Traders Threaten legal Action over Bridge Restrictions

Mill Road Traders’ Association is considering legal action over the Mill Road bridge traffic restrictions, introducing a ‘low traffic neighbourhood’ on the basis that the scheme is not truly ‘experimental’.

The allegation of illegality

In a press release, dated 12 December 2020, Mill Road Traders’ Association claim that:

The county council had no lawful authority to implement the Mill Road closure through an experimental traffic regulation order because the order violates section 9(1) of the Road Traffic Regulations Act 1984, which requires that an experimental order may only be made for a valid experimental purpose.

Shapour Meftah, Cantab Millennium, Chairman Mill Road Traders’ Association

Unfortunately, the Traders’ Association’s own website has not been updated with details of their latest action, however a PDF of the Mill Road Traders’ Association press release can be read/downloaded here. A useful summary was published in the Cambridge Independent.

Traders claim that the order to close Mill Road bridge to to all traffic except cycles and buses was “illegal” – and they have demanded that Cambridgeshire County Council reopens it immediately.

Alex Spencer, Cambridge Independent, 14 December 2020 (Click to view full article)

Interviews on BBC Radio Cambridgeshire

On Tuesday 15 December 2020, traders Abdul Arain (al:Amin), Sheila Gresham (Cambridge Antiques Centre) and Patty (Gwydir Street Hive) were interviewed by BBC Radio Cambridgeshire journalist Sarah Varey. Breakfast show presenter Andy Lake asked City Councillor Dave Baigent (Romsey, Labour) for a response.

Click below to hear the clip.

We noted that Abdul Arain, felt threatened by lorries and buses when cycling. We wondered about this and asked County Councillor Linda Jones, who responded:

We have always had lorry traffic in the Petersfield stretch of Mill Rd and any new development will generate a temporary increase. Lorry drivers can sometimes  be inconsiderate but I have had few complaints – and none about buses at all. 

County Councillor Linda Jones (Petersfield, Labour)

The legislation & Statutory Guidance

Readers can study the relevant sections of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 here. See also the Statutory Guidance from the DfT.

The coronavirus (COVID-19) crisis has had a terrible impact on the lives and health of many UK citizens, as well as severe economic consequences. But it also resulted in cleaner air and quieter streets, transforming the environment in many of our towns and cities.

And millions of people have discovered, or rediscovered, cycling and walking. In some places, the initial lockdown period saw a 70% rise in the number of people on bikes – for exercise, or for safe, socially distanced travel.

We need people to carry on cycling, and to be joined by millions more , particularly while public transport capacity is still reduced.

And millions of people have discovered, or rediscovered, cycling and walking. In some places, the initial lockdown period saw a 70% rise in the number of people on bikes – for exercise, or for safe, socially distanced travel.

We need people to carry on cycling, and to be joined by millions more , particularly while public transport capacity is still reduced…

The government therefore expects local authorities to make significant changes to their road layouts to give more space to cyclists and pedestrians. Such changes will help embed altered behaviours and demonstrate the positive effects of active travel…

Grant Shapps, Secretary of State for Transport, foreword to the to the Statutory Guidance from the DfT.

Emergency legislation came into force on 23 May 2020 to temporarily amend:
The Road Traffic (Temporary Restrictions) Procedure Regulations 1992
The Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996
The Secretary of State’s Traffic Order (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1990

The amendments introduce an emergency procedure for the making of temporary traffic orders. The main change is to the means of advertising the order, which can be via digital means. Once the order has been made, a second notice still needs to be published for information within 14 days. This is via a newspaper, where these are available, or via digital means if it is not reasonably practicable to publish in a newspaper.

Statutory Guidance from the DfT.

Further information on TROs, TTROs, ATTROs and ETROs can be studied in BRIEFING PAPER, Number CBP 6013, 11 June 2020, Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) from the House of Commons Library.

Cambridgeshire County Council’s scheme documentation

Cambridgeshire County Council issued a press release in June 2020 stating:

The Government has given authorities funding through the Combined Authority, to deliver pop-up cycle lanes, wider pavements, safer junctions and bus-only corridors. The Council has worked closely with city and district councils to prepare a list of schemes to get more people walking and cycling…

Cambridgeshire County Council – Cycling and walking support in midst of pandemic (click to read the full press release)

The official documentation for the Mill Road ETRO can be read/downloaded here:

The PDF of the full range of proposals discussed at the council’s Highways and Transport committee meeting on 16th June 2020 can be read/downloaded here.

