Mill road bridge to re-open!!

[tony sayer]

I see that someone has some sense!

Anyone know when its due to reopen?...

--
Tony Sayer


Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.

[Tim Ward]

On 28/07/2021 19:25, tony sayer wrote:
>
> I see that someone has some sense!

She is a rabid cyclist hater, has been for years. She tried (but failed)
to stop me putting some of those 600 new bike racks in the city centre
because she wanted the space for cars.

--
Tim Ward - 07801 703 600
www.brettward.co.uk

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 28/07/2021 20:18, Tim Ward wrote:
> On 28/07/2021 19:25, tony sayer wrote:
>>
>> I see that someone has some sense!
>
> She is a rabid cyclist hater, has been for years. She tried (but failed)
> to stop me putting some of those 600 new bike racks in the city centre

like the ones in the base of park street car patrk that are bnever ever
occupied?

> because she wanted the space for cars.
>

Cars bring more money


--
“It is hard to imagine a more stupid decision or more dangerous way of
making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people
who pay no price for being wrong.”

Thomas Sowell

[tony sayer]

In article <sdsahr$79c$1...@dont-email.me>, Tim Ward <t...@brettward.co.uk>
scribeth thus

>On 28/07/2021 19:25, tony sayer wrote:
>>
>> I see that someone has some sense!
>
>She is a rabid cyclist hater, has been for years. She tried (but failed)
>to stop me putting some of those 600 new bike racks in the city centre
>because she wanted the space for cars.
>

Well maybe someone might understand that not everyone can use a bike all
the time, cars be they fossil or fossil/electric hybrids are an
essential for a lot of the Cambridge population weather we like it or
not..

Yes cam is a special place not built for the motor car and it does need
managing but the public want their cars. Now i very rarely take mine
anywhere near the city centre and in fact rarely go there to buy
anything but there are other places that i do need to go and the car
suits me fine as for work reasons i have to cart a lot of equipment and
other clobber around with me that I couldn't carry on a bike let along a
bus, and they just do not go where i need to go etc..


But one problem that Cambridge does have is one natural barrier and one
man made.

Years ago i had to work for a small TV repair outfit and at the end of
the day if it was discovered that the Telly didn't work then there was a
frantic wailing if the lady of the house couldn't get to see that
evenings "Corrie" we were based at the bottom end of Mill road and a lot
of our customers were over what we always referred to as the "other side
of town" and that other side was that bloody river!

In those days the river was a big barrier and the only crossing towards
the centre of the town was Magdalene street bridge as in those days
Elizabeth bridge hadn't been built so long queues formed right thru town
sometimes you might have been able to use Fen causeway if that too
wasn't jammed.

When it came into service Lizzie bridge made a huge!! difference.

Now roll on the 21st century and the other barrier is that Railway line
there are very few crossings and Mill road whether it likes it or not is
one of the most important, apart from Hills road and Coldhams lane
crossings. All we are doing is concentrating the traffic flow into a
smaller space. Coldhams lane has small capacity as a lot of traffic in
that area is to do with places like the industrial retail estates on
Newmarket road and the Beehive estate.

I see that Nightingale Ave. and Sedley Taylor have in recent times been
blanked off to through flows as has Bateman street all nice i suppose
for these who live there but its not going to go away the motor car. All
it will do is to just clog up other places.

It needs managing, something that Cambridge never seems to do.

BTW, when are we going to get those charging points in the streets off
Mill road for all these "non polluting here" leccy cars, or will this
have to wait till we have viable small scale nuke power stations???

[Mark Carroll]

On 29 Jul 2021, tony sayer wrote:
(snip)

> I see that Nightingale Ave. and Sedley Taylor have in recent times been
> blanked off to through flows as has Bateman street all nice i suppose
> for these who live there but its not going to go away the motor car. All
> it will do is to just clog up other places.
>
> It needs managing, something that Cambridge never seems to do.

(snip)

I don't know if this is more cam.transport at this point, I'm happy to
follow it there, but I've wondered how much of this is that it's the
residents of the city getting the most power over that kind of planning
policy, in electing the relevant officials? It's been years since I
visited but, though it was lovely if living in a city centre college,
Cambridge always seemed to me to be a weird contradiction of being a
pain to get into and shop in but still wanting to be some major regional
retail centre where people would somehow come buy plenty of things and
hang out in the evening even though nobody would have any place to put
the stuff they bought (they're supposed to keep riding back and forth to
the park and ride?) and public transport would be rather lacking by late
evening. All the envisaged commerce won't happen without a welcoming
transportation infrastructure. Admittedly, I might have been able to do
more on a bicycle with panniers and a backpack but the rate at which
friends and strangers seemed to get hit by cars rather put me off.

I did manage to go without owning a car near Boston, MA, but there I
felt safer on a bicycle, perhaps mistakenly, and I could also rent a car
by the half-hour when necessary, and the non-car transportation
infrastructure was better anyway. Anyhow, I really hope Cambridge has
improved since I last visited, not that I see how with austerity then
the pandemic, but, as this group seems quiet these days, I thought I
could at least open the door to people saying if things have improved.
After all, it's the people I miss, not the place, and many of them chose
to stay, so clearly they find those practical aspects more tolerable
than I. As it was, after I had moved back there, even though I
eventually gave in and bought a car, it was easier to just go shop in
Haverhill or wherever instead.

-- Mark

[Theo]

Mark Carroll <mt...@kings.cantab.net> wrote:
> I don't know if this is more cam.transport at this point, I'm happy to
> follow it there, but I've wondered how much of this is that it's the
> residents of the city getting the most power over that kind of planning
> policy, in electing the relevant officials? It's been years since I
> visited but, though it was lovely if living in a city centre college,
> Cambridge always seemed to me to be a weird contradiction of being a
> pain to get into and shop in but still wanting to be some major regional
> retail centre where people would somehow come buy plenty of things and
> hang out in the evening even though nobody would have any place to put
> the stuff they bought (they're supposed to keep riding back and forth to
> the park and ride?) and public transport would be rather lacking by late
> evening. All the envisaged commerce won't happen without a welcoming
> transportation infrastructure. Admittedly, I might have been able to do
> more on a bicycle with panniers and a backpack but the rate at which
> friends and strangers seemed to get hit by cars rather put me off.

I have not sampled the shopping delights of Haverhill, but ISTM Cambridge is
a uniquely bad place for shopping. First of all the railway station is
nowhere near the shops so you need to take a bus. Then the shops are all
spread out by this dead space scattered around called 'colleges', which
means you need to do a lot of walking to get anything done, especially if
you need to do both market/Trinity St and Grafton.

I used to do my shopping in Guildford and Chichester, which had most of the
shopping on a couple of streets. Walk both streets (up the hill and down
again in Guildford's case, about 10 mins walking) and job done. In
Cambridge's case there's probably 30-60+ minutes of walking involved, and
measures to help (the city shuttle bus, P&R buses going to both centre and
Grafton) have steadily been removed. For many, that much walking (plus
all the walking around the shops) is too much.

This makes it relatively hostile if you don't have a bike to shorten the
distances. I haven't tried the current scooter trial; the Ofo hire bikes in
theory helped with this, but were often broken.

I suspect a lot of it is sustained by people who live in the city and are
relatively well served by public transport, or can cycle. The population
includes students (who probably support a lot of the 'everyday' city
shopping, such as remains), city residents (within cycling distance) and
tourists (who get dumped in the centre by tour bus, or from the station
likewise). From South Cambs you're either reliant on P&R (which tends to
vanish after 6pm, and even when it operated in the evening was largely
empty) or parking somewhere.

Grand Arcade was supposed to help with this, but I don't actually recall
buying anything from a shop there (apart from JL which was there before) -
they seem mostly aimed at upmarket tourists.

