CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!

“Town vs gown and car vs bike: row erupts over Cambridge congestion plan”

(3 posts)
  • Started 2 months ago by chdot
  • Latest reply from the canuck

No tags yet.


  1. chdot
    Admin

  2. ejstubbs
    Member

    This is basically the usual debate that arises when congestion charging is proposed, with added spice from gammon-infused lobbying groups attempting to leverage the historic town vs gown tensions in the city.

    The article states that the Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP) is made up of local councils, business representatives and the university - with the latter being a non-voting partner. So democratically elected local governments are directly involved, and it is perhaps to them that the lobbying groups should be making their representations?

    The article also contains the statement: "30% of the poorest households in our area don’t have access to a car." Sound familiar?

    The proposal is to use revenue from the congestion charge to subsidise bus fares, so the assertion in the standfast (that the scheme "will benefit only bicycling students and dons") appears flawed.

    TLDR: nothing new here, move along?

    Posted 2 months ago #
  3. the canuck
    Member

    I used to live in one of the satellite villages of Cambridge, and cycled 6 miles to work and back every day. In 4 years, I drove the car into the centre once. It was a nightmare.
    Only a masochist would do that without being paid.

    I mean, a large chunk of the core is not accessible to private cars anyways, if you don't actually live in the centre, driving into it is usually more difficult than using some other transport.

    Posted 2 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin