tunnels in Cambridge going back at least 15 years. While I'm pleased to see the end of CAM I just hope we don't spend another 15 years coming up with another alternative.
Sticking the busway into a tunnel would be a good idea, but crucially only if the tunnels were made big enough for future conversion to light rail.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,548
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Sticking the busway into a tunnel would be a good idea, but crucially only if the tunnels were made big enough for future conversion to light rail.

Agreed. The Busway would in due course be a relatively easy tram conversion, and it'd be great if it could get all the way into central Cambridge but still be converted later.
 

Dunnyrail

Member
Joined
26 Oct 2017
Messages
138
My point of raising this was to highlight that there has just been a stooped announcement wasting all the millions on consultancy by the previous inept Mayor, likely replaced by another one. Fact is CAM was an impossible dream I accept that, but yes Trams would have been a much better bet and cheeper too. Less costs on Tunnel build as the kinetic envelope of a Tram would be much smaller than the original proposals to have drivers in Cam till Autonomous is available. Same issue out side of Tunnels where less road would be taken up by Trams for the same reason. The CAM was a good concept looking for the right solution, not found and now the whole solution looks to be lost leaving Cambridge to be in gridlock for decades more. Oh and St.Neots that will also suffer with some 3000 new houses being built and on the cards to be built.
 

camflyer

Member
Joined
13 Feb 2018
Messages
876
My point of raising this was to highlight that there has just been a stooped announcement wasting all the millions on consultancy by the previous inept Mayor, likely replaced by another one. Fact is CAM was an impossible dream I accept that, but yes Trams would have been a much better bet and cheeper too. Less costs on Tunnel build as the kinetic envelope of a Tram would be much smaller than the original proposals to have drivers in Cam till Autonomous is available. Same issue out side of Tunnels where less road would be taken up by Trams for the same reason. The CAM was a good concept looking for the right solution, not found and now the whole solution looks to be lost leaving Cambridge to be in gridlock for decades more. Oh and St.Neots that will also suffer with some 3000 new houses being built and on the cards to be built.

First step in improving how people get around/across Cambridge would be to ban all private vehicles from the city centre core as done in many European city centres (Ghent in Belgium is a good example of a similar sized city) with deliveries to businesses outside of peak hours only. That opens up the limited road space to public transport, cyclists and pedestrians. If that requires some tunnelling in the core then so be it. A guided bus every 5 minutes on key routes which doesn't get stuck in traffic shouldn't cost that much

Of course the downside is that the council loses a lot of income from the central carparks!

Next problem is getting people in from nearby towns and villages to the major employment centres. That's harder to solve without spending a lot of money.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,548
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
First step in improving how people get around/across Cambridge would be to ban all private vehicles from the city centre core as done in many European city centres (Ghent in Belgium is a good example of a similar sized city) with deliveries to businesses outside of peak hours only. That opens up the limited road space to public transport, cyclists and pedestrians. If that requires some tunnelling in the core then so be it. A guided bus every 5 minutes on key routes which doesn't get stuck in traffic shouldn't cost that much

The problem isn't really the city centre, though, it's the roads into it and the ring road, and it would be just as bad if not worse if you did that. The reason for the tunnel is partly to avoid that and partly because the city centre itself is awkward for large vehicles due to narrow roads and tight corners.

Next problem is getting people in from nearby towns and villages to the major employment centres. That's harder to solve without spending a lot of money.

Given how rural the area is, park-and-ride is likely to be the only way to do that. Providing public transport from the entire hinterland is not going to be viable however good it is. The Busway does do this very well indeed.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,548
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
And cyclists!

Cyclists do slow buses down, but as we're talking about short distances with few stops in 20mph limits, it just means the buses need to go at cyclist pace as they do in similar situations in the Netherlands (Leiden springs to mind as comparable in many ways). London bus drivers seem to be generally good at sharing with cyclists, it's the lorries that pose a threat.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
Cyclists do slow buses down, but as we're talking about short distances with few stops in 20mph limits, it just means the buses need to go at cyclist pace as they do in similar situations in the Netherlands (Leiden springs to mind as comparable in many ways). London bus drivers seem to be generally good at sharing with cyclists, it's the lorries that pose a threat.
I was thinking more of the safety issues with hordes of cyclists around a large vehicle, and in the case of a tramway also at risk of falling in the rail grooves. Anyone who wants to understand the transport problems of Cambridge needs to stand (well back from the edge of the narrow pavement) on St John's Street ten minutes before lectures start!
 