Since pandemic I have barely been into town, but the loss of shops like
Debenhams can't have helped.

With all the developments going on, they may have a transport solution *to*
'Cambridge' (eg the bus or rail station), but there don't seem to be good
plans as to how they will get around Cambridge after that.

Theo

[Roland Perry]

In message <Pfv*If...@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, at 16:13:13 on Thu,
29 Jul 2021, Theo <theom...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> remarked:

>the shops are all spread out by this dead space scattered around called
>'colleges', which means you need to do a lot of walking to get anything
>done, especially if you need to do both market/Trinity St and Grafton.

Isn't the Grafton Centre dead now (unsurprising after their two anchor
stores closed, irrespective of the general "death of High St Retail"
thing.

...

>Grand Arcade ... I don't actually recall buying anything from a shop

>there (apart from JL which was there before) - they seem mostly aimed
>at upmarket tourists.

Agreed; I did buy (or continue to buy) from shops on Petty Cury, but
that's not really the Grand Arcade.

--
Roland Perry

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 29/07/2021 14:49, Mark Carroll wrote:
> After all, it's the people I miss, not the place,

Reverse for me. I miss the river colleges and the punts, but the average
toffee nose wannabe smartass Cambridge suburban resident can kiss my arse.

While I throw their illegally ridden lightless insurance less unlicensed
two wheel death trap in the river



--
Gun Control: The law that ensures that only criminals have guns.

[Michael Kilpatrick]

On 29/07/2021 16:13, Theo wrote:
> Mark Carroll <mt...@kings.cantab.net> wrote:

>
> I have not sampled the shopping delights of Haverhill, but ISTM Cambridge is
> a uniquely bad place for shopping. First of all the railway station is
> nowhere near the shops so you need to take a bus.

I'm aware not everyone is as fit (well, I'm getting on a bit these days,
actually) and mobile as I am, but in all my 21 years of living in
Whittlesford, although it's true that I sometimes drive in because it
has always been cheaper for a short trip to use pay&display which is of
course a different issue, I have NEVER once caught a bus from the
railway station into the centre of town to go shopping. I always walk,
whether I'm going no further than John Lewis or going as far as Bridge
Street and King Street.

I have only twice - I reckon - in those twenty years caught a bus back
from the centre to the railway station because I *really* needed to get
the next train back to Whittlesford to get home for something or other.

There was the odd occasion when, as a youngster, I would walk all the
way back to Twentywell Lane from the centre of Sheffield rather than
catch a bus. Just for the hell of it. And there were buses every ten
minutes.

> Then the shops are all spread out by this dead space scattered around
> called 'colleges', which means you need to do a lot of walking to get
> anything done, especially if you need to do both market/Trinity St
> and Grafton.

I find that very difficult to relate to. Walking from the city centre to
the Grafton is something I always considered fairly trivial. Slightly
annoying because it's not round the corner, but still pretty trivial.

Shoping for, let's say, clothes always was, in the days before internet
shopping, something that occupied a fair amount of time walking from
shop to shop. I never used to have a problem with that.

Michael

[Mark Carroll]

On 29 Jul 2021, Michael Kilpatrick wrote:

> I find that very difficult to relate to. Walking from the city centre to
> the Grafton is something I always considered fairly trivial. Slightly
> annoying because it's not round the corner, but still pretty trivial.

Certainly agreed with that in normal circumstances, I suspect much
depends on what size/weight of stuff one's buying and how one plans to
convey it. E.g., when my mother-in-law goes for city-centre shopping,
I'm quite used to coming along and being an extra bag carrier, but not
everyone has such a helper and it's not like she's buying DIY supplies
or suchlike. For going to the Grafton, I've rarely bought much more than
a coat or whatever when there, so the walking remains trivial for me.
However, for buying, say, a week's groceries for the family, I'd head
out to Fulbourn Tesco or whatever.

-- Mark

[Theo]

Michael Kilpatrick <ne...@mkilpatrick.co.uk> wrote:
> I find that very difficult to relate to. Walking from the city centre to
> the Grafton is something I always considered fairly trivial. Slightly
> annoying because it's not round the corner, but still pretty trivial.

It's not going from Drummer St to Fitzroy St that's the issue, it's the
spread of shops. You're looking for an item of clothing and you find
something plausible on Trinity St, but you want to see what they have in
Debenhams. You go, you find they don't have what you want, so now you have
to go back to Trinity St to buy the first one. Or if you bought the first
one, and find something better in Debenhams, you now have to walk back to
Trinity St to return the first one.

It's not so bad if you can line everything up in a single row, but the
back and forth that's the problem. If all the clothes shops were in Grand
Arcade it would be easy, but they aren't.

> Shoping for, let's say, clothes always was, in the days before internet
> shopping, something that occupied a fair amount of time walking from
> shop to shop. I never used to have a problem with that.

Internet shopping doesn't help a great deal - no traipsing, but instead a
row of parcels to return (at non-zero expense :( )

Theo

[Roland Perry]

In message <Pfv*Hy...@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, at 22:07:17 on Thu,

29 Jul 2021, Theo <theom...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> remarked:

>Michael Kilpatrick <ne...@mkilpatrick.co.uk> wrote:
>> I find that very difficult to relate to. Walking from the city centre to
>> the Grafton is something I always considered fairly trivial. Slightly
>> annoying because it's not round the corner, but still pretty trivial.
>
>It's not going from Drummer St to Fitzroy St that's the issue, it's the
>spread of shops. You're looking for an item of clothing and you find
>something plausible on Trinity St, but you want to see what they have in
>Debenhams.

It's closed now, anyway.

>You go, you find they don't have what you want, so now you have
>to go back to Trinity St to buy the first one. Or if you bought the first
>one, and find something better in Debenhams, you now have to walk back to
>Trinity St to return the first one.

That's not the way I shop - which is to pick one that has the sort of
things I want, then stick to it.

>It's not so bad if you can line everything up in a single row, but the
>back and forth that's the problem. If all the clothes shops were in Grand
>Arcade it would be easy, but they aren't.
>
>> Shoping for, let's say, clothes always was, in the days before internet
>> shopping, something that occupied a fair amount of time walking from
>> shop to shop. I never used to have a problem with that.
>
>Internet shopping doesn't help a great deal - no traipsing, but instead a
>row of parcels to return (at non-zero expense :( )
>
>Theo

--
Roland Perry

[Tim Ward]

On 30/07/2021 06:25, Roland Perry wrote:
>
> That's not the way I shop - which is to pick one that has the sort of
> things I want, then stick to it.

Some people appear to regard "going shopping" as a leisure activity,
rather than a chore.

From this discussion, however, walking from shop to shop doesn't count,
for them, as part of the leisure activity. I'd have thought it would all
be part of the nice day out.

[tim...]

"Theo" <theom...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote in message
news:Pfv*Hy...@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk...

> Michael Kilpatrick <ne...@mkilpatrick.co.uk> wrote:
>> I find that very difficult to relate to. Walking from the city centre to
>> the Grafton is something I always considered fairly trivial. Slightly
>> annoying because it's not round the corner, but still pretty trivial.
>
> It's not going from Drummer St to Fitzroy St that's the issue, it's the
> spread of shops. You're looking for an item of clothing and you find
> something plausible on Trinity St, but you want to see what they have in
> Debenhams. You go, you find they don't have what you want, so now you
> have
> to go back to Trinity St to buy the first one. Or if you bought the first
> one, and find something better in Debenhams, you now have to walk back to
> Trinity St to return the first one.

I've never understood this "I can only buy one new item at a time" lark

If I liked the first one enough to buy it, I will just keep it if I find
something else later and end up going home with 2.

They will both stay in the wardrobe and get worn on alternative occasions,
both lasting twice as long, meaning that there is a longer gap before I next
have to go shopping for a new whatever-it-is.

