Parking At Addenbrooke's - The Facts

The Cambridge Evening News is leading a campaign to force the Addenbrooke's NHS Trust and the City and County Councils into a vast extension of parking provision at the Hospital. Contrary to what you might reasonably have inferred from press reports, there has been no planning application for a multi-storey car park. The Trust realises that it cannot justify expenditure on such a facility taking priority over improved health care. Moreover, it must bear in mind its responsibility for promoting healthy living and not increasing car dependence.

Multi-storey car parking costs around £5000 per space (5 times as much as surface parking). Hence a two thousand-space car park would cost about £10 million. The debt charges on such a scheme would force parking charges up to levels at least as high as those in the City Centre, so people would continue to park in surrounding streets.

Roads around the hospital are already very heavily congested at peak travel times. Any increase in the amount of parking would cause gridlock, leading to demands for road-widening (goodbye trees, goodbye front gardens, goodbye houses even) and perhaps even the resurrection of the Southern Relief Road plan.

The main problem is the large proportion of hospital workers who drive their cars to the site. 70% of the present surface parking is for staff - yet only a quarter of daily visitors to the Hospital work there. The Trust is working with the City and County Councils on a Travel-for-Work Plan, which will encourage staff to make their journeys by car-sharing, public transport, cycle and foot. Such Plans have been very successful in reducing staff parking demand at other hospitals.

Addenbrooke's, though, is not yet making any real attempt to allocate staff parking according to need, by prioritising those with awkward journeys or shifts. There are 2100 spaces for 3000 staff, yet those arriving in the afternoon for the late shift (which ends after most public transport has stopped) cannot find a space - many are taken by administrators working 9-5 and living nearby. A further difficulty is that local officers of UNISON seem to be backing the demand for more provision for cars, rather than their union's national policy of support for Travel-for-Work Plans.

While the Trust and the Councils are resisting pressure from the pro-car lobby for more parking at the Hospital, they seem to be promoting the proposed Babraham Road Park-and-Ride, which is close by, as overflow parking for Addenbrooke's rather than as a means of reducing car journeys to the City Centre. The County Council has also applied, through the TPP process, for Government funding of a new station at Long Road with a (hopefully free) shuttle bus to the Hospital. The Railway Company, though, is very lukewarm about the idea - attracting commuter traffic off the roads is, apparently, not the best way of earning money for its shareholders.

Local residents are suffering from people - notably staff - using their streets for parking because they cannot find space at the hospital, or are unwilling to pay the parking charges. The County Council is not prepared to introduce parking restrictions to remove this option from anti-social motorists.

Members of Cambridge FOE's Transport and Planning Group take the following view.

Parking provision at the Hospital should be gradually decreased and certainly not increased.

Some provision at Addenbrooke's should be decentralised, thus putting health care closer to the patients, and reducing the need to travel.

Genuine public transport (the type you don't need a car to use) to the hospital must be radically improved. Certainly, the new station should be built as soon as possible, but we also need direct bus services to many more places not on the rail network.

Hospital staff (who are presumably committed to health promotion) have a duty to travel by environmentally friendly means whenever possible, not least to help improve public transport provision for those who suffer most at present - those visitors to the site, especially patients, who do not have access to a car and cannot easily get there by other means.

We supported the application for a Babraham Road Park-and-Ride, despite its being in the Green Belt - but we would have opposed it had we suspected its prime use was to be overflow hospital parking.

On the other hand, new bus services to the hospital (and other major destinations) from other Park-and-Ride sites should be provided.

Facilities for cyclists and pedestrians in the Addenbrooke's area should be improved.

We support the Hospital's Travel-for-Work Plan but believe staff should be allocated parking spaces according to need (or because they car-share) and without regard to seniority.

Parking restrictions in nearby streets are necessary to lessen the impact on local residents and to ensure success of the Travel-for-Work Plan.

If you work at Addenbrooke's, please contact Elizabeth Arndt (570884).

Write to the Evening News to put the environmental point of view across.

Write to your local Councillors (County and City / District) about the problem.

Use any links you have with Addenbrooke's to get the FOE view across.

Try to attend the consultation on bus priority for the Babraham Road Park-and-Ride.

Sign our petition (at the FOE office, or phone Elizabeth for a copy).

John Ratcliffe

PLANNING UPDATE

Cambridge FOE, in conjunction with residents in the Rustat Road area, have submitted a petition to the City Council. This will entitle us to put our views to planners, councillors and the developers at a Development Control Forum, probably in September. We shall continue to collect signatures up to this time, and a copy of the petition is enclosed. Please make use of it. Link to copy petition.

After much pressure from Cambridge FOE and other groups, the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions has called in the planning application for a Waitrose supermarket on Government-owned land in the grounds of Anstey Hall, Trumpington. This rarely used procedure means that there will now be a Public Inquiry. This will probably give most prominence to the impact on the Conservation Area and Listed Building, but traffic and the effect on local shops are also likely to be raised by objectors.

By the time you read this, the Public Inquiry on McDonalds' proposed Coldham's Lane drive-through is likely to be over. Cambridge City Council is fighting the proposal on traffic grounds. FOE has submitted written evidence focussing largely on the sustainability implications. We liased with the local residents' action group, SCRAM, while they prepared their oral evidence for the Inquiry.

John Ratcliffe

If we didn't live in Cambridge, you might think that allotments are the last things to get wired up to the Internet. But we do, and they have. Paul Jones of Burnside allotments has listed Email reps from a number of sites and has since launched a worldwide Web page to exchange views far and wide and provide a map of local allotment sites. At the moment, the Web URL has been problematic but should be sorted out soon. Paul by Email is at paul.jones@virgin.net

The Web soon proved its worth with a report from a Lancashire village who said that they had been "fooled" by their Council. The story exposed a new route for Councils to get their way and acquire allotment sites for housing by disguising their true plans until it was too late to challenge them. Here some parts of the Green Belt, it appears, could be converted into "areas of special restraint" which protected them from change, but only to 2006 when such areas can be freely developed for housing. By the time plans to build 88 houses on 3.5 hectares of 100-year-old allotments were uncovered, it was too late to mount a legal challenge.

The idea for a Web page came in the wake of a second and lively meeting called by the City on 28 April at Ross Street Community Centre (see March Newsletter's note of the first meeting). Councillor Ben Bradnack and three City officers were there to propose a new deal: only those sites with 15 per cent or more vacancies would be liable for housing (the previous limit was 10 per cent): cash generated by the sale of sites would accrue to a central allotments' fund for general improvements and the appointment of an allotments officer.

This got a mixed response. The last meeting had voted out an allotment officer as unnecessary and costly, but now we were to have one none the less. People felt they were being told, not asked. One exasperated veteran asked why it was that for 30 years the Council had "kicked allotment holders in the teeth" but now was so anxious to curry favour? The answer came, not from the platform, but from the floor. Most recently, we learned; John Prescott had decreed that local authorities would no longer win consent to build on allotments unless Councils could demonstrate that they had actively promoted their use. This, it was said, explained the City's recent efforts to cultivate the cultivators. Prescott 10: Cambridge City 1.

A local rider to the need for positive encouragement was raised at the meeting. It was pointed out that while the City's survey of allotments noted that no development was proposed for the site at Empty Common (adjacent to the Botanic Gardens), it added that it might be "returned to Common". This put the cat among the pigeons down at Empty Common. Those better-informed said that the Brooklands government offices site next to the allotments was to be developed for housing and the allotments turned into a municipal park: the rumour (if it was such) was enough to deter three or four people from taking up vacant plots. The speaker gave this as an example of the sort of discouragement by perceived threat that led to more vacant plots than there would otherwise be. While the planning officer on the platform did not comment on housing plans, she assured the meeting that it would be a long time before there could be any threat to the allotments. Yet, persisted the questioner, the uncertainty had in fact been enough to turn people away: the resulting vacancies that remained distorted the apparent lack of demand for plots.

Perhaps it is because the ruling factors in the present allotment saga are so obvious, that they are not stated. Councils and their politicians naturally feel impelled to build lots of houses as cheaply as possible. Building on land already owned by Councils is the obvious expedient. All that is needed is a passable policy line to lend decency to the eviction of allotment holders. Apart from the economy angle - and the historical accident of Council ownership - there is no other logical reason why allotment sites should be first in line for forfeiture before any other class of land. As we all know, the swallowing up or encroachment of allotments has been going on for years. Few City neighbourhoods have not suffered. Yet logic might argue that all the new households that have been crammed into the City must create a demand for more garden allotment facilities - not less.

But things are improving. Consultations following the City's recent review of allotments have responded to Cambridge FoE's contentions that the previous 10 per cent vacancy limit was too low a figure and that the City should encourage people by making them more aware of vacant plots. Now the limit has been relaxed to 15 per cent and John Prescott's new ruling seems to have snatched the very words out of FOE's mouth. Thus far, the City deserves credit for opening up the dialogue.

