iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

...Cambridge Rd in St Neots example shows: avg mph 85% 30.1 35.4 (30mph limit) 27.0 31.3 (20mph zone) That means ~435 (of 2904 tracked) vehicles going even faster than 31.3mph in a 20mph... how is that seen as successful? Obviously seeing a "drop" vs "increase" is seen as...

Screenshot of page 38 of Item 5 Appendix 1 "Appendix 1 - Speed and Collision Data Analysis" from 1st September 2026 Cambridgeshire County Council Transport Committee meeting at https://cambridgeshire.cmis.uk.com/ccc_live/MeetingsCalendar/tabid/70/ctl/ViewMeetingPublic/mid/397/Meeting/2705/Committee/62/SelectedTab/Documents/Default.aspx

100

...often the argument given is people don't want a "blanket 20", or they agree it should be "20 outside schools, and in town centres and where there's a lot of pedestrians". Yet this very (limited?) data shows that people haven't slowed down and aren't keeping to the 20 even outside a school...

100

...can such low data be representative of all "Light Vehicle Speeds" along a road over a year? 2.93 tracks (on average) per day could be one vehicle. It could be one delivery van doing those speeds. For example, it could be Amazon delivery van ~3 times a day, as per the Appendix 3 source of data...

Screenshot with highlight added from Item 5, Appendix 3 of Cambridgeshire County Council Transport Committee meeting 1st September 2026, at https://cambridgeshire.cmis.uk.com/ccc_live/MeetingsCalendar/tabid/70/ctl/ViewMeetingPublic/mid/397/Meeting/2705/Committee/62/SelectedTab/Documents/Default.aspx

100

...the smaller the town the lower the Compass IoT Telematics tracking appears to be, such as Ramsey, which shows "Upwood Rd, Ramsey" (it's actually Upwood Road in Bury, Ramsey Road, and High Street in Ramsey) tracking as 1023 N'bound, and 1071 S'bound. 1071 / 365 = 2.93 vehicles per day?! How...

Screenshot of page 33 of Item 5 Appendix 1 "Appendix 1 - Speed and Collision Data Analysis" from 1st September 2026 Cambridgeshire County Council Transport Committee meeting at https://cambridgeshire.cmis.uk.com/ccc_live/MeetingsCalendar/tabid/70/ctl/ViewMeetingPublic/mid/397/Meeting/2705/Committee/62/SelectedTab/Documents/Default.aspx

100

...St Neots (@arj2024.bsky.social) for "Cambridge Street, St Neots" has 2904 E'bound, 2792 W'bound recorded 01/12/2024 to 30/11/2025. 2904 / 365 = 7.95 vehicles per day?! And that's used as the way to measure speeds of "all" vehicles in the area...

100

Simon @simuk.bsky.social · 08/08/2026

...org's such as Cambridgeshire County Council an ability to see what the 'average speeds' are across the network (the 20mph zone) and on specific stretches of road. All seems reasonable, but the data seems really really limited. One village, Great Abington, had <400 tracks in a year, so doesn't...

Screenshot with highlight added of '5.30' from Item 5 report "20mph Programme Review – Tranche 1 (March 2026)" of Cambridgeshire County Council Transport Committee meeting 1st September 2026, from https://cambridgeshire.cmis.uk.com/ccc_live/MeetingsCalendar/tabid/70/ctl/ViewMeetingPublic/mid/397/Meeting/2705/Committee/62/SelectedTab/Documents/Default.aspx

100

Rye Park, Newcastle-under-Lyme past: Civic Offices now: Development site for... Capital&Centric’s Neighbourhood 3 and 4-bed suburban family homes and new build apartments Mix of new affordable homes New commercial spaces New urban park for community use and pop-up events Shared new parkland

Screenshot from Google Maps streetview https://maps.app.goo.gl/Cbb8YAWUHJAb1Uva8

100

Simon @simuk.bsky.social · 08/08/2026

Same design, image flipped, different time of day with different scenery in the distance...

Another project elsewhere in the country with the same building and image just flipped and different time of day with different buildings in the distance https://www.capitalandcentric.com/project/rye-park-newcastle-under-lyme

Simon @simuk.bsky.social · 08/08/2026

All three seem to be "transforming" car parks (that'll please motorists) but in the Huntingdon case they seem to be wanting to take the bus station land too, so public transport as well!? No real detail given beyond brief bullet point list in "The Plans" section on each page. (@acarpen.bsky.social)

Screenshot of part of the "Huntingdon" page at https://www.capitalandcentric.com/project/huntingdon but there are also (very similar) pages for St Ives and St Neots https://www.capitalandcentric.com/project/st-ives https://www.capitalandcentric.com/project/st-neots

100

Simon @simuk.bsky.social · 22/07/2026

I know it's really picky, and probably doesn't really matter (and all that), but BBC has used two images today for their "bus fare cap" coverage, which aren't even UK buses, as both have doors on the wrong side. Shouldn't BBC have UK photos for UK stories on their UK site. Not generic stock photos?

Simon @simuk.bsky.social · 08/07/2026

#Cambridgeshire and #Peterborough Combined Authority proudly announcing there have been 50,000 journeys on the Tiger on Demand services now. But, let's not forget... one single zone (Fenland) had a "trip generation" of 1,039,527 *PER YEAR* when proposed... #duffdata for bus network proposals?

Screenshot of the "Tiger On Demand reaches 50,000 passenger journeys as service expands into new areas of South Cambridgeshire" news story posted 8th July 2026 at https://cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/news/tiger-on-demand-reaches-50000-passenger-journeys-as-service-expands-into-new-areas-of-south-cambridgeshire/

screenshot of pages 12 and 13 of https://cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/3-Fenland-.pdf showing the Fenland Tiger on Demand "Plan on a Page" which was published at the time on https://cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/better-buses/ when the new On Demand zones were being proposed for launch.

Back then, it used a "trip generation" metric, based on DfT data, of "Potential Trip Generation - Using table NTS0303a: Average number of trips by main mode (trips per person per year): England, 2002 onwards, from the National Travel Survey
dataset (2023 interpolation of 27 trips annually)." as detailed on the last page of the South Cambridgeshire document on that webpage.

000

Simon @simuk.bsky.social · 06/07/2026

CPCA seems disappointingly stuck in a bad mindset of bus usage has been declining [for ages], so expecting it to keep declining. Essex have reported bus usage up. Norfolk and Suffolk have reported bus usage up. Portsmouth 41% increase in people using buses. CPCA dragging the bus stats down...

screenshot of post from Portsmouth City Council saying "More people are choosing to use the bus in Portsmouth - over the past two years, bus use has increased by 41%, with more than one million journeys made every month. This is the best post-Covid recovery of any UK city!"

at https://www.facebook.com/Portsmouthcitycouncil/posts/more-people-are-choosing-to-use-the-bus-in-portsmouth-over-the-past-two-years-bu/1336939188465652/

Screenshot from Norfolk County Council, saying "22 January 202609:52
Norfolk County Council's ambitious Bus Service Improvement Plan (BSIP) has transformed public transport across the county, driving a 26% increase in passenger numbers since 2022 and making Norfolk a leading national example for sustainable travel."

https://www.norfolk.gov.uk/article/75245/Norfolks-bus-service-improvements-deliver-record-growth-and-faster-journeys

100

Simon @simuk.bsky.social · 22/06/2026

🚌 #Cambridgeshire Guided Busway safety fencing: "cost of implementing the separation fencing has been higher than the original cost estimates provided in December 2025" Item 6 Cambridgeshire County Council Highways and Transport Committee 30th of June 2026 cambridgeshire.cmis.uk.com/ccc_live/Mee...