Obviously that's normal everyday wear. It doesn't scale to buying a new
Rolex watch :-)

[tony sayer]

In article <DUJzbhDf...@bancom.co.uk>, tony sayer
<to...@bancom.co.uk> scribeth thus

>
>I see that someone has some sense!
>
>Anyone know when its due to reopen?...
>

According to the CEN 3rd of August after all the paperwork's done;!...

[Espen Koht]

On 28/07/2021 19:25, tony sayer wrote:
>

> I see that someone has some sense!
>
> Anyone know when its due to reopen?...

It never made much sense to close the bridge to be honest. Mill Rd would
benefit from being strategically sub-divided to stop end-to-end
through-traffic but doing so at the bridge has never been the answer. My
suggestion would be to pedestrianise parts of it but leave the bridge
open. For example, make some nice car free space between Gwydir St and
Kingston St (but allow inbound traffic to turn left on Devonshire for
access to the Station) extending the public space around the Bath House.
Similarly I think something similar could be done on the Broadway over
in Romsey.

Espen

[tony sayer]

In article <OHy*5M...@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, Espen Koht
<eh...@cam.ac.uk> scribeth thus

Seems to me the real issue is that bloody railway line! Perhaps they if
they ever start the metro dig a tunnel at one end of Mill road to the
other ! That would be fun;)...

Whilst at it one by passing Addenbrookes another bypassing Trumpington
and one for East west rail under the Gogs for freight;!..

[Espen Koht]

On 30/07/2021 13:27, tony sayer wrote:
> In article<OHy*5M...@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, Espen Koht
> <eh...@cam.ac.uk> scribeth thus
>> On 28/07/2021 19:25, tony sayer wrote:
>>> I see that someone has some sense!
>>>
>>> Anyone know when its due to reopen?...
>> It never made much sense to close the bridge to be honest. Mill Rd would
>> benefit from being strategically sub-divided to stop end-to-end
>> through-traffic but doing so at the bridge has never been the answer. My
>> suggestion would be to pedestrianise parts of it but leave the bridge
>> open. For example, make some nice car free space between Gwydir St and
>> Kingston St (but allow inbound traffic to turn left on Devonshire for
>> access to the Station) extending the public space around the Bath House.
>> Similarly I think something similar could be done on the Broadway over
>> in Romsey.
>>
>> Espen
> Seems to me the real issue is that bloody railway line! Perhaps they if
> they ever start the metro dig a tunnel at one end of Mill road to the
> other ! That would be fun;)...

You say that; but they have been doing the more sensible version of this
in the Netherlands. Delft, for example, as moved their railway lines
around the station into tunnels, and as that was from viaducts one might
imagine doing the same here would free up even more land proportionally.

[tony sayer]

In article <gyh*54...@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, Espen Koht

Yes well as Cambridge is the home of;

"When all is said and done, more is said and feck all dun"


Ain't happening...

[Martin]

On Thu, 29 Jul 2021, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> like the ones in the base of park street car patrk that are bnever ever
> occupied?

What, these?

https://www.cyclestreets.net/photos/space/13715/

Perhaps use has declined in recent years, because the place needs a good
clean. Presumably the building as a whole is not being well-maintained
because the whole thing is about to be knocked down.


Martin

[Martin]

On Thu, 29 Jul 2021, tony sayer wrote:

> I see that Nightingale Ave. and Sedley Taylor have in recent times been
> blanked off to through flows as has Bateman street all nice i suppose
> for these who live there but its not going to go away the motor car. All
> it will do is to just clog up other places.

Not really. There are modal filters all around Cambridge, many of which
have been around for decades, and no-one has been asking to remove them.

The two you mentioned are dealing with places where rat-running traffic
avoiding the main roads still had not been dealt with.

The cumulative effect of the modal filters in residential areas is that
cycling and walking is a feasible option, which it wouldn't be if you
allow all that space to fill up with car drivers wanting to pass through.
Usage will fill to whatever space is available. Ref: M25 widenings.


Martin

[Martin]

On Thu, 29 Jul 2021, Theo wrote:

> Grand Arcade was supposed to help with this, but I don't actually recall
> buying anything from a shop there (apart from JL which was there before)
> - they seem mostly aimed at upmarket tourists.

There is a fruiterer[1] there which is quite popular in these parts.


[1] https://www.apple.com/uk/retail/grandarcade/


Martin

[Martin]

On Fri, 30 Jul 2021, Espen Koht wrote:

> It never made much sense to close the bridge to be honest. Mill Rd would
> benefit from being strategically sub-divided to stop end-to-end
> through-traffic but doing so at the bridge has never been the answer. My
> suggestion would be to pedestrianise parts of it but leave the bridge
> open. For example, make some nice car free space between Gwydir St and
> Kingston St (but allow inbound traffic to turn left on Devonshire for
> access to the Station) extending the public space around the Bath House.
> Similarly I think something similar could be done on the Broadway over
> in Romsey.

Personally I'm not closed-minded to looking at alternative solutions, but
the problem that has never been answered about this idea, is how you stop
the Gwdir/Kingston Street and Devonshire/Tenison Road pairs each becoming
massive rat-runs. Do you have ideas on that?


Martin

[Martin]

On Thu, 29 Jul 2021, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> Cars bring more money

Given that there is almost nowhere to park on most of Mill Road, that is a
highly questionable view.

Even if there was parking, per amount of road space available, research
shows that people cycling and walking bring more income.

https://www.treehugger.com/study-shows-people-who-walk-and-bike-to-main-streets-spend-more-4855935


Martin

[Tim Ward]

Yes. The "cars bring more money" claim of the petrolheads is simply wrong.

[Roland Perry]

In message <sflm30$l07$1...@dont-email.me>, at 14:24:48 on Thu, 19 Aug
2021, Tim Ward <t...@brettward.co.uk> remarked:

While there are many shades of grey, would the Grand Arcade have been a
success without the car-park attached? Or don't you think the project
was needed at all, and did you believe John Lewis threats to leave the
City if it hadn't happened?
--
Roland Perry

[The Natural Philosopher]

so there wont be anywhere to park a car in Cambridge near colleges
at all?
I think I will take my money to spend somewhere else.


--
No Apple devices were knowingly used in the preparation of this post.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 19/08/2021 13:18, Martin wrote:
>
>

That is because te studies were done where thy have disallowed cars
Duh!

> Martin

[The Natural Philosopher]

It is in cambridge, It is simply not worth visiting any more with a car

[The Natural Philosopher]

Frankly if John Lewis disappeared, no one would miss it - or most of the
high streets/grand arcades

online every time for me. It is perfectly plain that the citizens of
Cambridge don't want me, my money or my car so feck em

Today I parked for free in the centre of Bury st Edmunds and did my
shopping, got a hair cut and browsed a book shop and a kitchen supply shop

I was thinking about going to the Fitzwilliam, but frankly there's
nowhere to park and its all socially distanced and pre booked so fuck
that as well.

[Fevric J. Glandules]

Martin wrote:

> On Thu, 29 Jul 2021, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> Cars bring more money
>
> Given that there is almost nowhere to park on most of Mill Road, that is a
> highly questionable view.

I asked in Al Amin what they thought of the bridge closure.
They observed that getting a 25kg bag of rice on a bike was
a bit tricky.

[Fevric J. Glandules]

Martin wrote:

> Personally I'm not closed-minded to looking at alternative solutions, but
> the problem that has never been answered about this idea, is how you stop
> the Gwdir/Kingston Street and Devonshire/Tenison Road pairs each becoming
> massive rat-runs. Do you have ideas on that?

