There is more misery for traders on Mill Road, as inspection of the sewer during the current works has revealed a further collapse.
While Anglia Water were carrying out the repair works to the collapsed sewer in Mill Road they discovered another blockage 20 metres further along the Mill Road line.
They put a camera down the sewer and confirmed at a site meeting yesterday that the sewer has collapsed at that point and that there is a void under the road. The sewer is deeper than the one they are working on now at about 8.5 metres.
The estimated repair time for this is 9 weeks. A second team will deal with this repair whilst the first are dealing with the original collapse.
As traffic is already used to using the diversion that is in place Anglian Water has been instructed to continue immediately with the second repair rather than wait for the first to be finished in two weeks time. CCC highways team has told Anglian Water that even when Hobart Road is opened again it should not form part of a diversion route as it is a residential area. Instead it should be for access only.
Cyclists and pedestrians will still be able to pass the works at all times.
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Developers Present Plans for New Hotel
The developers of the Red House site on Station Road presented their latest plans to Councillors yesterday.
The site, on the north side of Station Road between Tenison Road and the station has been subject to two previous applications for hotels - a smaller successful application in 2006 (that wasn't implemented), and a plan for a larger 169 room hotel in 2009 that was turned down, mostly on transport grounds.
The site is next to Great Eastern House, which Microsoft wants to rebuild as its UK HQ. Whilst it isn't part of the area covered by the CB1 outline planning permission, the new plans seek to fit in with the CB1 proposals, which include a small open space behind the hotel site.
The developers, O'Callaghan hotels, are appealing against the refusal last year, but are also going to put in this new application to address the concerns raised (presumably in case the appeal fails). They are addressing the concerns by reducing the proposed height of the new building (which will be around 7 storeys), and putting in place a valet parking scheme.
Whilst the building itself looks to be a reasonable design for a business class hotel in an area destined to become more of an urban business district, I am concerned about the valet parking plans.
The new plans propose no on-site car parking, with those hotel customers who do have cars being offered valet parking - which will involve hotel staff transporting cars to the Leisure Park car park on Clifton Road. Even if, as developers claim, few guests will arrive by car - the valet parking will still create additional traffic on busy Hills Road and Cherry Hinton Road. It seems ironic that this scheme proposes to solve the problem of lack of parking on site by creating additional trips to the Leisure Park, when the lack of parking on CB1 was the reason given why such a large redevelopment wouldn't generate significant additional traffic. Even if the additional trips are relatively few, it will still add to an existing problem with the plans for the CB1 area.
The developers also claimed to have looked at parking restrictions around the site, and concluded there was nowhere that hotel customers could freely park for long periods of time. I asked if they had considered the Rustat Road area in their analysis, less than 10 minutes walk away - and as with the CB1 developer, the answer was no, this area, and its existing commuter parking problems had been forgotten. I don't accept that hotel users won't know about this, even guests who aren't on a repeat trip - all it will take is one comment about the valet parking and the Rustat Road alternative on a website like Tripadvisor and it could significantly add to the problems Coleridge residents are already facing and will face from commuter parking in the parts of the ward near the station.
The site, on the north side of Station Road between Tenison Road and the station has been subject to two previous applications for hotels - a smaller successful application in 2006 (that wasn't implemented), and a plan for a larger 169 room hotel in 2009 that was turned down, mostly on transport grounds.
The site is next to Great Eastern House, which Microsoft wants to rebuild as its UK HQ. Whilst it isn't part of the area covered by the CB1 outline planning permission, the new plans seek to fit in with the CB1 proposals, which include a small open space behind the hotel site.
The developers, O'Callaghan hotels, are appealing against the refusal last year, but are also going to put in this new application to address the concerns raised (presumably in case the appeal fails). They are addressing the concerns by reducing the proposed height of the new building (which will be around 7 storeys), and putting in place a valet parking scheme.
Whilst the building itself looks to be a reasonable design for a business class hotel in an area destined to become more of an urban business district, I am concerned about the valet parking plans.
The new plans propose no on-site car parking, with those hotel customers who do have cars being offered valet parking - which will involve hotel staff transporting cars to the Leisure Park car park on Clifton Road. Even if, as developers claim, few guests will arrive by car - the valet parking will still create additional traffic on busy Hills Road and Cherry Hinton Road. It seems ironic that this scheme proposes to solve the problem of lack of parking on site by creating additional trips to the Leisure Park, when the lack of parking on CB1 was the reason given why such a large redevelopment wouldn't generate significant additional traffic. Even if the additional trips are relatively few, it will still add to an existing problem with the plans for the CB1 area.
The developers also claimed to have looked at parking restrictions around the site, and concluded there was nowhere that hotel customers could freely park for long periods of time. I asked if they had considered the Rustat Road area in their analysis, less than 10 minutes walk away - and as with the CB1 developer, the answer was no, this area, and its existing commuter parking problems had been forgotten. I don't accept that hotel users won't know about this, even guests who aren't on a repeat trip - all it will take is one comment about the valet parking and the Rustat Road alternative on a website like Tripadvisor and it could significantly add to the problems Coleridge residents are already facing and will face from commuter parking in the parts of the ward near the station.
