Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire councils propose £1,000 fines after 22 incidents of dangerous driving and vehicle stunts

Cambridgeshire Live readers have shared strong views after reports of antisocial driving at park-and-ride sites across Cambridgeshire. Many want tougher action, while others say the problem will simply shift to other places if rules change in one spot.

Antisocial driving at a park and ride site in Cambridge has made “people feel unsafe”, according to a councillor. A total of 22 separate incidents were recorded at Babraham Road Park and Ride between April 2024 and mid-January this year.

Babraham Road Park and Ride, situated between Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire, has seen persistent problems with inconsiderate and dangerous driving, alongside loud music, according to South Cambridgeshire District Council and Cambridge City Council.

Most of these incidents are reported to occur during evening hours or late at night, frequently continuing beyond midnight. Both councils say that additional gatherings are being organised, and that despite reports being submitted to police, vehicles often reappear after being dispersed.

The councils wish to introduce new measures to tackle the antisocial behaviour. They are proposing to implement a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) covering the Babraham Park and Ride site.

Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) alongside existing CCTV would be used, enabling councils to monitor vehicles and issue fines without requiring a physical presence. The new measures would make it a criminal offence to do any of the following within the park and ride:

• Speeding or reckless driving that risks causing harassment, alarm or distress.
• Revving, racing and disruptive vehicle behaviour, including unnecessary acceleration, loud engine revving, horn misuse and amplified music causing nuisance.
• Dangerous stunts such as drifting, doughnuts, burnouts, wheel spins, J‐turns or wheelies.
• Organised meets or racing‐style activity, including entering the site for vehicle display or performance driving.
• Threatening or abusive behaviour towards other Park and Ride users.

Should the PSPO be implemented, anyone breaking the rules could face prosecution and fines of up to £1,000 or receive a Fixed Penalty Notice of up to £500.

One reader, Freddly, comments: “The PSPO needs to allow the car or van to be taken off the driver. Let’s spare a thought also for much more ‘respectable’ antisocial driving. Recently a pedestrian was killed by a car in a local car-park. Why was anyone driving fast enough in a to do this in a car-park? Since lawless and careless driving around supermarkets has become so commonplace, these car-parks, like our streets, need speed tables that damage cars if taken at more than 10mph.”

Campete2 says: “The penalty seems a little light. Although I suspect that a criminal conviction would have more impact after the fact, the prospect of vehicle seizure might be more effective at prevention. The thing is to make sure this doesn’t just move the problem elsewhere. People can break laws faster than authorities can make them.”

Skipper says: “Given that it seems legal for Lycra enthusiasts to hold push bike meets and race through the streets of Cambridge – and even get roads closed – plus free push bike tracks, how about some levelling up? Let’s have a taxpayer-funded tarmac area where car drivers can go to enjoy themselves, instead of the unfair demonisation of the car.”

Over on our Facebook page, Adam Barton comments: “Hope this happens and happens soon. Don’t get me wrong, there’s nothing wrong with youngsters having fun. However, right next door to Babraham Park & Ride, you have the Arthur Rank Hospice, which houses some terminally ill patients. Please show a little bit of respect to these people and their families.”

Molly Raé Hill disagrees: “Barley [sic] antisocial when people are meeting to socialise and appreciate each others [sic] cars, never known one to last past midnight either.”

Marshall Mars says: “This measure will hurt good and bad enthusiasts alike. Not all drivers go there for anti-social behaviour. Unfortunately, there are some groups that go there and can’t behave, acting like hooligans, ruining it for everyone else. Most go there just to be away from housing complexes and just park up for a chat.”

Are car meets really that bad? Comment below or HERE to have your say.

Readers remain divided over the controversial Cambridge bus gate nearly a year after fines began, with strong views on traffic, businesses, and air quality

Cambridgeshire Live readers remain divided over Mill Road’s bus gate, with passionate opinions about traffic, trade, and air quality. The bus gate continues to split opinion nearly 12 months after it became operational.

Cambridgeshire County Council implemented a permanent bus gate on Mill Road in 2025, with penalties initially handed out from March. The bus gate restricts all non-exempt vehicles from passing through, requiring them to take alternative routes.

Anyone who contravenes the bus gate receives a Penalty Charge Notice of £70, reduced to £35 if settled within 21 days. Exemptions allowing passage without incurring a fine include buses, taxis, cyclists, and emergency vehicles.

More than 4,600 penalties were issued during the first seven weeks after the bus gate’s activation, according to a Freedom of Information request submitted by the Local Democracy Service. Some residents argue that the restrictions have improved daily life.

One reader, Timbiscuit remarks: “‘Businesses’ [sic] will always want the bridge open due to the perceived more trade mindset. However, the shops are as busy as ever. I’ve lived on Mill Road for over twenty years. Traffic is less, air is cleaner, roads are safer, and more walking and cycling are taking place.”

Rhodabike adds: “‘The bus gate prevents all non-exempt vehicles passing through, meaning that they must use alternative routes.’ Exactly. Alternative routes are other neighbourhoods, which are now suffering increased congestion, thanks to the selfish demands of a vocal minority who can’t think beyond Mill Road.

“Visibly longer queues. And bus drivers are saying they’re struggling to run on time on other roads due to extra traffic. Plus, there’s the basic fact that cars, being physical objects, don’t disappear into thin air; every car no longer using Mill Road still exists somewhere else.”

Weneedqueenmeghan says: “The few businesses only want it open because it’s convenient for them to drive in and illegally dump their vehicles on the pavement. There are more people than ever shopping on Mill Road; it’s been proven over and over that pedestrianisation of areas increases footfall in shops.

“Remember, they tried to tell us traffic would go elsewhere, laugh! It hasn’t. They tried to tell us shops would lose business, it hasn’t! They tried to tell us drivers were stopping to shop, no, they weren’t, they were only using it as a rat run. Cyclists have been proven right once again.”

In contrast, Lilbec writes: “I don’t know anyone who actually agrees with closing the bridge. And bits [sic] clearly affecting businesses, whether you like it or not. If you don’t like living in an area with traffic, why did you choose to live there in the first place? If there is less traffic now, it’s only because people are abandoning Cambridge as a decent place to visit.”

Arborealfriend says: “I’ve lived off Mill Road for over a quarter century. The bridge restrictions are a huge improvement. I’ve spoken to traders who find the restriction inconvenient for a cash’n’carry run, whilst others – especially café/restaurant owners – appreciate the cleaner air and the way that there is now more passing trade. On foot. Stopping. Shopping. Eating. Drinking. Not driving past polluting. To check the FACTS about traffic, SmartCambridge (DotOrg) have sensors and full data available. No, there ain’t loadsa extra motor traffic on surrounding roads.”

Do you think the scheme is really making Mill Road safer, or is it just shifting the congestion elsewhere? Have your say in our comments section.