A copy of the “Harvey Goodwin Avenue Millennium Group” Annual General Meeting minutes were recently posted through my door in Cambridge.
The minutes report that the meeting was attended by six people, and that they are considering closing the road for the entire weekend around Saturday the 6th of July 2013 for their street party next year.
As far as I’m aware the group is mostly harmless, and they almost exclusively focus their activity on organising events.
I have in the past seen formal Cambridgeshire County Council notices announcing a road closure for the street party, however in recent years I’ve not seen any such notices, and all that appears to have happened is slips of paper have been placed on cars parked on Harvey Goodwin Avenue and on surrounding streets asking people not to park on the street on the day of the party, and the street has been closed informally with bins, and string etc.
In previous years the barriers closing the road have been clear, and orange flashing lights have been installed in the evening. During the recent 2012 street-party though string tied to a telegraph pole led to a bin placed in the middle of the road was used. This barrier was in my view dangerous, particularly to cyclists, but also to those who drove up to it noticing it only at the last minute.
The road closure caused some level of inconvenience to residents of the area, with a number of those living on the street pulling up to the barrier to unload shopping and DIY supplies on foot before finding a parking space elsewhere, and many people parking further away from their homes than usual. One thing which irked me a little was that some party goers drove past the barriers and parked at the ends of the street, despite having asked others to clear their vehicles from the road.
Cambridgeshire County Council’s application form for closing roads with little or no through traffic for parties states:
Please place and maintain a copy of the Order made by Cambridgeshire County Council at the end of the street to be closed at least 7 days prior to the event, making sure that it is clearly visible to passers by. Local residents who would be affected by this closure should be informed of it by ‘letter drop’ at least 7 days prior to the event. Village circulars and notice boards could also be used to advertise the closure.
As I have said I’ve not spotted any notices in recent years.
For one afternoon and evening a year I don’t think the closure is much of a problem, and I don’t mind it; however if the closure is extended to the whole weekend I think the inconvenience will exceed the benefits. Those impacted are a much larger group than those who partake in the street party.
I think that our local councillors should decide if the road closure should take place, and if so for how long it ought be in operation for. I think they could consider requesting common sense be applied in the construction of the road closure barriers (as has been used in the past, with lights and bunting), and perhaps allowing parking at the ends of the roads for all.
This year I noticed that there didn’t appear to be many people making use of the road closure; the AGM minutes reveal that due to the weather people used their, presumably more sheltered, back gardens in the evening.
The minutes also state:
On the Sunday morning after the street party, a van had driven up to some bunting which had sagged and attempted to drive on. In doing so the driver pulled a downpipe from one house which had then damaged a car whilst the owner and one of her children were in the car. This was an upsetting incident and the meeting asked that all avenues be explored so that the affected people could be assisted.
I think this probably again shows those organising the event have not been acting responsibly and with common sense.
9 responses to “Harvey Goodwin Avenue Street Party Closure”
Please remove my personal details from your blog. The meeting you’ve posted the minutes of was not a public one and no permission was given for it to be posted online. Your intention may be perfectly ‘harmless’, but on the other hand …
I am rather baffled by the above request.
It is only by publishing a surname in the comment above that the full name of “Jan (No.52)” has been revealed. She has apparently published her own name and address elsewhere:
http://www.creativefront.org/directory/browse/profile/135
I will write back asking for the personal information in question to be specifically identified. I cannot see any reference to “Jan” other than on the attendance list.
I have replied as follows:
During the break at the North Area Committee meeting I drew the attention of two of my local councillors (Ward and O’Reilly) to the proposal to close the road for the whole weekend and suggested the matter be discussed at the North Area Committee and a decision taken democratically, in public, by elected represenatives.
Cllr Ward expressed a view that such a request would be declined by county officers; and the if the closure was attempted without permission the police ought promptly act. He appeared to agree the whole weekend closure was excessive, but didn’t think councillors needed to preemptively act.
I note that Jan Hurst has publiclly published the following message on the street’s Google Groups newsgroup:
I note she as signed herself as Jan (no.52) as in the minutes there too, so it’s harder to see what the problem might be.
In my article above I noted:
I am very encouraged to see a traffic warden did take action in relation to at least some of these vehicles as some were illegally parked.
Not a public meeting? The notice on their discussion group says “It is a fairly ‘loose’ structure and everyone is most welcome to come and contribute to discussions about activities.”
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/harveygoodwin/Ochsx9YMFS8
Interestingly the 2010 AGM minutes are available to the public in full as a word document via the above posted link.
I have received a further email from Jan Hurst, simply reiterating her wish for her “name and house details” to be removed.
I have replied:
Trump winning reelection and that he undertook several actions “to avoid being yelled at by his boss.”
j tnkegf nk ht5gef nkrtgkef nk nyh nkrtge fkn5yrgtgejf knt4efjk nm4 jk5ytrgjk fm ktr gkf knyrgf kn ynhktrg fkj t4y k5 trkn5ytrg nkh 5yh trnkg n5yh ntr n yn