Legal action & similar cases

Speaking yesterday, Tuesday 15 December 2020, Piero d’Angelico claimed that the Mill Road Traders’ Association are advised by a barrister that ‘a judge had overturned’ a similar experimental scheme in London. It was unclear from the conversation which scheme had been ‘overturned’, nor the precise action which the Mill Road Traders’ Association planned. We assume that this would be a High Court application for judicial review. We have found a number of such applications, which we list below.


The publication of this post by Mill Road Bridges should not be considered an endorsement of the views of Mill Road Traders’ Association. Neither should this statement be read as one of opposition to their views. Our mission is to facilitate information and debates about all matters affecting Cambridge’s Mill Road. This post is open for (polite) comments.

Petitions and consultations

New petition from Mill Road Traders’ Association

Mill Road Traders’ Association have launched a petition against the restrictions on Mill Road bridge.

Piero d’Angelico writes:

For the last few days we watched more and more people concerned about the future of Mill Road bridge, our petition clearly its an evident fact that many locals wants the bridge reopened, for us is very important to know what residents and traders  want. Can you please post this link on your website  we will appreciate it so much.

Piero d’Angelico, Ambassador of Mill Road Traders’ Association
Click the image to visit the petition

Cambridgeshire County Council are using an Experimental Traffic Regulation Order to impose the closing of Mill Road Bridge except for buses and cyclists for up to 18 months. They are using funding provided by the Govt under the pretence of COVID and social distancing needs. Traders will be affected.

This has been done with NO consultation at all from local/county councillors. Local traders have suffered significantly over the last year with a previous bridge closure and with COVID-19, this will now have a significant impact causing many shops to close. The traders are more than happy to work with the council to find the right measures as opposed to implement now consult later. Please sign this petition to help businesses ‘stay open’ whilst a proper dialogue can be had about ‘staying safe’.

Mill Road Traders’ Association

Mill Road Bridges Web-Editor adds…

This is the latest in a number of petitions, including:

The publication of this post by Mill Road Bridges should not be considered an endorsement of the views of the Mill Road Traders’ Association, James Youd, Ruth Greene, or Rashel Mohammed, nor of the objections to the Mill Road traffic-reduction measures and associated restrictions on the railway bridge. Neither should this statement be read as one of opposition to their views.

You can participate in the Cambridgeshire County Council Mill Road Consultation, online, through clicking this link.

If you, or someone you know, would like a paper copy of the Cambridgeshire County Council consultation document telephone 0345 0455212 to have paper copies posted to you.

Survey participants often complain that the questions asked do not enable them to fully express their views. If you feel that way, you could set your views out clearly in an email to policyandregulation@cambridgeshire.gov.uk.

Once again, for those without an internet connection or email account, you can communicate in the traditional way, by writing to:
Policy and Regulation Team
Highways Depot
Stanton Way
HUNTINGDON
PE29 6PY

Mark your letter “Mill Road railway bridge ETRO consultation.”


Readers may also be interested in these items:

Passing traffic…

Local Tweeters have reminded the community of what might have been, for the Mill Road area and Cambridge, more generally.

Mill Road Lives

By Dave Baigent, City Councillor for Romsey

The last few days has seen more devastating news for people in the retail sector. More shops are closing in the city centre and this means hundreds, if not thousands of people are losing their jobs. Debenhams is perhaps our biggest casualty so far and these closures point to how much the lack of footfall in the city impacts on the retail market as people work from home. As Covid-19 ends, it is unlikely that working from home will stop. More likely that people will commute some days and work from home on others. The world has changed and this provides a huge opportunity for the traders locally.

There are around 20,000 residents in Romsey, Petersfield and Coleridge who live within a short distance of their local shops. There are over 54 traders on Mill Road who sell food to eat on their premises. As the risk from Covid-19 recedes the opportunity exists for them to attract people who work from home to venture out for a break. The provision shops on our road can also reach out to capture this new market. So too can the hairdressers. At the same time other shops can benefit from this passing trade.