Screenshot of "8. Significant Implications - 8.1 Finance Implications" including table showing Allocated Budget and Current Forecast, from Item 6 "Update on the Delivery of Busway Safety Works" of agenda at https://cambridgeshire.cmis.uk.com/ccc_live/MeetingsCalendar/tabid/70/ctl/ViewMeetingPublic/mid/397/Meeting/2570/Committee/62/SelectedTab/Documents/Default.aspx

000

Simon @simuk.bsky.social · 17/06/2026

Interesting(?) the Tiger on Demand map has been updated since last week, with a new "Tiger 10 South Expansion Area" covering part of South #Cambridgeshire to the south and south west of #Cambridge transport.cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/buses/tiger-...

Screenshot (with yellow highlight added over 'Tiger 10 South Expansion Area' section) from https://transport.cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/buses/tiger-on-demand/

Screenshot of the Tiger 10 South Extension which has appeared on the Tiger on Demand bus map from https://transport.cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/buses/tiger-on-demand/

Simon @simuk.bsky.social · 16/06/2026

One thing I will praise them for, the mapping given in the proposals is really nicely done. Seems they've used a proper mapping service (as mentioned bottom left of each map), the region could really benefit from having this type of mapping available for the whole network, at bus stops and in print.

Screenshot of two of the maps from 'Cambridge-City-Proposal.pdf' on the public consultation at https://cpca-yourvoice.co.uk/bus-network-review-engagement/

111

Simon @simuk.bsky.social · 16/06/2026

Appears CPCA have launched a public consultation today on proposed changes to bus routes/bus network - a day before the Transport meeting where councillors are being updated on such proposals. Of course nothing about it other than one of their social media pages on a site I don't even use

112

Simon @simuk.bsky.social · 14/06/2026

🚌 Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Combined Authority Bus Services Reimagined Project Proposals: "underpinned by clear standards for coverage and service levels" "Clear coverage standards" ✋What (where?) are the "clear standards for coverage and service levels", the "clear coverage standards"???

Screenshot of Page 3 from "Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Combined Authority Bus Services Reimagined Project Proposals" at CPCA Transport Committee meeting 17th June 2026, highlighting text that says:

"underpinned by clear standards for coverage and service levels"

Source: Item 13, Appendix A - Bus Services Reimagined Proposals Report https://democracy.cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=138&MId=693

010

"Woodhurst has been identified as having very low usage on the current 301 services and, as a result, will no longer be served by a fixed-route service. Tiger on Demand will continue to provide coverage in the Woodhurst area" But, Woodhurst isn't in any Tiger on Demand area...?

Screenshot of Tiger on Demand zones from https://transport.cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/buses/tiger-on-demand/ with a red 'x' added to the map where the village of Woodhurst is. (not in any of the Tiger on Demand zones)

Maybe, not sure. I think the Independent Review was done before (says January 2026) so don't think so. More confusion... the 'Bus Services Reimagined Project Proposals' report: 'Huntingdonshire Revised Service E' name appears on multiple routes?! Alphabet soup AI slop?

Oh dear, appears the legal Feb 2025 Franchising Order document, and the list of routes in the 2026 Independent Review don't align. (see yellow and pink highlights as potential issues I've spotted, maybe more in there too)

Screenshots of two documents side by side.

On the left, https://cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/CPCA-Franchising-Scheme-4.3-FINAL.pdf

"TRANSPORT ACT 2000 The Cambridgeshire and Peterborough
Combined Authority Area Franchising Scheme for Buses 2025 Made 17 February 2025", showing "ANNEX 1: SERVICES INCLUDED - ARTICLE 5".

On the right, https://democracy.cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/documents/s6934/Appendix%20A-%20Independent%20Review%20of%20Implementation%20Pathways%20for%20Bus%20Franchising%20-%20final%20report%20to%20CPCA.pdf

"Final Report January 2026 Independent Review of Implementation Pathways for Bus Franchising Scheme", showing "Table 9.1: Franchising Scheme – Routes by Operator, Depot and Funding Status"

100

"I haven't worked out how long it would take to cover the orbital, I would estimate over an hour" There is a proposed timetable for that one on Pages 59 and 60. An hour and 52 minutes on some trips. (as in 112 minutes, not a choice of an hour or 52 mins)

Screenshots from Page 59 and 60 of "Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Combined Authority Bus Services Reimagined Project Proposals April 2026" from 17th June 2026 Transport Committee meeting at CPCA, showing proposed Peterborough Orbital Service timetable.