ashkeba

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2019
Messages
2,171
I was thinking more of the safety issues with hordes of cyclists around a large vehicle, and in the case of a tramway also at risk of falling in the rail grooves. Anyone who wants to understand the transport problems of Cambridge needs to stand (well back from the edge of the narrow pavement) on St John's Street ten minutes before lectures start!
As said, look at Gent. As well as the centre car ban and circulation plan, it is a university city with trams and lots of bikes. Cyclists are either encouraged to use non tram streets or tram streets wide enough to allow them to avoid or cross rails not ride along them, apart from a few by the castlr.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
As said, look at Gent. As well as the centre car ban and circulation plan, it is a university city with trams and lots of bikes. Cyclists are either encouraged to use non tram streets or tram streets wide enough to allow them to avoid or cross rails not ride along them, apart from a few by the castlr.
There are no such alternative streets in Cambridge. Going through the centre it's St Johns Street one way and Sidney Street coming back. Each is mostly only wide enough for one traffic lane and a narrow footway.

Trams would have to stop further away much as the buses do now.
 

Dunnyrail

Member
Joined
26 Oct 2017
Messages
138
A lot of good viable comments there guys, as for traffic (cars etc) into Cambridge some time back a working place levy was consulted on. Needless to say it did not attract any support from the average driver into Town. If implemented it would likely have gone some way to getting money towards whatever Cam emerges as, this used in part for funding the Nottingham Trams.
 

rebmcr

Established Member
Joined
15 Nov 2011
Messages
3,845
Location
St Neots
There are no such alternative streets in Cambridge. Going through the centre it's St Johns Street one way and Sidney Street coming back. Each is mostly only wide enough for one traffic lane and a narrow footway.

Trams would have to stop further away much as the buses do now.
I think Victoria Avenue — Jesus Lane — Sidney Street — St Andrews St/Regent St/Hills Road — Railway Station would work. Then the remaining buses could be concentrated to serve the East Road side.

It might require singling through some sections (or gauntleting to save on points maintenance) but the actual corners are not too bad.
 

ashkeba

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2019
Messages
2,171
There are no such alternative streets in Cambridge. Going through the centre it's St Johns Street one way and Sidney Street coming back. Each is mostly only wide enough for one traffic lane and a narrow footway.

Trams would have to stop further away much as the buses do now.
It would be fine. People think Sidney Street is narrow because they ignore all the loading bays (often abused for parking) and some bike parking that could be moved into the ends of Sussex Street, Green Street and Market Street. The south end of Bridge Street is really narrow but not too long to be single/gauntlet track.

I think the main need is local government brave enough to close the centre almost fully to private vehicles and only allow walking-speed delivery vehicles, timed on the tram sections, then they could run trams on one side of the current one-way loop and two-way cycling on the other, as well as the routes that are too bendy for trams.
 

camflyer

Member
Joined
13 Feb 2018
Messages
876
It would be fine. People think Sidney Street is narrow because they ignore all the loading bays (often abused for parking) and some bike parking that could be moved into the ends of Sussex Street, Green Street and Market Street. The south end of Bridge Street is really narrow but not too long to be single/gauntlet track.

I think the main need is local government brave enough to close the centre almost fully to private vehicles and only allow walking-speed delivery vehicles, timed on the tram sections, then they could run trams on one side of the current one-way loop and two-way cycling on the other, as well as the routes that are too bendy for trams.

Unfortunately "brave" and politicians don't go together.

Having a traffic free city centre isn't even that radical an idea. There are number of European cities which have been doing it for years. G(h)ent has been mentioned above but Brussels has the second largest pedestrianised zone in Europe (after Venice) with delivery times to businesses restricted to the early hours of the morning.
 

