Inter-Urban Route Study Consultation Log

Transcription

Appendix 1 - Inter-Urban Route Study Consultation Log
Q1: Do you agree with the transport issues that have been identified?
Question 1 - County-Wide Comments
Organisation
Comment
HCC Response
Berkhamsted
Chamber of
Commerce
Hertfordshire is not an island. There is little acknowledgement of traffic flows
across county boundaries (except motorways).
Cycle Forum
Member
No mention on improving cycle route. Many residential areas are within
cycling distance of each other ie 10 miles.
Welwyn
Garden City
Resident 1
East Herts
District
Council
Am not able to fully agree as do not have enough knowledge.
The study aims to provide possible improvements to inter-urban
links within Hertfordshire. The focus has been on movements
between the urban areas and the impacts of traffic from
neighbouring towns on Hertfordshire
The cross boundary issues have been considered as part of the
study‟s development. However the identified interventions are
geographically based within Herts.
The study aims to promote cycle routes that are strategic in
nature and that will have an impact on mode shift. The routes
highlighted were those which were endorsed by the HCC Cycle
forum.
Noted
East Herts Council welcomes the initiative to look beyond specific place
boundaries (as covered by Urban Transport Plans) and seeks to identify ways
to ameliorate congestion and improve the inter-linkages between them.
East Herts Council supports the Study being a „live‟ document and timescale
to 2017, as this will enable Hertfordshire County Council to accommodate
future growth proposals of the emerging Local Plans throughout the County
and revise proposals in light of this.
In respect of the Corridor Strategy – Options, East Herts Council particularly
supports the continued deployment of Intelligent Transport Solutions (ITS)
including targeted Urban Traffic Management and Real Time Passenger
Information (RTPI) and would welcome their introduction to areas of East
Herts currently lacking these benefits at the earliest opportunity.
In respect of Figure 0.1 in the Technical Document notes that the Local
Transport Plan Family Tree details an „Inter Urban Route Strategy‟, whereas
this has now become an „Inter Urban Route Study‟.
Noted. Schemes and measures are included in the IURS if they
are considered deliverable within the initial 5 year horizon.
Hertfordshire has a programme for the implementation of ITS
detailed in it‟s ITS strategy. This is currently constrained by
funding. Clearly future growth may be able to contribute to these
mitigation measures.
Comments noted. The ITS strategy is being rolled out
throughout the county on a phase basis as funding comes
forward and your comments will be forwarded to the ITS team.
The interventions identified in the study will need to be subject
to further feasibility work and consultation prior to
implementation. This will involve further stakeholder
consultation.
Comment noted. Once all comments are collated and changes
made, it is intended that the study will form a strategy of inter
urban routes for the county.
Page 1 of 65
Welwyn
Garden City
Resident 2
The Inter Urban document seems to have a major flaw. Apart from one
instance where cycling routes are mentioned alongside the A414, cycling is
not mentioned. Hertfordshire towns are not far apart. Most of these trips
between adjacent towns can be easily carried out by bike providing safe
segregated cycling infrastructure is provided.
Nearly all people (including children and the elderly) do not feel safe cycling
or even walking. The sad consequence of the fear this we drive everywhere
by car.
The more we drive the less fit we become and the less we cycle or walk the
more we drive and so the cycle continues.
The modern myth is that we all have to be instantly mobile. As children grow
up they aspire
to own a car (just like their parents did). Eventually each adult household
member “have” to have their own car. Hence the problem grows. More and
more cars.
Decades of road building, cheap motoring and poor public transport have just
fuelled this expectation.
Average journey times have increased.
We know that building more roads is not the answer. To reverse the out of
control growth in motor traffic we have to commit to building proper safe
cycling infrastructure and to provide fully integrated public transport.
The study aims to promote cycle routes that are strategic in
nature and that will have an impact on mode shift. The routes
highlighted were that which were endorsed by the HCC Cycle
forum. Additionally, most of Hertfordshire towns are commuter
town whereby employment is further a field and though these
routes would be encourage more users the likelihood for
commuters using these routes is not high due to the relative
distances of travel ex. London and Cambridge to name a few
LTP 3 sets out how the County Council aims to address
transport need up to 2031 and how sustainable travel will be
facilitated .In town movements will be covered by the town‟s
UTP.
UTP.
UTP.
UTP.
LTP 3 acknowledges the growth in traffic and travel demand
and sets out how the County Council will address the issues up
to 2031
Dealing with growth requires a balanced approach to dealing
with increasing demand and a number of the likely countywide
interventions look to promote and support sustainable transport.
In town movements will be covered by a town‟s UTP.
Page 2 of 65
Markyate
Parish
Council
Most of our congestion and associated costs can be resolved by achieving
Dutch levels of cycling. This can only happen by properly funding safe Dutch
style segregated cycle paths. Getting everyone cycling also has massive
benefits on terms of beating obesity and heart disease.
This alone will save considerable sums of money. It will also lead to happier
lifestyles and a contented population.
We cannot keep going back to 60's and 70?s planning mistakes. Best
transport infrastructure
practice from Europe is easy to adopt. Here is an expat offering detailed
information and comprehensive
study tours (in English) showing how it all works in the Netherlands. See
http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/ and
http://hembrowcyclingholidays.com/studytour.html
The A5 down to St Albans does not feature. This is surprising when you look
at the 2011 current year stress map which shows rates of congestion.
The Motorways are almost unique with serious queuing and congestion on a
daily basis. There are just a few roads in the next category serious queuing
and congestion during peak hours- the A5 from the M1 to Markyate is one of
these. Even the road south of Junction 9 is rated at or above the stress levels
on roads in the identified corridors.
Both the M1/A5 junction 9 interchange and the Markyate traffic lights are
shown as congested junctions on key network. Unless these areas are to be
covered elsewhere in the main Transport Plan 3 or in another daughter
document, their omission would seem unjustifiable.
The A5 down to St Albans is clearly a very busy corridor. There are of course
major changes in the pipeline, which will affect our area; the A5 is currently a
trunk road under the MOT, with the North Dunstable A5/M1link the A5 from
the M1 junction 9 to the new link will be de-trunked. Maybe the County is
waiting until the responsibility is altered before it makes plans; there are likely
to be big problems during the road works and these as well as the longer term
issues should not be ignored.
The other gap in the Stress map occurs where you would see Luton and
Dunstable, but they are not in Hertfordshire.
Dealing with growth requires a balanced approach to dealing
with increasing demand and a number of the likely countywide
interventions look to promote and support sustainable transport.
In town movements will be covered by a town‟s UTP.
The LTP sets clear targets for growing cycling numbers, which
focuses of journeys of under 3 miles which are considered to be
realistic for Hertfordshire. This is ruling out longer distance interurban routes where it can be demonstrated as a viable travel
option.
A significant section from Markyate to the M1 is managed by the
Highways agency who have been included in the consultation of
this study. Further to the completion of the Northern Dunstable
By Pass and confirmation of growth in the area this area may be
considered in more detail. The issues are currently identified to
be addressed by the county wide interventions.
As the scale and location of development becomes clearer it is
likely that areas that are likely to be most affected will need to
be considered in more detail to assess the impact and identify
mitigating measures that should be considered for promotion.
Page 3 of 65
The County boundary actually runs more or less along the perimeter of Luton
Airport and this is the other big omission.
There are major plans in the pipeline which will potentially bring far more
traffic converging on Luton Airport. Add to this the North Dunstable bypass
which could be extended to the Airport, and the impact on the Lower Luton
Road will be immense. It is essential that there is some joined up thinking as
the Dunstable North By pass and the plans to expand Luton airport both will
have a major impact on local traffic; the County boundary must not be allowed
to put a blindfold on the transport planners in the various authority areas.
Rural Strategy: We looked at the Local Transport Plan Family and tried to find
out where Markyate would fit the plans if it was not in one of the Inter-Urban
corridors. We then looked for the rural strategy, as the most likely home, but
as far as we can find out, this is not yet available, we have been directed to
the Highways team at [email protected] but have yet to follow it up.
It looks as if we may be left to pick up elements of various daughter plans,
and have no overview, unless we can persuade a change of thinking.
County-wide demand management strategies and county-wide sustainable
transport options feature in many of the solutions/options.
Various areas of congestion covered by these general strategies- once
translated from new road numbers include: St Peters Street, St Albans, the
Peahen junction at the top of Holywell Hill St Albans, the London Colney
roundabout â€“ north of London Colney, M25 junctions South of St Albans.
Specific points made include: Lack of parking at Elstree & Borehamwood and
Harpenden stations: Support county-wide improvements to key rail stations
Hertfordshire county council will work in co operation with
neighbouring authorities wherever possible to assess and
identify implications and interventions to mitigate the impact of
development.
Noted – it will be available on line on Hertsdirect shortly.
These type of interventions are in line with The Local Transport
Plan 3 Vision: To provide a safe, efficient and resilient
transport system that serves the
needs of business and residents across
Hertfordshire and minimises its impact on
the environment. No Change
We will achieve this by:
• Making best use of the existing network
and introducing targeted schemes
where improvements are required so as
to deliver a reliable and readily usable
transport network to benefit local business, encourage further
economic growth and allow access for all to everyday facilities.
• Promoting and supporting sustainable
travel to reduce growth in car traffic and
contribute to improved health and quality of life for residents
with a positive impact on the environment and on the wider
challenge of reducing transport‟s contribution to climate change.
These schemes are covered by the St Albans and Southern St
Albans UTPs and have been included as they are directly
related to traffic travelling on the A1081 through St Albans..
These specific points were raised through an officer workshop
and in conjunction with the operator of the stations.
Page 4 of 65
Inappropriate use of Station Road by strategic traffic through Harpenden:
Harpenden town strategic traffic signing
Lack of official ring road for St Albans: Signalise and rephrase existing signals
on informal St Albans ring road to improve traffic flow
Congestion on the former A6 in various places at various times: Strategic
Park and Ride at M1 Junction 10a
Bus strategy Elsewhere, there are proposals for improvements to bus
services - We believe that they are more fully explained in the Bus strategy,
which we have not looked into. Please note the following:-
These issues were raised during the development of the
Harpenden Urban transport Plan. The town suffers from
interurban traffic travelling through on various routes including
the B651,B653 and lower category routes Including Piggottshill
Lane.
Raised during the development of the St Albans Urban
Transport Plan.
The County Council recognises the contribution that well
designed and sited Transport Hubs (interchanges) can have in
maintaining sustainable access to, from and within towns where
economic and housing growth is being considered. HCC will
work closely with District Councils on developing transport
strategies to support growth and is prepared to support, or
promote such transport hubs, if they are included in a District
Council's local plan and/or supported by the neighbouring
District (should the site(s) not be in the District of the town or
towns it was aimed at serving)
RTPI is being rolled out and available on mobile applications.
It is available on line at:
http://www.hertsdirect.org/docs/pdf/b/busstrategy.pdf
1. The location of the bus is more important when the service is infrequent.
Passengers need to know if they have just missed a bus, if the bus is running
late or worse has been cancelled. This is necessary in rural areas just as
much if not more than in town centres. The proposal would seem to
concentrate on provision in hubs- but there the passengers may have options,
they may also have somewhere at least covered to wait- not so in the villages.
2. The more business centres or education facilities are moved out of town,
the more complex the bus journey becomes for all save those living close to
the out of town facility. Reducing parking at out of town centres, or charging
the premises if they exceed a prescribed number of spaces.
is not the answer the fact that the premises have been located where they are
has made the need for private transport a necessity for many.
RTPI is being rolled out and available on mobile applications.
3. Until there is a bus service of a frequency similar to the train service, many
will find the service inadequate - particularly in the evenings, when few buses
are run to a schedule acceptable to commuters.
Unclear whether this is support for extending hours of bus
operation or not
Noted- the inter-urban route study does not make decisions
regarding local planning matters.
Any service will either be provided commercially or be assessed
for support based on known patronage, projected demand,
revenue forecasts, costs and proximity to alternative services
Page 5 of 65
Hitchin
Resident
Hertfordshire
Action on
Disability
Agree with all proposals to ease congestion by means of road improvements.
Our particular concern is the need for ambulances to be able to get to and
from the Lister hospital without delay, particularly in peak periods. With the
Lister becoming the major hospital for accidents and emergencies in East and
North Herts, the need for rapid access to the hospital at all times is more
important than ever.
This document does not appear to address the new issue of increasing
numbers of people a) being able to choose a hospital for treatment or b)
having to travel some distances to reach even basic care. For instance cancer
treatment in Hertfordshire is spread across QE2, Lister and Mount Vernon
depending on the start point all of these hospitals can be difficult to access. It
will become increasing important to acknowledge the distances travelled to
access treatment and to try to ensure adequate bus services to cope.
Noted - Ambulances can use blue light to get to emergencies
and then to appropriate hospital – whether Lister or other local
hospitals. They can are consulted on new schemes and
measures.
Most people will still attend local health care.
For residents who cannot get to or onto a bus the Health Trusts
& HCC work in partnership to provide information & book
journeys on non- emergency patient transport :Travellink:-01438 737252
A number of voluntary car schemes operate, providing door to
door journeys for Welwyn Hatfield residents :
Hospital car service
01438 284238
Welwyn Hatfield CVS car
Scheme
01707 273875
Herts and
Middlesex
Wildlife Trust
We are pleased to see that there is a process to consider and address crossboundary transport issues within the County and cumulative pressures on the
strategic transport network, which would not be covered in the Urban
Transport Plans. It is hoped that the council is effectively working with
neighbouring authorities and organisations such as Network Rail and the
Highways Agency to identify, consider and address issues that operate
across and beyond the county boundary. It is important that options take into
consideration growth and demand arising outside of the County, as well as
the potential network impacts in neighbouring areas of development, growth
and transport decisions within Hertfordshire.
I have no comments to make at present on specific issues or options
presented in the documents, but HMWT is keen to follow and input where
appropriate as priorities become clearer or details of the options emerge.
Specialist services that are centralised on key sites are being
examined, including developing intersite shuttle services linking
Lister, QEII & MVCC.
Comment noted. NR and HA will be one of our many partners
as we move forward in any improvements being sought.
Comments noted
Page 6 of 65
HMWT supports the county-wide measures within the IURS, which focus on
demand management and improving sustainable transport options. Measures
and policies encouraging modal change and addressing demand issues must
form the cornerstone of strategic transport planning. An integrated approach
is also critical for effectively addressing complex issues and managing
existing and future pressures on the transport network and on the wider
environment. The County needs to address its over-dependency on cars,
which would help to solve congestion issues and reduce the adverse
economic, social and environmental implications of heavy car use.
Comments noted
The Trust supports options to encourage walking and cycling, which are
positive for the environment but also bring health and wellbeing benefits.
Given the relative proximity of towns in the county, cycling should be seen as
a real option. However, cycling routes need to be safe, complete, well
connected, and well maintained in the long term, in order to encourage
uptake. All measures to address deficiencies and strengthen and improve the
cycling network are welcomed.
•The Council should consider potential synergies between broader policy
goals, and multiple benefits that can be delivered through the various
transport options being considered. There are many opportunities to combine
delivery of „grey infrastructure‟ with Green Infrastructure, and these should be
explored and encouraged from the outset.
Comments noted LTP and it daughter documents set out the
County Councils strategies and policies in relation to delivering
sustainable transport interventions and addressing travel
demand.
• Infrastructure planning strategies and Local Transport Plan policies should
be integrated with other strategic planning policies and strategies, including
Green Infrastructure Plans.
• The Council should consider the potential impacts (both positive and
negative, direct and indirect) on wildlife habitats and ecological connectivity of
strategic transport policy and infrastructure decisions, including new transport
routes, existing network improvements, etc.
The LTP sets out the County Councils policies for transport up
to 2031and seeks to co operate with other authorities and work
with other existing and future policies and strategies.
Comments noted- LTP3 recognises the importance of
preserving natural habitats. All significant schemes would have
to have an environmental impact assessment carried out as part
of their planning.
• Transport schemes should result in net gains for biodiversity. Projects
should avoid ecological impacts where possible; mitigate for impacts that
cannot be avoided; and finally compensate for any residual impacts through
off-site habitat creation or enhancement.
All Schemes would have to have a Environment Impact
assessment carried out as part of their development and LTP 3
was assessed by carrying out a Strategic Environmental
Assessment
• The Council should optimise opportunities to improve ecological connectivity
as part of route improvements and construction of new links (for instance
creation of linear habitats along new roads, cycleways etc, and creation of
wildlife links across roads, railways etc.)
Comments noted. The LTP does recognise the opportunities
that exist to help promote natural habitats.
LTP 3 sets out the possible interactions between schemes and
advocates a package approach to developing schemes and
interventions.
Page 7 of 65
• The Council should ensure surface water management, drainage and flood
risk issues are considered in relation to road network improvements.
Sustainable Drainage techniques should be employed, and retro-fitted where
appropriate, to reduce risks of flooding and water quality issues.
Comments noted The County Council considered surface water
management as part of scheme delivery and considers longer
term flooding issues in the local flood risk management strategy
–as Lead Local Flood authority for Herts.
• The Council should give consideration to relaxing management regimes on
road verges, and other highways maintenance decisions that could
encourage biodiversity and create wildlife links. District councils should also
be encouraged to adopt maintenance regimes for their roads that will benefit
local wildlife.
Comments noted, these will be passed to our maintenance
section within highways.
Three Rivers
District
Council
Principal corridors through Three Rivers District such as A412, A404 and M25
are not specifically included in the strategy. TRDC's concern will be to ensure
that these areas are not excluded. The major incident on M25 on 27th
November 2012 shows what happens to the road network in SW Herts when
something of this nature happens. TRDC is keen to see cycle way and
walkway networks developed throughout SW Herts. The Council is also keen
to see the Croxley Rail Link constructed according to current timescale and to
see service rail improvements throughout SW Herts.
The County Council is committed to improving the cycling
provision in South West Herts (including 3 Rivers district). A
number of routes have been identified in the South West Herts
Cycling Strategy which HCC & 3RDC officers are working
towards implementing. This includes a new route along the
A412 Rickmansworth to Watford.
The SWH cycle strategy which is currently being consulted on
seeks to enable a number of key cycle routes to come forward.
Croxley Rail Link currently awaiting Secretary Of State decision.
If the routes are not congested and future development will not
impact on these – they will not be included
Hertford
Resident
Corridor 6 needs to be extended toward Berkhamstead and there should be a
further corridor Watford - Hertford - Harlow
Dacorum
Borough
Council
1. General The Council is pleased to see that not only is the study picking up
on the major strategic
routes (e.g. M1/M25/A41), but also the more local and parallel routes through
the Borough (e.g.
A4251/A414/A4146 etc).The latter are of significance because of their
localised importance in serving key settlements, their inter-relationship with
the key strategic routes and that they too have issues that need addressing.
The Council is disappointed that the main focus of the document is only to
2017 rather than to 2031 in line with the Local Transport Plan 3 and our own
emerging Core Strategy (and its accompanying evidence base). This would
have helped support longer-term infrastructure planning work and in
identifying and securing such funding. However, it acknowledges that if the
aim of the IURS is for the County Council to keep it ?live? through regular
review, then this need not be a fundamental issue and many of the
interventions identified have potential implementation timescales beyond five
years.
These proposals would be out of Hertfordshires Boundaryhowever we are obliged to work with neighbouring authorities
with respect to these issues.
Noted
Cross County issues have been taken account of in the
development of the IURS. Schemes and measures are only
included in the IURS if they are deliverable within the initial 5
year strategy horizon. As the size and location of development
becomes clearer it is likely corridors and the interventions for
them will need to be reviewed in co operation with the relevant
planning authorities.
Page 8 of 65
2. Table 0.2 Options for a county-wide strategy It would be helpful if there was
better cross-referencing with the respective intervention tables under each
prioritised corridor strategy table. At present it is difficult to work out the nature
of the proposed intervention(s).
What exactly is meant by Roll-out Quality Network Partnerships, Under
intervention PT54.
How does the summary table (under Table 1) relate to each prioritised
corridor strategy table? This table appears to present different potential
options to that presented in the main document.
Welwyn
Hatfield
Borough
Council
The Study is a useful piece of work which has involved bringing together a
wide range of authorities and other partners with an interest in improving
transport networks across the county. If refined appropriately in response to
the current consultation, the Study should prove useful in prioritising
proposals for the inter-urban networks in a climate of limited funding
availability.
There are however a number of comments which need to be made
concerning the presentation of the Study, the proposed interventions and the
relationship between these interventions. The layout of the Study at this stage
is slightly confusing, it being necessary to refer to a number of different
schedules in different parts of the document to build up a full picture of
possible interventions for each corridor.
Also, it is not clear from the document how certain of the more general
interventions would assist in dealing with the transport issues identified.
For example, introduction of variable speed limits on the A1(M) is listed as an
option for addressing capacity issues on the A1000 between A1001 South
Way and Kentish Lane at Brookmans Park, but it is not obvious how this
would work.
Noted as a general point although table 0.2 does not appear in
the document.
A quality network partnership is the coming together of all
passenger transport operators in a location, and getting them to
work together to provide a better service for all. St Albans is the
first QNP in the country, and has seen a 15% increase in
passenger transport patronage since forming.
Noted that the cross referencing between the Executive
Summary and the main document are difficult to cross
reference. The final strategy will be more legible. The Study will
remain unchanged.
Comments noted.
Comments noted. The study will not be revisited; the final
strategy will use a revised format and plan presentation.
The use of variable speed limits on the A1(M) could facilitate
better traffic flows and more reliable journey times for motorists.
The benefits foreseen are that less traffic would detour onto the
A1000 if journey times were quicker and more reliable on the
A1(M).
Page 9 of 65
Broxbourne
Borough
Council
There also appears to be a reliance on countywide demand management
strategies to resolve a large number of the location-specific
issues. This is consistent with the importance given to ?Smarter Choices? in
the transport report of the Hertfordshire Infrastructure and Investment
Strategy (HIIS) from 2009, but it is by no means clear how effective demand
management will be in a period of traffic and population growth. Consideration
should
also be given to how the various location-specific interventions might interact
with each other to produce unplanned outcomes, or to what extent they are
part of a package of measures of strategic significance which are required to
deliver a desired outcome.
It may be that the work to date has started to address this issue, but it is not
apparent from the consultation document.
Further consideration should also be given to the mechanisms for investment
in public transport which need increased support from the Highway Authority
to ensure provision.
Particular consideration should be given within the detailed solutions for the
provision of increased public transport linkages to health facilities an example
being the lack of public transport from south Hatfield to the Lister Hospital in
Stevenage. As well exploration of the use of ITS to prioritise buses at
signalised junctions. Finally, and perhaps most significantly, the
appropriateness of some of the location-specific schemes, for example the
signal and dedicated left-turn arrangements at Jack Oldings roundabout
adjoining Junction 4 of the A1(M), may change once mitigation requirements
associated with nearby proposed locations for growth are known.
This would be covered by revising the traffic models and
reviewing the impacts/outcomes of the different interventions as
they are developed.
Interventions within corridors with a 5 year horizon will be
prioritised against the 5 LTP goals as part of the final IURS.
For Welwyn Hatfield, the process of assessing these mitigation requirements
with the County Council and the Highways Agency is continuing, alongside
consultation on the Emerging Core Strategy and the Land for Housing outside
Urban Areas document. Similar processes are taking place within other
Hertfordshire districts and the Inter-Urban Route Study, which is intended as
a „live‟ document, needs to explicitly reflect this.
The Study places a lot of emphasis on soft measures to help tackle
congestion including travel planning, the channelling of development to key
passenger transport corridors, a county-wide car parking strategy, SMART
ticketing, etc. Although these will make a contribution towards
reducing congestion, this will not be significant. The document should instead
prioritise major infrastructure and highway improvements regardless of
funding sources.
The final IURS will be able to be re-visited as the location and
size of developments become known. The county council will
work with other authorities and agencies to try to identify its
impact on the network and possible interventions for the
corridors.
revenue forecasts, costs and proximity to alternative services.
revenue forecasts, costs and proximity to alternative services.
development of the IURS.
Schemes and measures are included in the IURS if they are
considered deliverable within the initial 5 year horizon.
The Inter Urban Route Strategy is a daughter document of the
LTP and will prioritise interventions against its 5 goals. Location
of growth, mitigation measures and funding arrangements
should be identified in the transport section of the Local Plan.
HCC will continue to advise the Borough in the preparation of
Page 10 of 65
this evidence.
Hard measures should be identified and given more prominence including an
A10 express bus service, superfast broadband and use of the M25 hard
shouldering.
The Study has been prepared for the period to 2017 and assumes an early
review once local authorities have prepared their local plans. The Council
appreciates that appropriately planned infrastructure improvements need to
be based on an identification of future growth in the county.
However the highway issues identified in the Study are occurring now,
regardless of development planned over the next five years or local plan
period. The identification and prioritisation of highway improvements is
therefore essential within this version of the Study.
The Inter Urban Route Study should outline the costs, benefits, constraints
and delivery timescales of infrastructure schemes and all potential funding
mechanisms should be ascertained, including funding available through the
Local Enterprise Partnership.
to deal with exiting known issues or those identified in adopted
policy documents.
Noted
Noted
ross County issues have been taken account of in the
development of the IURS. Schemes and measures are only
included in the IURS if they are deliverable within the 5 year
strategy.
Location of growth, mitigation measures and funding
arrangements should be identified in the transportation section
of the Local Plan. HCC will continue to advise the Borough in
the preparation of this evidence.
One of the key objectives of the Study, which should be included on page 1,
is that the document will be used as a means of securing funding for
schemes.
The Study has omitted some important information which we would like to see
included. Information on High Speed 2 and Crossrail 2 should be incorporated
and the Oyster Card scheme has now been agreed for railway stations on the
Hertford East line including those in Broxbourne.
As a daughter document of LTP 3 the document will be used to
identify schemes fit with Local Transport Plan 3. It will also
inform the other bidding opportunities as they arise.
development of the IURS.
Page 59 should also identify Junction 25 of the M25 as a major hotspot for
congestion. Some minor points to note - paragraph 1.78 on page 53 should
identify the fact that the A10 is the borough‟s major highway route, connecting
residents with important services and facilities in north London, particularly
jobs and healthcare facilities.
M25 Junction 25 is highlighted on page 59 of the study.
Paragraph 1.85 on page 53 should refer to the fact that the A121 is at
Waltham Cross and not Broxbourne.
Noted. The study is not be revisited. The Strategy will address
inconsistencies and inaccuracies regarding routes.
Additional notes will be added to 1.78.
Page 11 of 65
Paragraph 1.92 on page 55 should state that Broxbourne will be undertaking
a new transport study in order to inform a Route Management Strategy for the
A10 and other main highways.
Broxbourne
Borough
Council
Central
Town
Residents'
Association,
Watford
The Council would like to take this opportunity to commend the Study and its
objectives. However more information needs to be included on the
prioritisation of schemes and infrastructure projects and the funding sources
required for delivery. We look forward to working with you on future stages of
the Study, particularly the provision of a route strategy for the A10.
Due to other pressures on my time, I have not been able to consider these
studies in sufficient detail as to be able to comment on more than a few
aspects, but I hope that the following might be of some use.
First, on the general scene, it seems to me that the lamentable absence of a
clear national strategy for all modes of transport, and especially the
uncertainty in the South-East regarding proposals for HS2, Airport Hub etc.,
must make it impossible to justify the allocation of resources to the
preparation of long-term proposals for major
infrastructure schemes which would have to integrate with changes to
national networks.
This limitation on the scope of plans currently under consideration appears to
be recognised in the documents, as does the need for coordination with
neighbouring counties.
Bus use is said to be low across the county (para 1.37). This seems to me to
be at least partly due to poor information services which are only now being
subjected to a belated programme of updating.
In and around Watford many of the 'flags' on bus stops do not even show the
routes served! We must hope that the county will soon catch up with the many
Noted
The Cheshunt and Waltham Cross A10 Study identified a
sequence of studies to be undertaken to ensure full
consideration of the impact of development in Broxbourne on
the Highway network. This identified on page 12 that
Broxbourne would produce a RMS for the A10.
A transportation study is to be undertaken by Broxbourne
Borough Council as evidence for there Local Plan and HCC
officers will provide support. This study will need to identify the
impacts of development on the whole transport network in the
Borough including the A10 and identify mitigation measures and
agreed funding mechanisms. Following the production of this
document the need for a dedicated route management strategy
for the southern A10 will be reviewed. It may be the findings of
the work can be incorporated into the IURS as the locations and
size of developments becomes clear.
Schemes included in the Study are often at an early stage of
consideration or feasibility and as such will be reliant on the
relevant authority or delivery partners working then up in to
feasible and deliverable projects for them to be able to be put
forward for funding consideration when opportunities arise.
Noted
Noted. The County Council is keen to be pro-active in looking at
the transport links between its towns and trip attractors whilst
working within National policy and strategy.
Noted
The County Council‟s Intelligent Transport Systems Strategy is
continuing to roll out real time passenger transport information
across Hertfordshire. Significant investment has and is being
invested in Hertfordshire. This includes real time passenger
transport information at bus stops and the relevant technology
fitted to bus fleets.
As part of the BIG Herts BIG Ideas project. (Funded by the
Local Sustainable Transport Fund) stop specific timetables will
Page 12 of 65
other transport authorities which have for some years provided real-time
displays.
In the present economic climate many of the proposals here must presumably
be considered as 'aspirational'. Meanwhile of more immediate priority is a
programme to deal with the backlog of repairs to the roads which we already
have, some of which ( especially in the countryside) are in a seriously poor
state.
St Albans
Resident
(Herts LAF
Member)
Cycle Herts
As a member of the Hertfordshire Local Access Forum I urge you to ensure
this document makes provision in all its corridors for vulnerable road users.
This includes the dense population of equestrian users in the county who
need safer road crossings especially where roads have made crossings
particularly dangerous. A414 for example. Wherever possibly multi user
crossings and paths should be provided. Interurban paths are particularly
important.
Corridors 2, 3, 4 (north of Hoddesdon) and 7 appear to offer the opportunity to
create significant off road cycling by the use of low use pavements which will
there fore be low cost.
Cycle Herts is very disappointed that cycling is not mentioned anywhere in the
strategy options. Many towns in Hertfordshire are an easy cycling distance
apart. For example Hatfield to St Albans or Welwyn Garden City or Hitchin to
Letchworth or Baldock. Indeed there are many cycle commuters who would
be capable of commuting longer distances. What prevents cyclists from doing
so is the lack of safe inter-urban all year cycle routes.
Hertfordshire already has a network of cycle routes in many towns. Out of
town there is, unfortunately, an over reliance on converted former railway
lines. These are no use for regular commuting:
They are remote, so the fear of crime deters use after dark, even sections
with lighting.
Surfaces vary from the very good to the hopelessly poor. No commuter
wishes to arrive at work covered in mud.
be implemented on key routes in Watford during 2013/14 and
2014/15. This will not only indicate all the routes served on the
timetables, but provide travel time information to the locations
served. “Near field recognition” technology will also be fitted to
some stops which will send real time information straight to
capable mobile phones.
The County Council has a „Transport Asset Management Plan‟
in place to deal with road maintenance repairs.
The LTP3 recognises the provision for infrastructure for
vulnerable road users and included an Equalities impact
Assessment.
Thank you for your detailed response on cycling in Hertfordshire
and routes you would like to see improvements on. Schemes
and measures are only included in the IURS if they are
considered deliverable within the 5 year strategy and some
cycleway improvements have been identified.
The County Council has a cycling programme that prioritises
measures on the basis of demand and value for money.
Detailed consideration is given to routes to schools and rail
stations as well as providing secure cycle parking. An Active
Travel Strategy is also being developed to prioritise measures
and develop an action plan. Consultation for this document is
currently taking place.
Hertfordshire County Council has worked in partnership with