From my position on the Greater Cambridge Partnership, I am able to confirm that Mill Road will soon be a destination highlighted for visitors who arrive at the station: a through route on foot to the city. Traders can react to this and encourage these visitors; it may even be possible to make Mill Road a destination in its own right for visitors to our city. This could also add to the growing night time economy on our road.

Three new shops have opened in as many weeks on Mill Road. Romsey now has a flower shop that deliver flowers by cycle. A baker that sells ‘home-made’ bread and cakes. And yesterday an organic supermarket for food and drinks opened. These are entirely new ventures, and these new traders can obviously see a future in opening here.

Harvest organic supermarket, Romsey Broadway, Mill Road [Photo: Dave Baigent]

There has always been a churn in the shops on Mill Road and, in some ways, this is part of its character as Mill Road adapted to local need. Change, too, is offered by the restrictions on the bridge. Pollution has fallen through the floor, the noise has reduced and it is now so safe that you see parents with their young children cycling over the bridge. Some cafés have extended their services by providing some tables on their shopfront.

This month you have the opportunity to comment on the restriction on the bridge in the County Council’s consultation. A positive outcome will result in the restriction being extended. Then local groups and councillors will be able to negotiate further improvements. At the top of my list it to find a way to support blue badge holders and a close second is to get the plastic bollards taken away, pavements to be widened and for the greening of our road by the provision of raised flower beds similar to those we provided outside the Co-op.

Click the image to read the blogpost referred to, below.

To help people consider the advantages offered by continued ‘restriction’, Over Mill Road Bridge [A separate site with no connection to Mill Road Bridges _Ed] has provided a list of some of the pluses and some comment that you may wish to use if you have yet to fill in the consultation. Why not look at them, here, and see if there are any ideas that you may wish to use?

Take care as Covid-19 is likely to remain a real threat for some time. At the same think about how the world has now changed and how you may contribute to the way our community develops.

Thanks for reading this. If you have any questions then please email me at dave.baigent@councillor.online.


Mill Road Bridges Web-Editor adds…

You can participate in the Mill Road Consultation, online, through clicking this link.

If you, or someone you know, would like a paper copy of the Cambridgeshire County Council consultation document telephone 0345 0455212 to have paper copies posted to you.

Survey participants often complain that the questions asked do not enable them to fully express their views. If you feel that way, you could set your views out clearly in an email to policyandregulation@cambridgeshire.gov.uk.

Once again, for those without an internet connection or email account, you can communicate in the traditional way, by writing to:
Policy and Regulation Team
Highways Depot
Stanton Way
HUNTINGDON
PE29 6PY

Mark your letter “Mill Road railway bridge ETRO consultation.”


Readers may also be interested in these items:

Let Mill Road Live

By Francis, a Petersfield resident

All agree that traffic fumes are detrimental to the health and wellbeing of human beings. We residents of Mill Road have found that our health has been impacted by increasing levels of pollution in recent years but it has improved as the volume of traffic was reduced in lockdown. Many Mill Road shops have had their stock rooms converted into flats which means they cannot keep as much stock on their premises as they formerly did and the need for frequent deliveries becomes important – in some cases the decision to convert was made by traders and not landlords. In other cases traders have had to cope with the ill judgement of landlords.

Image of car pumping out carbon dioxide, particulate pollution and oxides of nitrogen, with slogan "More pollution? No solution!"

Our traders are important to our road. We value them and they should welcome measures which benefit their resident neighbours and customers. They should support safe, non-polluted, traffic-free pavements. Excellent bus services and bridge-access rights to those who genuinely need access; Blue-badge holders for example and traders whose warehouses are over the bridge; possibly taxis.

For the good of our community let us say ‘No to accidents caused by vehicles mounting pavements. No to poisonous air. No to heavy-plant and transport-lorries using Mill Road as a rat-run between Bedford and Suffolk’.

Yes to deliveries for local traders, Yes to cleaner air, Yes to local shops for locals, Yes to the right to walk (or use one’s wheel-chair) on the pavement without fear of being knocked down. Yes to parking bays.

If these are your priorities you need to make your voice heard.


Web editor adds:
If you are a Mill Road area resident, a regular user of Mill Road’s shops, a trader, someone who delivers to shops, a taxi/hire car driver…
Whatever your view, do make it known.

Depending who you listen to, this scheme:

  1. has made it safer to cycle to local shops and for pupils heading to and from local schools ;
  2. will wreck Mill Road’s businesses;
  3. has improved air quality, and made the road safer;
  4. has generated more traffic and longer journeys avoiding the bridge;
  5. will help create a much improved ambience to Mill Road, giving a much-needed boost to local businesses.

You can participate in the Mill Road Consultation, online, through clicking this link.

If you, or someone you know, would like a paper copy of the Cambridgeshire County Council consultation document telephone 0345 0455212 to have paper copies posted to you.

Survey participants often complain that the questions asked do not enable them to fully express their views. If you feel that way, you could set your views out clearly in an email to policyandregulation@cambridgeshire.gov.uk.

Once again, for those without an internet connection or email account, you can communicate in the traditional way, by writing to:
Policy and Regulation Team
Highways Depot
Stanton Way
HUNTINGDON
PE29 6PY

Mark your letter “Mill Road railway bridge ETRO consultation.”

See also our earlier post National Pavement Parking Ban?

National Pavement Parking Ban?

Government Consultation – Have Your Say

Mill Road Bridges welcomes this consultation, which follows years of campaigning, nationally and locally. Parliamentarians of all parties, on the Transport Committee, including Cambridge’s MP, Daniel Zeichner, have been looking at this problem for some time. This could herald major improvements to shopping along Mill Road.

Now you can have your say in HM Government’s consultation on dealing with pavement parking, run by the Department for Transport (DfT).

We are not the only group in Cambridge to welcome this consultation. Cambridge Cycling Campaign (CamCycle) posted…

We very much welcome the government’s consultation on dealing with pavement parking. This is the culmination of many years of campaigning by national transport groups and disability groups, as well as local campaigning by us and others.

Parking of cars on pavements is a scourge which can be seen all around the city. It makes it difficult for people walking, using buggies, using wheelchairs and mobility scooters, and people with visual impairments. It damages pavements, and in general treats other road users with a lack of courtesy. It causes injuries and deaths of people walking, particularly children, as a result of drivers trying to park their cars on the pavement.

CamCycle:  Pavement parking needs to stop – and government is finally consulting on it

Many national and regional newspapers carried this Press Association report, pointing out…

Disabled people and parents are particularly affected by parked cars blocking their way

Recent research from charity Guide Dogs indicated that 32% of people with visual impairments and 48% of wheelchair users are less keen to go out on their own because of antisocial pavement parking.

PA Media in The Guardian (Click to read the full article, on the Guardian website.)
Taxi on Mill Road pavement
Taxi on Mill Road pavement

New research by Guide Dogs shows the wide variety of people affected by pavement parking, and the everyday impact it has on their lives. Nine in ten disabled people, including those with sight loss, mobility scooter users, and parents or carers with children said they had been affected by pavement parking. 

Guide Dogs (Read their full blogpost here.)

Read/download Guide Dogs’ full report Blocked in: the impact of pavement parking – February 2020 (PDF) here.


How did it get like this?

Many towns and cities were not designed to accommodate today’s high traffic levels; and at some locations, especially in residential areas with narrow roads and no driveways, the pavement is the only place to park without obstructing the carriageway. However, irrespective of whether pavement parking is deemed necessary, there are inherent dangers for all pedestrians; being forced onto the carriageway and into the flow of traffic. This is particularly difficult for people with sight or mobility impairments, and those with prams or buggies. While resulting damage to the pavement and verges is uppermost, a trip hazard, maintenance and personal injury claims are also a cost to local authorities.

Dft: Pavement parking – Options for Change

But Mill Road’s pavements are wide, in places…

Whilst some sections of Mill Road’s pavements look wide, a large part of what you think is the pavement may be the shops’ forecourt, which they can use for outdoor stalls, seating or displays.

