Worry over £200m busway not ignored, says council

The Busway network already serves the Cambridge area and is looking to expand

The concerns of people living near a proposed £200m busway have not been ignored, a council has told a public inquiry.

About 300 objections have been made to a planned two-lane guided busway linking Cambourne to Cambridge away from existing roads.

The first day of the inquiry - which is expected to last until November - heard disagreements between the safety of a proposed on-road alternative route.

Charity Cambridge Past, Present and Future (CPPF) said there was no justification for the scheme and there would be "significant harm" to the green belt.

The plans have been developed by the Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP) on behalf of Cambridgeshire County Council, which is seeking that a direction be made that planning permission be deemed to be granted.

At the conclusion of the inquiry, which is taking place in Cambourne, inspectors will make recommendations to the government about the scheme.

As well as the busway a new park and ride in Dry Drayton would be built and the route would include stops at the Bourn Airfield development, Hardwick and Coton.

Neil Cameron KC, right, opened the council's case at the inquiry on Tuesday

Neil Cameron KC, representing the council, told the inquiry: "There is very strong national and local support for the delivery of the busway.

"This reflects the demonstrable need for improved infrastructure to help unleash Cambridge's economic potential."

He said the proposed 3,500 homes at Bourn Airfield were "particularly dependent" on the busway as the development was restricted to 500 properties without it or an equivalent alternative.

It has been claimed the busway would reduce bus times by up to 19 minutes and help ease congestion.

Mr Cameron said the council "have not ignored [the] concerns" of those living near the busway and "adverse impacts have been identified and mitigated".

He said an alternative put forward by CPPF had been assessed as "unsafe and based on a plethora of unacceptable departures from the relevant design standards".

But Jack Parker, representing CPPF, said the alternative "in-highway" scheme would be safe, "be feasible in engineering terms" and cause less ecological harm.

He said: "It could be delivered more quickly so as to unlock growth in the short term, and it would avoid the need for a significant, time-consuming and costly incursion into the green belt for a scheme which is likely to become obsolete, or at least its benefits significantly curtailed, in the medium term if and when East-West Rail is constructed or some other mass transit scheme is advanced."

Mr Parker also said the evidence put forward about transportation benefits was "wholly inadequate".

He said the modelling used was from prior to the Covid pandemic.