Appreciate the post and it's interesting to understand the background.
Can I highlight 2 particular cases.
Clifton Road, near 50 Clifton road. Someone has logged 17671 3 weeks ago. It's flooded and now someone has left a traffic cone in it so drivers don't even think about driving over it.
Shelford road, Trumpington end has had multiple reports for dozens of potholes for months and drivers are now swerving to avoid them all.
Thank you for the transparency with your Substacks. I don’t envy your position, given the limited financial room local government has due to spending on statutory requirements and a large road network. With that said, I would like to ask a few hard questions, and raise a few specific issues.
Qs:
1. Do you know if the rate of deterioration of the highways exceeds the rate at which they are repaired? Can you quantify this, as it seems the most important indicator of successful maintenance program? If the deterioration rate exceeds the maintenance rate, you are losing the battle. Equal is treading water. My feeling is, despite your teams’ best efforts, that the rate of deterioration exceeds the repair rate, driving people’s frustration as they see the highways getting progressively worse.
2. Have you looked at the rate of injuries at A&E due to cyclists being injured from hitting potholes – has it increased recently? Some are very dangerous when it is dark and filled with water. At what point does it become a public health issue? (A disease causing a cluster of broken bones would merit an outbreak investigation, why not potholes?)
Issues:
1. Have you travelled down Cambridge road/Tunwells lane/ London road through Great Shelford and Stapleford recently? It is by FAR the worst road condition I have ever seen. There is a resurfacing scheduled for only a small part of it (Tunwells lane), but that is far too short to cover the craters along this road. Please do have a look yourself, because it really is terrible – could you look at extending the resurfacing works while they are there, please.
2. Many of the road signpost in South Cambs have rusted through completely and have collapsed or are about to. This suggests they do not comply to the corrosion resistance standard as laid out in BS EN 12899-1, and the procurement was likely incorrect? They should surely be galvanised steel with root protection and this wouldn’t be a problem? Is there a plan to replace these collapsing signposts? Does your team know the extent of the problem?
Why is the carriageway threshold higher than cycleways given us cyclists are often on carriageways and unable to avoid potholes due to traffic?
Also I've seen and reported plenty and yet nothing gets done...even ones that have been marked as urgent. Not to mention seen plenty where the spray paint has been done and months later, the spray paint has been washed away (or absorbed into the pothole) and still no fix... How are you getting better at chasing these?
Thanks for this interesting blog, but, sadly, it just doesn't seem to happen around Fen Road CB4. I get the impression that you are still losing the battle. Maybe it's partly because vehicles are getting heavier. (Is there a policy to ensure that taxation and parking charges are based on vehicle size and weight? There should be.)
I can't see anything that says how long it should take to *investigate* to reports, and around here they just don't seem to get investigated if they relate to potholes or verges, much less acted on in the timeframes you outline. We are a sea of orange.
eg Why has 17183 been logged (and maybe fixed) when the long standing and appalling one at 16880 hasn't? Does the inspection schedule mean that reports are not actioned until they have been inspected according to the schedule? However dangerous? What does it take to get a dangerous pothole acted on urgently if it's not on a main road?
And that's without looking at the response to verge comments which take 2-3 months to acknowledge and are then not followed up eg 00509491 (old system)
3381 from last August, early on the new reporting tool (red, so logged but not even being investigated) and many on the previous one were never responded to and are now erased.
Interestingly, the only green ones that I can see in the area relate to flooding which is presumably dealt with by someone different.
It's not clear from your description whether or how the risk assessment takes account of the road/footway classification. Where can we see the classification defined and shown (eg FW1–FW3) for our area? ... I'm not convinced that those scheduled inspections take place.
It all looks great on paper, but let's take a concrete example: there's a few huge potholes on Coldham's Lane (10-20 m away from the Cromwell Road traffic lights). These have been reported as early as the 2nd of December 2025, but works ordered only on the 9th of January. We're now on the 20th of January and still no sign of any repairs.
So a couple of problems:
- It looks like there's a significant gap between reporting and getting works ordered.
- There's no markings around these potholes, so I have no idea whether they're a Category 1a or 1b - perhaps the Report It map could show this?
- There are no traffic signs to warn drivers of these potholes - they are very deep
Sorry for the delay in getting back to you, I've been digging into this. Potholes there were ordered for repair (as cat1a) but then weren't delivered in the right timeframe and it wasn't caught. Very frustrating. They should be filled tonight though between 9pm-midnight.
Thank you for letting me know about them, we need to keep holding our contractors to account and people like you letting us know really helps with that.
On the subject of prevention being better than cure, does any part of the road maintenance strategy involve reducing traffic volumes or speeds? Besides the safety and environmental benefits, I can imagine that it would have maintenance savings.
For example, increasing that cycleways number above 41km, or introducing more 20mph zones.
No but it’s an interesting question! One of the frustrating things about cycle ways is that they don’t factor in the DfT maintenance funding formula. We do obviously have an active travel strategy focused on enabling more active travel but that’s usually geared on health, congestion and environmental grounds, not maintenance.
Thanks Alex - interesting. Has CCC considered 24/7 emergency crew provision for the really dangerous potholes - perhaps funded by the savings on compensation claims?
Hi Sebastian, yes we now always have a highways officer available for on call issues. They're usually able to do a temporary fix using an instant pothole repair kit.