Businesses are allowed to use the forecourt area for sales, displays or seating

When cars, vans and lorries pull onto the pavement, it leaves little room for people to walk past. It’s even harder if you’re pushing a child’s buggy, or using a wheelchair. And should you have to pull your toddler out of the way of somebody’s car?


But isn’t pavement parking already illegal?

Since 1974, parking on pavements, with certain exceptions, has been prohibited in Greater London… [with] Exemptions at specific locations … indicated by traffic signs… The reverse applies elsewhere in England, where parking on pavements and verges is permitted unless specifically prohibited by a … Traffic Regulation Order (TRO). The DfT is currently … looking at how … to make TROs easier to implement, including for pavement parking.

Dft: Pavement parking – Options for Change

What about ‘obstructing the highway’?

The offence of unnecessary obstruction of the highway, which includes the road as well as the pavement … allow[s] proceedings to be brought by the police … where parking on the pavement, in such a way as to cause obstruction, is … avoidable.

Dft: Pavement parking – Options for Change

Understandably, CamCycle complain that “The police have failed to take action to address pavement parking,” however, as has been pointed out elsewhere on this website

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).

Protecting Pedestrian Space on Mill-Road.com (Click to read the full opinion-piece.)

Part 6 of the Traffic Management Act 2004 allows most types of parking contraventions to be enforced by local authorities [in our case Cambridgeshire County Council – Ed] as a civil matter, instead of as a criminal matter by the police. enforcement ceases to be the responsibility of the police and becomes the responsibility of the local authority…

Civil Enforcement Officers (CEOs)… place Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) on offending vehicles [and] the local authority retains the proceeds from the penalty charges, which are used to finance the enforcement…* Any surpluses must be used for prescribed purposes only.

Dft: Pavement parking – Options for Change

* This means that enforcement would not increase council tax, and may even help fill a few of our notorious potholes.


What are the options?

The DfT outlines three options:

  1. rely on improvements to the existing TRO system
  2. allow local authorities to enforce ‘Unnecessary obstruction of the pavement’
  3. a national pavement parking prohibition

Read what the DfT says about these options, in full, here.

Which option is best?

  1. ❌ Cambridgeshire County Council would be under no obligation to do anything. The County have had powers to use TROs to deal with pavement parking for over nine years – powers they have not used, despite there being no cost to council tax payers. Option 1 would, effectively, mean no change to having to dodge cars, taxis, vans and lorries on Mill Road’s pavements.
  2. ❌ The same issues apply. Option 2 is simply an extension to the powers which Cambridgeshire County Council have been ignoring for nearly a decade. Would anything change?
  3. ✅ The effect of a national pavement parking prohibition would be to reverse the current situation. Cambridgeshire County Council would be obliged to enforce the ban, and would also have to decide where to allow pavement parking. (And, if drivers ignore the ban, the PCN revenue may even help to fill a few potholes.)

We can see why CamCycle write…

We encourage residents to respond positively to the government’s consultation and to support option 3 … In the meanwhile, we continue to ask why the police are not doing more to keep pavements clear for pedestrians.

CamCycle

But what about Romsey’s side streets?

Nothing would change about the parking arrangements along the narrow sections of (eg) Cockburn Street, Thoday Street and Catharine Street, unless residents asked for change.

Local authorities would be expected to decide where pavement parking remained necessary and to introduce the necessary exemptions and to place traffic signs and bay markings to indicate where pavement parking is permitted. The bay could be placed completely on the pavement where there is sufficient width, or part on / part off.

Dft: Pavement parking – Options for Change

What would change, is that it would become unlawful to pull any vehicle onto any of Mill Road’s pavements – and the same across the whole of Cambridge – except for specific exemptions. These would include:

  • fire brigade purposes
  • police purposes
  • ambulance purposes
  • delivery, collection, loading or unloading of goods to, or from any premises, in the course of business; where this cannot reasonably be carried out without the vehicle being parked on a pavement

Read the full list of exemptions on the DfT’s Pavement parking: options for change webpage, here.


Now complete your response

You can:
Respond online here
or
download a response form to email to Pavement.parking@dft.gov.uk
or
print out the response form to post to
Keith Hughes
Pavement Parking Consultation
Great Minster House
33 Horseferry Road
LONDON
SW1P 4DR

If this all seems very complicated take a look at the Dft’s Easy read: parking on the pavement questionnaire.