100

"The precept is assumed to be £36 per person" it's per household, isn't it? and that's at Band D, with it varying based on the council tax band. Not per person.

Screenshots of part of Pages 33 and 34 from "Independent Review of
Implementation Pathways for Bus Franchising Scheme", Item 18 Bus Franchising: Independent Review into Bus Franchising Implementation Pathways, Strategic Delivery Plan and Next Steps, "Appendix A- Independent Review of Implementation Pathways for Bus Franchising - final report to CPCA officers", 17th June 2026 Transport Committee meeting at https://democracy.cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=138&MId=693

Bus Franchising report: "Changes to key demand drivers focus on increased GDP per-capita and reduced costs of car ownership since the original model – both of these drivers lead to fewer people using bus services as private travel becomes more affordable" really? 👀

Screenshot with section of text highlighted as quoted in this post.

From 2.1 of "Bus Franchising: Independent Review into Bus Franchising Implementation Pathways, Strategic Delivery Plan and Next Steps" report Item 18, of 17 June 2026 Transport Committee meeting, Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority, at https://democracy.cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=138&MId=693

310

Appears to be a proposal to make the T1 Cambridge to Huntingdon go to St Ives (via Huntingdon) to form this route... [Timetable for this specific proposal isn't included (others are) and it's linked to on an inaccessible Sharepoint]

Screenshot from Page 33 (Item 13 Appendix A - Bus Services Reimagined Proposals Report), showing a proposed "Map of Huntingdonshire Revised Service C between Cambridge and St Ives" (not to be confused with any other "A B or C" named services such as the busway - the document uses 'Service A' 'Service B' and the like throughout, which is confusing when there are Busway routes using that letter...) from 17th June 2026 Transport Committee meeting at CPCA https://democracy.cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=138&MId=693

Map showing T1 Cambridge to Huntingdon route being extended to St Ives via Huntingdon. Timetable data for this specific proposed route isn't included and document (p69) has a link to a non-public sharepoint for this and two other proposed routes.

100

Even the Peterborough Orbital route (re-)appears! Public Questions deadline for this Transport Committee meeting is midday Friday 12th June 2026 @acarpen.bsky.social @cbgbususers.bsky.social @honeybadger200.bsky.social @arj2024.bsky.social @tridentthebear.bsky.social 🧵... 🤔💭 more to follow...

Screenshot from Page 39 of the "Bus Network Reimagined Project - Update" Item 13, "Appendix A - Bus Services Reimagined Proposals Report", showing "Map of Proposed Peterborough Orbital Service" at the 17th June 2026 Transport Committee meeting at Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority at https://democracy.cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=138&MId=693

111

...continued: * 70 page Bus Network Reimagined Project Update by Systra * 2x 73 page Transport Focus Survey reports (one appears to be semi-rural, other for busway) * 135 page Draft Interim Greater Cambridge Transport Strategy report by Steer, and 6 page summary report. 🧵...

Screenshot of front cover of from Item 13, "Bus Network Reimagined Project - Update", "Appendix A - Bus Services Reimagined Proposals Report", a 70 page report by Systra titled "Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Combined Authority Bus Services Reimagined Project Proposals April 2026", at the 17th June 2026 Transport Committee meeting at Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority https://democracy.cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=138&MId=693

Screenshot from Page 29 of "Draft Interim Greater Cambridge Transport Strategy | Report" "Figure 3.3: Map of key Greater Cambridge Transport Strategy rail, high quality public transport corridor and mass rapid transit interventions" of Item 10 Greater Cambridge Transport Strategy, "Appendix B – Draft Interim GCTS" of 17th June 2026 Transport Committee meeting at Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority https://democracy.cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=138&MId=693

101

Simon @simuk.bsky.social · 08/06/2026

Big (Huge... HUGE!) CPCA Transport meeting next Wednesday, 17th June 2026 Includes * Bus Franchising: Independent Review (part exempt, but a 103 page report from Steer available!) * Bus Network Reimagined Project - Update * Community Transport Review * Greater Cambridge Transport Strategy 🧵...

