A shop owner has been forced to use a horse and cart for his deliveries due to council-enforced bus gate restrictions.
John Ball, owner of Cut Price Carpets in Cambridge, has been using his two-year-old horse Sybil to transport his carpets to customers over the popular Mill Road Bridge.
A controversial Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) – approved last October – was introduced on the bridge in March, banning nearly all motor vehicles from using the bridge and leading to the installment of a bus gate.
Any owner of an unregistered vehicle found to be crossing the bridge is slapped with a £70 fine, enforced by ANPR cameras, with more than 4,600 fines issued in its first seven weeks.
Mr Ball described the new restriction of the city-centre bridge, which has divided locals and caused furious debate, as ‘devastating’ for his business.
Cambridgeshire County Council insists the restriction had been introduced to provide a ‘more enjoyable, safer place to visit’.
The shopkeeper, who discovered the loophole of using the horse and cart to transport deliveries to the other side of the bridge, remarked: ‘they can’t fine me’.
He added: ‘I’ve been here for 29 years for a reason, because we’re good at what we do and we’re reasonable – we look after people.
John Ball, owner of Cut Price Carpets in Cambridge , has been forced to use his two-year-old horse Sybil to transport his carpets to customers over the popular Mill Road Bridge A controversial Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) was introduced on the bridge in March, banning nearly all motor vehicles from using the bridge and leading to the installment of a bus gate
Any owner of an unregistered vehicle found to be crossing the bridge is slapped with a £70 fine, enforced by ANPR cameras, with more than 4,600 fines issued in its first seven weeks
Mr Ball described the new restriction of the city-centre bridge, which has divided locals and caused furious debate, as ‘devastating’ for his carpet business. However, Cambridgeshire County Council previously said that the restriction had been introduced to provide a ‘more enjoyable, safer place to visit’
‘We’ve been in the same shop, serving the local community. I’d just love for them to open the bridge back up because it’s destroying us little independent businesses.’
Mr Ball also revealed that the new restriction on what he described as a ‘main arterial road’ was having detrimental impacts on other small independent businesses.
Adding that the now ‘dying road’ had simply become a ‘rat run’ for taxis, who are still permitted to cross the bridge, he said: ‘It’s just snowballing. The taxis are using it as a cut-through and they’re flying up and down there.
‘Mill Road is a main arterial road. It’s the main high street of Cambridge. But it’s just a dying road.
‘It’s just getting filled up with nothing but takeaways and food-orientated shops. Little independent businesses are very few and far between.’
The controversial TRO was approved last year by county councillors, closing the bridge to traffic except buses, pedestrians, cyclists, emergency services, taxis and Blue Badge holders’ registered vehicles.
It was imposed following consultations that found majority support for the changes, which are designed to improve the road for pedestrians and cyclists, assist the reliability of public transport and aid air quality.
Adding that the now ‘dying road’ had simply become a ‘rat run’ for taxis, who are still permitted to cross the bridge, Mr Ball said: ‘It’s just snowballing. The taxis are using it as a cut-through and they’re flying up and down there’
Some living nearby believed it would transform the bustling area, which is packed with shops, pubs and restaurants and make it more pleasant to visit, as well as cutting pollution from engines.
But opponents argued it increases pollution by creating more congestion in nearby streets, while business owners have warned of catastrophic consequences from collapsing footfall.
Protesters also claim a public consultation – in which 52.9 per cent of people supported the Traffic Regulation Order – was not carried out properly.
Anyone found to be driving illegally through the bus gate is at risk of being issued a Penalty Charge Notice of £70, discounted to £35 if paid within 21 days.
Since the introduction of the restriction, more than 100 fines per day have been issued by the council, a Freedom of Information request submitted by the Local Democracy Reporting Service uncovered earlier this month.
Last week, Mr Ball joined the Friends of the Mill Road Bridge 2 campaign group who took their case to the High Court, challenging the council’s traffic restriction order which started in March.
Their challenge of the TRO rested upon four grounds, including that the council had failed to ‘provide legally adequate reasons’.
The council’s lawyers argued the TRO had gone through a proper democratic process and therefore the bus gate was something for council members, not the High Court, to determine.
Last week, Mr Ball joined the Friends of the Mill Road Bridge 2 campaign group who took their case to the High Court, challenging the council’s traffic restriction order which started in March. Their challenge of the TRO rested upon four grounds, including that the council had failed to ‘provide legally adequate reasons’
Cambridgeshire County Council spent around £300,000 on a first attempt to impose the bus gate, including £72,000 on a legal challenge that it lost in court.
It then immediately relaunched the plan, which was passed by councillors in October last year – prompting the judicial review from Ms Rose on ground including a failure to take into account a petition conducted by Mill Road Traders’ Association.
But the council went ahead and installed the infrastructure for the bus gate without waiting for the outcome, with building costs coming to another £200,000.
Around 60 protesters spent several nights there in November, trying to disrupt work from taking place. In March, vandals damaged the ANPR cameras with paint.
Alex Beckett, chairman of the highways and transport committee at Cambridgeshire County Council, previously defended the restriction, stating: Mill Road is the centre of a community. We want it to be a more enjoyable, safer place to visit and to encourage more people to come into the area.
‘Reducing motorised through traffic and installing the bus gate will help achieve this.
‘What’s important is that we now move forward with developing plans for public realm improvements supporting local businesses and allowing Mill Road to thrive.’
The outcome of the High Court case is not expected for some weeks.
Cambridgeshire County Council was contacted for comment.
