Grand Arcade web site
Colin Rosenstiel
will answer most questions arising here.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
zulu
"Colin Rosenstiel" <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote in message
news:memo.2003100...@a01-09-5548.rosenstiel.cix.co.uk...
> The web site is now live at http://www.grandarcade.co.uk/. Hopefully it
> will answer most questions arising here.
>
White font on a light tan (?) background...
AArrgghhhhhhh.
Why do people try to make things look pretty, rather than legible.
Idiots.
--
Ś zulu Ś
Phil Chung
> White font on a light tan (?) background...
> AArrgghhhhhhh.
> Why do people try to make things look pretty, rather than legible.
> Idiots.
Looks like black text here...
*Helen*
"Colin Rosenstiel" <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote in message
news:memo.2003100...@a01-09-5548.rosenstiel.cix.co.uk...
Thanks for that interesting link to the scheme that will revolutionise the
Cambridge retail experience.
Future users may like to note in advance that "the building will purvey a
level of strength about it and incite a level of subliminal security.......
it will represent a unique sense of place supported by both the physical
architecture and the social interaction that takes place within it.....
Users will experience a sense of trust, security and comfort. They will
feel free to browse, not to be hurried and to be provided with honest and
un-contrived service."
I am glad that I will feel free to be provided with uncontrived service.
Helen :)
zulu
"Phil Chung" <pylc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:10655306...@ersa.uk.clara.net...
What?
This bit...?
"The Grand Arcade is an exciting city centre retail development in the heart
of Cambridge."
etc.
--
Ś zulu Ś
Chris Brown
Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote:
>The web site is now live at http://www.grandarcade.co.uk/. Hopefully it
>will answer most questions arising here.
Very interesting, thanks for the pointer. Shame some cretin decided to use
JPEG for the (line art) plans though.
--
/* _ */main(int k,char**n){char*i=k&1?"+L*;99,RU[,RUo+BeKAA+BECACJ+CAACA"
/* / ` */"CD+LBCACJ*":1[n],j,l=!k,m;do for(m=*i-48,j=l?m/k:m%k;m>>7?k=1<<m+
/* | */8,!l&&puts(&l)**&l:j--;printf(" \0_/"+l));while((l^=3)||l[++i]);
/* \_,hris Brown -- All opinions expressed are probably wrong. */return 0;}
Phil Chung
> What?
> This bit...?
>
> "The Grand Arcade is an exciting city centre retail development in the heart
> of Cambridge."
> etc.
Weird... when I first went to the site, that bit was missing from the
browser. Well, it's perfectly legible to me as it's in a huge font
(which is actually an image).
Mark Ayliffe
zulu <zu...@ntlworld.com> illuminated us with:
Ahh, I see. That's an image, with NO SENSIBLE ALT TAG. Arrrgghhhh! Lettering
is mid tan on light tan at the bottom. I sincerely hope we haven't paid for
this out of our Council Tax?
--
Mark
Please remove nospam |
to reply by email. | Remorse is what you feel when caught.
www.ayliffe.org |
zulu
Yes, I know it's an image, as I couldn't copy and paste the text...
The font is certainly large, _but_ *I* can hardly read it...
Your eyes are obviously younger than mine.
I would also imagine that someone who is colour blind would have some
difficulty.
--
¦ zulu ¦
Nick Wagg
You got images? You lucky man you. Looking forward to that opsys
upgrade which will mean that I can use a browser which went out of
date only 5 years ago.
--
Nick Wagg
Phil Chung
> The font is certainly large, _but_ *I* can hardly read it...
> Your eyes are obviously younger than mine.
> I would also imagine that someone who is colour blind would have some
> difficulty.
I have the brightness quite low on my monitor which makes it easier to
read. If I crank the brightness up a bit it does become less readable.
Oh, the tan on tan is horrible.
Dudley Simons
Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
Thanks for pointing me towards that Colin.
I may have missed previous threads about this developent and the answer to
my question may already have been fully explained - if thats the case
sorry to rake the coals over again but I couldn't see an obvious answer on
the web site
Why do the new courts have to be in the center of Cambridge? Its not like
they need to attract passing trade? I dont imagine its so that shop
lifters canbe whisked smartly from Robert Sales straight in front of the
beak. It cant be because the site is so accessable with cheap/free
parking all around the area and I dont thnk its because it can earn as
much per square foot of floor space as a retail tenant would be paying.
If the court can manage to get by at its temporary location out in
Trumpington for three years it kind of proves that the court doesn't need
to be in the town. It could b anywhere out of town with good public
transport links .
Or am I missing something obvious here Colin?
regards
Dudley
--
Take out the TRASH to reply
Life - Some days you are the dog, some days you are the lamp post
Martin Read
Dudley Simons <drs...@TRASHesc.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>If the court can manage to get by at its temporary location out in
>Trumpington for three years it kind of proves that the court doesn't need
>to be in the town. It could b anywhere out of town with good public
>transport links .
You want good public transport in the vicinity of a city served almost
exclusively by Stageroach? Mwahahahaha.
m.
--
\_\/_/| Martin Read - my opinions are my own. share them if you wish.
\ / | a passer by was staring deep into your open skirt as we lay there
\/ | in the dirt as we lay there in the dirt should we make ourselves do
------+ painful things? and do they really hurt? -- Naevus, "Harm"
Meldrew of Meldreth
>If the court can manage to get by at its temporary location out in
>Trumpington for three years it kind of proves that the court doesn't need
>to be in the town. It could b anywhere out of town with good public
>transport links .
>
>Or am I missing something obvious here Colin?
The obvious thing is that Trumpington doesn't have good public transport
links - unless they are proposing that people walk from the P&R. Most
people will still have a two stage journey to make, instead of one.
--
"now, the thing you type on and the window you stare out of are the same thing"
Ben Harris
Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote:
>will answer most questions arising here.