Thanks for sharing Alex. You must have done something bad in a previous life to deserve this job! Have you looked at improved filler material as well as different machines. The work at Kings College & Swansea looks interesting https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/self-healing-potholes-pave-the-way-for-more-sustainable-roads
Hi Alex,
Appreciate the post and it's interesting to understand the background.
Can I highlight 2 particular cases.
Clifton Road, near 50 Clifton road. Someone has logged 17671 3 weeks ago. It's flooded and now someone has left a traffic cone in it so drivers don't even think about driving over it.
Shelford road, Trumpington end has had multiple reports for dozens of potholes for months and drivers are now swerving to avoid them all.
Dear Alex,
Thank you for the transparency with your Substacks. I don’t envy your position, given the limited financial room local government has due to spending on statutory requirements and a large road network. With that said, I would like to ask a few hard questions, and raise a few specific issues.
Qs:
1. Do you know if the rate of deterioration of the highways exceeds the rate at which they are repaired? Can you quantify this, as it seems the most important indicator of successful maintenance program? If the deterioration rate exceeds the maintenance rate, you are losing the battle. Equal is treading water. My feeling is, despite your teams’ best efforts, that the rate of deterioration exceeds the repair rate, driving people’s frustration as they see the highways getting progressively worse.
2. Have you looked at the rate of injuries at A&E due to cyclists being injured from hitting potholes – has it increased recently? Some are very dangerous when it is dark and filled with water. At what point does it become a public health issue? (A disease causing a cluster of broken bones would merit an outbreak investigation, why not potholes?)
Issues:
1. Have you travelled down Cambridge road/Tunwells lane/ London road through Great Shelford and Stapleford recently? It is by FAR the worst road condition I have ever seen. There is a resurfacing scheduled for only a small part of it (Tunwells lane), but that is far too short to cover the craters along this road. Please do have a look yourself, because it really is terrible – could you look at extending the resurfacing works while they are there, please.
2. Many of the road signpost in South Cambs have rusted through completely and have collapsed or are about to. This suggests they do not comply to the corrosion resistance standard as laid out in BS EN 12899-1, and the procurement was likely incorrect? They should surely be galvanised steel with root protection and this wouldn’t be a problem? Is there a plan to replace these collapsing signposts? Does your team know the extent of the problem?
Why is the carriageway threshold higher than cycleways given us cyclists are often on carriageways and unable to avoid potholes due to traffic?
Also I've seen and reported plenty and yet nothing gets done...even ones that have been marked as urgent. Not to mention seen plenty where the spray paint has been done and months later, the spray paint has been washed away (or absorbed into the pothole) and still no fix... How are you getting better at chasing these?
Thanks for this interesting blog, but, sadly, it just doesn't seem to happen around Fen Road CB4. I get the impression that you are still losing the battle. Maybe it's partly because vehicles are getting heavier. (Is there a policy to ensure that taxation and parking charges are based on vehicle size and weight? There should be.)
I can't see anything that says how long it should take to *investigate* to reports, and around here they just don't seem to get investigated if they relate to potholes or verges, much less acted on in the timeframes you outline. We are a sea of orange.
eg Why has 17183 been logged (and maybe fixed) when the long standing and appalling one at 16880 hasn't? Does the inspection schedule mean that reports are not actioned until they have been inspected according to the schedule? However dangerous? What does it take to get a dangerous pothole acted on urgently if it's not on a main road?
And that's without looking at the response to verge comments which take 2-3 months to acknowledge and are then not followed up eg 00509491 (old system)
3381 from last August, early on the new reporting tool (red, so logged but not even being investigated) and many on the previous one were never responded to and are now erased.
Interestingly, the only green ones that I can see in the area relate to flooding which is presumably dealt with by someone different.
It's not clear from your description whether or how the risk assessment takes account of the road/footway classification. Where can we see the classification defined and shown (eg FW1–FW3) for our area? ... I'm not convinced that those scheduled inspections take place.
It all looks great on paper, but let's take a concrete example: there's a few huge potholes on Coldham's Lane (10-20 m away from the Cromwell Road traffic lights). These have been reported as early as the 2nd of December 2025, but works ordered only on the 9th of January. We're now on the 20th of January and still no sign of any repairs.
So a couple of problems:
- It looks like there's a significant gap between reporting and getting works ordered.
- There's no markings around these potholes, so I have no idea whether they're a Category 1a or 1b - perhaps the Report It map could show this?
- There are no traffic signs to warn drivers of these potholes - they are very deep
Hi Rares,
Sorry for the delay in getting back to you, I've been digging into this. Potholes there were ordered for repair (as cat1a) but then weren't delivered in the right timeframe and it wasn't caught. Very frustrating. They should be filled tonight though between 9pm-midnight.
Thank you for letting me know about them, we need to keep holding our contractors to account and people like you letting us know really helps with that.
On the subject of prevention being better than cure, does any part of the road maintenance strategy involve reducing traffic volumes or speeds? Besides the safety and environmental benefits, I can imagine that it would have maintenance savings.
For example, increasing that cycleways number above 41km, or introducing more 20mph zones.
No but it’s an interesting question! One of the frustrating things about cycle ways is that they don’t factor in the DfT maintenance funding formula. We do obviously have an active travel strategy focused on enabling more active travel but that’s usually geared on health, congestion and environmental grounds, not maintenance.
Thanks Alex - interesting. Has CCC considered 24/7 emergency crew provision for the really dangerous potholes - perhaps funded by the savings on compensation claims?
Hi Sebastian, yes we now always have a highways officer available for on call issues. They're usually able to do a temporary fix using an instant pothole repair kit.