Sustrans, District Councils and other stakeholders to deliver a
number of off road routes in the County and the provision of
these has reflected the use and surrounding landscape and
budget available. Often the maintenance of these paths is
undertaken by other parties.
The construction of cycleways between towns has been
Page 13 of 65
Hertfordshire has until now had a strict policy that it will not fund inter-urban
links. Yet Cambridgeshire has shown that building such links can have a
hugely beneficial effect in reducing car commuting from the surrounding
villages.
There are many locations where lightly used pavements could be made dual
use at little cost to create inter-urban routes. Cambridgeshire makes better
use of quiet pavements, for example in St Neots. This would provide a very
cost effective way to deliver benefits rapidly, for example providing a cycle
route along corridor 4 in its entirety out of urban areas.
When planning these links, particular note should be made where cycle paths
could assist school children in cycling to school as this will remove school run
traffic. It is sad to note, for example, that of the 5 secondary schools in
Welwyn Hatfield only two are currently on cycle paths. The consequences
are unnecessary car journeys and indeed illegal use of pavements by children
cyclists who rightly fear cycling on the road. Our suggested route for corridor
3 will provide much needed links for Chancellor‟s School, Brookmans Park
and Monks Walk School Welwyn Garden City.
Where links to railways are considered, the study should note that in most
cases the train companies do not permit the carriage of non-folding bikes
during peak hours. Thus whilst routes to stations are important, at peak hours
trains may be of no use to say a parent and child headed for a work place
nursery on a bike with child seat. Secure cycle parking is essential and where
capacity is used up, is should be expanded to meet demand. St Albans City
is a model of good practice.
Where cycle routes exist (e.g. Hatfield – Welwyn GC), poster advertising by
roads and at bus stops should be used to increase awareness of the cycle
route and typical total journey times, for example the time taken to queue to
get into car parks and find a space.
If a road is widened or built new, a cycle path must be built as an integral part
of the works. For example the planned dual carriageway from Ware to
Stevenage. This should also include well designed run and run off points
connecting to parallel roads.
undertaken in a number of locations, however, the creation of
these routes to a recognised standard has proved costly and
demand limited. Recently the DFT has produced new guidance
for highway authorities on the provision of shared paths and
there appears to be recognition of this and an allowance for
highway authorities to relax standards where use is low. This
may allow us to undertake some trials in the future.
Once the quantum and location of development in Hertfordshire
is fully understood full consideration will be given to ensuring
sustainable infrastructure is identified to support them where
appropriate. In the meantime the routes you have highlighted
will be ranked against other projects in the county.
Junctions on all routes must be designed to ensure cycle and pedestrian
safety is paramount, even where this comes at the expense of traffic flow, and
without long diversions. It is of course sadly the case that many major roads
now create massive barriers equivalent to wide rivers. The success of the
A10 bridge at Cheshunt should be a model for future good practice.
Page 14 of 65
Cycle Herts therefore welcomes the opportunity to suggest locations along
the eight study corridors. Corridors 2, 3, 4 (north of Hoddesdon) and 7
appear to offer the opportunity to create significant off road cycling by the use
of low use pavements which will therefore be low cost.
Canals and
Rivers Trust
NHS
Hertfordshire
Coincidentally, we have recently produced a list of the “top ten” worst
towpaths in our South East Waterway (except there were 13).
Noted
There appears to be some interesting overlap between your NM01 and our
TP 13: “a poor quality section in Apsley that runs from Durrants Hill Rd to the
Marina”. (our ref: GU-176-P0475 to GU-177-P0525) ). About 1km in length,
our file note said that a bound surface was required, to attract customers to
this area. There is also a „hot spot‟ near Bank Mill Lane in Berkhamsted,
approx. 25 metres (our ref GU-170-P0250)
Noted- The HCC Rights of Way Department have been
informed..
The other section – at the west side of the County – is in Tring Rural. TP 1
runs down the Aylesbury Arm, from its junction with the Grand Union (main
line) eastwards to College Road. A total of some 5km, (about half of which is
in Herts), it would allow a surfaced towpath to be completed along the entire
length of the Arm. I am working on an Investment Plan for the Tring
Reservoirs and this would enable a great traffic-free route to be provided to
them. (Our ref: GA-001-P0375 to GA-004-P0950)
The PCT/CCGs welcome the LTP3 inter-urban route study but ask at the
outset that access to key healthcare sites, especially main hospitals be given
greater consideration. The strategic corridors identified, include main
hospitals in Hertfordshire and in adjoining counties. These sites all attract
large numbers of employees, patients and visitors.
Most acute specialist health care will be delivered at:
It is in the ROWIP
Stevenage
Watford
* Lister
* Watford General
where they will be providing specialised care which will result in large
numbers of employees and patients and visitors to each site.
Hemel Hempstead Hospital, the QEII site in Welwyn Garden City and St
Albans City Hospital will also see significant activity and patient attendances.
The PCT/CCGs welcome the opportunity to adopt, promote and contribute to
the range of potential options that address the identified issues for each
corridor, especially:
It may be better to concentrate resources & contribute to
transport , health and public health outcomes that address the
comments below:
1. improve access in the immediate locality of the main
Hertfordshire hospitals.
2. minimise congestion, emissions and accidents countywide.
3. extend bus network operating hours.
4. look to develop cycling & walking networks that contribute to
the public health agenda.
- travel planning for hospital employees, patients & visitors
- SMART ticketing and QNP initiatives
- use RTPI at main hospitals
- extending bus network operating hours
Page 15 of 65
- express bus network
This will complement the existing work of the Hertfordshire Integrated
Transport Partnership (HITP) which looks at access to both local (GP & health
clinics) and hospitals in Hertfordshire & adjoining counties. The partners have
responded to concerns from residents and developed transport information,
non-emergency PTS, health shuttles and work with the voluntary sector to
support residents who require door to door transport.
The County and Health partnership contributes to both supporting residents to
retain their independence and to maintain their quality of life by asking……
„How do we make it easy for residents to access healthcare?‟
County wide initiatives
It should be noted that congestion impacts on the main hospital sites and any
LTP actions that reduce the impact of sites with a congestion ratio of ≥ 1.0 will
contribute to improved access to those sites.
Current Year Stress map p18 IURS
The LTP supports schemes that address the issues raised and
the schemes in the Study will contribute to addressing them.
The initiatives to improve air quality and minimise transport related emissions
are also welcomed.
LTP targets p 14
IURS
The work to minimise fatal & serious accidents is welcomed.
1.19 p10 IURS
The inter-urban corridors should include, promote and improve the main
walking & cycling networks as an integral part of the corridors, providing
sustainable alternatives to powered transport. The specific target within the
Local Transport Plan to increase the cycling modal share of trips below three
miles can be linked to both staff travel plans and long term public health
benefits.
p 12 IURS
At a practical level it is questionable how many of the options identified will
come to fruition and it may be a case of concentrating resources that:- improve access in the immediate locality of the main Hertfordshire hospitals
-minimise congestion, emissions and accidents countywide
- extend bus network operating hours
- look to develop cycling & walking networks that contribute to the public
health agenda.
Page 16 of 65
St Albans
Cycle
Campaign
Highways
Agency
The study should be a valuable exercise and although it proposes to seek
improvements to sustainable transport networks (including cycling routes) "Background p.3", it is doubtful whether significance can be given to cycling
at this level by such a study, which is surely a mass movement issue. While
cycling has a key contribution to make for short journeys (though longer
commutes are not that rare), the issues for cyclists are often counter to
the improvement of traffic flow. Thus the only 2 problems and "potential
solutions" identified lack appreciation of cyclists' needs, and seem to merely
suggest a convenient (and cheap) way to forget the problem.
Noted. Thank you for your detailed response on cycling in
Hertfordshire and routes you would like to see improvements on.
Schemes and measures are only included in the IURS if they
are considered deliverable within the 5 year strategy and some
cycleway improvements have been identified.
I note that the IURS does not look at specific developments but instead
concentrates on the capacity of specific network corridors to enable
developers to gain a view on what the constraints are, along with any
mitigation that may be needed.
Noted
I‟m afraid I am unable to make any specific comments at this stage but am
pleased to see that the issues along the strategic road network (SRN) are
included and considered alongside the local road network.
Noted
You will already be aware of the improvements that have taken place and are
being planned for the SRN in Hertfordshire. The Highways Agency recognises
that there are capacity issues in the A1 (M) in Hertfordshire but are working
with key stakeholders to promote sustainable solutions including making the
most of the existing road space, for instance, we are working with the Districts
and Boroughs to help develop solutions when issues arise from planning
applications that affect the SRN and will continue to do so.
Our role is also to work with the local authorities as they develop their Local
Development Frameworks and we are currently doing this with councils
Hertfordshire. It may be useful, if you have not already done so, to capture the
work that the districts are doing to assess the capacity of the network in
relation to the planned growth in their areas.
Noted
The County Council has a cycling programme that prioritises
measures on the basis of demand and value for money.
Detailed consideration is given to routes to schools and rail
stations as well as providing secure cycle parking. An Active
Travel Strategy is also being developed to prioritise measures
and develop an action plan.
Comment noted. A scheme of this magnitude would be beyond
the 5 year horizon of the strategy in the first instance. It will be
noted and included in future option appraisal.
Page 17 of 65
Natural
England
The report identifies that the IURS will be required to contribute to the
overarching goals of the LTP3. Natural England welcomes these goals,
particularly enhancement of the natural environment and reducing transport‟s
contribution to greenhouse gas emissions. For clarity we would recommend
specific reference in the report to the requirement to maintain and enhance
the natural environment, including biodiversity, landscape, green spaces,
water and soils. These issues were identified through the LTP3 along with
other environmental enhancement measures such as use of recycled surface
materials; implementation of SUDS, ensuring signage conforms to any
policies and design codes (eg Chilterns AONB code). The report should
recognise the need for relevant proposals taken forward from this study to
require detailed environmental assessment and mitigation.
The LTP has undergone a separate Strategic Environmental
Assessment, and as you note similar issues to the LTP3 have
been identified.
We generally welcome the Local Transport Plan targets, including targets to
increase walking and cycling, public transport use and improvements in air
quality and per capita CO2 emissions. LTP3 target(s) to maintain and
enhance the natural environment should also be cited.
The majority of options are strategic in nature and may be unlikely to give rise
to significant adverse environmental impacts, although this is difficult to
predict based on the limited detail available at this stage. A number of
options, such as proposals for road widening/improvements, creation of
access links, provision/extension of rail interchanges etc, have the potential to
give rise to environmental effects. The report should acknowledge the need
for relevant proposals, if taken forward, to be fully assessed to determine their
impacts on the natural environment. This should consider impacts on
designated conservation landscape sites, including SSSIs, N2K sites and the
Chilterns AONB, wider biodiversity/geodiversity, access, air quality, soils and
climate change adaptation. Mitigation will be required where impacts are
predicted.
Where data is available we have used monitoring data in the
LTP3 SEA annual monitoring report to measure negative or
positive impact of receptors in the natural environment to
transport pressures in the county.
The IURS is a strategic document, and as such does not go into
detail about specific transport schemes, nonetheless it is agreed
the IURS should clarify that where appropriate, certain transport
projects will require EIA screening / scoping under the Town and
Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment)
Regulations 2011
According to the UK Air Pollution Information system (www.apis.ac.uk),
several Hertfordshire SSSIs are currently subject to nitrogen deposition in
exceedance of the lower critical loads for the relevant habitat types. Relevant
proposals taken forward will need to be carefully modelled and assessed to
ensure that traffic, and the associated air pollution, is not simply deflected
towards areas of high environmental importance such as SSSIs.
We welcome that LTP objectives focus on making best use of existing
infrastructure and promoting sustainable options rather than major new
infrastructure; this should help minimise the environmental effects of the
strategy.
Any transport scheme that requires scoping under the EIA
regulations will undergo detailed modelling to ensure that traffic
is not simply deflected to another sensitive area.
Agreed the IURS should clarify that where appropriate certain
transport projects will require EIA screening / scoping under the
Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact
Assessment) Regulations 2011.
Noted.
Page 18 of 65
We note that freight transport is an important aspect of Hertfordshire‟s
economy and the County‟s route hierarchy policy is to concentrate HGV flows
on motorway and trunk road networks and principal A roads to minimise the
environmental and other impacts of lorry travel. As mentioned above, the
potential for transport to have an adverse effect on sensitive habitats, through
nitrogen deposition, should be recognised and suitable mitigation proposed.
Lighting associated with transport schemes, through inappropriate design and
location, can also have an impact on biodiversity, particularly on sensitive
species such as bats and birds, and should be recognised in the report. The
effects of changes in noise levels on sensitive species should also be
considered as part of any detailed assessment.
Freight
Transport
Association
Hertford
Resident 2
Cambridge
Academic
Note Environmental Impact Assessments should include the
effects of lighting and noise on biodiversity when schemes are
further developed..
Please note that Natural England reserves the right to object to any of the
individual schemes in the event that, once further details become available,
we consider the scheme‟s environmental impact to be unacceptably high.
Noted.
We support the proposed road improvement measures identified and agree
that good traffic management improves journey reliability so also support the
suggestion of improved traffic management measures on the M1.
The document includes proposals for bus corridors on major roads and we
would like to see priority lanes for HGVs (+3.5 tonnes) also considered where
bus flows are light. This would not only improve journey times for HGVs, but
would importantly have the potential of reducing emissions from freight as it
would provide for smoother journeys, fewer gear changes and lower engine
revs.
The study does discuss passenger rail interchanges, but there does not
appear to be any reference to freight intermodal opportunities. The London
and Greater South East area is in great need of more freight intermodal
interchange capacity.
It is essential to the Ageing Well campaign now being waged by East Herts
Council that an Integrated Transport System for O.A.P.'s, attending our
Hospitals be put in place.
Noted
No Current plans for this to be implemented as the routes are
specifically intended to provide improvements for public
transport
This is a policy issue which sits outside of the Inter-Urban Route
Study.
Provisions are made to allow for nearly all Hertfordshire‟s
residents to hospitals via passenger transport.
1. Need to reduce traffic levels for reasons other than congestion, which
would bring the following benefits:
Where patients & visitors cannot use public transport NHS
Hertfordshire and the county council fund community &
voluntary transport schemes that provide door to door transport.
This is acknowledged and supported by the delivery of schemes
in line with the goals of LTP 3.
(a) Reduction in greenhouse gas emissions
(b) Reduction in pollution, noise and danger which would make cycling and
walking much more attractive
(c) If travellers could be switched to buses for journeys that can't be
conveniently made by rail, this would help to keep them going.
2. Need to develop feeder facilities so that places away from rail stations don't
Noted – For the purposes of the development of the Inter urban
Page 19 of 65
suffer as a result.
I believe that the list of corridors is incomplete. Furthermore I would like to see
Corridors 6-8 amalgamated into a single Luton-Stansted corridor -- I have
structured my response this way which I believe makes it much more
coherent. The Baldock to Royston section of Corridor 6, which falls outside
the amalgamated corridor, is adequately served by rail and I have no
comments to make on it.
The following corridors are the ones I'd like to add.
A: Watford to Rickmansworth and beyond
B: Watford to Waltham Cross
C: Watford to Gatwick Airport
D: Luton to Aylesbury.
The last two are of course mainly outside the county, but I believe that my
comments on these corridors are necessary to make my response more
complete.
Route Strategy the specified corridors will remain. As
development and the areas of growth become clearer in the
future it may be necessary t consider parts of corridors areas
individually.
Noted
Corridor 1: Add that Hemel Hempstead and Tring stations are too far from
their respective town centres to be convenient.
Corridor 2: Need for rail link between Watford and Luton.
Corridor 3: No comment.
Corridor 4: Need for better buses on A10 corridor between Ware and
Royston.
Corridor 5: Need for improved links to airports.
Stevenage
Borough
Council
Luton-Stansted (Corridors 6-8): Need for better cross country links by both rail
and bus.
 Whilst the efficacy of the route corridor approach is recognised in the
IURS context, it makes it difficult (i) to gauge an overall strategy for
the County‟s inter-urban routes and (ii) to construct a mental image of
how different corridor strategies interact at points where corridors
intersect e.g. Stevenage.
Noted. The corridor approach has been adopted to enable some
focus to be given to key routes. As growth and development
becomes more clearly known it is likely that corridors or sections
of multiple corridors that interact will need to be reviewed in
conjunction with each the to asses the over all impacts

