Find below some extracted comments from the 16 June Highways and Transport Committee meeting. These can be taken out of context so check out the video yourself.
You can find Cllr Hunt’s main contribution starting 39 minutes into the video. He asserted that the BP roundabout change would help local commuting for new, high value jobs on the Lancaster Way Estate. We have absolutely no problem making this commute easier. In a response to a later question, Cllr Hunt observed that the ‘Southern Bypass’ had resulted in an increased volume of motor traffic -and not a decrease in congestion at the BP roundabout. His words were ‘We are a victim of our success’. The officer noted that there are currently 26,000 movements on the A142 and that these are mainly long-distance journeys.
The outcome of this roundabout change will be an increase in long-distance traffic, not a decrease congestion. Cllr’s Hunts assumption that congestion will be lower and carbon dioxide emissions lower is wrong.
Additionally, Cllr Hunt pointed out that there has been extensive investment on the cycleway between Ely and Sutton. He acknowledged that this route eventually will need improvement, mentioning a bridge over the A10 that would cost £2M. But ‘We should share out the fishes and the bread’ by which we think he means that he prioritises spending a little bit of money on cycleways in (not necessarily to) other parts of the District rather than allowing use of the extensively invested cycleway that we have already built west of the A10 on the Ely to Sutton route.
You can find Cllr Baileys main contribution 39 minutes into the video.
In summary, the Committee approved the changes to the BP roundabout without amendment. There were laudable comments all around about respecting active travel at some undetermined time in the future. The County apparently expects the A10 dualling project team to correct the mess the Council made today. The Chair’s metaphor is that the County Council has hit the tennis ball into the Combined Authority’s court.