Tesco's 14th store in the Cambridge area is in Mill Road, Cambridge, one of Cambridge’s most cosmopolitan areas. The No Mill Road Tesco Campaign was set up to oppose these plans, and kept Mill Road Tesco-free for almost two years. Over 5,000 people signed our on-street petition and 1,000 objected to its planning applications. Tesco lost 3 planning applications, an alcohol license application and a public enquiry, leaving it with one of its smallest stores in the UK that it will have extreme difficulty in delivering to. The opening of the store brings the campaign into a second phase: ever-more active support for local traders, and making sure that any breach of planning condition or public safety results in Council action. Join our announcements mailing list to receive updates about the campaign.

Dear supporters

25th August 2009, 07:06 pm

P1120894Dear Supporters,

Despite two council decisions, one public inquiry and the best efforts of several thousand local residents over two years, Tesco are opening on Mill Road tomorrow, 26th August 2009.

We expect that a judicial review of the situation will happen later – hopefully very soon – but in the meantime, a judge has decided not to stop Tesco opening for now. With that in mind, we would like to say what we think this does, and doesn’t, mean, and what we want to do next.

The fact that very few local residents seem to want them while thousands want them to stay away; that they already own 13 stores in our small city, and are already trying to open yet another, on East Road; that their delivery operations have been judged to be dangerous by all competent authorities that have looked at them (and by Tesco themselves); that they would be more expensive and offer less choice than the existing shops; that they have been refused applications for the site again and again – none of this has been enough to stop them opening.

We think that any system where this can happen is a system that is deeply flawed and needs fixing. We think that local residents should have a meaningful voice in what happens to their community, so that when a dangerous and unpopular scheme like this appears, the community can take action to stop it.

But we also think that however unhappy we may be about Tesco opening, that the community has won far more than Tesco from this fight, and we won from the moment that the first person signed the petition, or put a poster up in their window, or went to a campaign meeting.

Whatever happens in the future, Tesco will never get back the more than £4.6 million in lost turnover that we estimate the delay in opening has cost them. They will always have been humiliated at two council meetings, a public inquiry and an alcohol license hearing. The delay meant, too, that they have had to open after Mill Road became a cumulative impact zone, meaning that they did not get an alcohol license. The efforts of the local community to highlight the dangers of deliveries and the noise and nuisance of their plans also meant that they had to open a much smaller store than they wanted, and one that is more expensive to operate. All this means that the local community has managed to permanently restrict the damage that this store can do to the area.

In contrast, the community has gained more than any of us could ever have imagined when the campaign started, almost two years ago. Many of us know our neighbours better, use our local shops more, and have learned to do things that we never thought we could do. The campaign has shown that thousands of people of every political viewpoint, age, religious view, and background can put aside the things that divide them and stand up together for something that unites them.

The mural on the Mill Road bridge says “respect and diversity in our community”. We think this campaign has proved that this is exactly what the Mill Road community is like. We always knew that Mill Road was a special place; that’s why we’ve all fought so hard to protect it. The two years of that fight have shown us how right we were.

So, even if Tesco are eventually allowed to stay open on Mill Road, we think that the community is much stronger and Tesco is weaker as a result of what has happened here.

So what happens next? Well, that depends on the outcome of the legal process, but in any case there are two things we would like to ask you to do if you have supported the campaign. These reflect the two concerns that have come up again and again over the last two years – the threat to road safety and the threat to local shops.

We are asking everyone to keep an eye on Tesco’s deliveries. They are not allowed to stop lorries (their own or their suppliers’) on the street – either on Mill Road or Sedgwick Street. They have to respect the one way system. If they don’t, or if they stop on the street, let us know and let planning enforcement and the police know.

traders

Traders of Mill Road: Support variety and choice on Mill Road

Secondly, and just as importantly, the best way that you can show your continued opposition to Tesco is to support your local independent shops. It’s likely that most of us will never want buy anything from this store, but more important than a boycott of a dull, overpriced chain store is a commitment to actively support the diverse and independent shops that Tesco threatens. Tesco will only hurt these businesses if we let it; so we’re asking all supporters to buy something from an independent business on Mill Road tomorrow. And to do the same the next day. And the day after that. Using our local shops is the way to keep them alive.