On 25 June MPs urged Ministers to halt the assault on allotment sites ("The Future of Allotments", report by the Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs Select Committee). Its chairman, Andrew Bennett (Labour) said that although many sites are nominally protected by law, this was patchy and the absence of credible checks upon local authorities meant that they were being sold off at an alarming rate. The report says that allotment land is now the main category of urban green space being lost: 74 per cent enjoyed statutory protection and could only be disposed of with the consent of the Minister, but the effectiveness of this protection had declined.

"The Secretary of State has not refused an application for the sale of a statutory site during the last three years," the report states. The Committee also had evidence of "manipulation by local authorities to categorise sites as derelict or surplus" thus ensuring Ministerial consent for sales. Since May last year, the sale of 51 statutory allotment sites had been approved and in only two cases were replacement sites provided.

Although 13,000 people were registered on allotment waiting lists, there were about 43,000 untended plots. In part this showed a mismatch between supply and demand in different regions, but it also reflected the uncertain legal status of many sites. The report goes on with a call from MPs for the Government to produce a Green Paper followed by a Bill within the lifetime of this Parliament, to protect the remaining sites.

Comment: The report backs most of Cambridge FoE's representations to the City and raises the question whether its ideas about a 10 or 15 percent vacancy limit have much more validity than a convenient expedient.

Patrick Forman

The meeting was held on March 26th and elections were held for office positions. Ken Richard is now campaigns co-ordinator as Elizabeth Arndt has stepped down. Thanks to Elizabeth for all her hard work and to Ken for agreeing to take on the position. Other positions remain unchanged ( see details at the end of the newsletter) so more thanks to those people for their work.

We heard brief reports of the year's campaigns, then listened to an entertaining and thought provoking talk by the Rev. Peter Owen Jones, vicar of Haslingfield, who previously worked for the Green Party and in advertising. He talked about the place of environmentalism within the church, and about how in his view people should be working together to protect the earth. It was interesting to hear that he thought environmentalists were sometimes drawn into debates, for example on genetic modification, on scientists' terms, when perhaps we should reject the idea on moral grounds. What impressed me most was his broad mindedness and his conviction that people should overcome their differences to tackle the environmental problems that threaten mankind's survival.

Tandy Harrison

On Saturday, May 23rd, we held our annual Street Collection. In spite of the fact that it was cold, a Bank Holiday weekend and coincided with the Cup Final, we collected an impressive sum of £206.43p.

We would like to thank the members who agreed to shake a tin: Steve Harangozo, Roger Lilley and Tony Higgins did particularly well - collecting over £20 each. The other collectors were: S. Winning, J. Atkinson, P. Harding, C. Croft, M. Potter, B. Cranfield, J. Murray, R. Burgess, H. McRobie, C.J. Piggott (Slim), S. Inglis, R. Harrison, L. Agate, P. Murdin and J. Goodall. Thanks are also due to Elizabeth Bond who gallantly spent several hours on the telephone cajoling members to turn out. Also a big thanks to everyone who helped to count the resulting huge pile of loose change!

Christina Marshall and Ian Ralls

We are having a picnic on Wednesday, 29th July at 7.00 on the Green beside the Mill Pond at the Granta pub on Newnham Road (see directions on this page). Please bring contributions of food. If we are lucky, we can enjoy our picnic under the glorious sunshine of an English midsummer's evening. If it's raining cats and dogs we can always go to the pub. Contact Ken Richard or the Office for further information.

Cambridge Friends of the Earth web site went live at the beginning of May. There is a link to our site from National Friends of the Earth web site. Our web address is http://www.cam.net.co.uk/camfoe. The web co-ordinating group have met a few times to work out what we should make available to web surfers!

On the site is basic information about Cambridge Friends of the Earth, the latest newsletter and forthcoming events. Old newsletters will stay on the web until we run out of space. There is a weekly updated page on what's happening in Cambridge and nationally of concern to Friends of the Earth. Also, there are links to other useful web sites.

Glynis Pilbeam, Web editor.

With the increasingly frequent occurrence of issues relating to genetically modified organisms (GMO's) (particularly genetically modified crops) in the news, and the resulting interest in and opposition to, such developments among the public / "green community", Cambridge FoE are considering setting up a new campaign group to concentrate on this area. If you are interested in getting involved, contact Lucy Agate on Cambridge 516551.