If you would like to see a full list of consultation questions before you respond, click here. Note: this is not the response form.


You are welcome to leave (polite) comments below, to engage with the local community, but these will not be seen by the DfT or become part of the consultation.


Mill Road Bridge – Disentangling the issues

Nina Lübbren, Romsey, published this measured and sensible comment elsewhere on an invitation-only social network. It is reproduced here with Nina’s permission.

At this point, I feel it would be useful to disentangle several issues about the Mill Road bridge closure.

  1. The lack of consultation. Probably most of us would have preferred more consultation but also understand why no consultation took place (because of government requiring immediate action).
  2. The need for social distancing. We can probably all agree that it is vital to enable social distancing for anybody crossing the bridge. Pedestrians have to step onto the road to keep a distance. Cyclists have to cycle in the middle of the road to keep a distance. People in cars are protected from the air outside but are faced with pedestrians and cyclists on the road. This was not a safe scenario.
  3. Decreased traffic; less pollution. A separate issue to 1. and 2. As with last year’s closure of the bridge, the decrease of pollution and traffic (and possible moving of this pollution and traffic elsewhere) is a side-effect of the closure of the bridge. Neither last year’s or this year’s closure was effected in order to address pollution. A joined-up urban planning measure with due consultation and a gathering of statistical data (pollution levels etc) needs to be undertaken in order to address this.
  4. Adverse effect on traders. This can be linked to 1. above but does not affect 2.
  5. Accessibility. For those who cannot cross the bridge by bike or on foot, there will need to be provision made, and quickly. Again, this is linked to 1. but now that the urgency of immediate action has passed, I would hope that the [Cambridgeshire County] Council puts measures in place to address both 2. and 5.

Nina Lübbren, Romsey


See also:


Do you have views about the measures which Cambridgeshire County Council are taking? How is it working so far… for you? Whatever your view, as long as it is expressed politely, you can add your comments below. Or on many of the posts above.


Protest Walk

There has been significant opposition to the restrictions on Mill Road Bridge posted on various social media sites.

This protest has been spotted on Facebook, Twitter and Nextdoor, a localised social media site.

Poster text:

ARE YOU UPSET BY
MILL ROAD BRIDGE CLOSURE
AND UBSTRUCTIUNS?
EN0UGH TALK!

WALK THE WALK WITH us
THIS SATURDAY. 1 AUGUST 2020
Peaceful & distanced stroll up Mill Road.
across the Bridge. and back
Please gather at 12 noon — Petersfield Play Area
(across from Donkey Common)
This poster has been appearing in the windows of some Mill Road traders

The publication of this post by Mill Road Bridges should not be considered an endorsement of this protest or of the objections to the Mill Road traffic-reduction measures and associated restrictions on the railway bridge. Neither should this statement be read as one of opposition to this protest and its aims.

It is unclear quite who the ‘ad hoc committee of Romsey and Petersfield residents’ are, but Pamela Wesson of Fantasia, 64 Mill Road, Cambridge,
CB12AS
purveyor of “unusual and unnecessary items” has been most active on Nextdoor, Facebook and Twitter.

Pamela has published, on Nextdoor, some of the responses to the poster. These are reproduced below.

To whom it may concern,

I am writing today to voice my support for the Mill Rd Bridge Closure. I live on Cavendish Road. I think the closure is working very well and makes Mill Rd much more pleasant to use as a cyclist and pedestrian. I do not understand the protests against the bridge closure. It seems unlikely to me that a large number of people drive to Mill Rd to shop given the limited parking, or that they are going to be significantly discouraged by having to park on one side of the bridge and walk to the other.

If anything, now that more of the road can be used by pedestrians, I would like to see provisions for more outdoor seating so that businesses suck as coffeeshops can serve more patrons.

I do not agree with the Mill Road Traders Association or the Ad Hoc Committee of Romsey and Petersfield Residents Against Obstructions and Bridge Closure on Mill Road that the bridge should be reopened.

Kind Regards,

K[…] N[…]

I have just got a flier through my door which does not specify any reasons for objecting the road closure but is planning a demonstration! Mill road is used by through traffic all the time. These people do not stop and visit shops or facilities on mill road, they cause noise, pollution and danger to our children.

