This article was published in 2008, in Newsletter 79.
In June, we launched a new website called www.UnclogCambridge.com, giving the facts about the proposals for the congestion charge in a clear manner, as well as putting forward arguments in favour of it and the £500m of up-front investment it would bring.
The debate continues to move on, with the announcement at the end of June of a new Commission to examine the proposals. We hope that the Commission will provide a good opportunity for us and others in favour of the proposals to explain the benefits.
The proposals offer both a carrot and a stick. In our view, both are needed if transport in Cambridge is to be made to work much better. Improving cycling will benefit car drivers too, as more people cycling means fewer vehicles in the queue in front. Indeed, our own members’ survey showed that the vast majority of our members own and use cars. Every time someone chooses to use a bike rather than a car it demonstrates to opponents of cycling why it makes sense to provide for cycling.
City Centre changes
There was much correspondence on our mailing lists in June about the changes to the St. Andrew’s Street area. What are your views on the changes? Personally I feel that they are a mixture, with St. Andrew’s Street itself feeling a lot easier to travel through.
The changes to Emmanuel Street are in progress at the time of writing. Our submission on the changes expressed concerns about how the contraflow will work, and we await the results in practice.
‘Cycling 2020’ and ‘Cycling in New Developments’
I’m pleased to report that the feedback on these documents has been overwhelmingly positive. Decision-makers we have spoken to seem particularly impressed. The New Developments paper, we feel, is becoming of particular use in our submissions on the various proposals for new housing – almost 50,000 new houses by 2016.
Martin Lucas-Smith, Co-ordinator