The connections between the IURS and the UTPs are unclear.
The relationship is set out in the introduction and in diagram 1.1

The county-wide prioritisation of schemes is difficult to identify.
The Study has not prioritised the schemes identified for in the 5
year horizon. Each scheme has an identified time scale and
value-for-money judgement which illustrates relative priorities
Page 20 of 65
Epping
Forrest
District
Council

Many of the maps are confusing and not easy to understand,
especially those for Corridor 3.
The Study will not be revisited. The maps included in the final
Strategy will be of a revised and simplified format.

The interactions between these issues are highlighted by the
problems associated with the mapping of the proposed high
frequency Stevenage-Hitchin-Letchworth bus triangle. Scheme PT10
on the Corridor 6 map does not show the legs of the triangular route
to Stevenage. Scheme PT29 on the Corridor 7 map is incorrectly
labelled (it should be PT10) and it does not show the Letchworth to
Stevenage leg of the triangle. It is arguable that this is also a Corridor
3 scheme, as it has the potential to take „local hop‟ journeys off the
A1(M), thereby releasing capacity for longer-distance journeys.
Sch4emes taken forward will require further assessment and
issues such as those raised will need tobe considered in more
detail.

The grey text used in the map keys will present legibility issues for the
partially sighted. It is suggested that black text is substituted.
The Study will not be revisited. The maps included in the final
Strategy will be of a revised and simplified format.

There should be an overall improvement to inter-urban public
transport services, especially between key locations, such as
Stevenage and the Luton & Dunstable Hospital (where no direct link
currently exists).
Currently bus services between Stevenage and Luton are
commercially operated.
It would appear that all the identified inter-urban corridors are entirely within
the boundary of Hertfordshire and consideration has not been given to intercounty movements. For example, it does not appear that consideration has
been given to the movement along the A121 between Waltham Abbey and
Waltham Cross and affect this has on the Monarch's Way/Eleanor
Cross/Abbey Road junction and the A10/A121 junction.
There are also known issues on Dobb's Weir Road and the surrounding
network due to general congestion a large number of HGVs using unsuitable
roads. Have these issues been taken into account?
Additionally future car and bus growth outside of Hertfordshire has been
derived by applying the Department for Transport's National Trip End Model
and incorporating dwelling and employment distribution from local planning
assumptions for the other counties within the East of England. The new
Epping Forest District Council Local Plan is still at an early stage and we are
We are working with Arriva to use S.106 funding to kick-start an
enhancement to Stevenage – Luton services which will help
people making connections in Luton. Any extension would be
outside Herts so
the risks associated with service enhancement can only be
considered of either commercially viable or meets the HCC
supported service criteria
100/1/2 are now generally fast between urban centres – the
slow running is through the town centres
deliverable within the 5 year strategy.
Waltham Cross and Cheshunt UTP identify the need for study
on the A121.
Further work being undertaken by Broxbourne Borough Council
to identify transport impacts locally of growth for their Local Plan.
The strategy will recognise the pressures and impacts
associated with developments across its boundaries and work
with neighbouring authorities =to reach a productive and
agreeable approach.
Page 21 of 65
Welwyn
Garden City
Resident
not currently in a position to provide accurate dwelling and employment
distributions. However, the Inter Urban Route Strategy should have regard to
the emerging Local Plan which will designate areas of housing and
employment within the district over the next 21 years. This is likely to have an
effect on the road network beyond Epping Forest.
I'm very interested in seeing easy, quick public transport from Welwyn Garden
City to Lister Hospital. At the moment it seems inadequate. Many can not
drive and even if they can, parking is difficult and expensive.
Links exist whether by train & bus.
Arriva‟s commercial service 301 provides a direct link to Lister
Hospital.
Page 22 of 65
Question 1 – Corridor 1 Comments
Organisation
Comment
HCC Response
Berkhamsted
Resident
There appears to be no attention given to traffic flows to from the
county to (i) Bucks [Chesham/Mid Chilterns and/or (ii)
Beds[Dunstable/Leighton Buzzard] There is considerable 'rat
running' from the western M25 to the Milton Keynes/M1 J14
through Chesham, Berkhamsted and Ivinghoe which needs
management.
No attention paid to further parking provision for Berkhamsted
station
The Rickmansworth Road is considered as part of corridor 1
although I would have regarded it more as corridor 2 and there
seemed to be little offered about it except it is listed on page 87
as reaching its capacity.
Creation of bus only lanes may help buses but they severely
restrict car and commercial vehicle capacity. Does it also create a
greater environmental hazard?
Cross County issues have been taken account of in the development of the
IURS. Schemes and measures are only included in the IURS if they are
deliverable within the 5 year strategy and largely within HCC geographical
boundaries.
At St Albans the Thameslink connection is not mentioned An
aside: there is no connection between the two St Albans stations
for handicapped persons.
Issues within St Albans such as those mentioned are considered in the St
Albans Urban Transport Plan. The stops at the station are DDA (disabled
discrimination act) compliant providing level access to buses which there are
numerous routes which link the two stations.
Noted. Have recommended that this is referenced in the document. The
County Council has no direct influence over stopping patterns but will
continue to lobby for inter city trains to serve Watford. It is noted that the refranchising will take place in 2014/15.
Berkhamsted
Resident
Watford
Resident
There has been no consideration of the dumbing down of Watford
Junction with
respect to fast services: both Virgin and London Midland only
provide a regular service stopping at Watford to Birmingham.
Changing trains at Milton Keynes is disliked by many persons.
Berkhamsted
Chamber of
Commerce
Councillor
WelwynHatfield
For Corridor1 no account has been taken of traffic between Bucks
(Chesham/Mid Chilterns) and beds (Leighton Buzzard/Dunstable),
which causes serious congestion in the Gade and Bulbourne
valleys.
TABLE 1- - Watford Junction platform length limited to eight car
trains: Are you sure? Watford councillors say this is not true for
platforms 6-9, the operative ones.
Watford Junction- St Albans single track limited capacity growth:
More passengers from Abbey line accentuate the capacity issue
Watford-Euston. –
Consultation by Dacorum Borough Council is underway on proposals for a
Controlled parking zone in Berkhamsted which includes station parking.
The importance of this route and the places it links is acknowledged through
the inclusion of:
 The Croxley Rail Link
 The A412 cycle route
The County Council has to take a balance between encouraging the use of
sustainable travel methods (in some cases the creation of bus lanes) with
retaining capacity for commercial vehicles. A delicate balance.
Cross County issues have been taken account of in the development of the
IURS. Schemes and measures are only included in the IURS if they are
deliverable within the 5 year strategy and largely within HCC geographical
boundaries.
Watford Junction Station platforms 6-9 can accommodate 12 car trains.
Platform 10, the bay platform, is limited to eight car trains. This means that
Watford Junction can accommodate 12 car trains on through services, but
that these trains can't start or finish their journeys at Watford Junction.
Although the Abbey line from Watford Junction to St Albans Abbey stations is
currently single track, there are proposals to change the operation to light rail
and introduce a passing loop at Bricket Wood, which would allow a 30 minute
or a 20 minute frequency to operate. While this would bring additional
passengers to Watford Junction, it would not represent a significant
percentage increase in passengers travelling between Watford Junction and
Page 23 of 65
Rail capacity into Euston: Not relevant to Watford-Luton.
Northchurch
Parish
Council
Cycle Forum
Member
Three Rivers
District
Council
CouncillorDacorum
Dacorum
Borough
Council
There had been a proposal to link Northchurch New Road and
Billet Lane, in Northchurch. This has been three-quarters finished
but the proposal is now that it should be removed from the
Dacorum Borough Council Core Strategy, which is not
satisfactory.
Large pent up demand for cycling route from NW London to
Hertfordshire locations on the A41. Hatch End to Kings/ Abbolts
Langley vie Watford.
Half of this cycling route already exists, but the two missing links
need to be filled with safe routes. Shared pavement route Hatch
End to Watford along A4008 very busy road.
Alternative route from S.Oxhey cycle path is available if cooperation with Harrow to allow cycling on footpath to Sylvia
Avenue Hatch End.
Making Langlebury Lane more cycle friendly by converting
pavement to shared use would complete a usefull safe route.
See above. Watford Junction Station is the intercity rail head for
Three Rivers. The Council is keen to see intercity services both
maintained and improved.
The Council is also keen to see more use of "real time"
information in regard to bus services throughout the area,
I think that the northwestbound part of the A4251 from its
(roundabout) junction with Brindley Way should have been
identified as being significantly congested in the evening rush
hour in particular. In fact it frequently takes 20 minutes plus to
reach the traffic lights at Two Waters Way from this point. Most
morning rush hours it takes 15 minutes plus to proceed along
A414 Breakspear Way from the roundabout junction with
Maylands avenue to the roundabout junction with Green Lane.
3. Corridor 1 - North London to Tring (A41/A4251) The header
should refer to the A4251 and not the A425. While the A4251 is
highlighted in other tables and maps elsewhere in the document,
we would
like to see a more direct reference to its role and associated
Euston given the overall level of usage of the latter. Additional capacity is
being provided on the West Coast Main Line through planned improvements
to timetable and rolling stock in the short term, and by the construction of
High Speed 2 in the longer term.
Noted: due the corridor specific nature of the study this issue has been
addressed due to it‟s geographic location within the corridor.
The proposal to link Northchurch new Road and Billet Lane for motor
vehicles is not supported by Dacorum Borough Council or HCC Highways.
Proposals to improve connectivity by providing a cycle link at this location are
being investigated through the UTP.
Thank you for your detailed response on cycling in Hertfordshire and routes
you would like to see improvements on. Schemes and measures are only
included in the IURS if they are considered deliverable within the initial 5 year
strategy and some cycleway improvements have been identified.
Once the quantum and location of development in Hertfordshire is fully
understood full consideration will be given to ensuring sustainable
infrastructure is identified to support them where appropriate. In the
meantime the routes you have highlighted will be ranked against other
projects in the county.
Agree and noted. (See comments in last line)
The County Council‟s Intelligent Transport Systems strategy is continuing to
roll out real time information across the County including investment in 3RDC
area. This includes 7 new “variable message signs” to be erected around the
Rickmansworth area.
Traffic modelling is currently taking place as part of future development
proposals.
Traffic modelling is also currently taking place as part of future development
proposals.
Typographical error noted.
The A41 provides the inter urban route with the A4251 provision designed for
local traffic only and therefore not within the scope of the IURS.
Page 24 of 65
congestion problems (e.g. through Kings Langley, at Apsley and
along Berkhamsted High Street etc.) under the main background
to Corridor 1 (paragraphs 1.56 ? 1.62).
Under intervention NM01, what is meant by TR4/TR11 in the SW
Herts Cycle Strategy when referring to improving the cycle link
between Berkhamsted and Hemel Hempstead?
Central
Town
Residents'
Association,
Watford
Reference should be made the emerging work on the
Berkhamsted / Northchurch / Tring Urban Transport Plan and its
potential to identify local level interventions to support the IURS.
Para 1.33 of the Technical Document notes that there is no one
major centre of population in the county. But surely Watford
Junction has to be recognised as a major transport hub, served
as it is by four rail routes (soon to be joined by a fifth) and by an
(admittedly inadequate) bus station. A new Travel Centre
continues to be much needed here.
The SW Herts cycle strategy identifies the opportunity to improve the towpath
on the Grand Union Canal as a transport corridor primarily in SW Herts,
however, there is the opportunity to link towns in the corridor between
Watford and Tring.
The relationship between the IURS and the UTP‟s is noted on page 6 of the
IURS.
Noted. This paragraph is recognising that Hertfordshire does not have one
major population centre.
There are a number of references throughout the document in terms of the
importance of Watford Junction as a transport hub. These are include the
following issues and projects:




Croxley Rail Link extension to Watford Junction (table 0.2)
Lengthening platforms at Watford Junction (table 0.10)
Abbey Line light rail conversion (table 0.10)
Overcrowding of trains between Watford and London (table 0.10)
The improvements currently taking place at the station ass part of the
National Stations Improvement Programme (NSIP) will be completed in
Spring 2013. These include improvements to the bus interchanges and
improvements to the concourse.
Cycle Herts

North London – Watford
o A4008 Oxhey Lane; Allow shared pavement use
Noted. Thank you for your detailed response on cycling in Hertfordshire and
routes you would like to see improvements on. Schemes and measures are
only included in the IURS if they are considered deliverable within the 5 year
The County Council has a cycling programme that prioritises measures on
the basis of demand and value for money. Detailed consideration is given to
routes to schools and rail stations as well as providing secure cycle parking.
An Active Travel Strategy is also being developed to prioritise measures and
develop an action plan.
Page 25 of 65


Aylesbury
Vale District
Council
Watford – Hemel (east)
o Langlebury Lane: Allowed shared use of
pavement to link existing route from Cassiobury
Park through Whippendell Woods to Hunton
Bridge.
o South Way: Extend shared use pavement west
to link to route above.
o Langley Lane/Bedmond Road: Allow shared use
on appropriate parts of commuter route from
Watford to Hemel Hempstead (Maylands)
Watford – Hemel (west)
o Langlebury Lane: Allowed shared use of
pavement to link existing route from Cassiobury
Park through Whippendell Woods to Hunton
Bridge.
o A4251: Create signed calmed parallel route via
Gypsy Lane – Kings Langley station – Lower
Road

Hemel – Berkhamsted
o A4251: Create signed calmed parallel route via
Chaulden Road – Pix Farm Lane
o A4251: Use pavement Bourne End Berkhamsted