Screenshot of front cover page of "Final Report January 2026 Independent Review of Implementation Pathways for Bus Franchising Scheme" from 17th June 2026 Transport Committee agenda documents at Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority, Item 18 "Appendix A- Independent Review of Implementation Pathways for Bus Franchising - final report to CPCA officers"

Screenshot of part of the report showing section 2.2 "Changes made following the Independent Review recommendations and Strategic Delivery Plan" for Item 18 Bus Franchising: Independent Review into Bus Franchising Implementation Pathways, Strategic Delivery Plan and Next Steps, of the 17th June 2026 Transport Committee at Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority https://democracy.cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=138&MId=693

432

How can a Local Transport Authority shortlist 32 "High Marketing Potential & Poor Quality" bus stops, yet *not know the NAPTAN codes* of 19 of those bus stops? For info on NaPTAN (national dataset of all public transport ‘stops’ in England, Scotland and Wales), see www.gov.uk/government/p...

Screenshot of
"High Frequency & Poor Quality"
"Bus Station Clusters"
"High Marketing Potential & Poor Quality"
"NAPTAN longlist= no duplicates"
columns from "Business Case Longlist" page/tab of "CA561 Response CPCA Bus Stops MCA v2.xlsx" from https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/bus_stopshelter_infrastructure_i#incoming-3430195

Red highlights added for clarity of the unknown NAPTAN codes. Bold text added to column headers.

200

Simon @simuk.bsky.social · 08/06/2026

Of the "longlist" of 100 stops, one is "#N/A" (as in it hasn't got a name... yet it makes the top 100?) There's a list of 22 "poor quality stops" with their naptan codes, but two don't have "unknown" naptan codes (how/why?)

Screenshot from "Business Case Longlist" tab/page of "CA561 Response CPCA Bus Stops MCA v2.xlsx" from https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/bus_stopshelter_infrastructure_i#incoming-3430195

Red highlights added for clarity of two sections of information which are covered in this post. Bold text added to column headers.

100

Simon @simuk.bsky.social · 01/06/2026

CPCA funding the 69 bus, runs once in the morning and once in the afternoon M-F. Nothing on Bustimes, Google or Apple maps yet. Contract value £316,627.92 excluding VAT £379,953.50 including VAT Award decision date 20 March 2026 7 tenders received www.find-tender.service.gov.uk/Notice/02587...

Screenshot of timetable from https://stephensonsofessex.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/48/2026/05/69-06-26.pdf

Screenshot of Bus Service 69 Tender Notice from https://www.find-tender.service.gov.uk/Notice/025877-2026?origin=SearchResults&p=1

000

Simon @simuk.bsky.social · 25/05/2026

'' Around 500 properties in Sussex and Kent are without water or have intermittent supply - South East Water says it is due to "increased demand" '' on BBC News page. It's only low 30s, summer gets warmer, UK has a 40.3c record, there shouldn't be shortages (anyway) due to "increase demand".

Screenshot from https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c1w24llvj48t with highlighting added over the text:

* Around 500 properties in Sussex and Kent are without water or have intermittent supply - South East Water says it is due to "increased demand"

000

Simon @simuk.bsky.social · 12/05/2026

Bus journey cost (and time) vs Train - example being Monday after 8am Cambridge South to Cambridge North (note train ticket is return, so you can get back too) Will be interesting to see if CPCA can get a bus+train ticket in place, like many other cities already have.

Screenshot showing stagecoachbus.com nationalrail.co.uk and bustimes.org showing the closest bus stop [Addenbrooke’s Francis Crick Avenue (near), CMBGMTAD 0500CCITY542] to the new Cambridge South Station as the comparison journey, with timings and ticket prices listed from Stagecoach and National Rail websites for a journey on the first Monday after the station has opened.