Dunnyrail

Member
Joined
26 Oct 2017
Messages
138
When I was a Councillor in St.Neots I proposed a way to make the Town Centre almost traffic free that needed to be combined with the dualling of the A428 from Black Cat to Caxton thus making the current bypass exactly that. Close the. Ridge to all traffic except Busses, Emergency Vehicles, Cyclists and Pedestrians. You would not believe the vile that erupted from Councillors that could and should walk into Town most of the time or even from the River Side Car Park, their car journey only being diverted the long way round for heavy shops from Waitrose. I think that sums it up.
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
17,624
Location
Another planet...
First step in improving how people get around/across Cambridge would be to ban all private vehicles from the city centre core as done in many European city centres (Ghent in Belgium is a good example of a similar sized city) with deliveries to businesses outside of peak hours only. That opens up the limited road space to public transport, cyclists and pedestrians. If that requires some tunnelling in the core then so be it. A guided bus every 5 minutes on key routes which doesn't get stuck in traffic shouldn't cost that much

Of course the downside is that the council loses a lot of income from the central carparks!

Next problem is getting people in from nearby towns and villages to the major employment centres. That's harder to solve without spending a lot of money.

As said, look at Gent. As well as the centre car ban and circulation plan, it is a university city with trams and lots of bikes. Cyclists are either encouraged to use non tram streets or tram streets wide enough to allow them to avoid or cross rails not ride along them, apart from a few by the castlr.
It's probably worth pointing out that Ghent (as per Camflyer's post) and Gent (as per ashkeba's) are two different cities, a similar distance either side of Brussels. It isn't a Flemish name/French name situation.

I believe a couple of Liverpool supporters came a cropper on that a couple of years ago!
 

ashkeba

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2019
Messages
2,171
It's probably worth pointing out that Ghent (as per Camflyer's post) and Gent (as per ashkeba's) are two different cities, a similar distance either side of Brussels. It isn't a Flemish name/French name situation.

I believe a couple of Liverpool supporters came a cropper on that a couple of years ago!
Point to them on a map. Are you confusing Gent and Genk?
 

Jozhua

Established Member
Joined
6 Jan 2019
Messages
1,856
Sticking the busway into a tunnel would be a good idea, but crucially only if the tunnels were made big enough for future conversion to light rail.
In lieu of a like button, I'm going to respond saying I agree!

Something available for today, but upgradable for tomorrow.

Although it may be worth investigating the cost of just starting off with light rail on the current busways!
 

Dunnyrail

Member
Joined
26 Oct 2017
Messages
138
Actually the Tunnels for the Autonomous Metro are likely to be bigger than required for Trams as they will need to have a Kinetic Envelope for a Driven Vehicle initially as the tech for full Autonomous Operation of free traveling vehicles (ie a bus equivalent) is not really suitable at the moment.

But for now I think any discussion is likely irrelevant as the new Combined Mayor has binned the project - hasn't he?
 

camflyer

Member
Joined
13 Feb 2018
Messages
876
Actually the Tunnels for the Autonomous Metro are likely to be bigger than required for Trams as they will need to have a Kinetic Envelope for a Driven Vehicle initially as the tech for full Autonomous Operation of free traveling vehicles (ie a bus equivalent) is not really suitable at the moment.

But for now I think any discussion is likely irrelevant as the new Combined Mayor has binned the project - hasn't he?

Yes, he binned it within hours of taking over but hasn't replaced it with anything other than talk of bus franchising. CAM was the wrong solution to Cambridge's problems but while franchising may be a welcome step there are still fundamental issues which need addressing. My fear is that the the problem will just be kicked into the long grass under yet another consultation exercise.
 

Dunnyrail

Member
Joined
26 Oct 2017
Messages
138
Yes, he binned it within hours of taking over but hasn't replaced it with anything other than talk of bus franchising. CAM was the wrong solution to Cambridge's problems but while franchising may be a welcome step there are still fundamental issues which need addressing. My fear is that the the problem will just be kicked into the long grass under yet another consultation exercise.
He also talks a lot about Roads, clearly the Environment and Cambridge Traffic Issues have passed this fellow by. I am now waiting for him to steam in with anti East West verbal nonesence.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
He also talks a lot about Roads, clearly the Environment and Cambridge Traffic Issues have passed this fellow by. I am now waiting for him to steam in with anti East West verbal nonesence.

He (well, the Combined Authority) seems to be a fan of reconsidering the Northern approach to Cambridge, plus serving St. Neots directly:


Further consideration should be given to East West Rail passing through St Neots, according to Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Combined Authority.

It also makes a request to see the evidence in favour of a southern rather than a northern approach to Cambridge. The proposed southern route has been strongly opposed by some residents in the affected area.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top