We will let you know as soon as we have any news about the legal action, but until then these are things that we can do, starting tomorrow, to help our community.

With all our best wishes and gratitude for your support,

The No Mill Road Tesco Campaign Committee

PS There will not be a protest at the opening of the store.

Category: Uncategorized

Press release: No Mill Road Tesco Campaign takes Cambridge City Council to court over failure to enforce planning restrictions

24th August 2009, 08:47 am

Richard Rippin, a member of the No Mill Road Tesco (NMRT) Campaign, will today seek a High Court Interim Order to halt deliveries to the proposed Cambridge store and ban the use of the Air Conditioning units that seem to have been installed contrary to planning controls.

Despite having no safe and legal means of delivering to the proposed Tesco Express site, the company intend to open the store this coming Wednesday. The City Council have been aware of these plans for at least six weeks but have done nothing to prevent them coming to fruition, and formalised their position of inaction at a meeting of their East Area Committee last Wednesday.

Further to the Interim Order, the campaign is also seeking a Judicial Review of the Council’s failure to act to prevent the unsafe operation of the store.

NMRT Committee Member Richard Rippin said, “As a resident of the area for 15 years, I know how dangerous Tesco’s delivery plans are. Everyone who lives in the area knows how narrow Mill Road is and how many road accidents there are already. Everyone who lives here also knows it would be impossible to send lorries around the area’s narrow residential streets several times a day.

“We are sad to be in the position of having to take the Council to the High Court, but we feel that we’ve have been left with no alternative. Whether Tesco try to deliver to the front or around the back in these lorries, they would be doing something which they are either specifically banned from doing at the site, or which a series of relevant professionals, including their own consultants, have said would be impractical and unsafe. The council have had several weeks to take action to stop this happening. On Wednesday they again decided to delay.”

Notes for Editors:

Richard Rippin can be contacted on 07886 757987 or rich@ash.coop

The NMRT Campaign has been running since September 2007 – see http://www.nomillroadtesco.org/

During this time Tesco have lost 3 planning applications, an alcohol license application and a public enquiry. Many of these defeats have been based on the fact that there is simply no safe way to service this site with in the region of 35 deliveries per week, using large vehicles which would either have to block a major route in and out of the city centre for extended periods each day, or navigate around narrow one way streets, which Tesco themselves have said was unworkable.

Over 5000 local people have signed a petition against the proposed store.

Category: Enforcement, Press releases

Tesco lorries down Sedgwick Street already causing problems

23rd August 2009, 12:00 pm

Entirely as predicted, Tesco’s lorries delivering to the back of the store are already causing problems down Sedwick Street.

These pictures were sent to us by a local resident of the street. If you have any more, please e-mail them to us via the address on our contact details page.

The lorry driver has had to exit the vehicle and move wing mirrors. Notice the proximity to the parked cars.

P1000476a P1000479a

Category: Site construction, Traffic

Legal update

19th August 2009, 07:24 pm

A considerable amount of legal correspondence regarding High Court action is being undertaken by our lawyer at present, between ourselves, Tesco’s legal representative and Cambridge City Council. This is in the light of various announcements and statements from both Cambridge City Council and Tesco themselves relating to the planning conditions, their enforcement, and delivery options.

We will publish a more detailed update as soon as possible.

Thank you to the very many of you who have contributed to our legal fund. Further donations can be made at Arjuna or Libra Aries.

Category: Uncategorized

CEN article on security guard

19th August 2009, 09:54 am

The Cambridge Evening News has today published an article concerning the hiring of a security guard at the Tesco site. Local residents such as ourselves are well aware that Tesco have in fact had a security guard present for over a week, and that this story is not in fact news.

The No Mill Road Tesco Campaign has always conducted its activity through entirely peaceful and lawful means. We note that the article did not feature any quotation from us.