[Note: Stagecoach doesn't yet show ticket prices for Monday 29th June 2026, but assumed ticket prices won't be changing before then. Stagecoach website also doesn't list a Return ticket]

000

Simon @simuk.bsky.social · 11/05/2026

"broken governance" Worth noting CPCA's "Bus Service Continuity & Bus Review Support Framework" approved November 2025 has a "Governance" section on Page 65 of the approved document. It's actually Page 64 after 'Decision Making' and before 'Tender & Award' and is... BLANK. There is no Governance?

Screenshot of the Contents page from "Appendix B - Draft CPCA Contracted Bus Service Review Framework" (which was approved in November 2025 at CPCA Board) from item 8, of 17th November 2025 Transport Committee meeting at https://democracy.cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=138&MId=623

Screenshot (highlighting added) of the 'Governance' page from "Appendix B - Draft CPCA Contracted Bus Service Review Framework" (which was approved in November 2025 at CPCA Board) from item 8, of 17th November 2025 Transport Committee meeting at https://democracy.cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=138&MId=623

The "Governance" section page is blank, and just has CPCA/Systra logos, page numbers, "CPCA Bus Service Review Framework V1.2.Docx Thursday 6 November 2025 - 12:34" and the "draft" watermark across it.

100

Simon @simuk.bsky.social · 10/05/2026

Looking at the one with five potential scores, and using the NAPTAN Code: PETGMGM quoted in the proposal list PDF... It's served by three buses per day (route 60) at 11:31, 14:21, 17:31 bustimes.org/stops/0590PF... One of nine Peterborough bus stops seen as high priority to be in the first batch?

Text in screenshot from Page 81 of proposed bus stop improvements, says:

===
The Peacock (Fletton)
NAPTAN Code: PETGMGM

Improvements
Total Cost Before OB: £1,705.00

Proposed Interventions:
• Bus cage extension

Notes:
• Not enough space for a shelter. Add bus cage to prevent
parking. Good flag and TTC.
===

Simon @simuk.bsky.social · 10/05/2026

Gone through the list, but so many with multiple stops under the same name. A lot scored higher (eg: a score of 12 or 13) yet aren't on the proposed list, so appears the scoring hasn't been used as the basis for prioritisation of stops to include in this batch of upgrades?

Text from image:

Peterborough Bus Stops in Proposed List of Bus Stop Infrastructure Improvements
(Appendix A, of Section 3.1 of the Transport committee 4th March 2026) PDF:

[Page 31]
Mill (Lincoln Road, Werrington)
NAPTAN Code: PETMGTA
--- scored 5 or 11 in FOI response ("higher = poorer quality")

[Page 43]
Paul Pry (Lincoln Road)
NAPTAN Code: PETJDWM
--- scored 7 or 10

[Page 44]
Hurn Road (Werrington)
NAPTAN Code: PETAJAT
--- scored 10 or 12

[Page 46]
Westwood Park Road (West Town)
NAPTAN Code: PETPGAG
--- scored 7 or 12

[Page 62]
High School (Peterborough)
NAPTAN Code: PETGJGP
--- scored 6, 8 or 10

[Page 63]
Central Square (Whittlesey Road, Stanground)
NAPTAN Code: PETJAJP
--- scored 6, 10 or 10

[Page 65]
Aldi (Whittlesey Road, Stanground)
NAPTAN Code: PETJAMA
--- scored 8 or 9

[Page 81]
The Peacock (Fletton)
NAPTAN Code: PETGMGM
--- scored 5, 7, 8, 9 or 9

[Page 87]
Central Square (Whittlesey Road, Peterborough)
NAPTAN Code: PETMJMA
--- scored 6, 10 or 10

210

Simon @simuk.bsky.social · 29/03/2026

Err, hold on a moment... I thought there was a survey of all 2964 bus stops in Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, consultants tasked (paid) to do work with a scoring system and shortlist. So was it scoring that got it on the list, or "lobbying" the mayor? If the latter, why bother with consultants?