<waves>

We have the technology. Here's one method:
https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/even-addenbrookes-road-residents-fined-13019404

But when I talked to some bods from the county council about traffic,
residents' parking etc., they told me that they can't do this
on *public* roads.

Equally one might have a rising bollard system and sell the magic
transponder to residents...

[Tim Ward]

On 19/08/2021 14:36, Roland Perry wrote:
>

> While there are many shades of grey, would the Grand Arcade have been a
> success without the car-park attached? Or don't you think the project
> was needed at all, and did you believe John Lewis threats to leave the
> City if it hadn't happened?

I don't think there was any particular need for the GA to be in
Cambridge - it's not as if it caters to Cambridge residents to any
noticeable extent.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 19/08/2021 20:07, Tim Ward wrote:
> I don't think there was any particular need for the GA to be in
> Cambridge - it's not as if it caters to Cambridge residents to any
> noticeable extent.

The staggering selfish stupidity and ignorance displayed by that remark,
as well as the patronising parochiality...

...seems typical of Cambridge local politicians

What the **** is the point of a market town at all?

If it doesn't have a catchment area well beyond the town/city
boundaries, to attract people who will spend their money in the town,
creating jobs and wealth for the town.

I think I will request that no one ends and goods from anywhere else
into Cambridge, on the basis that Cambridge has done nothing for them.

--
The New Left are the people they warned you about.

[Tim Ward]

On 20/08/2021 09:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
> What the **** is the point of a market town at all?

If it's to cater for people like you then I'm sure we can manage
without, ta very much.

You obviously hate us so much that you'd be much happier going elsewhere.

[Theo]

The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 19/08/2021 20:07, Tim Ward wrote:
> > I don't think there was any particular need for the GA to be in
> > Cambridge - it's not as if it caters to Cambridge residents to any
> > noticeable extent.
>
> The staggering selfish stupidity and ignorance displayed by that remark,
> as well as the patronising parochiality...
>
> ...seems typical of Cambridge local politicians
>
> What the **** is the point of a market town at all?
>
> If it doesn't have a catchment area well beyond the town/city
> boundaries, to attract people who will spend their money in the town,
> creating jobs and wealth for the town.

The original purpose of a market town was for people to bring things to
*sell*. Fixed shops grew to support the influx of people who came on market
day, as well as those who chose to live in the town. The shopkeepers income
went straight back into the local economy.

The Grand Arcade is nothing like that. It contains shops of 'global
brands', selling wares imported mostly from Asia, with the money going to
shareholders many of them abroad. The clientele is strongly tilted towards
tourists, who have no connection with the town.

I suppose you could count the Raspberry Pi store as just about local
(designed locally, assembled in Wales) but that's irrelevant to 95% of
Cambridge residents.

The shops employ some people and pay their rates, but that's about it. I
don't think the retail salaries are a lot better at Swarovski or Hugo Boss
as they are at Rymans or Heffers. The rates are probably slightly higher
due to the swankier address, but the income to the town can't be a great
deal more. I would venture that a few independent shops (like say Mackays)
would bring more value in terms of keeping money in the town than the Grand
Arcade.

To take another example, Bicester Village is plonked in the middle of the
Oxfordshire town but most of the customers are tourists bussed in or come by
train from London. When lockdown happened it was a ghost town. It could
equivalently be Dubai Airport Duty Free as far as the local economy is
concerned.

Theo

[Tim Ward]

On 20/08/2021 12:49, Theo wrote:
>
> I suppose you could count the Raspberry Pi store as just about local
> (designed locally, assembled in Wales) but that's irrelevant to 95% of
> Cambridge residents.

I'm happy to make an exception for that one shop. I'm afraid I've never
been there, as I started playing with Raspberry Pis only after covid.

[Brian Morrison]

On Fri, 20 Aug 2021 16:29:32 +0100, Tim Ward wrote:

> I'm happy to make an exception for that one shop. I'm afraid I've never
> been there, as I started playing with Raspberry Pis only after covid.

Well, I'm pleased that you have advanced to stating that covid is in the
past.

--

Brian

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 20/08/2021 12:21, Tim Ward wrote:
> On 20/08/2021 09:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>> What the **** is the point of a market town at all?
>
> If it's to cater for people like you then I'm sure we can manage
> without, ta very much.
>

And the 1m people like me who now wont bothre to vist cambridge

> You obviously hate us so much that you'd be much happier going elsewhere.
>

I don't hate cambridge citizens, pettyy offials lke you on the other hand...

--
To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.

[Espen Koht]

On 19/08/2021 13:12, Martin wrote:

> Personally I'm not closed-minded to looking at alternative solutions, but
> the problem that has never been answered about this idea, is how you stop
> the Gwdir/Kingston Street and Devonshire/Tenison Road pairs each becoming
> massive rat-runs. Do you have ideas on that?

I believe I've answered this before (even though I think it's a minor
detail):

The first on is easy: just dead-end Kingston St at the intersection with
Mill Rd. The 2nd is much more of a detour and I'm not sure how
attractive it would be for rat running (these tend to be attractive when
they are obvious short-cuts) and I think the various closures of Mill
Road of late probably has made people plan their routing better.

If it really was to be a problem I would suggest one-waying both
Devonshire Rd and Tenison for traffic way from Mill Rd (so you wouldn't
be able double-back in either direction.

Espen

[Espen Koht]

When is the last time you saw someone buy a 25Kg bag of rice in Al Amin
(or Cho Mee or Soul Plaza for that matter?). What did Bacchanalia say
(as a case of wine does get tricker on a bike if you want to factor to
risks).

Espen

[Fevric J. Glandules]

Espen Koht wrote:

> On 19/08/2021 19:34, Fevric J. Glandules wrote:
>> I asked in Al Amin what they thought of the bridge closure.
>> They observed that getting a 25kg bag of rice on a bike was
>> a bit tricky.
>
> When is the last time you saw someone buy a 25Kg bag of rice in Al Amin

Maybe they're loading it out out the back.

[David Williams]

[ Not on Mill Road, but "local" within Cambridge. ]

I've seen somebody riding a Voi e-scooter with a 12-bottle pack
of Peroni on the footboard. I was forced to conduct an experiment
so I know that pack weighs 6.3 kg. For comparison, a box of 6
standard wine bottles weighed in at 7.1 kg. Nice training stages
for the rice, and you get an optional seat. I'll get my coat.

Other e-scooter anecdotes available ...

--
David

[Martin]

On Thu, 19 Aug 2021, Roland Perry wrote:

> While there are many shades of grey, would the Grand Arcade have been a
> success without the car-park attached? Or don't you think the project
> was needed at all, and did you believe John Lewis threats to leave the
> City if it hadn't happened?

It's important to remember the background that the GA scheme was a counter
to the proposed Arbury Park Sainsbury's out-of-town complex scheme, which
would have seen large amounts of parking at the edge of Cambridge,
building in car dependency. The city council was able to argue
successfully that both were not needed, and that it was better to have a
city-centre scheme.

Personally I think that the present car park location is increasingly
anachronistic, and is problematic in terms of keeping traffic outside the
city centre. More disabled parking in the city centre remains needed.


Martin

[Martin]

On Thu, 19 Aug 2021, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 19/08/2021 13:05, Martin wrote:

> > Perhaps use has declined in recent years, because the place needs a
> > good clean. Presumably the building as a whole is not being
> > well-maintained because the whole thing is about to be knocked down.

and replaced by a new car park, with other stuff built above to pay for
it.

> so there wont be anywhere to park a car in Cambridge near colleges at
> all?

The other large car parks near colleges remain open.



Martin

[Martin]

On Thu, 19 Aug 2021, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> It is in cambridge, It is simply not worth visiting any more with a car

The vast numbers of people still clogging up the city, day in day out,
seem to disagree with you.

