Another guest blogpost from Protect Fenner’s Action Group.
Hughes Hall have confirmed that it has purchased land on Fenner’s and plans to extend the college campus, including student accommodation, onto the ground adjacent to the cricket pitch. This is currently designated as Protected Open Space in the Glisson Road-Newtown Conservation Area, used for all sorts of cricket-related activity, and is a precious green lung in an increasingly built up city.
Recent cricket match on Fenner’s, looking towards Covent Garden and the land Hughes Hall has purchased for development (photo: Lionel Sheffield)
Hughes Hall is proposing to build accommodation blocks for up to 100 students on the iconic Fenner’s Cricket Ground.
This means scarce and precious green space in the most densely populated part of Cambridge will be lost forever.
In planning jargon, Fenner’s is Protected Open Space with a quality rating similar to the Botanic Garden and Parker’s Piece.
If protected recreational grounds like Fenner’s are developed it will set a dangerous precedent for the whole city. If this is allowed, what green space is safe in the future?
Please read the details and sign. You can add a comment after you’ve signed and verified your signature by email.
Diagram of land purchased by Hughes Hall on Fenner’s Cricket Ground, for building student accommodation (Proposal shown to residents, 30 November 2023)
Our green and open spaces are of fundamental importance to our city’s character, ecology, and our own wellbeing. We must support all efforts to preserve them in the face of the constant drive to build and develop.
Please email protectfennersactiongroup@gmail.com to support our local campaign to save Fenner’s and green spaces in Cambridge for future generations. We will let you know when further details, including architects’ plans, are published.
Protect Fenner’s Action Group in the local and national press
Fenner’s cricket ground faces threat from student block Residents fear the three-storey block could spell the end of cricket at the home ground of Cambridge University Cricket Club Laurence Sleator, The Times, June 13 2024 (£)
Another one? Didn’t Pamela Wesson and her Friends of Mill Road Bridge group win a court case quashing the Traffic Regulation Order?
Not exactly. The legal challenge to the earlier Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) was challenged on technicalities.
Ms Wesson, chair of Friends of Mill Road Bridge, made a statutory claim under paragraph 35 of Schedule 9 to the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 challenging Cambridgeshire’s decision to make the Cambridge (Mill Road) (Bus Gate) Order 2023.
Ms Wesson argued that the authority: failed to provide adequate reasons for proposing and for making the order; made a mistake of fact in the operation of an exemption for ‘blue badge’ holders; failed to carry out the public sector equality duty; erroneously took account of the potential to attract funding; and that the decision was tainted by predetermination.
Ms Wesson posted on Facebook that her group was “tremendously gratified by the outcome of the case” which felt like “a David-vs-Goliath struggle”, alleging that the County Council “made a mistake of fact in relation to how the decision affected individuals with disabilities” and it wished for all people to be able to cross the bridge “without detours or fines”.
However, Katie Hawks, from Mill Road 4 People, said that it was wrong to describe the proposal as a road closure.
It’s not closed, it’s actually opening it up to more cyclists, pedestrians and faster buses.
We really, really want more children to be able to get to school by themselves safely and [this is] one way of doing this.
Now Cambridgeshire County Council has agreed to end the legal proceedings and start all over again.
Cambridgeshire County Council has agreed with the claimant to end legal proceedings in relation to the Mill Road Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) challenge.
We will no longer be defending the case through the courts, and the judge has agreed to quash the decision that was made to approve the traffic regulation order for the scheme.
A hearing on the case was held in February and the council has reflected on the outcome of this. It has decided to undertake the statutory consultation and decision-making process on the traffic regulation order again. This is to stop the council spending money and time associated with defending this case.
So this is yet another consultation? How many have we now had?
No. Cambridgeshire County Council has a legal obligation to invite comments on any TRO (rather like the City Council does with planning applications).
The County Council has a duty to look at all objections and take into account any that are valid.
So, I only need to contact the County Council if I object?
Yes and no. Those, such as the Friends of Mill Road Bridge, who oppose the bus gate are likely to claim that the TRO should not be approved if more people object to it, rather than support it.