Screenshot from the Mayor saying about how two councillors "lobbied me, made the case and got the stop on the list". So was the list actually based on prioritisation scoring, with a mathematical methodology, or was it people shouting loud(ly) enough?

Screenshot of section 3 'background' from Item 11 of 'Bus Stop/Shelter Infrastructure Improvement' Transport Committee - Wednesday, 4th March, 2026

https://democracy.cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/documents/s6402/Bus%20Stop%20Shelter%20Infrastructure%20Improvements.pdf

100

Simon @simuk.bsky.social · 27/02/2026

I've submitted a Public Question on this, which has been accepted for the 4th of March 2026 Transport committee meeting.

Text from screenshot:

It is good to see investment in Bus Stop Infrastructure in Cambridgeshire and Peterborough.

The report says a "composite score" was given for each stop, but doesn’t appear to be evidence of the scores in the report of Item 11 Appendix A, nor is the methodology of how the scoring was specifically applied and weighted, beyond references to it being so.

I hope the scoring system allows the Combined Authority to 're-score' the bus stops once the infrastructure improvement work has taken place, to show what uplift there has been to the scores, and also monitoring of how the investment in Bus Stops results in increasing ridership, in an effort to show Government that additional funding in this area could lead to even further positive change to our Public Transport.

My question is: What public engagement opportunities were provided, ahead of the commissioned consultants' scoring system, list creation, and stop-specific interventions being proposed, to ensure the "needs and expectations of passengers" were prioritised as per 4.9 of the region's Bus Service Improvement Plan 2024 Refresh?

-- 4.9: https://democracy.cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/documents/s3877/Appendix%20A%20-%20CPCA%20BSIP%202024%20Refresh%20Draft%20V5.1%20after%20DfT%20submission%20new.pdf

100

Now no report until June 2026 This, surely, pushes back any possible bus franchising even further? Screenshot from Director’s Highlight Report at CPCA Transport meeting 4th March 2026 democracy.cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/ieListDocume...

Screenshot from Director’s Highlight Report at CPCA Transport meeting 4th March 2026
https://democracy.cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=138&MId=625

(Highlights added for clarity)

100

March 2024 Transport meeting had another Public Question from @cbgbususers.bsky.social asking for "proposed improvements in an accessible format (eg a clickable map) in an accessible place on the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority website, with the opportunity for public comment"

screenshot of "question 5" from 13 March 2024 CPCA Transport and Infrastructure meeting "12 TIC Public Questions"

Source: https://democracy.cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/CeListDocuments.aspx?CommitteeId=185&MeetingId=569&DF=13%2f03%2f2024&Ver=2

111

Strangely 🤔 stops serving Business Parks, such as Ermine Business Park (on AW1 and 904 routes) aren't included despite being a small patch of muddy slabs hidden in bushes on a 3-lane 50mph road? Nor one raised by @cbgbususers.bsky.social in a Public Question to CPCA Nov 2023.

Screenshot of bus stop "serving" a business park on the edge of Huntingdon source: https://maps.app.goo.gl/Xi11tLLbcceu4V4Z8

Screenshot showing overview of area of bus stop "serving" a business park on the edge of Huntingdon. [Source: Google Maps]

Screenshot from Google Streetview of "CMBGAWJD 0500STEVE013" bus stop "Cherry Hinton Eland Way (near)" which was asked about by Richard Wood, Cambridge Area Bus Users in a Public Question to CPCA Transport and Infrastructure back at the 15 November 2023 CPCA TIC meeting.

Streetview Source: https://maps.app.goo.gl/771mcc5Yp4bL188q6

Screenshot of Public Question and response from CPCA, which referenced the "0500STEVE013" bus stop "Cherry Hinton Eland Way (near)" when it was asked about by Richard Wood, Cambridge Area Bus Users in a Public Question to CPCA Transport and Infrastructure back at the 15 November 2023 CPCA TIC meeting.