We have always undertaken entirely legal and legitimate campaigning activity. We condemn any activity which involves violence, damage to property or non-courteous approaches to Tesco’s employees or contractors. Also, we were not connected to the squatting activity.

Category: Uncategorized

Delivery options: key points

18th August 2009, 10:26 pm

Tesco have pursued two delivery options for their large lorries. Here are key quotes, with sections in bold being our emphasis:

1. Delivery from Mill Road:

Tesco have said:

“We will deliver to the front of the store as the previous occupants did and as do most retailers on Mill Road.”

Deliveries via the front entrance was also clearly marked on the plans presented at the licensing committee meeting, where Tesco lost their application to be allowed to sell alcohol on Mill Road.

The City Council planning department have said:

“There is a lawful planning consent for the use of 163-167 Mill Road for retail use which requires deliveries to be made only from a rear service yard. We are urgently contacting Tesco to establish the company’s intention for the premises given the lawful consent. If it becomes clear that enforcement action may be necessary then the officers will report to members as soon as possible on options for further action”

and

“There is no hard evidence of a continuous 10-year breach by the previous occupant.”

And the government inspector, concluded (when judging Tesco’s now-failed attempt to add an extension) that:

“I find that the Mill Road delivery option would pose unacceptable risks to highway safety in general, and for cyclists in particular.”

“I conclude that it would be unacceptable for 10.35m long lorries to load and unload from Mill Road. [...] In my opinion this was also the purpose of the condition imposed in 1972.”

2. Delivery around ‘the loop’ (Catharine Street and Sedgwick Street):

Tesco have now said:

“As you know the building does have a planning condition, which dates back quite a way that requires deliveries to be made to the rear doors.  This condition was in force prior to the surrounding roads being made into a one way system and would now require delivery vehicles to drive along residential streets.

“As part of our good neighbour policy we always consider local residents and neighbours and this was certainly a factor in our choice to deliver to the front of the store, as did the previous occupants, and most of the other traders along Mill Road do.

“Although we think this is probably the best option for the area I would like to confirm that we plan to service the store from the rear.”

i.e. drive round the loop into the rear of the site, manoeuvre a lorry in (and hope that there is space left in the car park).

Their consultant previously said [link], however:

“Due to the one way nature of Sedgwick Street access to the rear of the site would be via the ‘loop’ formed by Catharine Street and Sedgwick Street. This arrangement has the potential to cause detriment to the amenity and safety of local residents, due to multiple delivery movements per day with what will still be large vehicles. There is the also potential that poorly parked vehicles on could block access, requiring long and potentially dangerous reversing manoeuvres or police action.”

And the government inspector, concluded (when judging Tesco’s now-failed attempt to add an extension) that:

“the loop option “would pose a significant increase in the risk of accidents, damage and injury to vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians around the loop”.

“I find that both of the realistically available servicing options would pose unacceptable risks to highway safety, which would not be outweighed by benefits or the fallback position. I therefore conclude that both appeals should be dismissed.”

Category: Uncategorized

FoI request: response received

18th August 2009, 10:13 pm

On 22nd July 2009 we wrote to the City Council planning department with some Freedom of Information requests relating to planning issues at the site. We have now received a response.

Here is the City Council’s response to our FoI request, which also contains our questions interleaved.

Key extracts from it are:

[On the question of whether the previous occupant breached the planning condition that unloading must take place within the site:]

“There is no hard evidence of a continuous 10-year breach by the previous occupant.”

[On the question of the Council's position on Tesco failing to obtain a Certificate of Lawfulness for the site:]

“There has been no decision by the City Council planning officers or others, “to reverse the Council’s position that a Certificate of Lawfulness application by Tesco in relation to 163-167 Mill Road, Cambridge, would enable the Council to “make a proper assessment of the proposed works and give an informed formal legal view as to whether or not these works require planning permission”".”

[On the question of Tesco installing air conditioning:]

“The Council has been advised at meetings that all the air conditioning plant is now to be inside the building. There has however, despite requests, been very little information forthcoming, between 1 December 2008 and 22 July 2009, about what plant is to be introduced inside the building.”

Category: Enforcement, Planning applications

CEN article: Tesco fails to win licence for drinks

18th August 2009, 12:00 pm

john.downing@cambridge-news.co.uk

Cambridge - Tesco site Mill RoadTESCO’S new store in Mill Road will open without booze after city councillors rejected its application for a drinks licence.

The licensing sub-committee’s decision yesterday was greeted by loud applause from campaigners who had fought the supermarket giant’s plans every step of the way.

Ruth Deyermond, planning coordinator of the No Mill Road Tesco campaign, hailed the decision “a victory for common sense and the community”.

Solicitor Jeremy Bark put the case for Tesco’s application, saying the store would open “in any event” on August 26.

Tesco sought a licence to sell alcohol from 10am-10pm seven days a week.

He said 7 to 8 per cent of the sales at a typical Tesco Express are alcohol and the company had a “good history of working with police” to ensure all sales were legal.

Cambridgeshire police opposed the application, arguing further alcohol sales would exacerbate alcohol-related problems.

The Mill Road area was designated a “cumulative impact zone” in May 2008, meaning new applications would normally be refused unless the applicant could show it would not add to drink-related trouble.

Insp Marcia Nichols said the area suffered a “disproportionate” level of alcohol-related trouble and was already a “hotspot for violence”.

Dr Deyermond, speaking on behalf of the No Mill Road Tesco campaign, told the meeting the application was “totally inappropriate” in a cumulative impact zone.

Janette Evely, a parent from Argyle Street and a teacher at St Philip’s Primary School, said pupils often encountered antisocial behaviour related to street drinking, and Mill Road did not need another outlet selling drink.

Cllr Mike Dixon, sub-committee chairman, announced the application was rejected for its failure to adequately address the cumulative impact policy and the council’s planning policy.

Dr Deyermond said: “We think this is a victory for common sense and the community.”

Insp Nichols said: “The issue was never about Tesco. The increase in sales of alcohol by any premises would have had a detrimental impact.”

A Tesco spokeswoman said: “We are disappointed but are looking forward to opening the store on August 26 as planned.”

Category: CEN, Media coverage, alcohol

East Area Committee to discuss planning enforcement at Tesco site

17th August 2009, 10:54 pm

A meeting of the East Area Committee is to take place this Thursday to discuss planning enforcement at the Tesco site.

Date: Thursday 20 August 2009
Time: 10am
Place: St Phillips Church, 185 Mill Road, Cambridge CB1 3AN

The agenda has now been published.

The City Council previously issued a public statement recognising the validity of the planning condition preventing lorries unloading from on Mill Road for this site:

“There is a lawful planning consent for the use of 163-167 Mill Road for retail use which requires deliveries to be made only from a rear service yard. We are urgently contacting Tesco to establish the company’s intention for the premises given the lawful consent. If it becomes clear that enforcement action may be necessary then the officers will report to members as soon as possible on options for further action”

* Read our FAQ for the latest on all aspects of the Mill Road Tesco issue. A legal update will also follow soon.

Category: Enforcement, Events and meetings

STOP PRESS: Tesco lose application for an alcohol licence

17th August 2009, 03:12 pm

Tesco have failed in their attempt to obtain a licence to sell alcohol on Mill Road, an area with a known alcohol problem that is also a Cumulative Impact Zone.

The police, represented by a legal team, objected in strong terms to the application.

Our representative, together with other local residents spoke at the hearing. Thanks to all who opposed the application (121 representations, vs. 2 in favour) and/or took part in activity to prevent this.

So far, therefore, Tesco have:

  • Lost a planning application and Public Inquiry to build an extension
  • Lost a planning application and pulled out of a Public Inquiry for air conditioning
  • Have a planning condition requiring them only to deliver from within the site (i.e. not from Mill Road), a matter on which we are currently seeking enforcement
  • Lost an attempt to sell alcohol

Tesco state on their website that:

“We do not apply for licences in areas with known disorder issues”

We wonder what they thought they were doing on Mill Road …

Category: Uncategorized
« Previous Entries
Next Entries »