Plans for a 618-space multi-storey car park at Cambridge North station have divided opinion, with some saying it’s desperately needed while others warn it will worsen traffic

Cambridgeshire Live readers have been debating plans for a multi-storey car park at Cambridge North railway station. Some readers say it will help drivers and make trips easier.

Others say it will add to traffic, does not fit with ‘sustainable’ travel, and ignores bikes and buses. Chesterton Partnership has proposed to build a three-storey car park with 618 spaces on land north of Cowley Road in Cambridge.

The plans form part of the Cambridge North development. If approved, plans said the car park will provide a “strategically located parking infrastructure”.

The applicants added: “This arrangement establishes a clear and legible search pattern for drivers, improving wayfinding, reducing potential vehicle conflicts, and enhancing overall safety within the deck environment.”

For some, additional spaces are welcomed. Banthebikes says: “This is great news for car drivers and hopefully it will be full every day.”

Neil McArthur agrees that demand is genuine: “Yes, people actually drive in & around Cambridge, and desperately need convenient & affordable parking spaces across our city.”

Others argue the proposal misses the point entirely. Freddly writes: “There is nothing sustainable in this plan, and it needs to be turned down. Traffic simply expands to fill the space available – the last 40 years have taught us that. Even if this was considered ‘park and ride’ for the station, there is nothing virtuous or sustainable about driving to a station to take a train.”

Charlesbranston asks: “Any plans on finally creating a safe place for commuters to leave their bikes? Or should we all continue to use the main station in the absence of somewhere reasonably safe to lock up a bike, with at least the glimmer of hope that it hasn’t already been pinched before your return journey?”

Windypants believes: “This will just escalate the already terrible congestion throughout the city. There should be no parking at all at any station in Cambridge. Walking is good for you! As is cycling!”

Calumen Nomen disagrees: “No – they have taught us that if you recklessly expand the population, then you will also expand the activities and services that population generates and requires. Such as traffic. btw – we have ‘sustained’ driving for well over a hundred years now. How much longer before the fuzzy-minded element amongst us accepts that it is very obviously ‘sustainable’ (as if that matters)?”

Is this car park really needed? Comment below or HERE to join in the conversation.

Cambridgeshire County Council has approved £58 million for road maintenance in 2026/27, with key routes including A1307 Hills Road in Cambridge

Cambridgeshire Live readers are sceptical at the news that the County Council has approved nearly £60 million for road maintenance and improvements in 2026/27. The funding will focus on preventative work to extend the life of roads and reduce costly repairs.

Key routes include Hills Road in Cambridge, Cambridge Road in Great Shelford, and Ely Road in Soham. The investment aims to improve safety, resilience, and the overall condition of the county’s highways, according to the council.

Councillor Alex Beckett, chair of the highways and transport committee, said the programme is one of the council’s largest ever investments in local roads. The funding will also be used for maintaining signs and road markings, improving footpaths and cycleways, upgrading drainage, strengthening bridges, and other safety measures.

Most work is scheduled to take place between April 2026 and March 2027.

Commenter Freddly believes: “This needs to go alongside punitive measures to deter SUVs, for example much higher parking charges for SUVs and super-size transit vans, otherwise the pot-holes will soon be back.”

Windypants agrees: “Honestly, SUVs are wrecking our roads with potholes, and their drivers really ought to be paying way more for the damage, we’re talking bigger charges and fines, more often. A simple fix? Set speed cameras 10mph lower just for SUVs. That way, we’d actually get the cash needed to fix all the road damage they cause. Seriously, these vehicles belong off-road, not clogging up our cities, and they pump out more fumes than normal cars, which is why their taxes should constantly go up. The bottom line is we need to make owning an SUV so expensive and annoying that drivers just give up and switch to something sensible, like a bike, the best way to get around, hands down.”

Feelgood66 adds: “We should also be banning all the heavy electric vehicles, some weigh 2.5 tons, I wouldn’t want to be hit by one.”

Q06 complains: “Years of neglect, road injuries, and vehicle damage and this is the amount set aside to fix it all? I’d love to know where all our tax money actually goes.”

Martinjm agrees: “It’s a drop in the ocean. No major road work for nearly fifty years and lorries, buses and dustbin lorries are much bigger and heavier than the roads were designed for. Electric buses must be extremely heavy. If just cars, including SUVs were the only road users it would not be a problem. Commercial traffic is the problem. The problem has gone beyond potholes. I had to buy two new tyres in February and cars go through a lot of wear and tear because of the road surface. It is potentially lethal for cyclists.”

Jam L adds: “They had better be paved with gold for that price. This is where our council tax hikes are going.”

Lucy H says: “I drove along Granhams Road yesterday, the only road fully resurfaced, and remembered what driving used to be like when you could just drive without needing 4WD skills to navigate a combat zone. I’ve already damaged two tyres on potholes this week and they will never fix them all.”

What do you think of Cambridgeshire’s £60 million road plan? Will it make a real difference to safety and travel, or is it just more patching up? Share your thoughts in our comments section.

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.