During the open forum section of Cambridge City Council’s West Central Area Committee on the 18th of June 2009 a local resident raised the question of parking on Whyman’s Lane. The meeting was held in the Castle End Mission on Pound Hill. Whymans Lane is the cut-through directly opposite which leads to Castle Hill.
While there are bollards which deter entry by narrowing the space available for vehicles there are no double yellow lines and no indication that parking on or driving down the lane is prohibited. It appears to me, from the signage and road markings, that anyone can drive down the road and there are possibly a couple of unrestricted free-for all parking spaces on it. If the situation is any different then the signage ought clearly reflect that. The double yellow lines on Pound Hill continue across the junction with Whymans Lane; as this is not usual for a side road it might give some indication to drivers, cyclists and pedestrians that the road is, for some reason, being treated as a special case (a bit more like a private road / driveway). The “Whymans Lane” road sign though gives an indication that it is a normal public road.
Cllr Knightley, the meeting’s chair said there had been a lot of correspondence on the matter. He said the question of if this is an issue for the City or County Council is yet to be resolved. If such a small matter can’t be solved without bickering and buck-passing between the councils its a good argument for reducing the number of layers in local government; and ensuring decisions are made at an appropriately local level. A problem with deciding just how local to go was illustrated by what followed. The Liberal Democrats on the committee expressed their support for the owners of the three properties on the lane to agree what ought be done, saying they would then support the consensus. The member of the public, a Mr Youngblut (Youngblood?), however argued that a decision ought be taken by the area committee in the interests of the wider community. I think that too often in Cambridge the Liberal Democrats follow their mantra of localism too far, and allow residents in particular streets, or worse undemocratic residents associations, to have the final say on decisions. I think decisions ought be made by those who have been elected and are accountable to the electorate.
One of the points of contention was interpretation of a 1983 traffic order. The member of the public said that it was written in very plain English; however his interpretation of it and Cllr Knightley’s were different. The disputed point is if it allows access to off street parking, or access to parking [on the street]. One point of agreement between the two was that the 1983 order needs amending in light of new building adjoining the lane. The only options for action which were mentioned were double yellow lines, and introducing a resident’s parking bay.
I think it is very important that the law, the rules people are expected to follow, are reasonably accessible. In this case that means proper signage and road markings indicating what is allowed and what is not (in particular I think it is an inditement of poor signage that the councils have to publish a map to indicate where cycling is and is not allowed in the city centre).
I think it also not reasonable that the traffic regulation orders themselves are so hard to access. Even “advertisements” of proposed traffic regulations are posted only in local papers and not in a searchable, accessible form on the relevant council’s website. Local resident Ben Harris has been valiantly creating a collection of Cambridge Traffic Regulation Orders, though the County Council have recently described his requests for information as manifestly unreasonable, this has not deterred him from somehow scanning information held at the County Council’s offices and making it available online.
None of the County Councillors present made any comment at all either on the specific issue of Whymans Lane, or on the broader issues raised by the discussion.