Grr. Looks like my request for pedestrian access to Corn Exchange Street
opposite the entrance to the New Museums Site has been rejected. Oh well,
maybe someone can be persuaded to build a bridge instead... *grin*
--
Ben Harris
Jón Fairbairn
> Ahh, I see. That's an image, with NO SENSIBLE ALT TAG. Arrrgghhhh! Lettering
> is mid tan on light tan at the bottom.
And they clearly didn't try it out on a 256 colour laptop
display.
If I tip the display right back I'm treated to the conceit
that it's "Anchored by a 280 000 sq ft Robert Sayle
store". I'd rather hope that it's anchored more deeply than
that, otherwise it might float.
I do wish people could cope with the concept of 26 000m²
too. This is the 21st century¹, isn't it?
[1]² though I betray my personal 20th century history by
expecting "schizoid man" after hearing "21st century"³.
[2] since these notes aren't at the bottom (below my
signature), can we call them "ankle notes"?
[3] "cat's foot, iron claw ..." I think I might put a CD
on...
--
Jón Fairbairn Jon.Fa...@cl.cam.ac.uk
http://www.chaos.org.uk/~jf/Stuff-I-dont-want.html (updated 2003-08-02)
Tim Ward
news:3F82D574...@esc.cam.ac.uk...
>
> I may have missed previous threads about this developent and the answer to
> my question may already have been fully explained - if thats the case
> sorry to rake the coals over again but I couldn't see an obvious answer on
> the web site
>
> Why do the new courts have to be in the center of Cambridge?
This has been answered several times.
--
Tim Ward - posting as an individual unless otherwise clear
Brett Ward Ltd - www.brettward.co.uk
Cambridge Accommodation Notice Board - www.brettward.co.uk/canb
Cambridge City Councillor
zulu
I'm glad it wasn't just me being picky then!
--
Ś zulu Ś
Colin Rosenstiel
Harris) wrote:
Can you clarify where your think this entrance would be? There are some
unresolved details about Corn Exchange Street.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
mark.ayl...@pem.nospam.cam.nospam.ac.uk (Mark Ayliffe) wrote:
> Ahh, I see. That's an image, with NO SENSIBLE ALT TAG. Arrrgghhhh!
> Lettering is mid tan on light tan at the bottom. I sincerely hope we
> haven't paid for this out of our Council Tax?
No. The developers have. I'll mention this thread at the meeting tomorrow.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Mark Carroll
Dudley Simons <drs...@TRASHesc.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
(snpi)
>Why do the new courts have to be in the center of Cambridge? Its not like
AFAICT it's because the courts needed a new home and there weren't
viable alternative uses of the space that were any better.
-- Mark
Jonathan Larmour
>The web site is now live at http://www.grandarcade.co.uk/. Hopefully it
>will answer most questions arising here.
[I like the Terms & Conditions pop-up there. Very snazzy.]
Okay, so I've had a look to see what they've done about the cycle parking
since in the initial version I saw it was utterly stupid, and wrote as
much on the consultation thingy... and guess what. It looks like it's
still stupid. Please tell me I'm wrong!
It looks to me like the *only* cycle parking provision is round the wrong
side of the development, and up/down a ramp!
http://194.203.81.102/80256D74002F2D75/Files/design-floorplans/$FILE/lower+ground+floor+plan.jpg
[the IP address is their fault, as is the unclarity[1] because they've
put up the plans as jpegs]
It looks like the access to the cycle parking is from the path between
the job centre and Fisher House[2], and that there won't be access from
Corn Exchange Street even. This means that for cyclists to get to the
cycle parking, they either have to share the route on (narrow) Corn
Exchange Street with all the cars trying to get into the car park
(fumes in all in that nice canyon street), go round and double back
beside the Red Cow, dismount and wheel their bikes to the ramp, now you
have the option of going from a standing start down the (narrow windy)
ramp[3] or walking, and then parking the bike. Either will be fun in
winter when things are slippy and icy.
Then once you've got your shopping you have to haul it on your bike up
the ramp and out.
Or from other directions you would have to join the Johns Street, Market
Street, Market Square etc. one way system, and being forced to dismount
and walk through the bike banned area. Similarly once you've done your
shopping, although I bet many will start cycling down Petty Cury
instead of going the long way round Market Street, and then doubling
back past ex-Woolies etc.
I don't see any bike racks anywhere else or frankly _any_ cycling
provision at all. I note my question in footnote 3 of
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=g355j-orj.ln1%40worf.jifvik.org
was never answered. Nor
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=7ugg20%24c6k%241%40korai.cygnus.co.uk
Nor related points about the limited proposed capacity (I couldn't find
any mention of capacity on the new pages at the new site although it
does look better than originally planned, nor anything about the
transport plans, not even the Award Winning(sic) Park and Ride) as I had
mentioned at
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=t9nmpa-u3j.ln%40worf.jifvik.org
Perhaps they were ignored due to embarassment by posters here :-/.
The upshot is the certainty that cyclists who quite rightly aren't
prepared to go half a mile out of their way just to lock their bike up
are instead just going to dump them in front of the store. I know I
would. This will clutter up the area, reduce pavement width for
pedestrians and be less secure and protected for cyclists.
Presumably the Council doesn't want to put cycle racks there because
they think _they_ will clutter up the area rather than solving the
problem that will otherwise arise. As you can see from Burleigh Street
they don't like clutter, so evil cycle parking is fair game.
In fact it looks like some of the existing already overused cycle
parking will be removed!
The only difference I see from the original plans are that you have to
go down a ramp instead of up one, and the cycle parking may be larger.
If this is what's already been approved, and the plans are indeed as I
understand them, then it's pathetic. Absolutely pathetic.
If this was agreed with the Cycling Campaign then I think I will feel
obliged to resign.