Was there ever a proper consultation?
There was a thorough public consultation in 2022 carried out by the Greater Cambridge Partnership.
72% of respondents supported vehicle restrictions on Mill Road bridge.
77% opposed doing nothing.
54% indicated that congestion was the most important issue affecting their use of Mill Road.
A bus gate scheme has strong levels of public and political support: local councillors (city and county) have been calling for restrictions to through motor traffic on Mill Road bridge for over 50 years.
Should I respond?
Absolutely! Whether you’re for or against the bus gate TRO you should have your say.
But first read the information on the Cambridgeshire County Council website, to check what is being proposed – what categories of vehicles will be banned from Mill Road bridge, and which will be exempted. Decide for yourself if you think the TRO is fair, balanced and reasonable, or otherwise.
Don’t rely on what you may have read on (anti-)social media. There is a plethora of disinformation circulating.
There are a number of methods to respond. See the Have your say link.
For those in favour of the Mill Road bridge TRO, Camcycle have a variety of points which you may wish to include in this post New Mill Road TRO: Let’s go!
There are, moreover, a number of inaccuracies and contentious statements in this petition.
For example, the petitioners object to “shutting off a main arterial road” whereas Mill Road is one section – along with Brookfields, Parkside, Parker Street, Drummer Street and Emmanuel Street – of the Class III road numbered C280 maintained by Cambridgeshire County Council. Class III, not an A-road, not even a B-road, not ‘arterial’. The Drummer Street and Emmanuel Street sections of C280 are already restricted to buses, taxis, cycles and essential access (eg deliveries). Read for yourself and make up your own mind, whether the Mill Road Traders’ Association are making valid points, in their petition.
Is there more background?
Very much so. Not just the Covid-era restrictions, but a full closure for railway works in summer 2019. And an earlier closure in the 1980s
If you are unfamiliar with the recent history of Mill Road bridge restrictions the Background section on the County Council’s Mill Road bridge TRO webpage, will bring you up-to-speed.
For the 2019 railway-related closure shenanigans (and the Cadent Gas excavations) see Closure of Mill Road Bridge for Railway Works Summer 2019*, which also references the 1980s closure. *This Mill Road Bridges post has had a little updating but is likely to have a few broken links. It still gives a flavour of the disruption which the Mill Road community had to endure.
Nick Vose, Director, Marengo Communication, writes:
We are pleased to provide you with an update on Railpen’s proposals for the Beehive Centre.
As you will be aware, we first submitted plans last year, including proposals for new retail, leisure, and community space, as well as laboratory, workspace, and green public space.
However, following feedback on the plans we decided to come back to you with revised designs.
The key uses proposed for the site remain the same, but we have reduced the height and massing of a number of buildings and adjusted building footprints and locations to increase separation distances between buildings and our neighbours.
A new park roughly the same size as St Matthew’s Piece has been introduced and we will plant even more trees (275 in total).
There is also a new direct cycle/pedestrian route through the site and Coldham’s Lane Roundabout will be upgraded to a four-way signalised junction, creating safer connections for pedestrians and cyclists.
Around 20 new shops and leisure facilities, including a small supermarket and gym are included on the ground floor. This is in addition to our plan to invest in Cambridge Retail Park which is also moving forward and will support the re-location of several retailers from the Beehive Centre. The development will also fund an additional 15 public buses per hour with a service extension to the train station, a new service to Milton Park & Ride, as well as new direct services to Cambourne and St Neots, Huntington and St Ives, Ely and Waterbeach. More than 4,200 cycle parking spaces will be created, and 460 car parking spaces – a third of which will provide electric vehicle (EV) charging.
Finally, in response to earlier feedback, we are also looking carefully at how our proposals can help reduce urban temperatures. We know that green spaces, trees, green roofs and vegetation are all very helpful as natural cooling measures and we are planning to replace large areas of concrete with new landscaping, 275 new trees, rain gardens, permeable surfaces and green roofs. In addition, we have committed to undertaking an Urban Greening Factor assessment to evaluate the quality and quantity of green space provided. More commonly used in London this voluntary assessment will demonstrate how green infrastructure has been integral in the design of the development. Several other design choices will also be taken, including carefully selected materials with a higher albedo, which is the metric for how much incoming sun is reflected by a material surface.