I have not been able to cycleover mill road bridge with my children and as a result do not use shops on the town side of mill road. The one time i took my daughter over the bridge she fell off into the road! Wiith the bridge shut i’ll be hanging out and spending money on mill road more.

Shutting the bridge to commuters who have no interest in our community is a good thing.

I do not understand how it has a negative impact on anyone. Cycle or walk and if you must drive, just drive around!

I too now have to go the long way round in my car and i’m more than happy to do so in order to benefit my community.

I really do not understand objections to this scheme. Please can you explain?

L[…] (Thoday Street)

Asked, by another commenter on Nextdoor, “why are you posting copies of other people’s opinions etc?” Pamela responded, “Not fussed by showing other opinions. Often just showing them reveals why I personally oppose them.”


We are happy to publish your (polite) opinions on the Mill Road traffic-reduction measures and associated restrictions on the railway bridge, in the comments section of the Wider footways, barriers and bridge restrictions post. The How is it working so far… post is also open for comments.


Interestingly, in addition to a leaflet from the ‘ad hoc committee of Romsey and Petersfield residents’ (see poster above) a leaflet expressing opposing views from Cambridge Cycling Campaign (CamCycle) based on this post – Camcycle repeats call to county to fast-track improvements on Mill Road – on their website appeared on our web-editor’s doormat on Friday 31st July.

The leaflet also referenced a recent letter to Cllr Ian Bates, Chair of the Highways and Transport Committee. See below.

Click on the image to read/download the full 3-page PDF letter.

This post is also open for comments, but please limit these to this protest walk (ahead of the walk, during the walk, or afterwards).

If you have photographs to accompany your comments, please email them to us, from the same email address which you used for your comment.


See also:


Mill Road Bridge – Blue Badge Petition

Romsey resident, Ruth Greene, has started this petition.

To allow Blue Badge holders have access over Mill Road Bridge, Cambridge

Cambridge Council took the decision to widen the pavements over Mill Road Bridge, without consultation and only 2 days warning. Their reasoning was to encourage people to social distance. 

This will allow access for pedestrians, cyclists, public transport & emergency vehicles. This work is permanent, not temporary.

However, no access for Blue Badge holders, taxi drivers or private vehicles. I believe the Council has said it will review access for Blue Badge holders in 6 months.

Discriminating against the disabled is disgusting – and contravenes the Equalities Act 2020.

Work will also be done to widen some of the pavements both sides of the bridge – at the moment they are just screened off. We were not informed of this.

Not every resident on Mill Road is able to ride a bike or walk very far. Taking a taxi will cost more because of the circuitous route that the driver will have to take – and the disabled and elderly are not all made of money! And yes, I am walking disabled, not allowed to drive and cannot walk far without pain.

Please sign up to this petition, and compel the Council to re-think before it is too late.

Ruth Greene, Romsey Resident

Click here to go to the petition and decide whether to support Ruth.


See also these related items:


This post is not open for comments. Signatories to Ruth’s petition can leave them with their vote.

Comments on this website could be left below one of these posts.



Petition: Allow taxis to go, where buses go

Rashel Mohammed started this petition to Cambridgeshire County Council

Mill Road Bridges exists to give a voice to all who live in, trade in, shop in, visit, or have an interest in Mill Road. Our linking to this petition should not be read as support. Neither should this statement be read as opposition.

By excluding taxis access on Mill Road Bridge will discriminate against the elderly, or people with disabilities who are totally reliant on a door-to-door service. 

These individuals are statistically more likely to not own a vehicle or cycle and have mobility problems. Furthermore, in these challenging times they may have significantly less disposable income with which to pay additional costs associated with travelling the much longer routes incurred as a direct result of the diversion, for instance doctors appointments or essential shopping trips.

Rashel Mohammed

Click here to see the full petition, and decide if you wish to sign.


Don’t forget: If you have a petition about any aspect of Mill Road, let us know and we’ll usually be happy to link to it.


You can also add your (polite) comments below, or in the comments section of the Wider footways, barriers and bridge closure post or the How is it working so far… post.

See also: