Friends of St Matthew’s Piece say, “The building is completely out of scale with its surroundings and shows no respects for the local community”
A proposed building that would tower over a Cambridge park is far more intrusive than developers’ illustrations show, say campaigners.
It would dominate the entire area around St Matthew’s Piece and throw neighbouring houses into deep shadow, new 3D images demonstrate.
“These images are like a nightmare,” says Janet Wright, a supporter of Friends of St Matthew’s Piece. “You can see this monstrosity crouching on top of the existing building, overshadowing ordinary little houses and filling the view from the Piece.”
Architectural projections skilfully woven into a newly released video [above] reveal the proposed student housing block, more than 19 metres tall, looming over St Matthew’s Piece. Local campaigners have likened the building, intended to house more than 100 students, to a ‘spaceship’ or ‘monster’.
“The building is completely out of scale with its surroundings and shows no respects for the local community,” says a local resident who has contributed key architectural skills to the production of this dramatic video.
The video was made for Friends of St Matthew’s Piece by Mill Road TV. It marks the 122nd anniversary of the day the park was given to local residents “for ever”. Friends of St Matthew’s Piece celebrated the anniversary (23 June) with a socially distanced gathering, while calling on other local residents to join them in protecting the Piece.
Developers Federated Hermes have not yet put in a formal planning application, but have circulated their proposals to hundreds of local residents.
Press release from Friends of St Matthew’s Piece dated 6th July 2020
There is a limit to what research Mill Road Bridges can do. And a limit to the time which local traders can devote to letting us know. We are happy to post about anything they’re doing.
Perhaps the best way is if we can get readers’ feedback on their experiences of great service and innovative ways of trading from local businesses.
Maybe you’ve more-or-less abandoned the weekly run to the edge-of-town supermarket, in favour of friendly local shops. Perhaps you’ve delighted in the quality and range of foodstuffs in Mill Road’s shops. And have you made discoveries that you’d love to celebrate, and to share with the Mill Roaders?
Meanwhile, on Mill Road Bridge, I spoke to a retired gentleman, sunning himself on the Suzy Oakes commemorative bench, who told me, “I’ve been sitting here half-an-hour and counted 47 vehicles.”
This level of infringement is borne out by these vehicles, observed on Friday 26th June between 17:28 and 17:36. Some drivers may not have been aware and not have read the signage. But it is difficult to believe that the taxi driver was unaware of the closure, following the noisy demonstration on Wednesday 24th June.
We are waiting for an accident… Two accidents reported yesterday at Romsey side.
And these vehicles, observed on Sunday 28th June between 16:08 and 17:40.
Notice, again, the taxis, the two supermarket delivery vehicles (Asda and Sainsbury’s, the close-passing of cyclists and the congestion at the top of the bridge.Note also the cyclist on the pavement – avoiding the hazardous layout of the carriageway.
The situation is hazardous. It would appear that some drivers are aware that the ANPR enforcement cameras have not yet been installed. Others have failed to read the warning signs, or think rules don’t apply to them.Signage need to be clearer.
More explicit signage – No Entry except buses and cycles – is needed urgently. A rethink of the width and positioning of the pavement ‘build-out’ barriers needs to be undertaken, so that cyclists are not put at risk by those drivers who fail or decline to observe the signs.
You are welcome to post (polite) comments on bridge infractions and safety, on the layout of barriers, and on pavement below.
Blue badges belong to individuals, regardless of whether they are a car drivers or not. They can be used by friends and relatives when giving the blue badge holder a lift etc. So they aren’t tied to a car, but an individual, so not sure how easy access would be given…
I agree that this closure of the bridge to cars causes problems for people with disabilities.
My son has a Blue Badge. The poster who cited the arrangements at Cambridge Station for Blue Badge holders as being a workable arrangement probably hasn’t experienced the appalling bureaucracy and the threats from the Car Parking Company. My son doesn’t drive, and we don’t have a car. His support workers do.
The car parking Company makes you register the vehicle not the Blue Badge. This means that we can’t use the Disabled Bays, because of the appalling time-consuming process you have to go through every time there is a different vehicle being used to transport my son. And it seems, even when you have registered, the system issues you with a fine if you need to park at the station the day you have registered.
Last year we had 18 different support workers, most of whom used their cars to transport my son. You cannot register more than one car with a Blue Badge. This means every time there is a different vehicle you have to go online, take a picture of the badge, upload it to their website, fill in a detailed form. This takes me hours and help from several people. We aren’t all able to do this sort of thing. When my son needed a different car with a different driver, we had to go through this all over again.
What I didn’t realise was that we weren’t registering a second car, we were automatically deregistering the first one as well. The system didn’t tell me this. And you try phoning them up! Each time it was at least a 40-minute wait to get through and then you are given wrong information. The [people] from the parking company who set up this system fail to account for the fact the Badge belongs to the disabled person and not to any vehicle. They don’t care. They care nothing about disability issues.
The two railway companies involved at Cambridge station aren’t bothered either. The car parking company is acting as the agent of the company that runs the Station. The NCP should either have staff going round the car park checking the Blue Badge’s validity or, if they insist on scanning, they should scan the badge itself on entry or exit. Instead they rely on number plate recognition.
After I registered the second car, we then found that I needed to re-register the first one. I had an email saying this had been done and off the driver went with my son. But a few days later he then received a threatening letter from NCP imposing a heavy fine – nearly £100.
It took hours and hours of my time over several weeks to get them to cancel the fine. I asked for an apology but never received one. This system blatantly fails to provide for disabled people’s needs. And I, as the principal family carer, need this sort of problem like I need a hole in the head. So, the outcome is that now we never park at the station. I bet the same problem would apply if a Blue Badge exemption was brought in for crossing Mill Road.
Now we have to use taxis if we need to drive to the station the journey time and the cost has gone up because taxis can’t cross the bridge. Last summer when the bridge was shut, and Mill Road was chaos with the gas main, we hardly went into town at all because buses weren’t running, and taxi journeys were an expensive nightmare. Many drivers refused even to accept the fare when they heard where we lived. We are now back with the very expensive and unnecessarily lengthy taxi journeys. We are not getting on a bus at the moment for safety reasons.
Oh yes, and I think the street where we live will now become a rat run for vehicles needing to turn round before the bridge.
Reporters from BBC Look East (West edition) and ITV News Anglia were in attendance. Both featured the demonstration on their respective evening’s bulletins. Unfortunately BBC Look East (west edition) is not archived on iPlayer. The coverage on ITV News Anglia is archived.
This and the BBC report are solely on the demo, whereas Jeremy Sallis, on BBC Radio Cambridgeshire’s ‘Brunchtime live’ had a range of interviews and opinions. Click through to listen to the programme. (This link will work for as long as this programme is archived, approximately one month.) Drag the slider to 1hr 1min for the start of the reporting. Interviewees, included:
Katherine from Little Petra – in the news bulletin at 1hr 1min
Pamela Wesson from Fantasia – in the report feature at 1h 08min
An email from Sweet & Maurizio – following the above
Tom Holbrook from 5th Studio Architects – at 1hr 26min
Pamela (reprise clip) – in the news bulletin at 2hr 00min
Cambridgeshire County Councillor Linda Jones – following the above
‘Receiving funding for more than 90 schemes to improve cycling and walking transport links across the county is good news for Cambridgeshire. it will allow people to get out and about during the pandemic while enabling them to stay safe and maintain social distancing.
“Just to be clear – Mill Road bridge will not be shut to all vehicles – it will remain open to buses as well as cyclists and pedestrians. The measures we are putting in place – such as wider footpaths – will allow for more pedestrian space, which will increase accessibility and is essential for people to adhere to social distancing as lockdown is gradually eased and our towns, villages and cities start to open up again.
‘The money for the scheme is part of the governments emergency active travel fund: and must be used within eight weeks. As we are in the middle ofa pandemic, we are working on these projects quickly.
However, these measures are only temporary and people will have the opportunity to feedback to us.
“We welcome all feedback from those aﬁected by the changes. including shop owners, local residents. cyclists and those that worship on Mill Road. it’s important also to note that the changes are being made under an Experimental Traﬁic Regulation Order (ETRO). The use of an experimental order allows for the consultation to run alongside the implementation of the scheme and amendments can be made to the scheme during the life of the experiment.”
Cllr Ian Bates, Chairman of the Highways and Transport Committee at Cambridgeshire County Council
This post is nor open for comment. There is much more information on the associated post – Wider footways, barriers and bridge closure – and over 120 comments, in the comment section. You are welcome to add your (polite) comment, or reply to another commenter there. (It’s just housekeeping: it’s tidier if all the comments are in one place.
Today (23 June 2020) marks 122 years since St Matthew’s Piece was given to the people of Petersfield “for the recreation of the inhabitants for ever.
Now the tranquillity of the small park is under threat from developers who want to build a large block of student flats on the northern half of the original Piece.
The pandemic means Friends of St Matthew’s Piece, who oppose the development, can’t throw an anniversary party. But a small group will gather (safely) at 3pm on 23 June to mark the day with decorations and readings.
St Matthew’s Piece was opened in 1898 specifically to provide healthy public open space in a very crowded part of Cambridge. It is needed more than ever now.
With the latest news about the Covid Emergency Road Scheme, Mill Road and its special community spirit will be much in people’s minds. We don’t yet know if the Love Mill Road will go ahead in its usual form this year; the Mill Road Winter Fair Committee will make a decision by 1st September, the date when we would need to open the online stalls application process. However, in the meantime we are planning an inspiring new community project, which can take place even if the Fair can’t and which will be funded by a new charity, Love Mill Road.
Love Mill Road has grown from the Fair and from the legacy of the Suzy Oakes Trust. It has been established to provide a way to channel sponsorship and donations to local Mill Road community projects, including the non-commercial aspects of the Mill Road. As a charity, it can benefit from Gift Aid and will help to ensure the long-term sustainability and community focus of the Fair while also supporting community projects throughout the year, including (currently under discussion) a Repair Café at The Edge, support for Jimmys’ 25 year celebrations and a series of Mill Road Fringe events.
Mill Road Lanterns will be organised and led by the Mill Road Winter Fair Committee and funded by Love Mill Road.
Temporary cycling and walking measures are being put in place across Cambridgeshire during the Coronavirus crisis to help people get out and socially distance during this pandemic.
One of the first schemes is Mill Road, Cambridge, where from Wednesday, 24th June work started to widen footways using temporary barriers. Where footpaths have been widened, the road will be narrowed and there will only be sufficient carriageway width to allow one vehicle past at a time, so give-way features will be introduced at each section of widened footway.
Mill Road Bridge has been closed to all vehicles except buses and cyclists, the closure will be enforced by signs and automatic number plate recognition cameras.
Many of Cambridgeshire County Council’s schemes are being authorised under Experimental Traffic Regulation Orders (ETRO) which will be in place for 18 months.
The first six months of each ETRO will be a consultation period.
One rumour needs to be put to rest immediately. There is NO plan to make Mill Road a one-way road in whole or in part. This idea was mooted at one point, but it was removed at the request of Mill Road’s county councillors – Linda Jones (Petersfield) and Noel Kavanagh (Romsey).
If a road is currently a narrow two way street where motor vehicles need to slow down to pass each other, changing the road to a one way street will increase vehicle speeds. Vehicle drivers may also be tempted to drive faster because they do not expect any oncoming vehicles.
If motor vehicles speeds increase, this will reduce how safe the road is.
It appears to be a hang-over from last summer’s gas-main works along Mill Road (simultaneous with the bridge works) when there was a suggestion that to ease the gas-main works there should be one-way traffic along the Petersfield (city end) section of Mill Road. This was dropped as likely to create more problems than it solved.
The question was asked, within county highways, whether this would be a useful element for the Covid-related Experimental Traffic Regulation Order.
Mill Road’s ‘Community of Communities’) have the two local Cambridgeshire County Councillors – Councillor Linda Jones, Petersfield, and Councillor Noel Kavanagh, Romsey – to thank for ‘having our backs’ on this, both insisting that bus service provision must be at the heart of any scheme for Mill Road.
This report presents evidence that investment in better streets and places delivers quantifiable commercial returns. Businesses, residents, developers and visitors all benefit from investment in the public realm and walkability.
Promoting walking and cycling now underpins much national and local policy, with a strong evidence base showing the benefits for health, air quality and the wider environment. Active travel also complements efforts to revive high streets and create liveable, vibrant communities. Although walking and cycling infrastructure requires less comparative investment, it has generally been treated as the ‘poor relation’ of infrastructure spending and is still often an afterthought in urban planning. At a time when public resources are scarce, improvements to streets should be attractive to governments seeking high returns from public spending.
The business and commercial case for investing in walkability remains a challenging area within which to make robust claims about commercial returns. This is largely due to the absence of evaluations at the post-build or post-intervention stage. Five years on from the publication of The Pedestrian Pound hard, quantitative assessments remain very rare.
Does investment in the public realm and walkability create additional commercial benefits? There is a growing body of qualitative and case study evidence which, when evaluated alongside the available quantitative data, shows public realm investments deliver significant, cost-effective benefits to consumers and businesses.
The plans include the closure of Mill Road Bridge to private motor vehicles, a step that many residents have requested for some time. Currently, it is impossible to socially distance while walking or cycling down the road, especially once on the bridge, yet doing so is crucial to containing the coronavirus pandemic. Lockdown cannot be eased safely without taking extra measures such as this.
The positioning of some barriers isn’t well-thought-out…
This has prompted us to publish a separate post – How is it working so far… – looking at barrier positioning, pavement safety and the problems on Mill Road Bridge. It is ironic that measures to increase space for pedestrians, leads to pavements being blocked by vehicles. This is, as another trader pointed out to us, “An accident waiting to happen.”
It is noteworthy, though, that Arjuna have long been pulling their vehicles onto the pavemen for loading/unloading. They have said that it “helps the traffic” Unfortunately it prioritise drivers of motor vehicles over pedestrians, including their own customers.
Blue badges belong to individuals, regardless of whether they are a car drivers or not. They can be used by friends and relatives when giving the blue badge holder a lift etc. So they aren’t tied to a car, but an individual, so not sure how easy access would be given…
There is also a form to ‘send a supportive message to the County Council’.
Need for signage to help traders…
Will Mill Road have clear signage at both ends? It is essential that Cambridgeshire County Council install something appropriate, like this…
We contacted our local Cambridgeshire County Councillors.
When the Mill Road Bridge was closed as a result of GoviaThameslink’s work, last summer, there was, at least initially, inadequate signage to inform vehicle drivers and others that all of Mill Road’s businesses were open, but the bridge was closed.
Members and officers worked hard to get GTR to comply, for which thanks is due.
With the Covid-related works about to commence, trust there will be no issues with signage this time, as it will be entirely under the Highway Authority’s remit. I attach a suggested sign, though I’ve no doubt that the county team, in consultation with Mill Road’s Traders, will be able to come up with an improved version.
Mill Road Bridges
I agree about the need for signage and I specifically raised the issue of the inadequacy of last summer’s Signage with Cambridgeshire County Council. They stated that under the current measures they can create specific signage and are not bound by the DfT handbook. Keep a watch on this and feedback concerns.
Slogans have been sprayed on the carriageway. Whilst the slogans are a little cryptic, they would appear to express opposition to the plan to limit the bridge to cyclists, pedestrians and buses.
And, this being Mill Road there are a variety of viewpoints…
There is no doubt that this graffitist is in favour of restricting traffic over the bridge. As is this one, on the Romsey side…
Cambridge Independent have a report on the on-road graffiti – Mill Road spray painted with protest messages – though Alex Spencer seems to have missed the hand-drawn and hand-written graffiti in support of the Cambridgeshire County Council plans. We have contacted Alex to let him know. (And, no, neither the on-road nor the on-sign graffiti were from our organisation, nor the website manager in a personal capacity.)
Cambridge’s MP Daniel Zeichner is reported as calling the scheme “ill thought-out” and condemning the county council for failing to consult the public beforehand.
I know that the county council are keen to spend the money they have been given by government but a rush-job is not going to give us the best outcome.
We need a scheme that works for everyone and which respects the unique character of Mill Road. Mill Road will not be the same if traders are pushed out of the city and we lose independent shops that have been hit with one crisis after another.
Daniel Zeichner MP quoted by Alex Spencer, Cambridge Independent
The money is part of the government’s ‘emergency active travel fund’, and must be used within eight weeks. As we are in the middle of a pandemic, we are working on these projects quickly and closely with the city and district councils. However, these measures are only temporary and people will have the opportunity to feedback to us. We will listen to all feedback, including that from shop owners, local residents, cyclists and those that worship on Mill Road.
Cllr Ian Bates, Chairman of the Highways and Transport Committee at Cambridgeshire County Council, quoted by Alex Spencer, Cambridge Independent
There has been much comment, recently, in national news media, of central government decisions made ‘on the hoof’ and drafted ‘on the back of a fag-packet’.
To be fair, safeguarding measures which would not be delivered until (say) December after prolonged consultation would be about as much use as a chocolate teapot. (Other metaphors are available, if you area on a low-carb, low sugar diet.)
It is also worth noting that local councils (of whatever political complexion) frequently complain of initiative-itis from central government (of whatever political complexion) of inadequate funding and inadequate revenue-raising powers.
Whilst the proposals to allow more pedestrian space are welcome, there appears to have been no mention of protecting pedestrian space in Mill Road, East Road, nor elsewhere.
