Azara Blog: Cambridge transport bureaucrats back down over closure of Victoria Avenue

Blog home page | Blog archive

Google   Bookmark and Share

Date published: 2006/07/03

The Cambridge Evening News says:

Controversial plans to close a busy Cambridge street will be put on the back burner by transport bosses.

Cambridgeshire County Council considered stopping traffic from cutting through Maid's Causeway and Victoria Avenue during the day. Three options were put forward, including the idea of bollards in one of the streets.

At a county council workshop, 68 per cent of people attending had said traffic was a problem.

But when residents and business owners were asked, 74 per cent said cars, buses, cyclists, pedestrians and motorbikes were able to use the route without any difficulty and 61 per cent said the council should leave the streets as they were.

Now transport officers have recommended the Cambridge traffic management area joint committee puts off measures to control traffic on the streets.

Plans may be reconsidered as part of the council's long-term transport strategy.

Unbelievable, the Cambridge ruling elite seem to have backed down. The fact that 68 percent of people in one consultation allegedly supported the closure and 61 percent in another allegedly supported the opposite shows how unrepresentative these consultations are, it is quite easy for one side or the other to stuff the ballot box. And almost certainly in both consultations the Cambridge middle class were vastly over-represented and the non-residents (mainly drivers) who actually use Victoria Avenue and Maid's Causeway were vastly under-represented. The complaints from business people might have tipped the balance here. The best thing about the whole process was that it kept the Cambridge transport bureaucrats busy so that they have had less time to inflict their damage elsewhere.

All material not included from other sources is copyright For further information or questions email: info [at] cambridge2000 [dot] com (replace "[at]" with "@" and "[dot]" with ".").