Cambridge cycling advocates are hoping that the support of local businesses including pharmaceutical research giant AstraZeneca will help bring forward the creation of a safe cycling route between the city, the town of Royston to the south, and the villages between.
AstraZeneca is one of 100 Cambridge companies that have signed a petition demanding a protected cycle lane along the A10 between Cambridge and Royston.
The drug giant and a range of other companies want funding for the £7 million project to come from Cambridge's City Deal money, according to Cambridge News.
The plan for a high-quality cycleway along the A10 was put on hold when the number of City Deal projects was reduced by the three-man executive board executive board.
Susan Van De Ven, Lib-Dem county councillor for the area around Melbourn where AstraZeneca has a facility, presented the petition to board members on Friday.
"So many businesses know exactly how many of their employees are already cycling to work, and say that many more would do so if conditions were better," she said.
"One high tech company says that its recruit profile is someone who is young and fit, will work long hours, and expect to be able to cycle safely to work as a way of getting good daily exercise. Another business says its apprentices are now cycling to work in dangerous conditions because it is their only affordable mode of transport.
"Cycle paths need to be delivered in their entirely – not piecemeal fashion, if they are to provide a viable alternative to driving. It is great news that part of the A10, from Cambridge to Foxton, has now got funding from the Cycling Ambition fund, but the City Deal project is intended to match fund and fill gaps, in order to ensure that these scheme are completed."
AstraZeneca plans to base its 2,000 employees at its new global R&D centre and corporate headquarters on the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, which is linked to its Melbourn site by the A10.
All 11 companies and organisations with a stake in the Biomedical Campus have written to the City Deal board.
In their letter, they say: "There is an urgent need to address the travel congestion on the A10, which will be under significant pressure in coming years, and will affect access not just to the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, but Cambridge more broadly.
"Partners are working collaboratively in addressing travel, transport and sustainability relating to the Biomedical Campus, focusing on infrastructure, services, and communication and behaviour change.
"An important part of this strategy is achieving a step change increase in cycling and walking as the chosen means of transport to and from the campus."
20 thoughts on “AstraZeneca among 100 companies backing Cambridge A10 cycle lane”
I like bikes. I like riding
I like bikes. I like riding bikes, reading bike reviews, reading bike race analysis. This is non of these things. If I wanted to read the Cambridge News, I’d go directly to their website. The sex survey story is way more interesting than that one.
fennesz wrote:I like bikes.
Last time I looked you have to click on a title to get taken to a story, it isn’t pushed on you. Also, I generally find that the title gives a good clue to the content so it looks like something isn’t going to interest me, I don’t click the link. Is it different on your PC?
Personally, although an A10 route will make no difference to me I think this story is news that should be pushed onto every miserable-git MP, Councillor and policy maker to say, look, cycling infrastructure is important to big corporations who invest significant amounts of money in a region.
fennesz wrote:I like bikes.
Well run along to bike radar, cycling weekly, roadcyclinguk or any number of identikit cycling websites catering for people like you then. The best thing about road.cc is that it covers this stuff so its a lot more interesting to read.
I like riding bikes, reading bike reviews, reading bike race analysis too. But I also like reading about how the country might become a bit more bike friendly because I believe in the cause.
Quote, Another business says
Quote, Another business says its apprentices are now cycling to work in dangerous conditions because it is their only affordable mode of transport.
So pay them more!
FATBEGGARONABIKE wrote:Quote,
+1. A bit cheeky to expect the council to pay for your staffs basic needs.
Olionabike
+1. A bit cheeky to expect the council to pay for your staffs basic needs.— FATBEGGARONABIKE
Companies pay taxes (well most of them) and it’s fair to expect the government to help your staff get to and from work.
Olionabike wrote:+1. A bit
Do they have to pay directly for the roads that people use to drive there?
congokid wrote:Olionabike
Does anyone….
Roads are paid for out of general taxation, even local roads are paid for largely by central government. Local councils may raise local taxes but most of their income is from centre. So yes businesses do pay for roads in exactly the same way as everyone else.
mrmo wrote:congokid wrote:Do
I think you’ve missed the point – I took Olionabike’s comment to suggest that councils ought not to pay for ‘staffs basic needs’ if that need is infrastructure safe enough for everyone who wants to cycle to work.