Jifl
[1] ;-P
[2] Guildhall Place apparently
[3] Actually it may be worse than a ramp... it looks like the illegible
writing on the plan says "stepped" so your only choice is to walk, not
cycle, while balancing your shopping on your bike while wheeling it
down a groove beside the steps. Did that in college, and a right pain
it is too with stuff on the bike.
--
--["No sense being pessimistic, it wouldn't work anyway"]-- Opinions==mine
Al Grant
> The obvious thing is that Trumpington doesn't have good public transport
> links - unless they are proposing that people walk from the P&R. Most
> people will still have a two stage journey to make, instead of one.
On the other hand the other obvious thing is that many visitors
to the courts will arrive by car, especially those taking time out
from work to be witnesses, not to mention those who arrive in the
back of a prison van. How many court cases have been delayed
because of people fighting their way through Cambridge traffic
to get to Lion Yard I wonder?
Al Grant
> The web site is now live at http://www.grandarcade.co.uk/. Hopefully it
> will answer most questions arising here.
Or raise a whole set of new ones.
For example, it would appear from the material on the web site that
the council (as retail property developer) made a deal with Robert
Sayles that the council (as local authority) would use compulsory
purchase powers to forcibly obtain land from the Crowne Plaza for
use as a shoppers' car park, in the process consolidating the
council's retail property holdings in the area.
Now I don't know about you, Colin, but I think this sort of
collectivized capitalism stinks - and it gives the lie to the
"we are a local authority, we don't and can't interfere in the
retail property market" stuff you came out with about QD and
Woolworths.
Colin Rosenstiel
jifl...@jifvik.org.removethis.invalid (Jonathan Larmour) wrote:
> Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> enlightened us with:
> >The web site is now live at http://www.grandarcade.co.uk/. Hopefully
> >it will answer most questions arising here.
>
> [I like the Terms & Conditions pop-up there. Very snazzy.]
Ho, ho. The Disclaimer is good too on that basis., :-)
I'll ask why the javascript doesn't work later today.
> Okay, so I've had a look to see what they've done about the cycle
> parking since in the initial version I saw it was utterly stupid, and
> wrote as much on the consultation thingy... and guess what. It looks
> like it's still stupid. Please tell me I'm wrong!
>
> It looks to me like the *only* cycle parking provision is round the
> wrong side of the development, and up/down a ramp!
> http://194.203.81.102/80256D74002F2D75/Files/design-floorplans/$FILE/low
> er+ground+floor+plan.jpg
> [the IP address is their fault, as is the unclarity[1] because they've
> put up the plans as jpegs]
[snip]
The main cycle parking for shoppers will be on street as now, AIUI. The
element in the car park is all extra, as at Park Street. But I'll make
enquiries.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Meldrew of Meldreth
<alg...@myrealbox.com> writes
>On the other hand the other obvious thing is that many visitors
>to the courts will arrive by car, especially those taking time out
>from work to be witnesses, not to mention those who arrive in the
>back of a prison van. How many court cases have been delayed
>because of people fighting their way through Cambridge traffic
>to get to Lion Yard I wonder?
Car drivers arriving from outside the City can use the P&R. Which is
better than *everyone* having to use it (except those few arriving by
car from the south).
Douglas de Lacey
> In article <vrbc51-...@worf.jifvik.org>,
> jifl...@jifvik.org.removethis.invalid (Jonathan Larmour) wrote:
>
>
>>Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> enlightened us with:
>>
>>>The web site is now live at http://www.grandarcade.co.uk/. Hopefully
>>>it will answer most questions arising here.
>>
>>[I like the Terms & Conditions pop-up there. Very snazzy.]
>
>
> Ho, ho. The Disclaimer is good too on that basis., :-)
>
> I'll ask why the javascript doesn't work later today.
No, please ask them why they use javascript at all: why use a silly
pop-up rather than doing it properly.
>
> The main cycle parking for shoppers will be on street as now, AIUI. The
> element in the car park is all extra, as at Park Street. But I'll make
> enquiries.
Great. So yet again cyclists are made to feel second-class citizens. And
you describe us as "happy"?
Douglas de Lacey.
John Penton
"Colin Rosenstiel" <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote in message
news:memo.2003100...@a01-09-5548.rosenstiel.cix.co.uk...
Well, just in case they are reading: who drew Programme.jpg? They should
have used a ruler.
Bob
> >> > White font on a light tan (?) background...
> >> > AArrgghhhhhhh.
> >> > Why do people try to make things look pretty, rather than legible.
> >> > Idiots.
> > of Cambridge."
> > etc.
> Ahh, I see. That's an image, with NO SENSIBLE ALT TAG. Arrrgghhhh! Lettering
> is mid tan on light tan at the bottom. I sincerely hope we haven't paid for
> this out of our Council Tax?
Is there not something in the Disability Discrimination Act that
states that images should not be used for text or if there are the ALT
tag should contain the same text?
Tony Finch
>
>Can you clarify where your think this entrance would be? There are some
>unresolved details about Corn Exchange Street.
There's a path through the Lion Yard car park at the moment, just north of
the hotel, which provides a convenient route from the back of Robert Sayle
to the entrance to the New Museums Site under the old Computer Lab tower.
Tony.
--
f.a.n.finch <d...@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/
GERMAN BIGHT HUMBER: WEST OR NORTHWEST 6 TO GALE 8, OCCASIONALLY SEVERE GALE 9
AT FIRST. RAIN OR SHOWERS. MODERATE OR GOOD.
Dan delaMare-Lyon
> The web site is now live at http://www.grandarcade.co.uk/. Hopefully it
> will answer most questions arising here.
But does cambridge need a hundred more mobile phone shops?
(and a starbucks?)
Cheers
Dan.
Meldrew of Meldreth
delaMare-Lyon <danc...@hotmail.com> writes
>But does cambridge need a hundred more mobile phone shops?
>(and a starbucks?)
Apparently it does need a big John Lewis in the City Centre. But they
are going to trade quite happily near the Grafted-on centre for three
years. Why not stay there?
Dan delaMare-Lyon
> In article <uxRgb.9564$QH3....@newsfep4-winn.server.ntli.net>, Dan
> delaMare-Lyon <danc...@hotmail.com> writes
>>But does cambridge need a hundred more mobile phone shops?
>>(and a starbucks?)
>
> Apparently it does need a big John Lewis in the City Centre. But they
> are going to trade quite happily near the Grafted-on centre for three
> years. Why not stay there?
Or move out of town as they've been sugesting for at least the last 20
years?
Cheers
Dan.
Steve Hunt
> Hopefully it will answer most questions arising here.
Colin,
Your sense of humour is in good form today.
-- Steve
Jonathan Larmour
>In article <vrbc51-...@worf.jifvik.org>,
>jifl...@jifvik.org.removethis.invalid (Jonathan Larmour) wrote:
>
>> Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> enlightened us with:
>> >The web site is now live at http://www.grandarcade.co.uk/. Hopefully
>> >it will answer most questions arising here.
>>
>> [I like the Terms & Conditions pop-up there. Very snazzy.]
>
>Ho, ho. The Disclaimer is good too on that basis., :-)
>
>I'll ask why the javascript doesn't work later today.
Oh yeah, it's stopped working, when it did yesterday.
>> It looks to me like the *only* cycle parking provision is round the
>> wrong side of the development, and up/down a ramp!
>> http://194.203.81.102/80256D74002F2D75/Files/design-floorplans/$FILE/low
>> er+ground+floor+plan.jpg
>> [the IP address is their fault, as is the unclarity[1] because they've
>> put up the plans as jpegs]
>[snip]
>
>The main cycle parking for shoppers will be on street as now, AIUI. The
>element in the car park is all extra, as at Park Street. But I'll make
>enquiries.
That would be great, thanks. If there's cycle parking (*sensible* stands!)
in most of the directions that people will approach from, that would
assuage my concerns.
Although for the covered parking, I still think having a ramp you have to
get off and wheel your bike up/down, and can only be accessed from a
pedestrian area, misses the point!
Jifl
Paul Oldham
bob_b...@london.com (Bob) growled:
> [of the Grand Arcade web site]
>
> Is there not something in the Disability Discrimination Act that
> states that images should not be used for text or if there are the ALT
> tag should contain the same text?
Not that explicitly, but as we've discussed here before it does implicitly
say that a web site has to make it possible for people who are visually
impaired to use the site by doing that sort of thing.
--
Paul Oldham ----------> http://the-hug.org/paul
Milton villager ------> http://www.miltonvillage.org.uk/
and FAQ maintainer ---> http://the-hug.org/paul/camfaq.html
"Mother Nature's best aphrodisiac is still a naked woman"
Colin Rosenstiel
alg...@myrealbox.com (Al Grant) wrote:
Pity you didn't look at the detail and are talking though your usual
orifice, then.
This car park is only included in the CPO for the sake of the ownership
for one day in 113 years time! The freehold belongs to the City Council.
The site, including the car park and hotel, is leased to the Crowne Plaza
(or some company on their behalf) for 125 years from 1991. The car park is
leased back to the council for the same term, minus one day. The
development needs an uninterrupted title to the car park without a break,
even so far in the distance, because certainty is what it's about.
Therefore the car park has to be included in the CPO because the main
argument with the hotel, how much they should be paid for disruption
during the building works, is not yet settled.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Ben Harris
Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <bluqi5$kjm$1...@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>, bj...@cus.cam.ac.uk (Ben
>Harris) wrote:
>> Grr. Looks like my request for pedestrian access to Corn Exchange
>> Street opposite the entrance to the New Museums Site has been rejected.
>> Oh well, maybe someone can be persuaded to build a bridge instead...
>> *grin*
>
>Can you clarify where your think this entrance would be? There are some
>unresolved details about Corn Exchange Street.
<http://www.cam.ac.uk/map/v3/drawmap.cgi?mp=nmus;tl=New%20Museums%20Site>
The entrance I'm referring to is the one on the east side of the site. At
present, it's possible to reach this from Emmanuel Street by walking
through Robert Sayle, across St Tibb's Row, through Lion Yard car park and
across Corn Exchange Street, all in a reasonable approximation to a
straight line. Grand Arcade improves this route for the most part, but
makes the final crossing of Corn Exchange Street impossible by leaving the
pedestrian on a raised pavement several metres above the road and with no
access to road level except at the ends of Corn Exchange Street.
--
Ben Harris
Robert Hunt
College will lose out, for instance.
I would have thought that there is a real chance that Robert Sayle will
decide NOT to return to the centre of town after the Grand Arcade is
complete. What would happen in this case?
Also, what is the relative timetable of Grand Arcade vs. Bradwell's Ct?
Chris Brown
Richard Kettlewell <inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>rosen...@cix.co.uk (Colin Rosenstiel) writes:
>> The car park is leased back to the council for the same term, minus
>> one day.
>
Ah! I see you have the car-park that goes *PING*! This is my favouite, you
see we lease this back from the company we sold it too and that way it comes
under the current budget, and NOT the capital account.