Why does no Experimental Traffic Regulation Order prohibiting pavement parking appear to be under consideration?
Pavement parking is a menace in ‘normal’ times – particularly, but not exclusively, to people with disabilities, physical, visual, auditory or hidden, to young children, and it is wrecking Mill Road’s pavements, which were not designed to carry vehicular traffic. There is, indeed, aggressive driving onto the footway.
An Experimental Traffic Regulation Order prohibiting pavement parking would help pedestrians keep their distance during this pandemic. It would also give lasting benefit to residents and traders.
And Cambridgeshire County Council have had powers to deal with this for over nine years.
Councils with civil parking enforcement powers (including Cambridgeshire County Council) were given ‘special authorisation’ in February 2011 by the (then) Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, Norman Baker, to prohibit parking on footways and verges, wherever they considered it necessary. This would be through a traffic regulation order (TRO, or ETRO).
There would be no ongoing cost to council tax payers.
Enforcement would be self-financing as penalty charge revenue would help to pay the salaries of the existing enforcement officers.
Currently, enforcement officers need to wait to investigate the reasons why a vehicle is waiting (eg lawful loading/unloading or unlawful ‘Just popping into the shop’ waiting). Drivers know that they can come out our the shop or take-away say, “Sorry, I’m just going,” and get away with this misuse of pavements, time and time again.
At the present time, outside of Greater London, parking on the footway is not unlawful. But driving on the pavement is. Spotted the obvious logical flaw?
However, where a pavement parking prohibition is in place, it is breached the instant a vehicle mounts the footway, for whatever reason. Enforcement officers could issue an immediate Penalty Charge Notice.
It is my belief that Cambridgeshire County Council should introduce an Experimental Traffic Regulation Order prohibiting pavement parking along the length of Mill Road, where the footways are subjected to such abuse, and on East Road (which is particularly prevalent around the burger outlet).
There may well be other areas around Cambridge where similar ETROs would be of benefit.
Peterborough, which is a Unitary Authority brought in a city-wide Traffic Regulation Order prohibiting pavement parking in 2017. Although this is a Conservative-led authority, it was proposed by Labour councillors and gained multi-party support. The clever thing they did was to bring in a overarching Traffic Regulation Order and leave implementation to be a matter for discussion where local communities, or the emergency services requested it, or it was otherwise seen as essential.
A Unitary Authority means that Peterborough City Council have all of the responsibilities which, in Cambridge are split between Cambridge City Council and Cambridgeshire County Council.
Peterborough City Councillor Richard Ferris, Labour member for Park ward, said:
“It’s unusual when you get cross-party support like we did at the meeting. It’s a massive issue in Park ward. It’s up there as one of the top half-a-dozen issues people contact me on.”
Perhaps Cambridgeshire County Council are waiting for central government to introduce a national ban throughout England (save for permitted exceptions, such as in various Romsey side-streets). Despite having their own powers.
The House of Commons Transport Select Committee discussed this in September 2019. The Chair at that time, Lilian Greenwood MP, said:
“Pavement parking has a huge impact on people’s lives and their ability get around their communities. […] evidence to our inquiry revealed the impact on those with visual and mobility impairments and people with children.
“We are deeply concerned that the Government has failed to act on this issue, despite long-standing promises to do so. This is a thorny problem that may be difficult to resolve to the satisfaction of all, but the Government’s inaction has left communities blighted by unsightly and obstructive pavement parking and individuals afraid or unable to leave their homes or safely navigate the streets.”
The Chair of the Transport Committee, Huw Merriman MP, said:
“I am pleased the Government has taken on board the previous Committee’s concerns about the very real difficulties presented by pavement parking and our proposed solutions. […]
“However, we have to now deliver this change. The Government promised to look into the issue in 2015 but consultations, roundtable events and internal reviews failed to lead to any actions to improve the experience of the public. This Government has signalled an intent to finally deliver change. We now need a detailed timeframe from the Department for Transport to ensure this happens.
“In publishing today’s Response, we are putting the Government on notice that we will be monitoring progress carefully. We look forward to reviewing progress on each of the pledges and our Committee has committed to a further evidence session in 12 months’ time to drive real change.”
But Cambridgeshire County Council has had powers to prohibit this menace since February 2011. What are we waiting for?
Do you have views about the measures which Cambridgeshire County Council are taking? Would you like to walk along a vehicle-free pavement? Whatever your view, as long as it is expressed politely, you can add your comments below.