Source: "5 Public Questions and Responses - 15.11.23 (002)" at https://democracy.cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/CeListDocuments.aspx?CommitteeId=185&MeetingId=567&DF=15%2f11%2f2023&Ver=2

121

Each stop in the report has the routes listed with a number in brackets, which I presume is the number of times it's served by each route, but... per day? per week? what? Busway "B" 109 per day? can't be. But the 303/305 service is daily count. So is this "duff" data being used to score things?

Screenshot from the first two bus stops listed in the "Appendix A - Summary of Proposed Bus Stop Infrastructure Improvements" report for Item 11 "Bus Stop/Shelter Infrastructure Improvement" of the 4th of March 2026 CPCA Transport committee meeting

I wonder how many of the un-cared-for bus stops @acarpen.bsky.social has spotted while travelling around Cambridge, have made it to this "longlist"? Way back on 13 March 2024 "officers have devised an initial methodology" (for "initial high priority 50 stops/shelters") Where is the methodology?

Screenshot from 13 March 2024 Transport and Infrastructure meeting docs showing section 2.5 of Item 10 "Bus Stop/Shelter Improvements".

Source: https://democracy.cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/CeListDocuments.aspx?CommitteeId=185&MeetingId=569&DF=13%2f03%2f2024&Ver=2

Unless I've completed missed it, I can't find the "scoring system" that has been used, despite it being mentioned in the Item 11 report Or referenced in the Economic Case section of the Full Business Case [p9] Where is it? How have they scored stops? All purely data and no actual passenger input?

Screenshot of '3 Background' from Item 11 of the CPCA Transport committee meeting on 4th of March 2026 https://democracy.cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=138&MId=625

[Partial text from screenshot]
"Criteria for Scoring:
• Passenger Demand: Frequency and volume of bus services.
• Accessibility Compliance: Presence of hardstanding, seating, and space for wheelchair users.
• Safety Improvements: Lighting, visibility, and pedestrian environment.
• Marketing Potential: Opportunities for advertising revenue.
• Strategic Fit: Alignment with Bus Service Improvement Plan (BSIP) and CPCA policy objectives.
Weighting and Scoring:
• Each stop is scored against the above criteria.
• Weighting is applied to reflect CPCA priorities (stops that were poor quality, had high marketing
potential, and high frequency services scored higher).
Shortlisting:
• Stops with the highest composite scores are shortlisted.
• Geographic spread was monitored as part of the weighted criteria and results to ensure
consideration of improvements across urban and rural areas (please see 4.1 for a map of the
identified stops)."

Screenshot from 'Economic Case' section of the "Appendix B - Business Case submitted to Funding Panel" document in Item 11 of the 4th of March 2026 CPCA Transport Committee meeting, including references to:

"Raw audit data coded to score quality responses" and "Mixed process to identify stops with marketing potential, cross-referenced
against Google Traffic data (with locations manually sense checked)" and "Weighting applied against stops to quality data, to pull through stops into longlist".

So what is the "Quota agreed with CPCA to pull through a range of stops based on indicators including: Poor quality stops, high frequency & poor quality, high marketing potential & poor quality, bus station exercise"? Who decided the value for each of those indicators, and what input has the public - people who actually use the bus services - ever had?

130

Randomly spotted this [p75], it's at St Ives Note it says "TTC, Flag and RTPI in fine condition". Timetable is facing away from road - have to stand on (wet & muddy?) grass to read it. Also the RTPI, it's leaning? Just gets £1.7k paint on road. For 'fun' here it was in Google Streetview in 2008

Screenshot from Google Streetview of the same stop, in 2008 https://maps.app.goo.gl/qw1kbn4rbaniugHB8

Awful run-down Huntingdon (with a 't' in the report case) only appears to be getting RTPI for each bay - seriously? Queensgate Bus Station Peterborough appears to have been overlooked (@honeybadger200.bsky.social) maybe it was simply too grim to visit.

Screenshot of a Huntingdon Bus Station stop from the report (complete with wrong spelling) suggesting a £90,460.45 addition of "Provide new RTPI at all bays" as the one and only improvement.