We are still listening and are now inviting residents and stakeholders to comment on these revised plans before we submit an amended planning application.
You can find out more about our updated plans on the 17, 18 and 19 July.
Wednesday 17th July 2024, 12pm – 4pm ScS – Unit 11 (next to Nando’s), Cambridge Retail Park, Newmarket Road, CB5 8JG
Thursday 18th July 2024, 4pm – 7.30pm ScS – Unit 11 (next to Nando’s), Cambridge Retail Park, Newmarket Road, CB5 8JG
We are also holding a further event for adjacent neighbours on Wednesday 17 July between 6pm and 7.30pm. This event will also be held in the ScS and a separate letter has been sent via the Royal Mail.
Further details of our events are enclosed in the attached community flyer – which has been sent this week to over 6,000 local residents – and we have prepared a social media friendly graphic, also attached, which we are asking stakeholders to share via their own social media channels.
We look forward to talking you through the latest proposals.
Mill Road Fringe’s annual Summer Shindig is on Sunday 14th July and the weather is (so far) looking warm and sunny. A perfect way to meet friends and enjoy an afternoon/evening of live music in the park. Lots of activities for children. More info here.
A guest blogpost from Protect Fenner’s Action Group.
Cambridge college preaches on environmental issues while planning to build on local protected green space.
Hughes Hall, which recently set up the Centre for Climate Engagement, is proposing to build student housing on protected green open space in the Mill Road neighbourhood. If this is approved, it will set a precedent that makes precious green areas in Cambridge much more vulnerable to development.
In November 2023, the President and Bursar of Hughes Hall told a meeting of local residents about their plans to expand their site, and to build accommodation for 100 more students on part of Fenner’s cricket ground. Fenner’s is a hidden gem that used to be open to the public to wander in, and we are already concerned that over the last 20 years Hughes Hall has privatised it with locked gates.
We haven’t yet seen the plans, but whatever the design details, we are shocked and angry that Hughes Hall feels entitled to build a large development on one of the most highly protected recreational spaces in Cambridge – a space that also acts as a vital green lung within our ward and our dense city centre.
Recent cricket match on Fenner’s, looking towards Covent Garden and the land Hughes Hall has purchased for development (photo: Lionel Sheffield)
What stands out is the precedent this sets, and the choices the college is making. It is going against local, University and national policies aimed at saving green spaces to alleviate climate change, and increase community well-being.
Fenner’s is formally designated as a Protected Open Space in the Cambridge Local Plan 2018 [SPO 18, Outdoor Sports Facilities, Fenners Cricket Ground, Petersfield Ward, p290]. Such a designation is a national planning tool that local authorities can use to preserve open spaces in areas or urban zones which are under increasing pressure from developers. This is an issue which the Greater Cambridge Planning Authority and the Universities are working together to address, as the city is rapidly expanding.
This mooted development could be considered to be in breach of the Cambridge Local Plan.
In protecting existing assets, including heritage assets, landscape and water management, development should:
seek to protect existing public assets, including open space and leisure facilities. Where the loss of such assets is unavoidable, appropriate mitigation should be provided, including where applicable the replacement of assets in an alternative location, in addition to infrastructure generated by the needs of the development;
ensure public rights of way are protected, and enhanced where possible;
Not only is Fenner’s a Protected Open Space, it is also rated in the City Council’s Open Space and Recreation Strategy (October 2011) as the 10th most important Protected Open Space amongst 311 across Cambridge (SPO 18, p105). It amounts to one third of the total open space in Petersfield Ward, and is hugely important in a ward which is densely built up, without much open green space.
Cambridge’s Petersfield Ward lies in the bottom 20% nationally of the ‘Environment Domain’ in the government’s Index of Multiple Deprivation. Indeed, Petersfield Ward has only one public park – St Matthew’s Piece – vs 56 official parks in Cambridge’s other 13 wards.
Unfortunately there are caveats built into the Cambridge Local Plan Protected Open Space policy, with some potential overrides around education and sports need. Hence our alarm to hear that Hughes Hall is buying land from the Cambridge University Cricket and Athletics Club Ltd (which owns the cricket ground), and commissioning architects’ plans to build a substantial amount of student accommodation.
However the National Planning Policy Framework [Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, December 2023] imposes duties upon local planning authorities, in regard to open spaces.
Access to a network of high quality open spaces and opportunities for sport and physical activity is important for the health and well-being of communities, and can deliver wider benefits for nature and support efforts to address climate change. Planning policies should be based on robust and up-to-date assessments of the need for open space, sport and recreation facilities (including quantitative or qualitative deficits or surpluses) and opportunities for new provision. Information gained from the assessments should be used to determine what open space, sport and recreational provision is needed, which plans should then seek to accommodate.
Existing open space, sports and recreational buildings and land, including playing fields, should not be built on unless:
a) an assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown the open space, buildings or land to be surplus to requirements; or
b) the loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location; or
c) the development is for alternative sports and recreational provision, the benefits of which clearly outweigh the loss of the current or former use.
It is hard to predict how the National Planning Policy Framework may help our case until we hear what Hughes Hall and Cambridge University Sport offer in mitigation of any potential breaches of section 8 of the National Planning Policy Framework (above).
College and City values undermined
Hughes Hall recently set up the Centre for Climate Engagement About us – Centre for Climate Engagement (climatehughes.org). The Centre’s mission “is to encourage academic excellence in climate law, governance and organisational change, and to translate and transfer this knowledge to corporate boards to accelerate the race to net zero emissions and climate resilience.”
Hughes Hall diagram of land purchased on Fenner’s for building student accommodation: proposal shown to residents, 30 November 2023
And yet the College does not see fit to translate these aspirations into its own actions. What does its own Corporate Board have to say about building on precious green open space which it is lucky enough to have on its own doorstep, and which is recognised as a much broader community amenity?
Given the College’s apparent commitment to environmental and climate issues, residents wonder why the development team hasn’t taken a much longer-term and environmentally responsible approach to secure buildings or brown field sites to develop close by – as Anglia Ruskin University has done over the last 20-25 years.
Anglia Ruskin University has made significant progress on the East Road site in modernising the faculty accommodation within the framework of the agreed 2009 masterplan. A planning application was subsequently approved and this work is now largely complete and provides around 9,000 sq m of new accommodation.
When the masterplan was written in 2008, Anglia Ruskin University needed around 12,000 sq m. The campus on East Road remains one of the tightest in the sector. However, implementation of the masterplan has left a shortfall in teaching space. The most recent Anglia Ruskin University estate strategy and corporate plan 2012-2014 has identified a need for at least 6,000 sq m of additional space. As well as catering for growth in student numbers, there is also a need to enhance existing space and recently redeveloped space, e.g. for laboratories, which are not meeting current requirements, and to reconsider the future of Anglia Ruskin University’s library on the site. This will require the masterplan for Anglia Ruskin University to be revisited.
The East Road site and area remain the most sustainable location for Anglia Ruskin University during the next plan period, and any future needs for this institution should, in the first instance, be met close to this site. Therefore, any development proposals that come forward in these areas should consider whether faculty development is an appropriate use.
There are other alternatives too. The University of Cambridge has been working with Greater Cambridge Shared Planning to help Cambridge grow sustainably in the future. They explicitly acknowledge the importance of ceasing piecemeal development in the city centre, and avoiding eating up existing green spaces. The new development of Eddington to the north west of Cambridge is part of this wider plan, with spaces designated for accommodation, education, social, cultural and sporting activity– with which several colleges are already successfully engaged.
The University of Cambridge has plans to grow undergraduate numbers by 0.5 per cent a year and postgraduates by 2 per cent a year in order to maintain its globally successful institution. The University of Cambridge’s key growth needs are being met by the developments in West and North West Cambridge and around Addenbrooke’s, including those satellite centres where the plan is seeking densification and a broader mix of uses. The development of the University of Cambridge’s North West Cambridge site is assessed in accordance with the North West Cambridge AAP. The policy acknowledges existing plans of the University of Cambridge on sites outside of the city centre and also provides an opportunity for redevelopment of sites in the city centre where plans are evolving. The University of Cambridge has other, less advanced, plans for development of faculty uses, for example at Madingley Rise. These will be considered on their merits, and against other relevant policies in the plan – for instance, at Madingley Rise much of the open space is protected.
Fenner’s Cricket Ground is an iconic and historic site existing long before Hughes Hall came into being. The land was formerly part of the medieval Open Fields of Cambridge. In 1846, Francis Fenner leased what was, by that time, a former cherry orchard, from Gonville and Caius College for the purpose of constructing a cricket ground. In 1848 he sub-let the ground to Cambridge University Cricket Club.
The local streetscape has been shaped by the boundaries of Fenner’s and the views and open space of the ground are characteristics of the Conservation Area. This land has never been built on. Why does Hughes Hall think it is appropriate to build on it now, for their own benefit and to the detriment of others?
Our green and open spaces are of fundamental importance to our city’s character, ecology, and our own wellbeing. We must support all efforts to preserve them in the face of the constant drive to build and develop.
Please email protectfennersactiongroup@gmail.com to support our local campaign to save Fenner’s and green spaces in Cambridge for future generations. We will let you know when further details are published and our petition is launched.
Protect Fenner’s Action Group in the local and national press
Fenner’s cricket ground faces threat from student block Residents fear the three-storey block could spell the end of cricket at the home ground of Cambridge University Cricket Club Laurence Sleator, The Times, June 13 2024 (£)
No, it’s not Brenda from Bristol bemoaning another election; it’s yet another threat to the three trees on St Matthews Piece.
It is hard to believe but the same three magnificent trees on St Matthews’ Piece are againat severe risk.
The Friends of St Matthew’s Piece, write:
The insurance company hopes you will get tired of repeating yourself.
Meanwhile the three trees are each facing a new and truly deadly threat.
Please help stop this, by writing an objection to planning application 24/0413/TTPO – ideally by mid-July 2024. (Friends of St Matthew’s Piece have learned that 24/0413/TTPO will not come to the Cambridge City Council Planning Committee before 24 July, at the earliest.)
THE THREAT
An insurance claim at 193 Sturton St (a 28-year-old new-build property) blames ‘clay shrinkage subsidence’ on three 126-year-old Sturton St trees. This is the third time in three years these insurers have applied to severely harm – or kill – these three trees.
PLEASE HELP FIGHT THIS
Objections from members of the public are needed at least through mid-July 2024.
Comment on planning application 24/0413/TTPO via the Council’s Planning Portal or via email. Read below for how to do this.
Any brief objection on what matters most to you is perfect!
Some possible grounds to use in your objection are outlined below.
SUGGESTED OBJECTIONS
You will have good reasons of your own but here are some extra suggestions:
The 4.5 m deep trench proposed (in 24/0413/TTPO) would be dug to install a root barrier that would be a minimum of 7m from 193 Sturton Street – placing it about 5 m from the three protected trees – well within their vital “root protection areas” (RPAs).
Cutting the roots at that location would destroy up to 26.5% of the three trees’ essential RPAs.
The British Standard BS5837 : 2012 defines the RPA as the minimum needed for trees to be viable. A tree’s Root Protection Area can be equated to a circle, using the tree as the centre-point, with a radius that is twelve times the tree’s Diameter at Breast Height for a single stemmed tree.
Cambridge’s Petersfield ward has only one public park – St Matthew’s Piece – vs 56 official parks in Cambridge’s other 13 wards. (More details can be found in The Background section, below.)
Petersfield has a particularly poor tree canopy, with very few mature trees.
Every tree matters in Petersfield, which suffers badly from the ‘Urban Heat Island Effect’.
Each of these 126-year-old Plane Trees has a Tree Preservation Order (TPO), and is in our Conservation Area.
These trees are vital to the wellbeing of every person who lives, works or studies in our community
Harming these trees would breach Cambridge Local Plan 2018 policies 55, 56, 61, 67 & 71 and, being within the Eastern Gate Opportunity Area (p89) policies 14 & 23, as well as the National Planning Policy Framework [Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, December 2023] ¶96abc, ¶97abc and ¶102 (pp28, 29).
In 2006, 2007 & 2008, in connection with another planning application (06/0567/FUL), the City Council’s own tree expert repeatedly stressed the importance of preserving all the trees on St Matthew’s Piece, both individually and as a group – these trees have only grown in importance since then.
Go back to 24/0413/TTPO, and choose the tab for Comments.
Select Make a Comment.
Type in your comment. You might like to draft your comment in your preferred word processing app (Apple’s Pages, MS Word, etc) in case of any glitch on the Planning Portal. When you’re satisfied with your wording and have corrected enymystaikesany mistakes and typos, you can copy’n’paste into the box on the Planning Portal.
Every adult in your household may register and comment.
You should receive a confirmatory email immediately; if not, something went wrong, find the comment tab and copy’n’paste again.
If you continue to experience difficulties, you can email planning officer joanna.davies@cambridge.gov.uk citing 24/0413/TTPO. Once again copy’n’paste your comments into the email. You must include your full name and postal address.
Local residents have been fighting to protect and conserve local amenity and environmental assets via Friends of St Matthew’s Piece since 30th April 2020 – and, before that, via Petersfield Area Community Trust, since 1998). Friends of St Matthew’s Piece stand on the shoulders of the giants who, 100 years earlier, in 1898 had established St Matthew’s Piece. This included planting the magnificent London Plane trees that provide all of us with such wonderful benefits today.
IN FUTURE
To be kept up to date, please emailfriends.of.st.matthews.piece@gmail.com and ask to be added to the FoSMP Supporter’s List. You will be led through a GDPR-compliant sign-up process. This will make sure you receive very occasional email updates on issues like this one.
If you would like to join Friends of St Matthew’s Piece or assist in any of the issues raised in this blogpost, kindly hosted by Mill Road Bridges, please use this email link.
Please forward this blogpost to people who care about trees in or around Cambridge!
Kieran Gleave, a second-year PhD student at the Department of Archaeology at the University of Cambridge writes:
I am conducting part of my PhD research in Cambridge’s Petersfield and Romsey areas. Through my data collection, I aim to explore the relationships that community identities within the Mill Road area have with the ‘everyday’ traces of the industrial past. In essence, I’m trying to understand how the remnants of the industrial past inspire or shape what it means to belong to a community within the area.
To collect my data, I’m recruiting local people to get involved with my project by participating in one-to-one interviews.
Kieran Gleave
Kieran seeks to recruit local people who feel a sense of belonging to a community within Petersfield and Romsey to participate in one-to-one interviews for PhD research between June and October 2024. The research aims to explore how the ‘everyday’ traces of the industrial past inspire what it means to belong to a local community within the area.
The research will be through informal one-to-one interviews, of between 30 – 60 minutes, talking about:
The community or communities to which you feel a sense of belonging;
What it means to belong to these communities;
The relationships your community has with the industrial past.
If you are interested in participating, or in learning more about this research, please email Kieran Gleave at ktg29@cam.ac.uk.
If somebody you know might be interested in participating in an interview, or in learning more about this research, please forward this blogpost to them.
Rana, a Master’s student at the Department of Archaeology (Heritage Studies) at the University of Cambridge. Has been in touch.
Mill Road Central Mosque dome, seen from roof-height
I am conducting research on ‘heritage-making’ in Cambridge, looking at the Cambridge Central Mosque in particular and how locals respond to/ engage with the space. This is in relation to broader community and cultural relations in the city.
