Petition to Cambridge City Council

The future of the Lower Yard at Cambridge Museum of Technology: preserving an inclusive, alcohol-free family space on the Cheddars Lane riverside.

To: The Chief Executive and Members of Cambridge City Council, c/o Democratic Services, PO Box 700, Cambridge CB1 0JH

Re: The Museum’s decision not to renew Kerb Kollective’s agreement to operate in the Lower Yard, and the proposal to merge that area into the Engineer’s House

Introduction
We, the undersigned, are residents, families, dog-walkers and regular customers of Kerb Kollective are writing about the future of the riverside site at Cambridge Museum of Technology, Cheddars Lane. The Museum has decided not to renew the agreement under which Kerb Kollective, the speciality coffee shop and bakery, operates in the site’s Lower Yard, and intends to merge that area into the adjoining Engineer’s House, an evening bar and pizza venue. We are asking the Council to use its standing on this site to ensure that any such decision is taken openly, and with proper weight given to the community benefit it would put at risk.

Background
Cambridge Museum of Technology occupies the former Riverside Pumping Station under a long lease from this Council, and is itself a registered charity (Cambridge Museum of Technology, Charity No. 1156685) entrusted with caring for the site for public benefit. Two independent hospitality businesses currently trade on the site under arrangement with the Museum: Kerb Kollective, which has served specialty coffee and home-baked pastries to the local community since 2020, and the Engineer’s House, an evening bar and pizza venue.

The Engineer’s House is itself leased from Cambridge City Council, which gives the Council a direct and continuing interest in how this part of the site is used. We are asking the Council to help ensure a fair and transparent process before the decision affecting Kerb Kollective becomes final.

Why this matters to our community

• Kerb Kollective is a community asset, not just a café. Kerb Kollective is where neighbours meet for breakfast and lunch every day of the week. It is welcoming to dogs, to children, and to people of every background and belief. This is exactly the kind of everyday, inclusive public space that is increasingly rare and increasingly valued. It has also become a communal gathering for people from across Cambridge after social events such as charity runs and rowing activities - the long queue on weekends speaks for itself. Through years of dedicated hard work, forming good connections with local residents and regular coffee-goers, alongside serving good quality food and drink, the staff at Kerb Kollective have turned an unknown, underused venue into a vibrant, inclusive, and thriving community space. It is a well-loved small, independent business that cannot simply be replaced by another vendor.
• As it operates today, the Lower Yard is a calm, family-friendly daytime space, free of alcohol and the disruption of late-night trade, and welcoming to children, to dogs, and to people of every background and belief. Spaces that are genuinely open to everyone in this way are increasingly rare, and increasingly valued. Merging the area into an evening alcohol-and-pizza venue would change that character fundamentally.
• Local jobs on the line. Kerb Kollective employs around ten local people across coffee roasting, baking and front-of-house roles. Their loss would be felt well beyond the riverbank.
• An uneven playing field. The Engineer’s House, the on-site alcohol venue, has sought to use Kerb Kollective’s premises to serve its own customers in the evenings. On numerous mornings, Kerb Kollective’s staff and customers have found broken glass and alcohol stains left behind, with no evidence that the area is cleaned afterwards. A coffee shop that opens for breakfast should not have to begin each day clearing up after another business’s late-night trade.
• The decision conflicts with the Museum’s own stated Vision and Statement of Purpose. The board’s policies pledge to create an 'open space and social hub for the community' and promise 'open and transparent' communication with stakeholders. Evicting the very business that successfully established that social hub—without open public consultation—actively undermines their institutional objectives and alienates the modern Cambridge community they are chartered to serve.
• Monetary profit should not be the only measure of value. We recognise that an alcohol-led venue may generate higher revenue per head than a coffee shop. But the price of that extra margin is lost goodwill and the displacement of an inclusive, family-friendly business. This is being paid by the wider community, not by the businesses concerned.
• The verdict is already in the reviews and social media following. Kerb Kollective’s 260+ online reviews are double those of Engineer’s House and consistently outscore the Engineer’s House, a reflection of the quality, care and community spirit that residents have come to rely on. Kerb Kollective has over 3,700 followers, the Engineer’s House has about 1,000 followers, and the Museum itself has fewer than 700.
• Cambridge does not lack for pubs. There are at least three public houses within easy reach of the museum site. Kerb Kollective is the only specialist coffee shop. Losing it would not diversify what is on offer locally, it would narrow it.

What we are asking the Council to do

1. Use its standing on this site, including as landlord of the Engineer’s House, to convene an open and transparent conversation between Cambridge Museum of Technology and the parties affected, before the decision becomes final.
2. Ask the Museum, as trustee of a public-benefit charity, to set out how its decision not to renew Kerb Kollective’s agreement, and its plan to expand the Engineer’s House into the Lower Yard, sit alongside its charitable objectives and its responsibilities to the community it serves.
3. Ask that the inclusive, alcohol-free and family-friendly character of the Lower Yard be protected, and that community benefit, continuity of local employment and customer feedback be given proper weight, alongside commercial return, in any decision about who operates on the site and how.

Conclusion
We do not ask the Council to take sides. We ask only that it brings both parties together, openly and fairly, so that a business this community has come to depend on is not lost without proper scrutiny or any chance of compromise. We thank the Council for its time and consideration, and we ask that this petition be formally received and acted upon.