There needs to be proper reallocation of such roadspace to public
transport and cycling, to give people an alternative to the car.


Martin

[Martin]

On Thu, 19 Aug 2021, Fevric J. Glandules wrote:

> I asked in Al Amin what they thought of the bridge closure. They
> observed that getting a 25kg bag of rice on a bike was a bit tricky.

Are you suggesting that Cambridge's entire transport system should be
designed around the rare cases of someone buying 25kg bags of rice bought
from a local shop?

I think even a person as intelligent as Abdul would surely not claim that.

In any case, there is a car park directly opposite the shop. During the
bridge closure to rat-running traffic, that car park remained accessible
24/7 to all vehicles. So the point is irrelevant anyway.


Martin

[Martin]

On Wed, 25 Aug 2021, Fevric J. Glandules wrote:

> Espen Koht wrote:
> > When is the last time you saw someone buy a 25Kg bag of rice in Al
> > Amin
>
> Maybe they're loading it out out the back.

Or from the front, on the pavement, as the case may be.

https://www.cyclestreets.net/location/5615/



Martin

[Roland Perry]

In message <alpine.LRH.2.00.2...@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk>,
at 15:09:02 on Wed, 1 Sep 2021, Martin <mv...@remove.cam.ac.uk>
remarked:

There's always been a huge number of empty disabled spaces in QAT car
park when I've been there.
--
Roland Perry

[Tim Ward]

On 19/08/2021 16:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
> so there wont be anywhere to park a car in Cambridge near colleges
> at all?

Whenever I have had a real need to park a car in Cambridge near a
college the college in question has allowed me to use their car park.

[Fevric J. Glandules]

Martin wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Aug 2021, Fevric J. Glandules wrote:
>
>> I asked in Al Amin what they thought of the bridge closure. They
>> observed that getting a 25kg bag of rice on a bike was a bit tricky.
>
> Are you suggesting that Cambridge's entire transport system should be
> designed around the rare cases of someone buying 25kg bags of rice bought
> from a local shop?

Don't shoot the messenger.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 01/09/2021 22:56, Fevric J. Glandules wrote:
> Martin wrote:
>

>> Are you suggesting that Cambridge's entire transport system should be
>> designed around the rare cases of someone buying 25kg bags of rice bought
>> from a local shop?
>
> Don't shoot the messenger.
>

But Cambridge's entire transport system is *already* designed around the
rare cases of street legal, well ridden bicycles with lights on that
give hand signals, being the de facto and de jure mode of transport
--
WOKE is an acronym... Without Originality, Knowledge or Education.

[Rupert Moss-Eccardt]

And I am not sure Park Street it is the most proximal for the most
colleges anyway.

[Roland Perry]

In message <ipedm3...@mid.individual.net>, at 12:02:25 on Fri, 3 Sep
2021, Rupert Moss-Eccardt <n...@moss-eccardt.com> remarked:

It's a good location because it's easy to get to by road. Also a stone's
throw from Sidney and Jesus (did you see Professor T?) as well as close
to Magdalene, Johns, Trinity and all the others down to Kings. Not too
bad for Christs, either (via the King St entrance).
--
Roland Perry

[The Natural Philosopher]

Its proximal for the market square trinity johns magdalene and christs
and is generally obscure enough not to get car damage from twats when
parking there, nor suffer from queues and difficult access like the one
by the Grand Arcade, which given the pedestrianization and one ways
systems for me is about an extra three miles down congested roads to access.

Unless someone knows a better way to get to it from the Milton road
other than either the backs and fen causeway or east road catholic
church etc.

I always assumed that councillors over the years have deliberately made
it virtually impossible to access Cambridge by car.


--
"First, find out who are the people you can not criticise. They are your
oppressors."
- George Orwell

[The Natural Philosopher]

Exactly, and, most importantly, since the only shops worth visiting in
Cambridge are now Waterstones and Heffers, extremely close to both which
when you have massive angina and cant walk more than 50 yards, without
stopping several times, was convenient

--
Labour - a bunch of rich people convincing poor people to vote for rich
people by telling poor people that "other" rich people are the reason
they are poor.

Peter Thompson

[Martin]

On Fri, 3 Sep 2021, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> Exactly, and, most importantly, since the only shops worth visiting in
> Cambridge are now Waterstones and Heffers, extremely close to both which
> when you have massive angina and cant walk more than 50 yards, without
> stopping several times, was convenient

There is blue badge parking just round the corner from those, on Jesus
Lane:

https://www.google.com/maps/@52.208175,0.1201142,3a,75y,230.69h,82.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szkAW48qqqAFQ_xxYSqx_Nw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656


Martin

[Martin]

On Fri, 3 Sep 2021, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> I always assumed that councillors over the years have deliberately made
> it virtually impossible to access Cambridge by car.

No, at most times it is the number of cars that make it difficult to
access Cambridge by car.


Martin

[The Natural Philosopher]

cant get blue badges for temporary problems

>
> Martin
>


--
There is nothing a fleet of dispatchable nuclear power plants cannot do
that cannot be done worse and more expensively and with higher carbon
emissions and more adverse environmental impact by adding intermittent
renewable energy.

[The Natural Philosopher]

because the councillors closed all the roads with bollards

There are now no road crossing points for the river apart from fen
causeway, and elizabeth way.

Bridge street and silverstreet are both closed to cars. HALF the
capacity, Trinity street and te market are now no go for cars, so you
cant get to kings parade easily at all


There is only one real road from the east - East road - every other
possible route is now blocked by the council.

To blame that on 'traffic' is a complete lie. Typical of anti-car fanatics

[tony sayer]

In article <shvqml$np8$1...@dont-email.me>, The Natural Philosopher
<t...@invalid.invalid> scribeth thus

>On 16/09/2021 16:22, Martin wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 3 Sep 2021, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> I always assumed that councillors over the years have deliberately made
>>> it virtually impossible to access Cambridge by car.
>>
>> No, at most times it is the number of cars that make it difficult to
>> access Cambridge by car.
>>
>because the councillors closed all the roads with bollards
>
>There are now no road crossing points for the river apart from fen
>causeway, and elizabeth way.

Victoria Avenue is still open!, well it was the other week!...

>
>Bridge street and silverstreet are both closed to cars. HALF the
>capacity, Trinity street and te market are now no go for cars, so you
>cant get to kings parade easily at all

Never need to go there none of the shops have owt that fits me, all
online now;!..

>
>
>There is only one real road from the east - East road - every other
>possible route is now blocked by the council.
>

The real issue with Mill road is that it crosses the Railway line
closing it forced a lot of traffic onto and down Coldhams lane and
thats badly congested at its junctions with the beehive centre and
Newmarket road.

From the few times I've been up and down Mill road it isn't that bad
people are still sitting on chairs by the road enjoying a breath of
diesel particulate's.

I do note that the peeps who live on the streets off Mill road aren't
short of the odd motor or many!, perhaps the council had better get on
with a decent on street charging system;)..

Once we've sorted the electrical supply for the UK.


No more BLOODY useless Windy mills !!!!

>To blame that on 'traffic' is a complete lie. Typical of anti-car fanatics
>
>
>

--

Tony Sayer


Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.

[Roland Perry]

In message <4Qz96DS1...@bancom.co.uk>, at 21:32:53 on Thu, 16 Sep
2021, tony sayer <to...@bancom.co.uk> remarked:

>>>
>>>> I always assumed that councillors over the years have deliberately made
>>>> it virtually impossible to access Cambridge by car.
>>>
>>> No, at most times it is the number of cars that make it difficult to
>>> access Cambridge by car.
>>>
>>because the councillors closed all the roads with bollards
>>
>>There are now no road crossing points for the river apart from fen
>>causeway, and elizabeth way.
>
>Victoria Avenue is still open!, well it was the other week!...

