IT seems that after the council has failed to move their offices to Angel Drove, they are now planning a car park there. This is presumably for the benefit of commuters. This is quite wrong. If the council think such a car park is needed, they should leas
IT seems that after the council has failed to move their offices to Angel Drove, they are now planning a car park there. This is presumably for the benefit of commuters. This is quite wrong. If the council think such a car park is needed, they should lease the land to NCP or some other firm. Then, not only would there be no cost for Council Tax payers, there would be income. If a firm like NCP decides such a car park is not economically viable, why should Council Tax payers as a whole subsidise a car park for commuters? Most of us never use the station car park, and many of us are on low incomes, including pensioners. The answer to the problem of getting people to the station is a frequent reliable shuttle bus service.
It is welcome to read that the council is to employ people to patrol the streets to keep vehicles in order. But why was the situation in the centre of Ely allowed to develop? I see that Council Tax payers as a whole are to pay for ensuring that a minority of drivers keep to the regulations.
V PERRY by email.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here