Rana, MPhil Heritage Studies, University of Cambridge
Rana is hoping to contact individuals in the Mill Road “Community of Communities” who might want to take part in her research.
Taking part in Rana’s research would consist of a chat (around 30 minutes) either online or on the phone.
Rana adds that she would also be happy to meet in-person at the Cambridge Central Mosque, Mill Road, and show them around. She is looking for a diverse range of participants local to the area – no specialist or previous knowledge needed – just anyone who is local and enthusiastic about Cambridge!
Rana would also really appreciate you forwarding this blogpost, or the email link to anyone else who you think would be interested in contributing to her research.
Many of us will have fond memories of Ed Lloyd Jenkins. And Mill Roaders may wish to attend Ed’s Memorial Service at St Philip’s Church, 185 Mill Road, CB1 3AN on Saturday, 24th February at 4:30pm.
Memories can also be added to this Facebook page for Ed. And appreciative comments can be added below this post.
Shops and railings along Mill Road displayed a version of the above poster for several weeks
The call went out to Mill Road area’s fashionistas to try their luck as models for the forthcoming Mill Road Preloved Fashion Show.
Organisers were overwhelmed as nearly 40 men and women of varying ages, styles, heights and ethnic heritages – credible super models every one – turned up for the casting event at the Mill Road Community Centre.
The event is part of Love Mill Road’s Fringe Celebrations Click the image above to view/download a printable PDF to display in your window
Despite the models’ diversity there are uniting features; all participants love Mill Road and walked with elegance; candidates expressed their love of pre-loved clothing in advance of their screen shots and turns on the catwalk.
It was interesting to learn why they all preferred charity shop and other pre-loved clothes.
Kitty told Mill Road Bridges that she had always worn pre-loved clothes. As a child in Essex her mother would get outfits from Ebay because they searched for quirkiness. Now, as an adult, she continues to shun new clothes.
Pam Wesson, a well-known local trader in pre-loved fashion, is attracted by value and quality, brand-new Amani suits for around £50 for example. She enjoys acknowledging provenance and when she is selling at her outlets she often mentions previous ownership.
Emma and Nicky have collected so many fabulous garments that they now concentrate on looking for statement jewellery; whereas younger people are motivated to get a basic wardrobe economically.
Naturally many participants are motivated primarily by sustainability. Academics and administrators from both our universities were present at the audition. They seem to choose pre-loved to relax in for ethical reasons even if they buy high end High Street and tailor-made suits for work.
Carol’s relationship with preloved fashion stretches back many years, as a young single parent she would dress her children in items from jumble sales out of economic necessity but never resented doing it. Jumble sales gave way to charity shops and styles change but, although she found herself on a firmer footing financially, she refused to buy distressed jeans with holes and grunge shirts at high street prices.
It comes as no surprise that so many participants are motivated by ethical concerns. Fast-fashion is wasteful of energy and water, it exploits human labour and is ruining the planet.
Mill Road EcoChic showcased clothes and accessories from Mill Road’s charity and vintage shops on the catwalk, alongside local designers who specialise in sustainable fashion.
Photos Chryssie Greece
Photos Chryssie Greece
Photos Chryssie Greece
Photos Chryssie Greece
Photos Chryssie Greece
Photos Chryssie Greece
Photos Chryssie Greece
Photos Chryssie Greece
Photos Chryssie Greece
Photos Chryssie Greece
Photos Chryssie Greece
Photos Chryssie Greece
The show offered a unique and memorable celebration of creativity and sustainability, reflecting the diversity and independence of Cambridge’s distinctive Mill Road neighbourhood, featuring stylish, exciting finds curated by enthusiastic fashionistas and modelled by local real people.
Stylish, exciting finds curated by enthusiastic fashionistas and modelled by local real people.
Mill Road EcoChic Fashion Show provided:
pop-up stalls focused on sustainable fashion
a spectacular catwalk fashion show featuring clothes from Mill Road’s fabulous charity and vintage shops
food & drink – pizzas from Scott’s All Day and drinks from Bacchanalia.