And plenty of other river crossings for those who walk and cycle.
--
Roland Perry

[Paul Bird]

On 16/09/2021 21:32, tony sayer wrote:

> I do note that the peeps who live on the streets off Mill road aren't
> short of the odd motor or many!, perhaps the council had better get on
> with a decent on street charging system;)..

The situation is more complicated than a quick glance would suggest. In
the years we lived on Suez Road we only ever owned one vehicle at a
time, perhaps others owned more than one however owing to the 10-12
minute walk to the station platforms from there the street is used for
commuter parking on a M-F basis.

Then there are the weekly parkers who don't live in the street or
perhaps even the area but want free parking for whatever reason and deny
residents street space. It was not uncommon to see a vehicle parked on
the street without moving for up to a week, and longer occasionally.

Since the mosque was built there is the Friday prayers situation and
this despite the presence of a large underground car park. This causes
less trouble since the street only fills up for 30 mins then they all go
again but the traffic it causes is a pain.

In the years we lived there the street slowly went BTL and is probably
worse now, so charging people to park there is going to be complicated.

The freehold owners won't pay because they don't live and park there.
The frequent tenant changes mean keeping up with permits for renters
will be an ongoing headache for the council and the BTLs by their very
nature make the parking situation worse since each BTL house is likely
to house multiple vehicle owners.

I'll leave it there but you can see why it's not as simple as charging
the residents to park.

PB

[Alan Jones]

On 17/09/2021 11:05, Paul Bird wrote:
> On 16/09/2021 21:32, tony sayer wrote:
>
>> I do note that the peeps who live on the streets off Mill road aren't
>> short of the odd motor or many!, perhaps the council had better get on
>> with a decent on street charging system;)..
>

> I'll leave it there but you can see why it's not as simple as charging
> the residents to park.
>
> PB

ITHM "on street -electric vehicle- charging system".

Alan.

[Roland Perry]

In message <si1p91$gur$1...@dont-email.me>, at 11:05:21 on Fri, 17 Sep
2021, Paul Bird <pa...@nospamcamtutor.co.uk> remarked:

>> I do note that the peeps who live on the streets off Mill road aren't
>> short of the odd motor or many!, perhaps the council had better get on
>> with a decent on street charging system;)..
>
>The situation is more complicated than a quick glance would suggest. In
>the years we lived on Suez Road we only ever owned one vehicle at a
>time, perhaps others owned more than one however owing to the 10-12
>minute walk to the station platforms from there the street is used for
>commuter parking on a M-F basis.
>
>Then there are the weekly parkers who don't live in the street or
>perhaps even the area but want free parking for whatever reason and
>deny residents street space. It was not uncommon to see a vehicle
>parked on the street without moving for up to a week, and longer
>occasionally.

I know someone who lived for a couple of years in Malta Road fairly
recently so can relate to that.

When I lived in the 'leafy suburbs' of Nottingham, almost all the cars
parked on the street would be commuters using it as an informal daily
P&R for getting a bus onwards into the City centre.

Apart from Saturdays when there was a football match at one of the two
grounds, when the entire suburb was swamped. Trent Bridge cricket ground
were better at arranging ad-hoc off-street parking (on playing fields or
whatever) for their Test Match spectators.
--
Roland Perry

[tony sayer]

In article <si1p91$gur$1...@dont-email.me>, Paul Bird
<pa...@nospamcamtutor.co.uk> scribeth thus

>On 16/09/2021 21:32, tony sayer wrote:
>
>> I do note that the peeps who live on the streets off Mill road aren't
>> short of the odd motor or many!, perhaps the council had better get on
>> with a decent on street charging system;)..
>
>The situation is more complicated than a quick glance would suggest. In
>the years we lived on Suez Road we only ever owned one vehicle at a
>time, perhaps others owned more than one however owing to the 10-12
>minute walk to the station platforms from there the street is used for
>commuter parking on a M-F basis.
>
>Then there are the weekly parkers who don't live in the street or
>perhaps even the area but want free parking for whatever reason and deny
>residents street space. It was not uncommon to see a vehicle parked on
>the street without moving for up to a week, and longer occasionally.
>

>Since the mosque was built there is the Friday prayers situation and
>this despite the presence of a large underground car park.

Never knew there was one there!, why don't the worshippers use it
then?..

> This causes
>less trouble since the street only fills up for 30 mins then they all go
>again but the traffic it causes is a pain.
>
>In the years we lived there the street slowly went BTL and is probably
>worse now, so charging people to park there is going to be complicated.
>
>The freehold owners won't pay because they don't live and park there.
>The frequent tenant changes mean keeping up with permits for renters
>will be an ongoing headache for the council and the BTLs by their very
>nature make the parking situation worse since each BTL house is likely
>to house multiple vehicle owners.
>
>I'll leave it there but you can see why it's not as simple as charging
>the residents to park.
>
>PB

I went to visit a mate in Catherine street on a Sunday night a few weeks
ago, had a real problem finding a place to park! Just managed to creep
into a small space outside the Empress pub so all those cars on a
Sunday night are commuters then;?.


Ready for Monday morning?....

[Tim Ward]

On 17/09/2021 21:04, tony sayer wrote:
>
> I went to visit a mate in Catherine street on a Sunday night a few weeks
> ago, had a real problem finding a place to park!

I know where I can always find somewhere to park a very short walk from
there. Guess whether I'm going to publish where it is!

[Vir Campestris]

On 17/09/2021 11:05, Paul Bird wrote:
>

> Then there are the weekly parkers who don't live in the street or
> perhaps even the area but want free parking for whatever reason and deny
> residents street space.  It was not uncommon to see a vehicle parked on
> the street without moving for up to a week, and longer occasionally.

My car has not left my garage all week.

I would have thought it far from unlikely that a resident would leave
their car in one place for a week, given that there's a station for
London commuting in easy reach, and local shops. They might even have
another car in the same household.

Andy

[Paul Bird]

No. These are cars not seen in the street before. When you live in one
of those streets you get to know the cars in the immediate vicinity that
regularly come and go. When one appears from nowhere, not previously
seen, remains for a week, ten days, or a fortnight and then vanishes as
quickly as it arrived then that is not a neighbour's car, that is
somebody using a space on the street for their own ends and removing a
space for residents.

PB

[Alan]

On Mon, 20 Sep 2021 09:57:34 +0100, Paul Bird <pa...@nospamcamtutor.co.uk>
wrote:

As opposed to a resident using it for their own ends? :-)


--
Alan

Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

[Paul Bird]

Resident has more right to the space, this has to be formalised somehow
and therein lies the problem see back up the thread

PB

[Martin]

On Thu, 16 Sep 2021, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> Bridge street and silverstreet are both closed to cars. HALF the
> capacity, Trinity street and te market are now no go for cars, so you
> cant get to kings parade easily at all

Are you seriously arguing for the de-pedestrianisation of the city centre?

Why should hundreds of car drivers taking a shortcut have dominance in
that space over tens of thousands of pedestrians enjoying the space?


Martin

[Roland Perry]

In message <si9idv$aij$1...@dont-email.me>, at 09:57:34 on Mon, 20 Sep

2021, Paul Bird <pa...@nospamcamtutor.co.uk> remarked:

Exactly! We have this issue in the street where I live, and for a
hundred yards in either direction on both sides of the road, I could
tell you which cars (and some light commercial vehicles) belong to
particular households, and which are "tourists". A pattern like that
emerges clearly within a few weeks of moving in.
--
Roland Perry

[Tim Ward]

On 20/09/2021 09:57, Paul Bird wrote:
>
> a space for residents.

It's only "a space for residents" if there's a residents' parking scheme
in effect.