Berkhamsted – Tring
o A4251: Allow shared use of pavement.
Corridor1 should really be North London to the end of the dualled
section of the A41 at Aston Clinton.
Noted- corridors were agreed with district and borough councils within
Hertfordshire during the initial project workshops.
Does the transport strategy to accommodate the Arla Dairy
development at College Road North (west of Tring) have any
bearing on the identified issues for this corridor?
Also I would suggest Buckinghamshire
County Council should be involved in the investigation of solutions
in co-operation with Herts CC 2.
The live nature of the document will react to any new developments which
will have impacts on Hertfordshire‟s network.
How have the bus routes and frequency in the County and
adjoining areas been factored into the assessment of likely future
road and rail use? For example from Aylesbury the service 500
serves key settlements along the A41 down to Watford.
Any service will either be provided commercially or be assessed for support
based on known patronage, projected demand, revenue forecasts, costs and
proximity to alternative services.
We look to work with all neighbouring authorities under the duty to cooperate
Page 26 of 65
St Albans
Cycle
Campaign
Has the Grand Union Canal been
considered as one of the other sustainable transport networks?
(p.3 of the Executive Summary) our view is that it should be.
We support walking and cycling initiatives along the Corridors in
proximity to Aylesbury Vale particularly the A41 and former A41
between Aylesbury, Tring and Hemel Hempstead.
a safe option from Berkhamstead to Hemel Hempstead along the
Grand Union Canal.
Knowledgeable cyclists will already be aware of the option,
although towpath width/surface finish/licensed fishermen/moored
boats/pedestrian users + dogs/water hazards (bearing
in mind that the guideline standard for a shared path is 4 metres),
are hardly conducive to safety, or efficient commuting. There is
nothing new on offer and it seems inconsequential within the
wider issue
The Canals
and Rivers
Trust
The Trust is surprised that the Grand Union Canal is not seen as
a potential cycle / pedestrian link throughout its length as it
passes through the county. The route of the canal either passes
through several urban areas, or provides a link to them, all
presumably experiencing some level of traffic congestion at peak
times. Whilst we welcome recognition that the canal towpath
could be used to overcome congestion between Berkhamsted
and Hemel Hempstead we would suggest that the use of the
canal towpath is promoted more generally as a sustainable
transport route and not just to solve a particular issue in
Berkhamsted.
The Grand Union Canal is a key walking and cycling route through and
between towns in Hertfordshire. HCC would be keen to work in partnership to
promote and improve the route where feasible.
Noted
The Grand Union Canal is a key walking and cycling route through and
between towns in Hertfordshire. HCC would be keen to work in partnership to
promote and improve the route where feasible.
Page 27 of 65
Question 1- Corridor 2
Organisation
Comment
HCC Response
Cycle Forum
Member
Large pent up demand for cycling route from NW London to
Hertfordshire locations on the A41. Hatch End to Kings/ Abbolts
Langley vie Watford. Half of this cycling route all reads exists, but
the two missing links need to be filled with safe routes. Shared
pavement route Hatch End to Watford along A4008 very busy
road.
Alternative route from S.Oxhey cycle path is available if cooperation with Harrow to allow cycling on footpath to Sylvia
Avenue Hatch End. Making Langlebury Lane more cycle friendly
by converting pavement to shared use would complete a useful
safe route.
Cycle Herts


Uxbridge – Watford
o From boundary, signed route via Old Uxbridge
Road.
o A412: Allow shared use of pavement to
Rickmansworth.
Watford – St Albans
o A405: Shared use of pavement Tippendell Lane
(NCN6) - Park St roundabout.
o A414: Use pavement Park St Roundabout London Colney to enable Watford – Hatfield
cycling.
o B4630: Traffic calm as route for cyclist parallel to
A405.
o B4630: Bridge over A414 (ex M10) allow cycling
both
o ways on east pavement to stop NCN6 users
having to cross the road twice.

St Albans – Harpenden:
o A1081Existing shared use pavement (NCN6)

Harpenden – Luton:
o A1081: Allow use of pavement Kinsbourne Green
(The Fox) – Luton (M1 Junction 10a)
Page 28 of 65
Organisation
Comment
HCC Response
Welwyn
Garden City
Resident 1
Do not think that all the pinch points in Welwyn Garden City have
been identified - ie coming off the A1 at the WGC junction into
WGC and also the exit and entrance into Shire Park Business
centre at peak times.
North
Mymms
Parish
Council
The Council wish to express concern that simply introducing
demand management and variable speed limits to the A1(M),
which is stated as approaching capacity does not address the
build up of traffic on the A1000 which passes through this parish.
This pinch point is identified as a network stress in Corridor 3 A1(M), Potters
Bar to Letchworth Garden City (Number 2 on page 50) A1000 Bessemer
Road between A1(M) Junction 6 and Mundells Roundabout (Welwyn Garden
City) exceeding capacity. This would also include the Shire Park Business
Centre as this links to the two aforementioned roads.
The use of variable speed limits on the A1(M) will facilitate better traffic flows
and more reliable journey times for motorists. The benefits foreseen are that
less traffic would detour onto the A1000 if journey times were quicker and
more reliable on the A1(M).
Nor does it address the congestion and safety issues brought
about by traffic diverting off the A1(M) on to local roads or the
increase in traffic if the proposed Incinerator/Energy for Waste
facility at New Barnfield proceeds and there is also the problem of
general peak time traffic.
Covered in above comment.
The IURS document does not make provision for developments that have
not yet supported by local plans. A developments impact on the surrounding
highway network would be part of the Traffic Impact Assessment or a review
of the corridor in the light of development being committed. The IURS is a
live document and impacts to the network would be added where necessary.
New Barnfield is a policy issue which sits outside of the Inter-Urban Route
Study.
Hitchin
Resident
Woolmer
Green
Parish
Council
Cycle Herts
The Council is concerned that the proposed potential options /
solutions would not adequately address the above issues.
In corridor three, the widening of the A1(M) in both directions
between junction 6 and junction 8 is critical
The Council considered this at their last Council Meeting but felt
that it was difficult to comment on other than to say that the
Potters Bar - Letchworth route would impact greatly on the difficult
traffic situation occurring at rush hours at the B197 junction at the
Clock in Welwyn. It is, however, difficult to see what other route
could have been chosen.
 Cockfosters – Potters Bar
o A111: Allow shared use of pavement on west
side.
Comments noted
Noted – the A1 is managed by the Highways Authority. The County council
are working with them to identify both short term improvements and possible
longer term interventions to help mange traffic on this section of the A1M
noted
Page 29 of 65

Potters Bar – Great North Road - Hatfield (Fund using
Incinerator Section 106 payments):
o A1000: Little Heath – Brookmans Park: Allow
pavement use
o Signed and calmed route via Mymms Drive, Golf
Club Road, The Drive (Chancellor‟s School)
o A1000: Brookmans Park – South Way, Hatfield:
Allow pavement use
o South Way junction: Works to ensure cyclists can
get up on to bridge over railway.
o A1001: Allow pavement cycling on South Way,
Roehyde Way to join NCN12 at Millwards and
cycle path to University at Lane End. (Or
construct a new cycle path from Dellsome Lane to
South Way via the University Park and Ride car
park.)

Brookmans Park – Welham Green – Hatfield
o Allow pavement cycling on Station Road, AL9.
o NCN12 Welham Green to Hatfield already exists
and is lit.

Hatfield – Welwyn Garden City
o A1000: Use existing road side NCN12/61 cycle
path
o A6129: Encourage use of the parallel cycle path
on Old Stanborough Lane by cutting down hedge
to make path visible and allow light from road.
This will benefit school children commuting from
Hatfield to Stanborough School and commuters
cycling to/from county Police HQ.

Welwyn GC – Welwyn:
o A1000: Extend Bessemer Road cycle path to
Welwyn using pavement on south side of Hertford
Road.
o Make subway under A1(M) dual use to avoid very
busy junction.
o Sign route through Welwyn village
Hatfield – Welwyn
o Signed route via Lemsford Lane from existing
cycle path past Stanborough School
o B197: Allow pavement cycling Lemsford –
Welwyn.
o Signed route through Welwyn village centre.

Page 30 of 65


Stevenage
Borough
Council
Welwyn – Knebworth - Stevenage
o B197: Allow pavement cycling Welwyn –
Knebworth
o Knebworth: Signed route via Pondcroft Road –
Kerr Close – Peters Way.
o B197: Allow pavement use from Peters Way to
existing shared use pavement and cycle lanes to
Stevenage.
Stevenage – Letchworth
o B197: Allowed shared use of pavement Lister
Hospital – A505
o A505: Use existing cycle path over A1(M)
Junction 9 to Letchworth
o A505; Use existing cycle path to B197.
o B197: Allow shared use of pavement to Weston
Way, Baldock.

Baldock – Stotfold
o A507: Allow shared use of pavement to Norton
Mill Lane.
o A507: (Re)Construct shared use pavement
Norton Mill Lane – Radwell Lane
o A507: Allow shared use of pavement Radwell
Lane – Access road to Grange Cottages.
o A507/A1(M) Junction 10: Construct new off road
path across roundabout north side.
o A507: New cycle path north side A1(M) to cut off
end of Baldock Road, Stotfold. Connects to
NCN12 to Arlesey.

In Corridor 3, scheme PT32 (Hitchin rail viaduct) is now
well under construction: something which is not
acknowledged in the document.
Noted – This will be amended in the final strategy.

Scheme HW56 should be explicit that the lobbying is of
the DfT and Highways Agency for the widening (possibly
in stages) of the A1(M) from two lanes to three lanes from
junctions 6 to 8. We believe that the cost of widening
between junctions 6 and 7 would be in the order of £40M.
Noted- capacity constraints noted within corridor.

We should jointly explore the construction of a parallel
local road between A1(M) junctions 7 and 8 in case the
Highways Agency will not proceed with capacity
improvements over this section. This would be a new
scheme.
Comment to be acknowledged in document.
Page 31 of 65

Scheme NM15 suggests the installation of up to 15 cycle
hubs (storage and maintenance) in Stevenage town
centre. We would identify to you that, depending upon the
scale and nature of these „hubs‟, the visual impact of the
proposal will need careful assessment.
Acknowledge the sentiment, though in reality many of the cycle hubs will
form part of individual UTP schemes which will be consulted on separately

Finally, in Corridor 3, we have little confidence in scheme
PT14, a Stevenage northern park and ride facility. We
consider that it needs to be further justified in the light of
the weakness of Stevenage town centre (the attractor).
There are currently plentiful parking spaces in Stevenage
town centre at reasonable prices and we have no plans to
reduce supply.

We would suggest that, in order for any Park and Ride
scheme to be successful, it needs to encourage car users
to leave their vehicles behind part-way through their
journey and use a high-frequency bus service by:
The County Council recognises the contribution that well designed and sited
Transport Hubs (interchanges) can have in maintaining sustainable access
to, from and within towns where economic and housing growth is being
considered. HCC will work closely with District Councils on developing
transport strategies to support growth and is prepared to support, or promote
such transport hubs, if they are included in a District Council's local plan
and/or supported by the neighbouring District (should the site(s) not be in the
District of the town or towns it was aimed at serving)
This intervention has been identified as part of a countywide measure and
each site would need to be assessed in terms of viability.
(i) having a well located P&R
Comments and reservations noted.
site that is visible to passing drivers on route(s)
that carry large volumes of traffic to the proposed
destination (in this case, Stevenage town centre);
(ii) using high quality modern hybrid buses that
have a specific identity;
(iii) providing good quality shelters for waiting
passengers at both termini, together with secure
car parking at the P&R site;
(iv) ensuring ready availability of accurate real
time information about the time keeping of buses;
(v) providing combined bus and parking services
that are cost competitive with the car; coupled
with
(vi) a comprehensive town-wide parking regime
that does not make on- or off-street parking in, or
close to, the town centre significantly more
attractive by means of ready availability or cost;
and
(vii) bus priority measures that allows buses to
compete effectively with cars in reaching their
Page 32 of 65
destination in a timely manner.
We would not be prepared to support all of these
measures. Were scheme PT14 to be considered viable
after further investigation, it would require significant
liaison and co-operation between the two councils,
coupled with high-level political commitment at both
bodies. We are not willing to offer such backing at
present.

With these reservations and comments, we can provide
support in principle for the schemes suggested for
Corridor 3.
Noted
Page 33 of 65
Organisation
Comment
HCC Response
East Herts
District
Council
Thunderidge
Parish
Council
In route corridor 4, supports the signalisation of the Amwell
roundabout (HW10) as a measure to address traffic congestion;
Noted
For sometime now the members of the parish council have
been concerned that some of the buses serving the parish
travel between ware and Puckeridge along the by-pass.
Members have made several requests that all buses should
travel along the C183 to service the villages of Thunderidge,
Wadesmill, High Cross and Colliers End.
Parishioners who live in these villages find it very frustrating that
buses on some of the return journeys by-pass the villages. It is
hard to understand why some of the buses travel along a route
by-passing four well populated villages.
Cycle Herts






Waltham Cross – Cheshunt – Broxbourne – Hoddesdon
o Traffic calmed, cycle lane and signed route
using B176, A1170
Hoddesdon – Ware:
o Create traffic calmed signed route using
Stansted Road – Amwell Lane – Lower Road,
then cycle path by A1170.
Ware - Puckeridge:
o Signed calmed route along former A10.
Puckeridge – Buntingford
o A10: Shared use of pavement
Buntingford – Royston
Royston – Foxton
o Melbourn: Signed route via village
The County Council has a cycling programme that prioritises measures on the
basis of demand and value for money. Detailed consideration is given to
Page 34 of 65
Organisation
Comment
HCC Response
East Herts
District
Council
In route corridor 5, to address the westbound delays on A414
London Road between A10 and A414 Gascoyne Way
(Hertford) (HW17), would only support the SCOOT
signalisation and linking of roundabouts subject to the
retention of the existing landscaping on these roundabouts
(likewise for measures linking to junction improvements on
A414 Gascoyne Way (HW34));
- A414
I do not favour the installation of traffic lights on the remaining
two large Roundabouts (At Cross Lane (I live close and so
declare that 'interest')) (at Hale Road)
Noted as identified in the Hertford and Ware Urban Travel Plan.
CouncillorHertford
At many time during the day ALL traffic flows freely. Traffic
lights, however linked and sequenced, make delays for some
inevitable even at midnight.
When the peak hours congestion develops, I don't share some
engineers' optimism that A414 traffic will be able to flow right
thorough, better.
With better boxing and white lining, traffic leaving the Town
Centre (and if driver good manners could be improved) should
be able to do so more quickly than if lights favouring travel
times on the A414 were to be installed.
Hertford
Resident
The proposed corridor is deficient in not covering a corridor
Watford - Hertford - Harlow e.g. M25, A405, A414.
(Note: There could be a future alternative using M25 junction
22 and an improved Courses Road joining the A414 bypassing
Colney Heath).
Consideration of traffic signals at Hale Road and Cross Lane is identified
within the Hertford and Ware Urban Transport Plan. The benefits of these
measures is not clear and further engineering assessment would be required
to identify there effectiveness. Further growth in Hertfordshire places further
demands on this principal route and examination of measures to mitigate this
is required.
Consideration could be given to peak time signals. New signal installations
include technology to minimise delay to traffic during free flow conditions. As
such any unnecessary delays should be minimised.
is required.
is required.
Noted, the corridors have been agreed as part of a consultation workshop
attended by representatives from District Councils.
There are no current plans to implement the proposed Courses Lane scheme
at present, instead we would like to see traffic travelling from east to west to
either use the M25, and then any of north south routes to complete the
journey, alternatively, by using the A405 to the A414 then East west on this
route.
Page 35 of 65
Dacorum
Borough
Council
Central Town
Residents'
Association,
Watford
Cycle Herts
Harpenden should be omitted from this route and corridor 5
modified southward to pick up Watford. Watford is a significant
population centre. Harpenden does not need as much
connectivity to Harlow and Stansted as Watford
Noted, the corridors have been agreed as part of a consultation workshop
attended by representatives from District Councils.
Hemel Hempstead to Harlow (A414/A4147) The Council is
pleased to see that the study has highlighted more localised
problems with the A4147/B487, A4146 and congestion issues
around the Maylands Business Park (A414).
However, it would also like to see direct reference to
supporting the delivery of the North East Relief Road. This is
seen as a major opportunity to tackle congestion in this part of
town and around the Maylands Business Park, as well as
meeting the traffic demands generated from the development
of future housing adjoining the business park.
The lack of adequate E-W orbital links is noted in paras 1.36
and 1.37. Particularly useful would be reasonably fast
services, rail or limited stop buses, providing access and
interchange between the radial main line rail services
emanating from central London. In my view this possibility
deserves serious consideration.
This proposal is seen as a local strategic link for future Development and
Growth rather than an inter-urban issue.


Hemel – St Albans
o Signed route via Westwick Row to A4147
o A4147 New road side cycle path Westwick
Row to Appspond Lane
o Signed route via Appspond Lane,
Poterscrouch lane, Bedmond Lane.
o A4147 New road side cycle path to King Harry
Lane
o King Harry Lane: Bluehouse Hill to cycle path
across Verulamium Park and on to
The 724 route serves East-West movements across the county, also
intersecting all of the north-south rail routes which pass through Hertfordshire.
Rail is unforeseeable in the 5 year time frame which this document is intended
for.
The County Council has a cycling programme that prioritises measures on the
basis of demand and value for money. Detailed consideration is given to
Hemel – Harpenden
o B487 needs new road side cycle path
Page 36 of 65


Harpenden – Hatfield
o B653 use pavement Batford Mill to Manor
Road, Marshalls Heath.
o B653 use pavement Marshalls Heath to
Wheathampstead.
o B653 create new off road cycle path Cory
Wright Way roundabout to Marford Road
Layby
o B653 use pavement Marford Road layby to
Lemsford.
o B653 use pavement Lemsford Road – Brocket
Road – Stanborough.
o Connect to existing Hatfield – Welwyn cycle
route at Stanborough.
St Albans – Hatfield
o A1057 use pavement shared use from
Oaklands College to Smallford (north side)
then Smallford – Ellenbrook (south side)
o A414: Use pavement Watling Street to
London Colney to enable Watford – Hatfield
cycling.

Hatfield - Hertford
o A414: Link existing NCN12/61 path on A1000
to cycle path from Mill Green to Gypsy Lane.
Surface existing overgrown section of Bush
Hall Lane immediately east of A1000.
o A414: Create new cycle path Gypsy Lane to
Council recycling centre at Cole Green (avoids
section of A414 where cyclist was killed.)
o A414: Sign parallel route
o via subway and then Old Coach Road (former
A414) to Hertingfordbury
o A414 shared use pavement thence to
Hertford.

Welwyn GC – Hertford
o B195: Create new parallel cycle path from
end of current path at Cole Green Lane to
A414 and round roundabout to Cole Green.

Hertford – Ware
o A119: Create signed route using side roads
and pavement on north side of Ware Road.
Page 37 of 65

St Albans
Cycle
Campaign
Ware – St Margarets – Harlow
o A1170 use north side pavement to Lower
Road
o Signed route via Amwell Lane
o B181 use pavement to Rye Road
o Create new off road path to Roydon level
crossing
o NCN1 via Harlow road to Harlow.
a parallel cycle path alongside the A414.
There is already an extensive cyclepath alongside the A414
from the London Colney roundabout to the Hatfield tunnel, and
the hard shoulder of the previous M10 became a cycleway
when it was de-motorwayed. Much of the remaining distance
is paralleled by the Cole Green Way, which although not fully
surfaced serves commuters already. The real issue for
commuting cyclists is negotiating multi-lane roundabouts and
links en route, say the London Colney r'bt, Hatfield tunnel R'bt
to the Galleria, the A1001 (Tesco) Junction to Mill Green,
which also serve local journeys otherwise more devious. It
would be of considerable advantage at such locations to
provide safe transit for cyclists, though unlikely
without significant cost and conceivably at odds with increased
traffic flow, e.g., dedicated lane space or a controlled lighting
interval.
Thank you for your detailed response on cycling in Hertfordshire and routes
you would like to see improvements on. Schemes and measures are only
included in the IURS if they are considered deliverable within the initial 5 year
Once the quantum and location of development in Hertfordshire is fully
understood full consideration will be given to ensuring sustainable
infrastructure is identified to support them where appropriate. In the meantime
the routes you have highlighted will be ranked against other projects in the
county.
Page 38 of 65
Organisation
Comment
HCC Response
Hertford
Resident
Corridor 6 should be extended westward to provide a corridor
Cambridge - Hitchin - Luton - Tring. This corridor would then
serve Luton airport from the west and the east.
It is not considered that Luton – Tring is a major corridor in terms of
Hertfordshire.
Cycle Herts


Luton – Hitchin
o A505 Beech Hill to West Street. Lilley: Create
off road cycle path
o Signed route via Great Offley village centre
o A505 Great Offley turn to Hitchin: Create off
road cycle path
Hitchin – Letchworth
o A505 allow pavement use

Letchworth – Baldock
o B656 Allow pavement use from A505 to cycle
path east of Jubilee Road.

Baldock – Royston
o B656 Allow pavement use Baldock to A505
junction.
o Then use road parallel to and north of slip road
to A505
o A505 create new off road cycle path
o Allow pavement use Baldock Road to Royston
town centre
Page 39 of 65
Question 1 – Corridor 7
Organisation
Comment
HCC Response
East Herts
District
Council
In route corridor 7, to address the peak congestion on the
A119 approach to Hertford, would only support the SCOOT
signalisation and linking of roundabouts on the A414 (HW17)
subject to the retention of the existing landscaping on these
roundabouts;
noted
In route corridor 7, would only support the implementation of
a Park and Ride facility to serve Hertford and Ware (PT17)*
subject to its need being fully established; demonstration that
this facility would not generate unjustifiable additional
motorised trips; and, a suitable location being identified that
would not unduly compromise issues of Green Belt
importance;
The County Council recognises the contribution that well designed and sited
Transport Hubs (interchanges) can have in maintaining sustainable access
to, from and within towns where economic and housing growth is being
considered. HCC will work closely with District Councils on developing
transport strategies to support growth and is prepared to support, or promote
such transport hubs, if they are included in a District Council's local plan
and/or supported by the neighbouring District (should the site(s) not be in the
District of the town or towns it was aimed at serving)
Cycle Herts
(*N.B. In terms of the provenance of this scheme (as detailed
in Table 0.6 of the Technical Document), this should be
expanded to include reference to the Hertford and Ware
Urban Transport Plan, where this initiative is formally
identified);
 Ware – Watton at Stone
 A602: Route via Hertford and A119.
 Sign route using Sacombe Road to A602 at
Burr‟s Green
 Agree access and sign route through
Sacombe Park (Bridleway)
 Surface track at Sacombe Church
 Allows access to villages north of A602 via
Sacombe Road
 When new dual carriageway Ware –
Stevenage is built, ensure parallel cycle path
along entire route.
 Hertford – Watton at Stone
 A119 Allow pavement use B1000 Hertford to
A602Watton at Stone (with some gaps in 30
mph zones): Links villages to Hertford North
station and The Sele School.
 Watton at Stone – Stevenage
 A602 Allow pavement cycling to Bragbury
End thence Stevenage cycle network.
Page 40 of 65
Stevenage
Borough
Council

We note scheme PT10 (the proposed high frequency
Stevenage-Hitchin-Letchworth bus triangle) in
Corridor 6. See our further points below.
Noted

We can also provide in principle support for schemes
in Corridor 7:
Noted

HW24 (A602/A1 junction segregation
improvements);

HW25 (re-signing A602 traffic along Gresley
Way/Martins Way, rather than through Old
Town or the A1); and

HW26 (re-signing A1 traffic for Stevenage
town centre from junction 7 rather than
junction 8).

In Corridor 7 there are particular issues associated
with the A602 south-east of Stevenage towards
Watton-at-Stone: it may be better to concentrate the
effort of scheme HW51 along this section.
Noted- schemes will be prioritised against the 5 LTP goals by corridor.

Because of the issues on the A602, we believe that
consideration should be given to an increased
frequency of rail services on the Hertford branch line.
During the peaks, there are services every 30
minutes between Stevenage and Hertford North
whilst the off-peak frequency reduces to one every
60 minutes. There is clearly the potential for the rail
link to relieve capacity on the A602, although
additional work might need to be done on the age of
the rolling stock, the potential for intermediate
stations, fare levels and publicity. This would be a
new scheme.
Improved services will occur due to introduction of Thameslink improvement
programme.

The issues surrounding the mapping of the proposed
high frequency Stevenage-Hitchin-Letchworth bus
triangle are covered in the over-arching section
above. Scheme PT10 straddles three corridors
(Corridor 3, Corridor 6 and Corridor 7) and has the
potential to contribute towards the resolution of
issues in all three. (It also, of course, could
contribute to the resolution of issues in the
respective UTPs for these urban areas).
Noted
Page 41 of 65

We would suggest that, in order for scheme PT10 to
be successful, it would need to encourage car users
to leave their vehicles behind and use a highfrequency bus service by:
(i) employing a route that serves town centres,
key employment locations and residential areas
via direct routes; and
The service network is continually reviewed in conjunction with the
commercial service providers
The risks associated with service enhancement can only be considered of
either commercially viable or meets the HCC supported service criteria
The service network is continually reviewed in conjunction with the
commercial service providers
(ii) uses high quality modern hybrid buses that
have a specific identity; and
(iii) provides good quality shelters for waiting
passengers, together with accurate real time
information about the time keeping of buses;
coupled with
(iv) bus priority measures that allows buses to
compete effectively with cars in reaching their
destinations in a timely manner.
Green bus provision continues to be reviewed against commercial or funding
opportunities
Infrastructure continues to be enhanced as resources are available
Bus priority measures continue to be reviewed against quantified running
data
The Borough Council cannot offer its support for the
implementation of all of these measures nor can it
offer any revenue support for the service.
Consequently, it would need to be an entirely
commercial operation.

With these reservations and comments, we support
in principle all of the schemes suggested for
Corridors 6 and 7
Page 42 of 65
Question 1 – Corridor 8
Organisation
Comment
HCC Response
East Herts
District Council
In route corridor 8, supports the long term aspiration to
consider the Little Hadham bypass (HW27) and would
welcome its being brought forward at the earliest
opportunity, as the scheme has already been subject to
public consultation and has the support of both District and
County Councils.
 Ware – Standon: See 4.
 Standon – Bishops Stortford
 A120 Allow shared use of pavement where
possible.
 Ware – Bishops Stortford
 B1004: Hard to provide off road solution.
Should be traffic calmed and slowed to
encourage cars to use A10, A120, which
may then improve on road cycling.
The Little Hadham Bypass remains a scheme outlined by the LTP3, and it
will be brought forward if funding becomes available.
Cycle Herts
Page 43 of 65
Question 1 – Cross Corridor Comments
Organisation
Comment
HCC Response
Councillor
WelwynHatfield
Hitchin Curve: Solving this makes the Welwyn- Woolmer
green capacity more of an issue.
Lack of parking at Elstree and Borehamwood and Harpenden
rail stations: Elstree and Borehamwood is not between
Watford and Luton.
You need to decide if corridor 2 is from Watford (in text) or
from Elstree/Borehamwood (on map).
In Royston the public transport system is poor. I admit we do
have a very good train link to London and Cambridge and the
stations between, but bus routes are in my opinion not up to
standard.
Firstly we have no buses on a Sunday or Bank holiday, or late
evening on Monday to Saturday.
As a market town we rely on people coming to town on market
days, and as a town on the borders with Cambridgeshire one
of our main rotes comes from Cambridge ( No 26). Some of
the buses that used to serve Cambridgeshire Villages have
been stopped by the authorities in that county.
The Hitchin Flyover will increase line reliability and capacity; however the
bottleneck at Woolmer Green will remain an issue.
All of these sites fall within the revised corridor 2.
We have no services going East from Royston, and not too
many buses (331 Service) going South to Ware and Hertford,
although we do now have a link to Baldock and Letchworth.
Noted. Partly covered by scheme PT55. Improvements to bus services likely
to come from funding from developer contributions. Other than Saffron
Walden, it is difficult to identify a traffic objective east of Royston. Infrequent
bus services operate from villages east of Royston to satisfy shopping
demand.
The result of this is very high car use, and although some
people may cycle, the distances for the average person to
cycle are too great, unless you are Sir Chris Hoy or the like.
Unless money that no one has can be found to invest in public
transport, I have no idea how to solve the problems of
transport in our area, especially when our main bus route
(Stagecoach Service 26) comes from and paid for by
Cambridgeshire.
Noted- the LTP3 sets out the County Councils cycle targets, another
daughter document, the Active Travel Strategy also confirms this
commitment for modal shift.
Improvements to bus services likely to come from funding from developer
contributions. Stagecoach service 26 is largely a commercial service which
operates without Cambs CC subsidy.
- Hertford Loop (Rail)
I hope there are aspirations for longer trains to London.
I hope there are possibilities for a linking in of services on the
Hertford Loop to, say, ThamesLink.
It would not be feasible to introduce trains longer than six cars on the
Hertford Loop due to platform capacity constraints along the line. However, it
is proposed that frequencies on the Hertford Loop will be increased up to ten
trains per hour.
Royston
Resident
CouncillorHertford
Mapping to be changed to accurately reflect corridor description.
Partly covered by scheme PT55. Improvements to bus services likely to
come from funding from developer contributions.
Noted. See above
Partly covered by scheme PT55. Improvements to bus services likely to
come from funding from developer contributions.
Page 44 of 65
Cambridgeshire
County Council
I hope services direct and to the north can be developed
beyond Stevenage, and especially to Cambridge and to
Peterborough.
Royston provides the main point of entry from Cambridgeshire
into Hertfordshire by road via the A505, the A10 and the
A1198. Cambridge is a significant focus for Royston in terms
of employment, retail draw, and hospital facilities and as such,
there is a significant volume of cross-boundary trips for these
purposes. Likewise, Royston has a couple of large employers
and an industrial park which draws many of its employees
from the villages surrounding Royston, including those that lie
in Cambridgeshire.
The development of the Thameslink Programme by the Department for Transport
will ultimately decide the frequency of service and the range of destinations on
offer.
Whilst the area around Royston is not highlighted as a
particular problem area on the stress maps included in the
study, the roads feeding into the A505 from Cambridgeshire
do experience congestion at peak times feeding onto the
A10/A505 roundabout and also the A1198/A505 roundabout,
with traffic queuing back to the Melbourn junction and
Bassingbourn junction respectively.
Accidents on the A505
It is noted that the site at the junction of the A505 with Station
Road, Odsey is identified as a „mass action site‟. This junction
is of concern to Cambridgeshire residents living in Steeple
Morden and Guilden Morden as it provides the principal
access to the primary road network in the area and yet is wellknown in the area for accidents and „near-misses‟. The
biggest problem is on the eastbound carriageway where traffic
waiting in the central reservation is waiting to turn right into
Odsey, meanwhile traffic from Odsey is also trying to turn right
onto the A505 towards Baldock. The issue has become more
acute since the opening of the Baldock Bypass as traffic lights
within the town used to provide some break in the traffic,
however now it is increasingly difficult for vehicles to find a
safe gap in which to cross the 70mph dual carriageway.
Royston has the lowest congestion ratio of 0 – 0.49 (very little or no
congestion during peak hours).
Noted
The IURS is not dealing with individual site specifics.
Page 45 of 65
There has been considerable cross-authority working at both
an officer and a member level to find a solution to the problem
outlined at this junction. Options for bringing forward the white
line in the central reservation and also prohibiting right turns
out of the Odsey road have both been discussed but
unfortunately no improvement has yet been agreed, despite
support from elected members from both the authorities and
MPs representing South Cambridgeshire and North
Hertfordshire. We would welcome continued dialogue on this
issue.
You may be aware that Cambridge City Council and South
Cambridgeshire District Council are currently considering
potential allocation sites for inclusion in their local plans. In
parallel with this, Cambridgeshire County Council is
developing a transport strategy to support this that covers the
two areas. Whilst at an early stage due to the fact that the
district councils have not yet finalised their allocations, some
transport modelling work has already been undertaken to start
informing possible strategies.
The IURS is not dealing with individual site specifics.
None of the development scenarios that are currently under
discussion significantly impact on any of the routes that feed
into Royston, namely the A10, the A1198 and the A505.
However, the modelling does show that the A10 will see an
increase in traffic due to overall development in the area and
increase in number of trips. This on its own will exacerbate
queues that are already seen on the A1198 and A10 at peak
times, as they queue to access the A505. The A1198 linking
Royston to Huntingdon will also increase in importance as a
route due to developments taking place in that part of the
county.
You may be aware of the Alconbury Enterprise Zone, which
lies next to the A1(M) to the north of Huntingdon. The site will
create some 8000 new jobs and a significant number of new
homes will be built. Whilst it is acknowledged that the A1(M)
is a Highways Agency road and the most immediate impacts
on this road will be in the Sandy/Biggleswade area which lies
in Bedfordshire, it is worth highlighting the potential knock-on
effects further down the road into Hertfordshire. It will be
necessary for us to work with the Highways Agency,
Bedfordshire and also Hertfordshire as this site develops.
The final strategy will be a live document that will be revisited as the level of
development and its impacts become clearer. This will allow the cumulative
impact to be considered and corridors or sections of corridors will be looked
at in more detail.
Noted.
The Highways agency have been consulted as part of this study.
Page 46 of 65
The technical document does not break down the likely
increase in dwellings and jobs that are predicted in Royston,
from the rest of North Hertfordshire but given the increase in
jobs planned for Cambridge, any further development in
Royston will increase pressure on the A10 in particular.
The Royston-Cambridge corridor is well-served by the
Cambridge-Kings Cross railway line and any measures that
can be implemented within Royston to encourage people to
use this is welcomed.
The reference to a Cambridge-Royston-Broxbourne-Waltham
Cross cycle route is noted and welcomed. As mentioned
above, Royston does act as a focus for local services for
people living in the surrounding villages. The villages of
Bassingbourn and Melbourn in particular lend themselves to
commuting by bike because of their proximity; however
conditions along both the A10 and the A1198 are not ideal for
cyclists. Both are long, straight roads and as such traffic
speeds are high. In both cases, crossing the A505 is a
significant barrier because of the large roundabouts that need
to be negotiated. Whilst improvements to all routes are
obviously desired, the A10 corridor is not one of
Cambridgeshire‟s priority routes at the moment simply
because there are greater development pressures elsewhere
in the county and as such there is no funding currently
identified to improve this route. However, it is important to
seek out and exploit any opportunities that do arise for crossboundary collaborative working and as such we would always
welcome any discussion on how improvements to this route
could be delivered.
The suggestion of rural hubs is noted with interest as this is
also a potential intervention that we will be looking at in
Cambridgeshire once the development strategy in Cambridge
and South Cambridgeshire is clearer. Again, collaboration with
Hertfordshire on this would be welcomed if this is a possibility
for the Royston area.
Current levels of congestion are low, and the “live” nature of this Strategy will
react to developments as they become known and committed.
A scheme of this magnitude would be beyond the 5 year horizon of the
strategy in the first instance. It will be noted and included in future option
appraisal.
Agreed. HCC is a consultee in the rail franchise process
Current cycle schemes within the UTP similarly reflect the development of
such schemes within the boundary of Royston only.
Offer of collaboration welcomed.
Comment noted. A scheme of this magnitude would be beyond the 5 year
horizon of the strategy in the first instance. It will be noted and included in
future option appraisal.
Page 47 of 65
In conclusion, many of the interventions that you are
proposing to encourage the use of more sustainable modes of
transport align with the types of things we are considering in
Cambridgeshire. As would be expected, Cambridgeshire is
experiencing similar budgetary and funding issues as
Hertfordshire and therefore strongly agrees with the need to
work jointly to address issues. Any opportunity for the two
authorities to work collaboratively to deliver interventions that
benefit both counties is welcomed.
noted
Page 48 of 65
Q2: Do you have any comments on the long-list of potential interventions?
Question 2 – County-wide Short Term Comments
Organisation
Comment
HCC Response
Berkhamsted
Resident
£50k - £100k on devising a county wide parking strategy seems
a waste of funds. What is similar in Berkhamsted and
Hitchin...but not in any other Home Counties town?
St Albans
and District
Friends of
the Earth
Northchurch
Parish
Council
Given that most of the potential interventions are indicated as
further strategy, with out any indication as to which particular
part of the strategy is supposed to help, it's hard to make any
comment on these
For the Link Road in Northchurch to be developed.
A parking strategy would allow for a county wide understanding of
requirements to be developed and understood whilst recognising a specific
locations requirements. It would inform any consideration of Strategic
Transport Hubs.
As the scope and scale of development becomes clearer and schemes are
developed each individual intervention would be subject to assessment
and consultation.
Hertford
Resident
Public transport alternatives such as peak time express buses
are needed to alleviate congestion. Routes should not be
primarily between town/city centres (although calling at them)
but accessing industrial/commercial centres where traffic
currently terminates
One has to doubt the will and the justification to implement
changes of this nature under a mass transport umbrella,
particularly as hardly any specific addition to the network are
posited throughout the County, nor through demand for cyclists
on these axes considered. Any real benefits to local movement
would be appreciated, at negligible cost within the overall
budget that must be envisaged. However, with a paucity of
ideas of added value to cycling networks, the study may as well
not play lip service to cycling as a key sustainable element in its
remit.
St Albans
Cycle
Campaign
Cambridge
Academic
That is not to say that the many issues facing cyclists on these
axes are not relevant. Perhaps to be dealt with in other ways,
with more visibility.
Countywide short term: the proposals are fine as they stand but
the following should be added. There is potential to amend the
route network in such a way as to bring more villages onto the
inter-urban network, thereby giving their inhabitants a greater
choice of links, which would also become more viable by taking
both short and longer distance travellers. As many of the
relevant services are supported this could be done immediately.
The proposal to link Northchurch new Road and Billet Lane for motor
vehicles is not supported by Dacorum Borough Council or HCC Highways.
Proposals to improve connectivity by providing a cycle link at this location
are being investigated through the UTP.
Any service will either be provided commercially or be assessed for
support based on known patronage, projected demand, revenue forecasts,
costs and proximity to alternative services.
Schemes included have been put forward by Cycle Herts. The Cycling
Strategy has focused investment on urban routes, however the study does
recognise the importance of providing interurban routes.
There are political, legislative and operator issues related to Quality
Contract Systems that need to be considered and addressed before
existing practices could be changed.
Page 49 of 65
I would like to see a move towards a Quality Contract system,
enabling networks to be planned as a whole. This has been an
outstanding success in London, and it has always mystified me
why other local authorities aren't lobbying strongly to follow suit.
I may, however, say that I believe that management of quality
contracts should not be confined to local authorities but should
also include local operators and public transport user groups,
thus bringing a wider range of expertise to the process -- and,
hopefully, mollifying opposition to the idea from operators.
These days there seem to be many buses operated for specific
groups of people, on inter-urban as well as local routes. Quite
often these inter-urban routes are not at all well served by public
buses. There should be a goal to make such services open to
the public. An example where this has already been achieved is
Uno, which developed out of a network of buses serving
Hertfordshire University students. Buses serving St Edmunds
College near Puckeridge would provide a worthwhile start. If
positioning workings could also be made available, then people
could connect between different routes serving the same
institution.
Regarding PT19, I would like to see discussion of specific goals.
How about the following ?
All town centres to have at least hourly links to the public
transport network including evenings and Sundays. Buses
(assuming they aren't served by rail -- there tends to be no
problem for places that are) should run late enough to allow
people to have an evening out in London, and the last bus
should make a guaranteed connection with a specified incoming
train from London.
The QNP in St Albans is an example of where linking up of passenger
transport has been successful and has attracted an ever increasing
amount of people to use sustainable modes, both active travel and
passenger travel. Plans are to create more QNP‟s across the county, with
the hope that the same benefits will be experienced.
Comments noted. Interesting idea‟s put forward. Schemes such as
“PlusBus” have been set up to attract more inter-modal passenger travel.
All large villages not served by rail to have evening buses
allowing passengers to return from London after the evening
peak (i.e. on trains where off peak tickets are valid) and, at
weekends, allowing evenings out in the nearest large town.
Again, the last bus should make a guaranteed connection with a
specified incoming train. On Sundays, there should be sufficient
buses to permit shopping and to allow people to return in the
evenings from longer day trips or weekends away.
Sufficiently many orbital inter-urban corridors should be served
in the evenings and on Sundays to allow passengers to make
journeys between towns on different radial corridors out of
Page 50 of 65
London.
Regarding the second, the primary beneficiary in commercial
terms of improved bus/rail links is likely to be the rail operator,
as most passengers will be using trains for the bulk of their
journey. For this reason we should aim to develop ways of
getting the rail operators to finance such links out of the
improved revenue they would be getting as a result.
Page 51 of 65
Question 2 – County-wide Long Term Comments
Organisation
Comment
HCC Response
Berkhamsted
Resident
£10m to devise Quality Network Partnerships seems poor value.
If one is operating in St Albans I see no better public transport
service than elsewhere in the county.
Include PT23 - Improved station car parking at Berkhamsted.
The benefits of the St Albans QNP are quantified and clearly visible with up
to 15% improvements in passengers being recorded
Berkhamsted
Resident
St Albans
and District
Friends of
the Earth
Berkhamsted
Chamber of
Commerce
Given that most of the potential interventions are indicated as
further strategy, with out any indication as to which particular
part of the strategy is supposed to help, it's hard to make any
comment on these.
Extension of Personal Travel Planning (cost £2m - £5m) seems
very poor value.
Hertford
Resident
East/West streams need to be upgraded to provide improved
public transport and road connections (see corridors 5 and 6)
Cambridge
Academic
develop orbital rail links. The most important opportunities are
on the Watford-Rickmansworth corridor (using the Croxley Link
now approved), the Watford-Luton corridor (via a link at St
Albans, see my comment on Corridor 2), and at Hertford and
Rye House (see my comments on Luton-Stansted).
There are a few cases where the development of an effective
bus network is hampered by the unsuitability of the local road
network. In such cases I would support the spending of money
on the upgrade of country lanes so that they could take buses.
I believe that policies PT13 and PT15 should be combined, with
cross county express services providing links from park & ride
sites to a variety of destinations and often avoiding the need for
motorists to use cars for the bulk of their journeys and only
switch to a bus (or train) for the last few miles. By integrating
park & ride with conventional provision, I also want to avoid a
situation where park & ride passengers are offered high quality
services but other people have to put up with slow and
circuitous routes.
Consultation by Dacorum Borough Council is underway on proposals for a
Controlled parking zone in Berkhamsted which includes station parking.
As the scope and scale of development becomes clearer and schemes are
developed each individual intervention would be subject to assessment
and consultation.
Travel planning works, there are many examples both locally and
nationwide where schemes have caused a modal shift towards more
sustainable modes; which reduces congestion, emissions and increases
quality of life. Please see the DfT Example.
This has been subject to continued review and for which funding has been
sought.
Page 52 of 65
Question 2 – Corridor 1 Comments
Organisation
Comment
HCC Response
Berkhamsted
Resident
Is a line identified for the Hemel Hempstead North and West
bypass? I see great controversy.
It is good that funds will spent on improving the Berkhamsted Hemel Hempstead cycleway.
There is no mention of the improvement to the B4506 on the
edge of Northchurch; this will relieve the B4506/A4251 junction.
This is a long term scheme and would need to be considered as part of
future development & growth and will not form part of the 5 year strategy.
Noted
These comments are in the context of the constrained valley
situation at Berkhamsted. Adoption of a co-ordinated parking
strategy (cost £250k - £1m). Very poor value. Why do the
problems of each Herts town have to be treated in a uniform
way?
There is a place for a strategic overview of parking to ensure a fair and
consistent approach for standards and charging.
Development of interactive terminals at bus stops. These are
unreliable and poor value. Development of Quality Network
Partnerships. (cost £10m). There isw no evidence of any
success with existing QNPs.
The benefits of the St Albans QNP are quantified and clearly visible with
up to 15% improvements in passengers being recorded
Development of Park & Ride. Berkhamsted's traffic problems
are caused by the central location of the railway station. P&R is
not a solution.
However the strategy should INCLUDE increase of Railway
Station Parking (PT23)
There is mention of a North and west Bypass for Hemel
Hempstead (cost £100m). Has a line been fixed. This will be
very controversial in the Chilterns AONB.
There is no prospect of relocating the railway station so other avenues
need to be explored.
A4251 London Road Apsley needs parking restrictions
extended alongside the HCC building "Apsley One". This
stretch frequently is jammed because the remaining
carriageway does not allow for a wider vehicle at the same time
as a car.
This is a local issue which is not within the scope of the IURS however
modelling work is being undertaken as part of a development proposal in
the area.
The Green Lane roundabout on Breakspear Way could be more
efficient - especially it needs a way to prevent tail backs from
traffic going North into Green Lane, and a "burst" type of
operation using peak time lights.
The corridor reference should refer to the A4251 and not the
A425. Park and Ride schemes are not really feasible options in
the case of Berkhamsted and Kings Langley and should be
omitted.
This problem has been noted but no solution has been identified at this
stage within the IURS. Any significant measures required at this junction
would be picked up through the traffic impact assessment produced at
an early stage of any proposed future development in this area.
The A41 provides the inter urban route with the A4251 provision designed
for local traffic only and therefore not within the scope of the IURS.
Berkhamsted
Chamber of
Commerce
CouncillorDacorum
Dacorum
Borough
Council
This issue is being investigated as part of the UTP
Parking issues at the station is being explored as part of the UTP
This is a long term scheme and would need to be considered as part of
future development & growth and will not form part of the 5 year strategy.
Page 53 of 65
Cambridge
Academic
Reference should be made the emerging work on the
Berkhamsted / Northchurch / Tring Urban Transport Plan and its
potential to identify local level interventions to support the IURS.
Better bus links (including evenings and Sundays) to Tring from
either Tring or Berkhamsted station. There are better links to
Hemel Hempstead town centre, but it is still inconvenient for
passengers to have to change twice, and therefore as many
buses as possible should provide links to Hemel Hempstead
station, especially those serving key destinations such as
Whipsnade Zoo. (Note incidentally my proposal for a new
station for Hemel Hempstead, see Corridor 5.) On HW47, I
have experienced significant delays when using buses south of
Watford at peak times. Would it be appropriate to remove stops
at Bushey station which can only be served by making the bus
go round the loop twice ?
There is no prospect of relocating the railway stations so other avenues
need to be explored.
future option appraisal when the need for a review of the corridor is
apparent..
Page 54 of 65
Organisation
Comment
HCC Response
St Albans
Cycle
Campaign
NB p. 11 comments on the B652 as being an inappropriate
route 'through' Harpenden; as a B road from Kimpton skirting
Harpenden it may well be correctly identified but doesn't seem
to relate to any of the axes defined in the study. The B653
might be seen rather to go 'through' Harpenden.
I propose a new railway running close to the A414 to link the
Abbey Line with the Midland Main Line. I would oppose any
conversion of the Abbey Line to tramway operation if it isn't
compatible with this, but I see no reason why it should be (e.g.
by using tram trains). I would regard the closure of St Albans
Abbey station as a worthwhile sacrifice to pay to enable
through trains between Watford and Luton if this was
necessary, but again I see no reason why tram trains can't
continue to serve Abbey while main line trains run to Luton.
See my comment on Corridor 5 which would lead to a new
station at Napsbury, where Watford-Luton trains would join the
Midland Main Line.
The issue is noted an dit is accepted that a route if defined may not follow
the existing corridors or routes that exist.
I would also like to propose the diversion of inter-city trains on
the Midland Main Line to Kings Cross by means of a new line
between Napsbury and Brookmans Park. This is intended to
release capacity at St Pancras for eventual use by high speed
trains between Birmingham (and beyond) and Kent or
Continental Europe, and I would expect it to be financed by
savings in the upgrade costs for Euston under the HS2
scheme. This is, of course, of little relevance to the internal
transport needs of Herts.
future option appraisal when the need for a review of the corridor is
apparent.
Cambridge
Academic
The conversion of the Abbey line to tram is part of the County Councils
aspirations to accommodate a more frequent service
NO COMMENTS QUESTION 2 CORRIDORS 3
Page 55 of 65
Organisation
Comment
HCC Response
Cambridge
Academic
I suggest the following network of buses on the A10 corridor
between Hertford and Royston.
(a) Between Hertford and Buntingford, hourly, alternately via
existing 331 route and via 384 route to Dane End then Great
Munden and Westmill.
(b) Between Buntingford and Royston, hourly, alternately via A10
direct and via Wyddial and B1368 to Barley.
Comment noted. Any service will either be provided commercially or
be assessed for support based on known patronage, projected
demand, revenue forecasts, costs and proximity to alternative
services.
These would amalgamate to provide through buses between
Hertford and Royston; I believe that if they could run through to
Cambridge it would considerably improve patronage (PT55 is
relevant here).
Page 56 of 65
Organisation
Comment
HCC Response
Hertford
Resident
The A414 is seriously congested at peak times with single
occupancy vehicles and is becoming much more lightly loaded
otherwise. This suggests that that this corridor should carry
considerably enhanced public transport at these times. One
approach would be to extend the guided busway from Watford - St
Albans on to pick up (for example) the rail link using the existing
Hertford East to Broxbourne and Harlow
Suggest replacing Watford-Stansted proposal in the longer term
by a Heathrow-Stansted express link which would serve new
parkway stations on all three main inter-city routes where they
cross the A414. The basic route would be via the M25, A41, A414,
A10 and A120 but there would be deviations to serve key locations
en route including Hertford town centre.
Noted. Schemes and measures are included in the IURS if they are
I would also like to see route 724 shortened by omitting Welwyn
Garden City.
Passengers could use frequent services to either Hatfield (by train
or bus) or the QE2 Hospital to connect, and Welwyn GC should
also retain through services by other routes to both Hertford and
St Albans.
My proposals for a rail link between Hitchin and Stansted (see
below) would also bring benefits to this corridor.
services.
Cambridge
Academic
Epping
Forrest
District
Council
A transport issue has been identified to the north of Harlow on the
A414 Eastwick Road on the approach to Allendale Avenue.
However, the only potential intervention proposed to improve the
situation is the improvement of Watford to Stansted bus service.
This will require further consideration given the potential of East
Hert's emerging Local Plan to allow development across the
district and around Harlow in particular. In addition the Strategy
should also have regard to the findings of the Harlow Stansted
Gateway Transportation Model which will demonstrate the likely
impact of growth in the Harlow area on the local road network.
services.
Comment noted. A scheme of this magnitude would be beyond the 5
year horizon of the strategy in the first instance. It will be noted and
included in future option appraisal.
Schemes and measures are only included in the IURS if they are
HCC are supporting EHDC and other local stakeholders in the
development of the Harlow Stansted Gateway Transportation Model
to understand the transport impacts of growth in this area should it
occur.
NO COMMENTS QUESTION 2 CORRIDOR 6 or 7
Page 57 of 65
Organisation
Comment
HCC Response
Hertford
Resident
The section of A120 from the A10 carrying traffic to/from Gatwick*
and the East coast is seriously congested
Schemes and measures are only included in the IURS if they are
Assumed the consultee means Stansted
HCC currently lists the Little Haddam bypass in its LTP programme.
Page 58 of 65
Question 2- Other Responses
Organisation
Comment
HCC Response
Cambridge
Academic
Luton-Stansted (Corridors 6-8): I think that my top priority long
term proposal for the whole of the county would be a link
between the two lines at Hertford.
Comment noted.
This could fulfil the following three functions:
(a) In combination with a curve at Rye House, to complete a
through route between Stansted Airport and Hitchin via Harlow,
Ware and Stevenage. I would also like to suggest a "second
east-west rail link" extending this further to Milton Keynes via
Flitwick and Ridgmont, but I would regard this as outside the
scope of this consultation.
(b) To link the two commuter routes to Hertford. This would
provide a faster route to Hertford Town Centre by using the Great
Northern route (Hertford North station being an inconvenient walk
from the town centre), and it would also give Ware more trains to
London as passengers could use the Great Northern route.
(c) To take long distance freight off the roads by providing a
through route from the Channel Tunnel and Ports to the east side
of England (i.e. the East Coast Main Line catchment) via Ashford,
Dagenham, Seven Sisters, Cheshunt, Ware and Stevenage.
I don't know whether it would be feasible to restore the old route
through the town centre; if not then a route through open
countryside skirting the town would have to be used, as a result
of which function (b) could not be served, though the other two
could. In any case I believe that although this is a longer term
proposal a route should be protected as soon as possible.
Meanwhile we need to improve bus services in the area. At
present neither the supported 88 through the villages nor the
mostly commercial Arriva service links Luton town centre and
airport directly with Hitchin station, thus facilitating connections
towards Cambridge and Peterborough. Cambridge is served by
National Express from Luton
(though not very frequently) but Peterborough isn't.
Comment noted. A scheme of this magnitude would be beyond the
5 year horizon of the strategy in the first instance. It will be noted
and included in future option appraisal.
support based on known patronage, projected demand, revenue
forecasts, costs and proximity to alternative services.
Page 59 of 65
I suggest the following local bus service between Luton and
Stansted:
A: Hourly to airport then alternatively via Breachwood Green and
Great Offley to Hitchin town centre and station.
B: All buses continue to Stevenage, possibly via Great
Wymondley and Graveley.
C: Alternate buses continue to Aston, Benington, Dane End, St
Edmunds College, Puckeridge then via A120 corridor to Bishops
Stortford and Stansted Airport.
D: Other buses run via Walkern and Cottered to Buntingford then
via either Puckeridge or Furneux Pelham to Bishops Stortford
and Stansted Airport.
These services would replace many existing supported services
in the area, including the 88, 384 (in conjunction with the
proposed route suggested in my comment on Corridor 4) and
700, so should not cost much to introduce.
Comment noted. Any service will either be provided commercially
or be assessed for support based on known patronage, projected
services.
Watford-Rickmansworth: When the Croxley Link opens the
opportunity should not be missed of providing through trains from
Watford to Amersham, Chesham or Aylesbury.
I don't know what the feasibility would be of running a direct bus
service between Watford and High Wycombe via Rickmansworth,
Chorleywood or Maple Cross, Newland Park (University of
Bucks), Chalfont St Giles, Seer Green and Beaconsfield but I
believe that such a link might well be worth the cost of any
country lane upgrading that might be necessary.
Watford-Waltham Cross: Another "country lane" upgrade
proposal (assuming the existing road can't cope), this time
between Shenley, Ridge and South Mimms. The rest of the
corridor is covered by existing routes.
Watford-Gatwick: My proposal involves the following:
(a) Provision of trains at least every 15 minutes between Watford
and Gatwick, running beyond at both ends. These would replace
existing trains to Euston and Victoria.
(b) Reopening platforms on the "slow AC" lines at Willesden
Junction Low Level for use by these trains, which would also
serve all other stations between there and Clapham Junction.
(c) Diversion of the existing Overground service from Stratford to
Clapham Junction to run from Willesden Junction to Acton Main
Line and Heathrow Airport, replacing the Heathrow Connect
service.
Comment noted. Any service will either be provided commercially
or be assessed for support based on known patronage, projected
services.
Page 60 of 65
North of Watford trains could either run to Luton (thus linking with
my Corridor
2 proposal) or serve London Midland destinations as far as
Birmingham (the people of which often lament the loss of the
direct link to Gatwick formerly provided by Cross Country). I
would expect at least an hourly service on each of the above
routes. Apart from this, the proposal would release terminal
capacity at Euston, Paddington and Victoria, and I hope it could
pay for itself in those terms
Luton-Aylesbury: While my comments on this corridor have only
minor relevance to Herts I can't resist including them because I
am very indignant about the way its Sunday service has been
treated over the years, which strikes me as a classic case of what
happens when local authorities fail to cooperate. This corridor
has a sentimental value to me because in my student days I often
enjoyed the ride on the now withdrawn section when using the
Cambridge-Oxford bus to get to Tring for walks in the Chilterns.
Bedfordshire County Council, and in more recent years Central
Beds Council, have consistently supported a Sunday bus service
on route 60 (now 31) between Luton and Studham via
Whipsnade Zoo. There also used to be a Sunday service on
route
61 between Luton and Aylesbury via Eaton Bray and Tring.
At one stage, however, Bucks CC was in "cuts" mode and axed
their part of the 61. Beds CC then amalgamated their part with
the 60 to form a circular route.
Later, Bucks CC reintroduced a service (161) between Aylesbury
and Whipsnade; however connections with the 60/31 to Luton
simply didn't work thus no doubt eliminating any lingering
demand for through travel (which one would expect to be
significant, including passengers for Luton Airport).
This lasted a number of years -- in fact longer than I expected -but last year Bucks CC cut back the 161 to Ivinghoe (with the
remaining section renumbered as route 50), thus eliminating the
highly scenic section between Ivinghoe and Whipsnade.
Only 1 journey in each direction on route 31 serves the Chilterns
Gateway Centre, from which a very popular escarpment walk
runs in each direction, with the northbound route marred by the
noise of traffic on the nearby B4541.
noted
Page 61 of 65
My proposal therefore is:
Noted, the B4541 is out of Hertfordshire
(a) Close the B4541 north of the Gateway Centre on Sundays,
except for buses, bikes and access.
(b) Run a bus shuttle linking Luton, Dunstable, the Gateway
Centre, Whipsnade Zoo and the Bison Car Park (the southern
end of the escarpment walk). Car park charges at the Gateway
Centre would be increased but would include free travel on this
service. Park & Ride facilities should also be provided elsewhere
(e.g.
near the M1).
(c) Provide a 2 hourly bus service between Luton and Aylesbury
via Dunstable, Totternhoe, Stanbridge, Eggington and Leighton
Buzzard then as existing route 150. Buses would be timed to
cross at Leighton Buzzard and connect there with the remaining
section of route 150 to/from Milton Keynes.
(d) Provide an interworking 2 hourly bus service between Luton
and Aylesbury via Stockwood Park, Caddington, Markyate,
Kensworth, Studham, Whipsnade, Eaton Bray, Edlesborough,
Ivinghoe then as existing 50 via Tring and Wendover (where
connections would be made with Chiltern Line trains).
To serve other parts of the Chilterns, I would like to see the return
of the Chiltern Rambler, but though it would continue to serve
Hemel Hempstead it should also serve Chesham to provide
direct access with the Underground and thereby attract
Londoners to use it, which I would expect to result in
considerably increased patronage.
Page 62 of 65
Q3: The next stage of the strategy development will be to short-list potential interventions and develop a delivery strategy
Key criteria that will be used to develop a shortlist of schemes include the following:
Which of these criteria is most important to you? (Rank in order with 1 being most important and 9 being least)
 Deliverability;
 Fundability (i.e. ability of scheme to be funded via potential funding partnership)
 Value for money
 Support economic development;
 Support planned dwelling growth;
 Improve transport opportunities for all and achieve behavioural change in mode choice;
 Enhance quality of life, health and the natural, built and historic environment for all Hertfordshire residents;
 Improve the safety and security of residents and other road users;
 Reduce transport‟s contribution to greenhouse gas emissions and improve its resilience;
Question 3 – Further Comments
Organisation
Comment
HCC Response
St Albans
and District
Friends of
the Earth
We feel that urgent actions needs to be taken effect a modal shift
from car use reduce air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions,
congestion and make roads safer for active transport users.
We hope that Herts County Council will encourage strong public
transport links that can benefit all sectors of society, not just car
owners.
Travel between centres such as Watford and St.Albans, WGC
and Hatfield, Harpenden and St.Albans could be made by bicycle
and we hope that improving facilities for cyclists on such routes
will be considered.
All of these are important and it's difficult to rank.
Noted
Particular consideration should go into improving links between
all areas served by the Lister Hospital. Both road accessibility and
public transport links. I draw specific concern to Welham Green,
South Hatfield, and surrounding areas where residents report
extreme difficulty in getting to the hospital.
If a scheme doesn't fulfil these criteria I don't want it included. As
far as the other criteria are concerned I find myself unable to
choose between them -- they are all important, but with the
qualification that economic development and dwelling growth
must be sustainable, i.e. I would not support schemes that
supported car oriented development.
Direct services and those which require interchange are provided to
Lister Hospital. From Hatfield the Arriva route 301 provides a direct
link to Lister Hospital. Where patients & visitors cannot use public
transport NHS Hertfordshire and the county council fund community
& voluntary transport schemes that provide door to door transport.
Noted
Three
Rivers
District
Council
Welwyn
Hatfield
Councillor
Cambridge
Academic
Noted
Noted
Noted
Page 63 of 65
Q4: Would you support the delivery of transport interventions on Hertfordshire‟s Inter-Urban Corridors?
Question 4 – Further Comments
Organisation
Comment
HCC Response
Berkhamsted
Resident
Herts is not an island.
There are some excellent ideas in the IURS but it pays little
attention to marginal border issues which are more prevalent in
the Bulborne Valley [A41/A4251]
St Albans
and District
Friends of
the Earth
Three Rivers
District
Council
Welwyn
Hatfield
Councillor
Cambridge
Academic
Canals and
Rivers Trust
Depends what the interventions are.
Noted
The study aims to provide possible improvements to inter-urban
links within Hertfordshire. The focus has been on movements
between the urban areas and the impacts of traffic from
neighbouring towns on Hertfordshire.
geographically based within Herts. As development both within
Hertfordshire and across its boarders becomes clearer, further work
will be required to assess its impacts and identify appropriate
interventipons.
Noted
TRDC is working with Hertfordshire on this through the various
mechanisms already in place.
Noted
Measures to improve access to Lister hospital would certainly
have my support.
Noted
Yes, provided they fulfil the above criteria
Noted
The promotion and increased usage of the towpath as a
sustainable transport route may result in the need to upgrade or
improve specific stretches or overcome particular barriers to
accessibility. The Canal & River Trust would wish to discuss this
further if the Council wish to promote this use however the
increased usage of the canal network in this way is fully in line
with the Trusts charitable objectives. Localised improvement may
be necessary in the form of widening, resurfacing, better signage
or removal of physical barriers.
Noted
Page 64 of 65
Q5
Could you/your organisation support County Council in the future to secure funding for Inter-Urban Transport interventions?
Question 5- response
Organisation
Comment
HCC Response
Three Rivers
District Council
TRDC has already indicated that it is prepared to work
with Hertfordshire to deliver its own capital
programme.
By increasing industrial/commercial activity and
increasing the percentage of the population that work
within Hertfordshire
I would support bids to secure funding for worthwhile
schemes if I could, but I don't see how I can.
The Trust will seek to work in partnership with the
Council to secure funding for improvements and
through its volunteer projects may be able to offer
other aid in the future.
Noted we will continue to work with District and Borough Councils to
develop and deliver schemes..
Hertford Resident
Cambridge
Academic
Canals and
Rivers Trust
Noted
Noted
Noted, we will continue to work with the Canals and Rivers Trust.
Page 65 of 65

Inter-Urban Route Study Consultation Log

Transcription

Similar documents

Cycling tour in Chezk Republic

Proposed Xpress Route 423 Schedule, Fare, and Route:

Dane Work, ABR

wardrop street bike route project

5K Trail Blazer - Waasegiizhig Nanaandawe`Iyewigamig Health

Brochure - Premier Commercial Realty

50000 in free upgrades!

25miles of historic route 66

muttaburrasaurus - Clyde Peeling`s Reptiland

Easy cycle rides for leisure - i