At the last Office Meeting, we decided to set up an IT committee. Its aims will include improvement of the group's IT facilities, volunteer training, and looking at ways of using resources to their full potential. If you are interested in contributing in any way, contact Dave Bailey on tel/fax:01223 721112; Email: tech-horizons@home.cam.net.uk; Web: http://www.cam.net.uk/home/tech-horizons

Friends of the Earth are trading again on Tuesdays between 11am and 3 pm in St. Michael's Church Hall, Trinity St. We need volunteers to help set up and run the stall. Can you give us some time? It would be best if you could make a regular commitment but not essential. You don't need to come for the full four hours either. It's fun to do and you won't be alone. It's a good opportunity to help out and meet new people, as well as promote Friends of the Earth. If you are interested please phone Helen McRobie on 01223 262598 or contact the office.

Tandy Harrison

You may have noticed that this issue of the Newsletter has a different appearance. This is just the start of an overhaul for the Newsletter's image. You can expect more changes to the design of the next issue. As the Newsletter is the major point of contact between CamFoE and many of our members, we feel it is important to keep its image up to date.

There will be a one day event organised by East Anglia FoE Local Groups, as part of the above East Anglia wide FoE Campaign, entitled a Recipe For Success. It is free and open to all East Anglia Local Group Members. The event will include a series of talks given by Patrice Gladwin, Lucy Agate and Pete Riley (Food and Biotechnology Campaigner, FoE), among others. There will also be a social event. It will be held on Saturday, 18th July, 10.30 am - 4.30 pm, at the Stoneyard Centre, St Andrews St, Cambridge. For further information contact Lucy Agate on 01223-516551, Email: lucya@foe.co.uk

On Saturday 25th April the Reclaim the Streets No-Road Show came to Cambridge. For the most part a good-natured demonstration, the only sour note being hit by the actions of the usual over enthusiastic/drunk minority, with even car drivers brought to a standstill by the demonstration entering into the spirit of the occasion. Reaction from traders along the route was fairly good with many reporting an increase in trade over a usual Saturday, though it would be unfair to suggest that all were enthusiastic about the event.

The response from certain local papers, however, was predictably reactionary, with emphasis being placed on the cost of policing the event. The 'Traffic chaos as groups unite' and various petulant editorials which, in carefully avoiding mentioning the car-derived chaos which affects Cambridge every other day of the year, made me wonder if their prime motivation was genuine concern for Cambridge, or a catchy headline.

Ian Ralls

I had the opportunity to attend the Biodiversity training day on March 21st to hear about FoEs campaigns and future strategy. It was great to hear from the people who are involved in putting the campaigns together and to see how Cambridge FOE fitted into the big picture. A proportion of the meeting concentrated on FOEs medium to long term strategy (15 years onwards), and FOEs expectations of government's, industry's and society's commitment to certain basic goals of environmental sustainability. Then we heard some more realistic strategies and aims for the next five years which would act as stepping stones towards the medium term objectives. The summary of national FOE's strategy to achieve these medium term aims was to do less (Yes, I did hear it right) BUT focus more and follow through the campaigns, so at the end of the day national and local FOE can be more effective. So what are FOE's aims and strategies over the next five years?

Aims: Stem the loss of global diversity; focus on forests, which are the largest store of Biodiversity. Locally, focus on U.K loss of wildlife and protection of S.S.S.Is which are the vital refuges of threatened species.

Strategy for the forests: Use legislation such as Appendix II of CITES to protect keystone species such as mahogany. Influence mainstream investment companies to include environmental criteria in their investment strategies (see Green Investment Campaign ). Campaign for the introduction of laws regarding the recycled paper content of newspapers (see Recycled Newspapers ).

Strategy for the protection of U.K. wildlife: Form coalitions with other wildlife organisations to bring wildlife law in to line with the wildlife charter which it is hoped will become a government bill. Run national and local campaigns to prevent loss of specific S.S.S.Is and maintain a network of intelligence nationally and locally to monitor our important wildlife sites.

FOE mentioned other smaller campaigns that were ongoing, such as those related to water resources, wood and paper consumption levels, timber trade etc., and of course following current Biodiversity issues which may become campaigns of the future.

It was also good to hear about the specific work that national FOE are involved with. National FOE told us about some of the current high profile issues and how they put FOE's side of the story to the national media. One example came out during the update on the rainforest campaigns; our national campaigner was investigating the MOD, who had confidentially bought 204 cubic metres of rainforest mahogany. By hook or by crook FOE found out the dirty deed and revealed all. The MOD claimed that the wood was from a sustainable resource (apparently impossible according to our forest experts). This resulted in major media coverage and embarrassing questions in parliament. At present national FOE is in the process of making a legal appeal to the Secretary of State.

In summary, as a local campaigner I found it a useful event. It was good to meet FOE members from other regions and to talk to the people who plan FOE's strategy, and even better, it gives you enthusiasm to keep on going.

Jane Goodall