[Tim Ward]

On 20/09/2021 10:12, Paul Bird wrote:
>
> Resident has more right to the space, this has to be formalised somehow

If it has been "formalised somehow", ie there is a residents' parking
scheme in effect (the only such mechanism I'm aware of), then the
resident does have "more right to the space". Otherwise they don't -
there is no general right to store your private property on public land
at public expense.

[Alan]

On Mon, 20 Sep 2021 10:12:14 +0100, Paul Bird <pa...@nospamcamtutor.co.uk>

If you want room to store your property, you buy land to do it on don't
you? At least with any certainty.

[Roland Perry]

In message <si9vfj$5fc$2...@dont-email.me>, at 13:40:21 on Mon, 20 Sep
2021, Tim Ward <t...@brettward.co.uk> remarked:

>On 20/09/2021 10:12, Paul Bird wrote:
>> Resident has more right to the space, this has to be formalised
>>somehow
>
>If it has been "formalised somehow", ie there is a residents' parking
>scheme in effect (the only such mechanism I'm aware of),

There's also marked parking spaces, which are not necessarily within a
residents parking scheme.

>then the resident does have "more right to the space". Otherwise they
>don't - there is no general right to store your private property on
>public land at public expense.

However, absent any parkings to the contrary, there's also no general
prohibition either, apart from when the vehicle is also causing an
obstruction.

What causes neighbours to fall out is when they misunderstand the
principle of "first come, first served".
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <si9vce$5fc$1...@dont-email.me>, at 13:38:40 on Mon, 20 Sep

2021, Tim Ward <t...@brettward.co.uk> remarked:

>On 20/09/2021 09:57, Paul Bird wrote:
>>
>> a space for residents.
>
>It's only "a space for residents" if there's a residents' parking
>scheme in effect.

There's also "disabled" bays (often nominally associated with a specific
property).
--
Roland Perry

[Tim Ward]

I think if one were to park in a marked parking space one would expect
(whether reasonably or not I don't know) in normal circumstances to have
a defence against "causing an obstruction" just by virtue of having parked.

What is this concept of a parking space that is marked as giving
residents some sort of priority but (outside private roads and other
edge cases) is not a "residents' parking scheme"? What legal force does
it have?

[Tim Ward]

Nope. They are indeed often originally provided at the request of a
resident of a particular property[#], but then anyone (who is allowed to
park in a disabled space) can use them. This is, or should be, made
clear to the resident when they request such a space.

[#] And someone, somewhere, has the job of noticing when such a person
has died - I've had a request from officers "the resident for whom this
space was created has now died, do you have any objection to us removing
the space?".

[Roland Perry]

In message <sia22o$q19$1...@dont-email.me>, at 14:24:40 on Mon, 20 Sep

2021, Tim Ward <t...@brettward.co.uk> remarked:
>On 20/09/2021 14:01, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <si9vfj$5fc$2...@dont-email.me>, at 13:40:21 on Mon, 20 Sep
>>2021, Tim Ward <t...@brettward.co.uk> remarked:
>>> On 20/09/2021 10:12, Paul Bird wrote:
>>>>  Resident has more right to the space, this has to be formalised somehow
>>>
>>> If it has been "formalised somehow", ie there is a residents'
>>>parking scheme in effect (the only such mechanism I'm aware of),

>> There's also marked parking spaces, which are not necessarily within
>>a residents parking scheme.
>>
>>> then the resident does have "more right to the space". Otherwise
>>>they don't - there is no general right to store your private
>>>property on public land at public expense.

>> However, absent any parkings to the contrary, there's also no
>>general prohibition either, apart from when the vehicle is also
>>causing an obstruction.

>> What causes neighbours to fall out is when they misunderstand the
>>principle of "first come, first served".
>
>I think if one were to park in a marked parking space one would expect
>(whether reasonably or not I don't know) in normal circumstances to
>have a defence against "causing an obstruction" just by virtue of
>having parked.

Indeed so, they should only be so marked if that was the case.

>What is this concept of a parking space that is marked as giving
>residents some sort of priority

They aren't. Apart from a few edge cases like "Doctor" bays which may or
may not be limited to the GP outside whose house/surgery they are
installed.

>but (outside private roads and other edge cases) is not a "residents'
>parking scheme"?

Some marked parking bays are inside, and some outside, the umbrella of a
residents parking scheme.

>What legal force does it have?

First we need to agree the functionality, before finding a law which is
engaged.
--
Roland Perry

[Mark Goodge]

On Mon, 20 Sep 2021 14:24:40 +0100, Tim Ward <t...@brettward.co.uk>
wrote:

>
>What is this concept of a parking space that is marked as giving
>residents some sort of priority but (outside private roads and other
>edge cases) is not a "residents' parking scheme"? What legal force does
>it have?

It's possible to get a disabled space marked on the street in front of a
house with a disabled resident who needs to be able to park their car
nearby. This still doesn't make it "their" space, but, unless there are
other regular users of the street with a blue badge, it means they will
normally be able to rely on it being left clear.

Mark

[Roland Perry]

In message <sia299$q19$2...@dont-email.me>, at 14:28:09 on Mon, 20 Sep

2021, Tim Ward <t...@brettward.co.uk> remarked:
>On 20/09/2021 14:03, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <si9vce$5fc$1...@dont-email.me>, at 13:38:40 on Mon, 20 Sep
>>2021, Tim Ward <t...@brettward.co.uk> remarked:
>>> On 20/09/2021 09:57, Paul Bird wrote:
>>>>
>>>> a space for residents.
>>>
>>> It's only "a space for residents" if there's a residents' parking
>>>scheme in effect.
>> There's also "disabled" bays (often nominally associated with a
>>specific property).
>
>Nope. They are indeed often originally provided at the request of a
>resident of a particular property[#],

That is an association

>but then anyone (who is allowed to park in a disabled space) can use
>them. This is, or should be, made clear to the resident when they
>request such a space.

All part of the joyous "first come first served". Although I've now
found this in a Cambridge Traffic Order:

Each Doctor, Medical Practitioner and Samaritan Parking Place
may only be used in accordance with this Order for Waiting by
Vehicles displaying in the Relevant Position a valid Permit
issued in respect of that Vehicle relating to that Parking
Place

Which seems to lock such spaces to particular persons/vehicles.

>[#] And someone, somewhere, has the job of noticing when such a person
>has died - I've had a request from officers "the resident for whom this
>space was created has now died, do you have any objection to us
>removing the space?".
>

--

Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <qp3hkgp9h1a2utln8...@4ax.com>, at 14:46:52 on
Mon, 20 Sep 2021, Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:

Although I can't find it on Streetview, there's a Cambridge Traffic
Order which implies there's a marked space for the exclusive use of "the
head teacher of Park Street Primary School", therefore is it possible
that there could be Disabled spaces similarly tied to an individual?
--
Roland Perry

[Mark Carroll]

On 20 Sep 2021, Roland Perry wrote:

> Although I can't find it on Streetview, there's a Cambridge Traffic
> Order which implies there's a marked space for the exclusive use of "the
> head teacher of Park Street Primary School", therefore is it possible
> that there could be Disabled spaces similarly tied to an individual?

I have a hazy memory of maybe having seen disabled parking in Cornwall
tied to a particular residence but I might be wrong and that was many
years ago and plausibly a facet of some specific council's residents'
parking scheme.

-- Mark

[Alan]

On Mon, 20 Sep 2021 14:55:36 +0100, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

>
> Although I can't find it on Streetview, there's a Cambridge Traffic
> Order which implies there's a marked space for the exclusive use of "the
> head teacher of Park Street Primary School", therefore is it possible
> that there could be Disabled spaces similarly tied to an individual?