--
/* _ */main(int k,char**n){char*i=k&1?"+L*;99,RU[,RUo+BeKAA+BECACJ+CAACA"
/* / ` */"CD+LBCACJ*":1[n],j,l=!k,m;do for(m=*i-48,j=l?m/k:m%k;m>>7?k=1<<m+
/* | */8,!l&&puts(&l)**&l:j--;printf(" \0_/"+l));while((l^=3)||l[++i]);
/* \_,hris Brown -- All opinions expressed are probably wrong. */return 0;}
Mark Goodge
>The entrance I'm referring to is the one on the east side of the site. At
>present, it's possible to reach this from Emmanuel Street by walking
>through Robert Sayle, across St Tibb's Row, through Lion Yard car park and
>across Corn Exchange Street, all in a reasonable approximation to a
>straight line. Grand Arcade improves this route for the most part, but
>makes the final crossing of Corn Exchange Street impossible by leaving the
>pedestrian on a raised pavement several metres above the road and with no
>access to road level except at the ends of Corn Exchange Street.
Use a ladder?
Mark
--
--> http://photos.markshouse.net - now with added kittens! <--
"Let's see colours that have never been seen"
Paul Oter
news:memo.2003100...@a01-09-5548.rosenstiel.cix.co.uk...
> element in the car park is all extra, as at Park Street. But I'll make
> enquiries.
It's not *all* extra, since the development will remove the existing cycle
parking in St Tibbs Row (behind Robert Sayle) and in Corn Exchange Street
(by the recycling centre). So a proportion of the new cycle parking can be
considered as replacement for that.
PaulO
Meldrew of Meldreth
>> The car park is leased back to the council for the same term, minus
>> one day.
>
Undoubtedly because some clever lawyer thought it would protect his
client's interest in some way.
Colin Rosenstiel
rosen...@cix.co.uk (Colin Rosenstiel) wrote:
> In article <vrbc51-...@worf.jifvik.org>,
> jifl...@jifvik.org.removethis.invalid (Jonathan Larmour) wrote:
>
> > Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> enlightened us with:
> > >The web site is now live at http://www.grandarcade.co.uk/. Hopefully
> > >it will answer most questions arising here.
> >
> > [I like the Terms & Conditions pop-up there. Very snazzy.]
>
> Ho, ho. The Disclaimer is good too on that basis., :-)
>
> I'll ask why the javascript doesn't work later today.
The pop-ups work on other pages. Looks like an error. I'll be drawing this
thread to the attention of those responsible for the web site.
The official URL is http://www.thegrandarcade.co.uk/, by the way. As you
can see there are aliases.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
jifl...@jifvik.org.removethis.invalid (Jonathan Larmour) wrote:
> Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> enlightened us with:
> >In article <vrbc51-...@worf.jifvik.org>,
> >jifl...@jifvik.org.removethis.invalid (Jonathan Larmour) wrote:
> >
> >> Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> enlightened us with:
> >> >The web site is now live at http://www.grandarcade.co.uk/.
> > Hopefully >>it will answer most questions arising here.
> >>
> >> [I like the Terms & Conditions pop-up there. Very snazzy.]
> >
> >Ho, ho. The Disclaimer is good too on that basis., :-)
> >
> >I'll ask why the javascript doesn't work later today.
>
> Oh yeah, it's stopped working, when it did yesterday.
As I said it works from some pages. However, I guess your original comment
related to the non-scrolling Terms and Conditions pop-up where the text
overflows the space provided?
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
Harris) wrote:
> In article <memo.2003100...@a01-09-5548.rosenstiel.cix.co.uk>,
> Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote:
> >In article <bluqi5$kjm$1...@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>, bj...@cus.cam.ac.uk
> >(Ben Harris) wrote:
> >> Grr. Looks like my request for pedestrian access to Corn Exchange
> >> Street opposite the entrance to the New Museums Site has been
> >> rejected. Oh well, maybe someone can be persuaded to build a bridge
> >> instead... *grin*
> >
> >Can you clarify where your think this entrance would be? There are
> some >unresolved details about Corn Exchange Street.
>
> <http://www.cam.ac.uk/map/v3/drawmap.cgi?mp=nmus;tl=New%20Museums%20Site
> >
>
> The entrance I'm referring to is the one on the east side of the site.
> At present, it's possible to reach this from Emmanuel Street by walking
> through Robert Sayle, across St Tibb's Row, through Lion Yard car park
> and across Corn Exchange Street, all in a reasonable approximation to a
> straight line. Grand Arcade improves this route for the most part, but
> makes the final crossing of Corn Exchange Street impossible by leaving
> the pedestrian on a raised pavement several metres above the road and
> with no access to road level except at the ends of Corn Exchange Street.
Thank you. I'm not sure much can be done about that, I'm afraid but I
hope the point will be noted and checked up on.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Jonathan Larmour
>In article <j2ed51-...@worf.jifvik.org>,
>jifl...@jifvik.org.removethis.invalid (Jonathan Larmour) wrote:
>
>> Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> enlightened us with:
>> >In article <vrbc51-...@worf.jifvik.org>,
>> >jifl...@jifvik.org.removethis.invalid (Jonathan Larmour) wrote:
>> >
>> >> Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> enlightened us with:
>> >> >The web site is now live at http://www.grandarcade.co.uk/.
>> >
>As I said it works from some pages. However, I guess your original comment
>related to the non-scrolling Terms and Conditions pop-up where the text
>overflows the space provided?
Nope, at the time I looked the T&C page said "text needed here" and that's
all :-). I see now the front page points to a link that doesn't exist, but
other pages inside the site now seem to work better (modulo the overflow
as you say).
Colin Rosenstiel
(Richard Kettlewell) wrote:
> rosen...@cix.co.uk (Colin Rosenstiel) writes:
> > The car park is leased back to the council for the same term, minus
> > one day.
>
> Why minus one day?
It's normal practice with commercial leases. It wouldn't really make any
difference if the leases ended at the same time. It's still a
discontinuity which introduces an element of uncertainty. It's uncertainty
that scares off funding institutions.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
wrote:
> There is some "real" Compulsory Purchase taking place though: Christ's
> College will lose out, for instance.
Not in any real sense. The college will receive fair compensation for
their freeholds which are subject to long leases. Agreement is close in
their case, I am advised.