Employers currently are not expected to pay directly for roads on which their employees can drive to work. Occasionally they do, but in my experience those roads tend to be private.
But generally, the lack of safe infrastructure for cycling on to workplaces (the ‘dangerous conditions’ referred to by FATBEGGARONABIKE) is not the fault or responsibility of employers. It’s the council’s/government’s job to build it – and pay for from tax, just as they already do for local roads.
Olionabike also overlooked an existing example of taxes going toward removing barriers to cycling to work – the Cycle to Work scheme. Here companies and employees again benefit at little or no cost to the employer.
Olionabike wrote:
+1. A bit
Like they pay for roafs? Refuse collection? Education? Etc. If we expect public money to fund roads but employers to fund cycle routes we will never get anywhere.
Or the big multinationals
Or the big multinationals could all dip into their own pockets to at least partially fund the development, since the council is skint?
TheSpaniard wrote:Or the big
I’m pretty sure they’re already paying business rates, national insurance, corporation tax…
TheSpaniard wrote:Or the big
The council isn’t skint. They have the first £100 million of a potential £500 million from the Cambridge City Deal. The projects for this phase have been prioritised.
There is money for cycling in the City Deal, although a lot less than there is for bus priority. The Chisholm trail will be funded by it, as well as city centre improvements for walking and cycling.
But the A10 improvements were ditched because, among other things, the leader of one of the councils’ thinks that people don’t cycle more than 1 or 2 miles.
So the A10 cycling campaign is trying to re-build the case for why this inter-village and long-distance route is important. One part of this is the business demand.
The real story is that the City Deal Assembly made a recommendation to the City Deal Board to prioritise the A10 cycle route, then to put it as first reserve, and the Board rejected it. Leading everyone to wonder what the point of the Assembly is.
Just been cycling in Belgium.
Just been cycling in Belgium. Or was it a dream ? Anyway there were miles and miles and miles of beautiful, well surfaced wide Cycle paths that were remarkably uncluttered by bus stops, lamp posts, broken glass and dog shit. Cyclists have right of way at junctions and crossings. Cars give way and overtake sensibly so do juggernauts. One assumes that all this infrastructure has come from state funds unlike here in Blighty where the charity bowl has to be passed round before anything is done. Still what does Johnny Foreigner know ! !
“One high tech company says
“One high tech company says that its recruit profile is someone who is young and fit, will work long hours, and expect to be able to cycle safely to work as a way of getting good daily exercise.”
I’m sure the employment lawyers will be interested in contacting those who have applied for jobs at this company!
3cylinder, no it’s the same
3cylinder, no it’s the same as you. The point stands – the article is a cut and paste from an article from the CEN. It’s plain lazy and not really road.cc-like. They belong on ww.commuter.cc or perhaps http://www.infrastructure.fu.
‘people like me’. P3t3 –
‘people like me’. P3t3 – don’t be such a twat. This site is publishing more and more bits lifted directly from local news sites. Cambridge has more of it’s fair share due the nature of the city.
There have been comments made previously trival/lazy nature of some of the stories – as a longstanding user/visitor, I’m just adding my voice.
‘The cause’. Pfft.
It’s great to hear of any
It’s great to hear of any business taking some responsibility for the greater good of the wider community as well as its employees. Particularly in a cycling context. Hopefully any positive PR for them will encourage other organisations to do them same.
In a small way we try to do our bit by sponsoring charities and supporting some of CTC goals and by being an ethical manufacturer as far as possible.
AZ are taking the mick. They
AZ are taking the mick. They urinate cash up the wall on all sorts of building projects only to close sites the week after. They dont give a toss about their staff, they are only worried about getting new cheaper staff at their whute elephant site as they have realised noone can live anywhere near as tge house prices are too high. AZ shoukd foot tge bill themselves, the vampire squid wasters wanting the tax payer to foot the bill, cheeky bar stewards.
frazered wrote:AZ are taking
AZ are one of 100 businesses supporting the route. This is not their campaign, they are not pushing it, they are doing what cycle campaigners have asked them to do, which is add the voice of business in support of a cycle route.
FFS. It’s like half the people on this thread don’t want cycle routes to be successful and wanted.