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
East Chesterton Councillor Resigns
Siep Wijsenbeek has resigned as county councillor for East Chesterton. A by-election is expected on 16 September.
The current make-up of the county council is:
42 Conservative
22 Liberal Democrat
2 Labour
1 Green
1 UKIP
1 Vacancy
But of the county councillors within the city boundaries:
10 Liberal Democrat
2 Labour
1 Green
1 Vacancy
This by-election will be a great opportunity to elect a Conservative onto the county council from within the city. It would be hugely beneficial for Cambridge residents to be represented by at least one councillor in the ruling group on the county council. All the other city-based councillors who were present at the TIF vote last year voted for congestion charging - they clearly cannot be relied-upon to stand up for Cambridge's interests.
Cambridge Conservatives' James Strachan gave the Lib Dems the closest run at the last county council election in East Chesterton while Kevin Francis has been a close second in recent city council elections there.
The current make-up of the county council is:
42 Conservative
22 Liberal Democrat
2 Labour
1 Green
1 UKIP
1 Vacancy
But of the county councillors within the city boundaries:
10 Liberal Democrat
2 Labour
1 Green
1 Vacancy
This by-election will be a great opportunity to elect a Conservative onto the county council from within the city. It would be hugely beneficial for Cambridge residents to be represented by at least one councillor in the ruling group on the county council. All the other city-based councillors who were present at the TIF vote last year voted for congestion charging - they clearly cannot be relied-upon to stand up for Cambridge's interests.
Cambridge Conservatives' James Strachan gave the Lib Dems the closest run at the last county council election in East Chesterton while Kevin Francis has been a close second in recent city council elections there.
Sunday, August 1, 2010
Connecting Asbury Close & Golding Road
Coleridge Conservatives have supported a cycle route between Ashbury Close and Golding Road since 2007.
This is a scheme which Chris Howell requested for an environmental improvements grant. A plan has now been devised. See page 83 (87) of the agenda pack for the last East Area Committee for the details
Cycling is currently banned in the area but in practice this rule is barely followed, with people variously cycling on the pavement and on the grass, neither of which is ideal for residents.
A cycle path between the two, if well sited, could ensure that those who already cycle do so in a considerate fashion and open up the route to people who are currently penalised for following the rules.
If the path eliminates a couple of 4x4s from driving children to school and puts cyclists out of the way of pedestrians and children playing on the grass then it will have been a very worthwhile scheme.
We have generally found residents to be accepting of this idea, with a small amount of opposition. The concerns expressed have been:
I support this scheme but only on condition that:
1. No more than one parking space is lost at each end and options are investigated to reduce this to nil. (I think more work on the current plan is due in this respect.) It certainly would not be acceptable for council officers to introduce gratuitous parking restrictions by the back door through this proposal.
2. It is as much as is practical a separate rather than shared-use path.
3. The large grass area should not be dissected.
4. There is a proper consultation of local residents - and not the usual faux consultation.
At the city council's recent East Area Committee of 17 June Coleridge Conservative Councillor Chris Howell spoke in support of the scheme but stressed the importance of a proper consultation, which officers have promised to provide.
As a footnote, the record of what local politicians have said about this scheme in the past is available on the Cambridge Cycling Campaign website:
May 2010 District Elections (question 6; see also question 5).
May 2008 District Elections (question 8).
This is a scheme which Chris Howell requested for an environmental improvements grant. A plan has now been devised. See page 83 (87) of the agenda pack for the last East Area Committee for the details
Cycling is currently banned in the area but in practice this rule is barely followed, with people variously cycling on the pavement and on the grass, neither of which is ideal for residents.
A cycle path between the two, if well sited, could ensure that those who already cycle do so in a considerate fashion and open up the route to people who are currently penalised for following the rules.
If the path eliminates a couple of 4x4s from driving children to school and puts cyclists out of the way of pedestrians and children playing on the grass then it will have been a very worthwhile scheme.
We have generally found residents to be accepting of this idea, with a small amount of opposition. The concerns expressed have been:
- It will increase cycle movements.
Not much – the current prohibition is widely ignored & some movements will be instead of vehicle movements clogging up nearby roads and parking. - It will bring antisocial behaviour.
I cannot see how this claim is supportable - Parking will be lost.
This is a risk but a good scheme would lose only two spaces and possibly fewer - The money could be better spent.
The proposed grant is from the environmental improvements pot and this is a capital project so comparisons with potential expenditure that would be recurring are not fair. - Cyclists will be a menace to pedestrians.
This should become less true than it currently is because the path will mostly run along the inside of the existing pavement and will mainly not be shared. - The path would otherwise dissect the greens and be a loss to an area for children to play.