I read that as for the use of the school, applied for by the head teacher,
not necessarily for him/her:

"Business Parking Permit

9.1(b) Subject to Article 9.7 a Business Proprietor (not being
a head teacher of Park
Street Primary School) whose business is included in streets identified in
Schedule
2, 4, 5, 6, 8,11 and Schedule 12 Part 1 of this Order may apply to the
Council for
the issue of one Business Parking Permit for each such
business and the head
teacher of Park Street Primary School may apply to the Council for the
issue of one
Business Parking Permit in respect of that school."

[Fevric J. Glandules]

[stationary cars]

There's one I go past every day which hasn't moved in months.
It's in *precisely* the same position it was in when I first
noticed that it never went anywhere.

Intriguingly it's on Street View in the same spot (easily judged
because it's a couple of feet away from a double yellow) but
dated Sept 2020. Which is odd because it's been MOT'd in the meantime
(various websites exist which can provide this info).

I'm fairly sure it belongs to a resident...

[Tim Ward]

On 20/09/2021 23:34, Fevric J. Glandules wrote:
> [stationary cars]
>
> There's one I go past every day which hasn't moved in months.

My car didn't move for about eighteen months. Dunno if you've noticed,
but there's this plague out there - if I'm not going anywhere I don't
need to move a car.

[Chris Shore]

Then along comes a car with teeth and an engine at both ends, and the number plate 346 GNU…

[Roland Perry]

In message <sib29i$ub8$1...@dont-email.me>, at 22:34:26 on Mon, 20 Sep
2021, Fevric J. Glandules <f...@invalid.invalid> remarked:

There are plenty of drivers OCD enough to park within an inch of the
same spot every time.

>I'm fairly sure it belongs to a resident...

--
Roland Perry

[Theo]

Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <sib29i$ub8$1...@dont-email.me>, at 22:34:26 on Mon, 20 Sep
> 2021, Fevric J. Glandules <f...@invalid.invalid> remarked:
> >[stationary cars]
> >
> >There's one I go past every day which hasn't moved in months.
> >It's in *precisely* the same position it was in when I first
> >noticed that it never went anywhere.
>

> There are plenty of drivers OCD enough to park within an inch of the
> same spot every time.

You can usually tell if they've been driven recently or not, due to the
amount of dirt on the windscreen (modulated by the proximity to trees etc).
Unless a different kind of OCD driver comes out and squirts the windscreen
every week.

But I think a lot of cars this year are going to have very low mileage at
their next MOT. If you look up this particular vehicle the MOT records
should tell you the mileage that was done between tests, and whether it's
gone anywhere or just been parked.

Theo

[The Natural Philosopher]

I just had an MOT done. 2500 miles a year the last two years.

--
No Apple devices were knowingly used in the preparation of this post.

[Tim Ward]

On 21/09/2021 12:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
> I just had an MOT done. 2500 miles a year the last two years.

I just had an MOT done. Less than 500 miles since the last one two years
ago.

[David Williams]

tony sayer <to...@bancom.co.uk> writes:

[ Going OT to discuss the mosque and the Stirling Prize ]

> In article <si1p91$gur$1...@dont-email.me>, Paul Bird
> <pa...@nospamcamtutor.co.uk> scribeth thus
>>On 16/09/2021 21:32, tony sayer wrote:
>>
>>> I do note that the peeps who live on the streets off Mill road aren't
>>> short of the odd motor or many!, perhaps the council had better get on
>>> with a decent on street charging system;)..
>>
>>The situation is more complicated than a quick glance would
>>suggest

<snippage>

>>Since the mosque was built there is the Friday prayers situation and
>>this despite the presence of a large underground car park.
>
> Never knew there was one there!, why don't the worshippers use it
> then?..
>
>> This causes
>>less trouble since the street only fills up for 30 mins then they all go
>>again but the traffic it causes is a pain.

In reverse order of Tony's statement and question:

The mosque has capacity for 1000 worshippers and I suspect some
do use the underground car park. Maybe the space is inadequate
for peak numbers - they suggest Queen Anne Terrace as an
alternative, as well as suggesting public transport and
non-motorised solutions. (How does any overspill into
neighbouring streets compare with the situation around schools
and hospitals?)

The mosque is set back from Mill Road behind a garden and far
less dominating of the view than you might think given its
capacity. Anyway, you'll be able to see it on local and maybe
national news from today. It is on the RIBA Stirling Prize 2021
shortlist, having already won various regional and national
awards.

IIRC, part of the site was used by the Robert Sayle warehouse
(before John Lewis in Trumpington took over its role) and
other light industrial or office buildings. It spent a long time
behind hoarding before construction started.

-

BTW, Cambridge has another entry in the six-strong Stirling
shortlist. It's Key Worker Housing at Eddington, bounded by
Turing Way, Pheasant Drive, Eddington Place, Eddington Avenue,
Eddington Square and Wileman Way. Alternatively, you could call
it a slice of the buildings just north of Sainsbury's pedestrian
entrance, extending from Eddington Avenue to Turing Way.

--
David

[Paul Bird]

On 21/09/2021 18:32, David Williams wrote:

<snippage>

>
> BTW, Cambridge has another entry in the six-strong Stirling
> shortlist. It's Key Worker Housing at Eddington, bounded by
> Turing Way, Pheasant Drive, Eddington Place, Eddington Avenue,
> Eddington Square and Wileman Way. Alternatively, you could call
> it a slice of the buildings just north of Sainsbury's pedestrian
> entrance, extending from Eddington Avenue to Turing Way.
>

With the ever present roar of the M11 close by. I went on a walking
tour round the Girton College accommodation for post docs there a few
years back. Not greatly impressed by any aspect of it.

I cannot for a moment imagine it winning the Stirling Prize with the
Mosque in the running.

PB

[Tim Ward]

On 21/09/2021 18:32, David Williams wrote:
>

> The mosque is set back from Mill Road behind a garden and far
> less dominating of the view than you might think given its
> capacity. Anyway, you'll be able to see it on local and maybe
> national news from today. It is on the RIBA Stirling Prize 2021
> shortlist, having already won various regional and national
> awards.

Anyone who hasn't already been on one of Shahida's real live tours can
probably find the pandemic video version that she did online.

[Tim Ward]

On 21/09/2021 19:03, Paul Bird wrote:
>
> I cannot for a moment imagine it winning the Stirling Prize with the
> Mosque in the running.

It really is quite impressive, isn't it.

[Espen Koht]

On 17/09/2021 12:07, Alan Jones wrote:
> On 17/09/2021 11:05, Paul Bird wrote:

>> On 16/09/2021 21:32, tony sayer wrote:
>>
>>> I do note that the peeps who live on the streets off Mill road aren't
>>> short of the odd motor or many!, perhaps the council had better get on
>>> with a decent on street charging system;)..
>>

>> I'll leave it there but you can see why it's not as simple as charging
>> the residents to park.
>>
>> PB
>
> ITHM "on street -electric vehicle- charging system".

You've got 10 years or so years to figuring that one out, which to me
suggest you need to start now for areas like Romsey with precious little
off-street parking or opportunities for it.

Starter for 10: scrap on-street parking in favour of collective parking
which has has EV charging facilities. Why not reap the benefits of a
humane streetscape from the start? However, perhaps we've already sold
off the brown-field sites nearby that could have accommodated such
facilities in favour of 'development'

[Paul Bird]

On 21/09/2021 22:50, Espen Koht wrote:
<snip>

> However, perhaps we've already sold
> off the brown-field sites nearby that could have accommodated such
> facilities in favour of 'development'

The ten pin bowling / John Lewis warehouse / now Mosque site would have
been an obvious candidate for the area. What now?

PB

[tony sayer]

In article <B8x*3t...@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, Espen Koht
<eh...@cam.ac.uk> scribeth thus

So a car park in effect around the say Mill road Romsey town area where
would you put it then?...

--
Tony Sayer


Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.