> I would have thought that there is a real chance that Robert Sayle will
> decide NOT to return to the centre of town after the Grand Arcade is
> complete. What would happen in this case?
They are committed to taking their space in the completed scheme. They
have signed on the dotted line.
> Also, what is the relative timetable of Grand Arcade vs. Bradwell's Ct?
Grand Arcade is still ahead at present. Bradwell's Court doesn't have
planning permission yet. No application even, IIRC.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
jifl...@jifvik.org.removethis.invalid (Jonathan Larmour) wrote:
> Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> enlightened us with:
> >In article <j2ed51-...@worf.jifvik.org>,
> >jifl...@jifvik.org.removethis.invalid (Jonathan Larmour) wrote:
> >
> >> Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> enlightened us with:
> >> >In article <vrbc51-...@worf.jifvik.org>,
> >> >jifl...@jifvik.org.removethis.invalid (Jonathan Larmour) wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> enlightened us with:
> >> >> >The web site is now live at http://www.grandarcade.co.uk/.
> >> >> [I like the Terms & Conditions pop-up there. Very snazzy.]
> >> >
> >[snip]
> >As I said it works from some pages. However, I guess your original
> >comment related to the non-scrolling Terms and Conditions pop-up where
> >the text overflows the space provided?
>
> Nope, at the time I looked the T&C page said "text needed here" and
> that's all :-). I see now the front page points to a link that doesn't
> exist, but other pages inside the site now seem to work better (modulo
> the overflow as you say).
:-) No doubt it will come right - in time.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Al Grant
> for one day in 113 years time!
So? It evidently has real commercial value to John Lewis, or they
wouldn't have insisted on it. Here's what the Council's "Statement
of Reasons" (for the CPO) says:
As part of securing the commitment of John Lewis Partnership
("JLP") to the scheme, the Council and the Developer agreed to
secure all of the public car parking spaces in this annexe for
use during the entire term of their occupation of the new
department store premises.
Why didn't you just tell JLP to obtain whatever they wanted from
whoever had it at a market price? Do JLP really need your help
more than QD, Woolworths and Eaden Lilley did?
Tony Finch
>The web site is now live at http://www.grandarcade.co.uk/. Hopefully it
>will answer most questions arising here.
Where are the street elevations? I'm wondering what Downing Street will
look like. ARe they going to completely replace the grey concrete building
that contains Heffer's and Pizza Express?
Tony.
--
f.a.n.finch <d...@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/
THE WASH TO NORTH FORELAND: WEST OR SOUTHWEST 4 OR 5, OCCASIONALLY 6. MAINLY
FAIR. MODERATE OR GOOD. SLIGHT TO MODERATE.
Colin Rosenstiel
Finch) wrote:
> rosen...@cix.co.uk (Colin Rosenstiel) wrote:
> >The web site is now live at http://www.grandarcade.co.uk/. Hopefully
> >it will answer most questions arising here.
>
> Where are the street elevations? I'm wondering what Downing Street will
> look like. ARe they going to completely replace the grey concrete
> building that contains Heffer's and Pizza Express?
Yes. As I said some time back, 1970s architecture has not friends.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
You don't understand the purpose and practice of CPOs. Some parts of the
site are owned by the City Council and USS, the developer, but are still
included in the CPO to create a single title to the land.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Ben Harris
Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote:
Hrmph. I like the Arup Building (the one with the whale on the New Museums
Site, built in 1971), and I know I'm not alone in that. 10 Downing Street
is a bit dismal, though, I'd agree.
--
Ben Harris
Syv Knight
Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote:
Have you seen the amazing fossils in the side panels of that building? Great
big sea sponges and stuff.
People assume that because it looks 1970s and ugly from a distance, it must
be all boring grotty concrete with holes in.
--
Syv
Colin Rosenstiel
Harris) wrote:
I thought of writing "few friends" but settled for "no friends". What I
typoerd (oh what a wonderful mis-type!) is another matter. Mutter.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Michael Kilpatrick
> The web site is now live at http://www.grandarcade.co.uk/. Hopefully it
> will answer most questions arising here.
>
Judging by the first page, this site is pretty inaccessible and
content-void for anybody with disabilities using a screen reader, etc.
For example, the text "Anchored by a 280000sqft Robert Sayle..." is
part of an JPG image, not text. Therefore, any blind people trying to
access the site with a screen reader will not be able to read this
overview paragraph.
It's also got crap Javascript menu rollovers, and I can't see the text
items for the main menu (Scheme Overview, Partnership, Design....)
existing as text titles for <a> link elements within the source code.
Therefore the main menu is probably inaccessible too.
Why do people insist on creating crap sites like this, especially
such public projects?
Have they forgotten that the Olympic Committee were sued for
the Syndey Olympics site for their dreadful inaccessible web design?
Michael
Michael Kilpatrick
> The web site is now live at http://www.grandarcade.co.uk/. Hopefully it
> will answer most questions arising here.
>
Monstrous JPEG images! Blimey, I've been waiting about 5 minutes for
the main floorplan image to load. It's as slow as an old dog with a
wooden leg.
Michael
Ben Hutchings
Plus they seem to be uncacheable thanks to a brain-dead content
management system.
Tony Finch
Where are the pictures of the replacement frontage?
Tony.
--
f.a.n.finch <d...@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/
MALIN HEBRIDES: WESTERLY 7 TO SEVERE GALE 9 DECREASING 5 OR 6. RAIN THEN
SQUALLY SHOWERS. MODERATE OR GOOD.
Colin Rosenstiel
Finch) wrote:
> rosen...@cix.co.uk (Colin Rosenstiel) wrote:
> >In article <-8b*hW...@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, d...@dotat.at (Tony
> >Finch) wrote:
> >>
> >> Where are the street elevations? I'm wondering what Downing Street
> >> will look like. ARe they going to completely replace the grey
> >> concrete building that contains Heffer's and Pizza Express?
> >
> >Yes. As I said some time back, 1970s architecture has not friends.
>
> Where are the pictures of the replacement frontage?
They should be on the web site, FWIW.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Tony Finch
>d...@dotat.at (Tony Finch) wrote:
>>
>> Where are the pictures of the replacement frontage?
>
>They should be on the web site, FWIW.
The only external picture on http://194.203.81.102/pages/design-visualdesign
shows the adaptation of a listed shop-front on St Andrew's St to provide
an entrance to the shopping centre. It doesn't show any of the other changed
external elevations.
Tony.
--
f.a.n.finch <d...@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/
ST DAVIDS HEAD TO COLWYN BAY, INCLUDING ST GEORGES CHANNEL: EAST OR SOUTHEAST
4 OR 5, LOCALLY 6 AT TIMES. RAIN OR SHOWERS. MODERATE OR GOOD. SLIGHT.
Kevin Symonds
Kevin
Dan Sheppard
>Future users may like to note in advance that "the building will purvey a
>level of strength about it and incite a level of subliminal security.......
>it will represent a unique sense of place supported by both the physical
>architecture and the social interaction that takes place within it.....
>Users will experience a sense of trust, security and comfort. They will
>feel free to browse, not to be hurried and to be provided with honest and
>un-contrived service."
Amused to see that the New Museums Site has become the Science Museum
and the Sidgwick Site has become Downing College on their overview
map. Good to know they've been engaging in a constructive conversation
with the owners of adjacent properties. At least that bloody Crowne
Plaza place looks like it's going to be flattened. They've got a bit
of Downing Street within their Baliwick on the map, I do hope that
road will be maintained.
I'm now wondering if this site isn't a spoof by Thom Yorke.
Grand Arcade will be simply a collection of shops and restaurants. It
will represent a generic shopping experience, rather like that to be
gained in many cities of Cambridge's size, supported by identekit
shops selling a wide variety of nothing-in-particular, populated by
blank-faced slowly-ambling uninteracting people endulging in a poorly
focussed quest for meaning. The building will incite a level of
subliminal dispair overlaid by a soporiphic sense of smothering
fog. Users will experience a sense of hopelessness, anger and
frustration. They will feel free to browse, as if metaporphosed into
cattle in a field, not have any purpose, and be provided with
uncaring, minimal service by undervalued staff.
The architecture of the space will be regarded as a shopping centre;
an extension to lion yard which adds a fourth arm, blasted through
Dixons hangering left at one of those scarily non-human-scale atria,
and emerging blasting onto St Andrews Street somewhere near
Lunch-Aid. It will rely predomintantly on the use of apparently
natural, but nevertheless completely man-made materials including
stones, glass, steel and timber, rather than actual natural substances
such as rock strata, sand, iron-ore and forests. This material will no
doubt be combined in the usual steel-frame construction, with the
largely incidental overlay being left to someone more fluffy.
The architecture style has been developed as unyielding, hermetic,
reactionary and, in a sense, bland. It indulges in the current fear of
modernism and design by indulging a nursery pastiche of historical
styles taken out of context and glued together arbitrarily.
March on, join bravely, let us to't pell-mell; If not to heaven, then
hand in hand to hell.
Dan.
Tony Finch
>
>Amused to see that the New Museums Site has become the Science Museum
>and the Sidgwick Site has become Downing College on their overview
>map. Good to know they've been engaging in a constructive conversation
>with the owners of adjacent properties. At least that bloody Crowne
>Plaza place looks like it's going to be flattened.
Nope, it'll remain.
Tony.
--
f.a.n.finch <d...@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/
LOUGH FOYLE TO CARLINGFORD LOUGH: SOUTHEAST 5 OR 6. FAIR. MAINLY GOOD. SLIGHT
TO MODERATE, LOCALLY MODERATE TO ROUGH IN THE NORTH CHANNEL.
Dan Sheppard
>Dan Sheppard <da...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>>At least that bloody Crowne
>>Plaza place looks like it's going to be flattened.
>
>Nope, it'll remain.
Damn. It is looking decreasingly grand by the moment. As far as I can
tell, Lion Yard is remianing pretty much as-is, the multistorey
carpark is being replaced by a new ... multistorey carpark, they're
just building this route through to St Andrews Street from Lion Yard,
making Sayles' bigger and doing lots of tinkering.
Dan.
Mary Pegg
[snip]
> March on, join bravely, let us to't pell-mell; If not to heaven, then
> hand in hand to hell.
<applause>
Colin Rosenstiel
da...@chiark.greenend.org.uk (Dan Sheppard) wrote:
> At least that bloody Crowne Plaza place looks like it's going to be
> flattened.
YMTTICPC. It won't be.
10 Downing Street goes, though. Not the London one before you all get too
excited. :-)
> They've got a bit of Downing Street within their Baliwick on the map, I
> do hope that road will be maintained.
The CPO only extends that far because of the need for crane oversailing
rights.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Franck Arnaud
> The CPO only extends that far because of the need for crane oversailing
> rights.
How high does property go? Does Tim need oversailing rights to fly
over someone's property?
Colin Rosenstiel
da...@chiark.greenend.org.uk (Dan Sheppard) wrote:
The new car park will be wrapped around a shopping centre which should
alter the Corn Exchange frontage for the better. The car parking will
basically be below and above the shops (and below the hotel as now).
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
fra...@nenie.org (Franck Arnaud) wrote:
Yes except that aviation legislation probably over-rides the rights.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Michael Kilpatrick
> The web site is now live at http://www.grandarcade.co.uk/. Hopefully it
> will answer most questions arising here.
>
I thought we were talking about increased bus provision as part
of this scheme. I can't see any sign of space for lots of bus
stops in this scheme. Oh, yes, they can drive past and stop for
a minute, but there don't seem to be any signs of space for
laybys and terminals for a *serious* bus stop.
Michael
Martin Lucas-Smith
> You got images? You lucky man you. Looking forward to that opsys
> upgrade which will mean that I can use a browser which went out of date
> only 5 years ago.
> Ahh, I see. That's an image, with NO SENSIBLE ALT TAG. Arrrgghhhh!
> Lettering is mid tan on light tan at the bottom. I sincerely hope we
> haven't paid for this out of our Council Tax?
> [etc.]
Why oh why do sites with such basic accessibility problems like this
continue to be made?
If the council have paid for this, they really should force the site
developers to sort out the lack of accessibility on that site. I'd be very
interested to see what formal requirements for accessibility are put in
the tender document..
Martin Lucas-Smith
www.lucas-smith.co.uk
Senior Computing Technician (Web Technician)
Department of Geography, University of Cambridge (01223 3)33390
& Webmaster, SPRI
Scott Polar Research Institute, University of Cambridge
Franck Arnaud
> 1970s architecture has no[] friends.
Friends of Friendless Carbuncles is here:
http://www.c20society.org.uk/
Tony Finch
>
>10 Downing Street goes, though. Not the London one before you all get too
>excited. :-)
I'm quite amused to see that they have office space to let there. "Short
term leases" apparently :-)
Tony.
--
f.a.n.finch <d...@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/
CAPE WRATH TO RATTRAY HEAD INCLUDING ORKNEY: SOUTH OR SOUTHEAST 5 OR 6, BUT 4
IN SHELTER. FAIR. GOOD. MODERATE OR ROUGH.
Anetta Meriranta Pirinen
<michael.kilpatrick@btinternet_spamwitheggs.com> wrote:
> I thought we were talking about increased bus provision as part
> of this scheme. I can't see any sign of space for lots of bus
> stops in this scheme. Oh, yes, they can drive past and stop for
> a minute, but there don't seem to be any signs of space for
> laybys and terminals for a *serious* bus stop.
I've been wondering about that -- and I thought I must have read the
webpage wrong... Don't the people involved in this Grand Arcade thing
have any idea how packed the bus stop in front of the main post office
can be, especially now that somebody put the 77 P&R stopping on it? At
least once I had C5 bus leave me on the bus stop because it simply
could't fit itself on the stop, nor could it stay in the middle of the
road. (And it's a long, long wait for the next C5, half an hour during
the day, an hour in the evening.) If you want to have people using the
buses, why not have a similar bus stop scheme as Addenbrooks now has.
Or aren't the bus passengers simply not as important as the people who
come to the centre in their private cars? (I see there will be parking
for them.)
Anetta to reply drop NOSPAM
Forgiveness is the only hope I hold.
And love-- love will be my strongest weapon. -- R.E.M.
Ben Hutchings
<snip>
> will represent a generic shopping experience
As represented by the extremely generic and somewhat amusing names on
the shops in the artist's impressions.
<snip>
> The architecture of the space will be regarded as a shopping centre;
> an extension to lion yard which adds a fourth arm, blasted through
> Dixons
<snip>
It looks to me like Game is going to be displaced, not Dixons.
--
Ben Hutchings
Every program is either trivial or else contains at least one bug
Colin Rosenstiel
mv...@cam.ac.uk (Martin Lucas-Smith) wrote:
> > You got images? You lucky man you. Looking forward to that opsys
> > upgrade which will mean that I can use a browser which went out of
> > date only 5 years ago.
>
> > Ahh, I see. That's an image, with NO SENSIBLE ALT TAG. Arrrgghhhh!
> > Lettering is mid tan on light tan at the bottom. I sincerely hope we
> > haven't paid for this out of our Council Tax?
>
> > [etc.]
>
>
> Why oh why do sites with such basic accessibility problems like this
> continue to be made?
>
> If the council have paid for this, they really should force the site
> developers to sort out the lack of accessibility on that site. I'd be
> very interested to see what formal requirements for accessibility are
> put in the tender document..
The site was produced by the council's development partners but they
didn't ask us for advise. I have contacted the man from Grosvenor.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
michael.kilpatrick@btinternet_spamwitheggs.com (Michael Kilpatrick) wrote:
There will be an important bus stop at the Downing Street entrance.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
<slrnborrna.srm.b...@shadbolt.i.decadentplace.org.uk>,
ben-publ...@decadentplace.org.uk (Ben Hutchings) wrote:
> In article <k3g*8I...@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, Dan Sheppard wrote:
> <snip>
> > Grand Arcade will be simply a collection of shops and restaurants. It
> > will represent a generic shopping experience
>
> As represented by the extremely generic and somewhat amusing names on
> the shops in the artist's impressions.
>
> <snip>
> > The architecture of the space will be regarded as a shopping centre;
> > an extension to lion yard which adds a fourth arm, blasted through
> > Dixons
> <snip>
>
> It looks to me like Game is going to be displaced, not Dixons.
Correct. You may have noticed they have opened another Cambridge branch
recently, in Fitzroy Street.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Bob
> > Grand Arcade will be simply a collection of shops and restaurants. It
> > will represent a generic shopping experience
>
> As represented by the extremely generic and somewhat amusing names on
> the shops in the artist's impressions.
>
> > an extension to lion yard which adds a fourth arm, blasted through
> > Dixons
>
On the plan <http://194.203.81.102/80256D74002F2D75/Files/design-floorplans/$FILE/ground+floor+plan.jpg>
it appears to show two shops facing onto the new thoroughfare in the
space currently occupied by Dixons, I presume. So maybe Dixons will be
displaced a bit, anyway.
Game has another store just around the corner in Petty Cury, in any
case, although it is not as big or nice as the one in Lion Yard.