The proposed plan has the path mostly adjacent to the path or nearly adjacent to the path. Of greater impact to children enjoying themselves must surely be the miserly 'no ball games' signs adorning the area?
I support this scheme but only on condition that:
1. No more than one parking space is lost at each end and options are investigated to reduce this to nil. (I think more work on the current plan is due in this respect.) It certainly would not be acceptable for council officers to introduce gratuitous parking restrictions by the back door through this proposal.
2. It is as much as is practical a separate rather than shared-use path.
3. The large grass area should not be dissected.
4. There is a proper consultation of local residents - and not the usual faux consultation.
At the city council's recent East Area Committee of 17 June Coleridge Conservative Councillor Chris Howell spoke in support of the scheme but stressed the importance of a proper consultation, which officers have promised to provide.
As a footnote, the record of what local politicians have said about this scheme in the past is available on the Cambridge Cycling Campaign website:
May 2010 District Elections (question 6; see also question 5).
May 2008 District Elections (question 8).
Friday, July 30, 2010
One day left to vote for your favourite blogs
There's only one day left to e-mail your votes for your favourite blogs in this year's Total Politics blog awards.
The blog awards weren't on our radar last year until Richard Normington unexpectedly received one for the blog he wrote on the local association website. Richard's blog is a great read and highly recommended in its new location.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Green Car Park Madness
Abbey Ward councillors are certainly providing good entertainment value at the moment for avid local politics watchers.
First we had the Labour councillor at full council a week ago claiming that zero-rated VAT goods included hidden VAT payments for the input costs of producing and selling the items. Hint: next time you waste council time debating national policies it's probably best to do your homework first...
Now the Cambridge News reports Green councillors wanting to replace Park Street car park with so-called 'affordable' housing. The car park, which also includes secure cycle parking, is in need of major work or replacement. Originally budgeted at c. £1m it seems the cost may now exceed £2m.
This call is plainly bonkers. Apart from the significant loss of amenity and the effect on city centre trade the loss of the car park would punch a hole in one of the city council's most lucrative sources of income.
The council's budget setting report doesn't appear to break down the figure by car park and doesn't make it easy to find all the associated costs but gives a projection of £7.5m in annual car parking income. Even at the higher end of the scale for the cost of sorting out Park Street car park it is hard to imagine that it wouldn't still be a good value investment. Of course, Coleridge Conservatives would encourage the city council to do its best to keep the costs down!
Just as crazy, however, is the suggestion that it should be so-called 'affordable' housing that the site is used for. How is it good value for council taxpayers and the purchasers of unaffordable housing (anyone not eligible for the 'affordable' stuff) to subsidise accomodation on a prime site in the centre of the city?
First we had the Labour councillor at full council a week ago claiming that zero-rated VAT goods included hidden VAT payments for the input costs of producing and selling the items. Hint: next time you waste council time debating national policies it's probably best to do your homework first...
Now the Cambridge News reports Green councillors wanting to replace Park Street car park with so-called 'affordable' housing. The car park, which also includes secure cycle parking, is in need of major work or replacement. Originally budgeted at c. £1m it seems the cost may now exceed £2m.
This call is plainly bonkers. Apart from the significant loss of amenity and the effect on city centre trade the loss of the car park would punch a hole in one of the city council's most lucrative sources of income.
The council's budget setting report doesn't appear to break down the figure by car park and doesn't make it easy to find all the associated costs but gives a projection of £7.5m in annual car parking income. Even at the higher end of the scale for the cost of sorting out Park Street car park it is hard to imagine that it wouldn't still be a good value investment. Of course, Coleridge Conservatives would encourage the city council to do its best to keep the costs down!
Just as crazy, however, is the suggestion that it should be so-called 'affordable' housing that the site is used for. How is it good value for council taxpayers and the purchasers of unaffordable housing (anyone not eligible for the 'affordable' stuff) to subsidise accomodation on a prime site in the centre of the city?
Monday, July 26, 2010
Cambridge Gateway and Hills Road
Coleridge residents will already be aware of the latest works on Hills Road bridge. When the bridge was being restored after the recent guided bus works the opportunity was taken to trial new cycling arrangements over the bridge. Now the Cambridge Gateway project designed to create a new bus, pedestrian and cycle link to the railway station area is in progress and includes a new permanent layout for the bridge with more cycling provision.
There are traffic restrictions in place such as a ban on turns from Hills Road into Brooklands Avenue and no overtaking of cyclists on the bridge in the single lane on the bridge. All the work is expected to finish in February 2011 and work on the bridge is anticipated to be finished by Christmas.
We are anxious that the no overtaking restriction is observed. We previously secured CCTV for this purpose but to doubtful effect. It would be easier to solve the problem if cyclists had the confidence to ride in the middle of the lane in this situation but that rarely seems to happen.
More information is available on the county council website: layout and briefing note.
Personally I think the new layout is far too complicated and would be happier cycling over the bridge without any cycle lanes at all but I accept that is a minority preference. Let's hope when the work is finished that it proves to be worth the money!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
