Superstore developments

[Tardis]

The Town Council will conduct another consulattion, presumably in the square in July, although you should watch the noticeboards for further information

[Tardis]

According to the Lancashire Telegraph, the residents of Colne around the Sainsbury's are less than impressed by the working practices of the store. Apparently taking deliveries at 5am from refrigerated trucks

[Chrissyp]

Please note that there will be an additional meeting of West Craven Committee at Rolls Royce Social Club on Monday evening 20th August starting at 6p.m. to discuss the Supermarket applications.

Just got this message.

[Tardis]

Excellent!

That is the day after the Bradley Wiggins event in Victory Park, so we'll have perfect examples of how well the roads of Barnoldswick can cope with the expected increase in traffic, already a bone of contention in many of the submissions from LCC

[Stanley]

There's a letter in the BET this morning that demonstrates the level of public awareness about the supermarket saga. The writer thinks that seeing as how we are going to get an Aldi and a Tesco in the town the Pioneer store should be turned into an indoor market.....

[Big Kev]

Just an experiment to produce a "Big Kev" front page

[Whyperion]

The suggestion that the Co-op site should be used as a market I believe was raised by me on OGFB, I don't suppose the newspaper correspondent read it here so its two of us with the same thought.

Note that it appears that Beales (formerly Westgate Department Stores- Anglian Co-op )in Skipton (dept store ) is closing down if I read the window banners from a distance correctly ).

Of course any planning permission is only for the development of the property in a particular way , and for a particular purpose. The actual end operator , so far as I know , cannot be specified in the planning permission granted. So Aldi could get planning permission for their site , and then sell the site or store ( with the permission or after completion ) to Tesco or whomever at any time they like , subject to planning rule that work must commence within a given time otherwise permission lapses.

[PanBiker]

The suggestion that the Co-op site should be used as a market I believe was raised by me on OGFB, I don't suppose the newspaper correspondent read it here so its two of us with the same thought.

Why on earth would anyone propose that a perfectly viable business should be abandoned in favour of a market. You may not like it but the fact is it is not a redundant site and therefore not up for potential redevelopment into anything at the moment.

Oh I know, lets redevelop the site and put a railway station there, now that's an idea!

[Whyperion]

I understand staff hours have been cut , which makes one think that the super-profits Pendle think are being earned there are not to the extent any kind of supposed economic modelling Pendle have access to calculates them to be.

I never said it was a redundant site . I think I originally said it could be better for the town if it were a market hall ( though if that were a successful viable option the weekly Majestic Market would still be running ) and that ( being the lesser of economic evils ) the Co-Op relocated to the proposed Tesco / L&P site. I also thought it was the kind of in town site that would suit an Aldi ( I rather like Aldi's own brand cereals ).

Anyone else notice that in town centre area there are only two empty retail outlets ( both overpriced by the agent's in my opinion ), and that from an old comment that the number of second-hand/antique shops had gone down in number there are now two new(?) outlets ( admittedly one appears to be a shop window store with a call number if interested ).

The railway station ( though with the new road the integrated bus service to Earby would be quite adequate for most needs ), would be OK located at the Southern End of Rain Hall Road Car Park as being just as accessible to town , or on the unnamed road down to Lower Park Marina as alignment has been built over or looks to be needed for expansion of the School site. I look forward to a Parry People Mover connection to a re-instated Skipton to Colne rail link.

[Stanley]

The thing that struck me about the letter was that whoever had written it was not aware that up to press we only have one supermarket and it remains to be seen whether we will get more. As for the Pioneer store, has anyone given any thought to the fact that no matter what we think about supermarkets it is an asset to old people and anyone who hasn't a car? It makes living easier....

[Tardis]

Most of the comments made about the proposed Supermarkets were along the lines of the co-op is too expensive, etc

So the greater issue appears to be that the co-op may actually sell it's site, in which case it may well be pot luck what actually appears

It did intimate that it would carry out a review if the Tesco site was approved.

The greater issue is that Pendle does not appear to be supporting the town at all, the car park is full of weeds growing through the tarmac, and it has taken sometime just to make sure that the public toilets are open, clean and stocked

[Tardis]

Poll released by the Tories from their May election canvassing says:

51% for
49% against

The rest apparently is on Keith Bailey's Facebook page. I don't #FB so can't see it #fail

[Tardis]

Someone helpfully forwarded on this:

Next Monday 20th August West Craven Area Committee will be making a decision on which site to choose for a new supermarket that could change Barnoldswick & West Craven forever, probably one of the most difficult decisions ever to be made by this committee in its history. At the local elections in May the Conservative Candidates surveyed almost 7500 homes across West Craven, at the time there were only Two application on the table, the main Question was do you want a Supermarket Yes or No! We are now releasing the figures of this totally unbiased survey.
Of those who expressed a preference 49% said NO and 51% said Yes
The results for each ward was as follows
Earby 66% Yes 34% No
Coates 41% Yes 59% No
Craven 47% Yes 53% No

Interesting that barnoldswick says no, but Earby skews it to yes.

these are the documents for the meeting which went live on Pendle's site yesterday I believe

http://www.pendle.gov.uk/meetings/meeti ... _committee

[PanBiker]

One or two threads that this could go in but probably better to keep it in this one.

Just come back from the West Craven Area Special Committee Meeting at Rolls Royce.

Councillors have voted unanimously to support the application put forward to re-develop the Albert Hartley Site with demolition and rebuild of a new manufacturing base for the firm and a supermarket on the same site. This is subject to agreement on a suitable level of 106 funding for the town centre. The proposal will now go to The Secretary of State for approval.

Cllr Whipp asked for a minimum of £500,000 for the 106 agreement which then seemed to escalate to £600,000 and more before the officer suggested that plucking such figures out of the air as caveats for the developers without due consideration of the actual level of impact that the proposed development may have would run the risk of being sent straight to judicial review. After reconsideration It was agreed to pass the proposal subject to a calculated level of funding being agreed.

At the present moment there is no proposal for any particular supermarket chain to take up the retail space that will be provided if the scheme goes ahead so I suppose the AH team will now be punting for a suitable candidate. I know that one of the Tesco guys at the meeting had his head in his hands at one point but of course there is nothing really to stop them from putting a pitch in to AH if they had a mind to.

The promise of saving more existing jobs coupled with an ongoing apprentice scheme plus the employment potential from a new store seemed to be what swayed the Councillors toward that particular proposal.

Consequently the AP Springs/Tesco proposal was rejected on the grounds of over development if allowed along with the preferred option. The Skipton Road/Aldi proposal was rejected on conservation area grounds.

[Tripps]

Brilliant post Ian - I understand every word. I think that's a first on this topic.

[Whyperion]

I had emailed one of the Committee members last week requesting them to circulate my considerations , which were broadly the same conclusions , but with leaving let out to Secretary of State for both L&P and AH site proposals.

Will AH go into temporary accomodation while its being re - developed ? ( I think the proposal was build the required manufacturing capacity first then the retail outlet so some time waiting to go shopping). As there is still possibly a demand for employment land ,the L&P redevelopment is not totally a non starter , just it may have to be an industrial offering on site rather than a retail.

[Stanley]

Ian, sounds as though some clarity and common sense is coming into the debate. (and the posts!) If there is to be a supermarket, the Crow Nest site ticks the box for me.

[Tardis]

AH will apparently move round the site whilst it is beinf redeveloped as they argued that they couldn't have a break in revenue as that would mean laying off the workers.

[Tardis]

What struck me as odd from the meeting:

1/ Cllr Whipp said he entered the room with an open mind, yet had already costed out the Promotional package that he wanted to offset the development to be be applied to the Town Centre

He even continued to argue for this cash, on top of the money for the puffin crossing and other bits, even when Mr Watson informed him that it was highly likely the council would lose any Judicial Review, and that would then jepardise all the other 106 monies because the impact is disprotionate to the money requested.

2/ A Liberal requested protection from competition for the Town Centre

3/ The Co-op is 'over trading' which means that we need to force a competitor on it. So a business that is successful is to be penalised for being just that, when the figures that were given supposedly demonstrated that 90% of cash already left the town

4/ Cllr Purcell first put forward the resolution, seconded by Cllr Carroll, and supported by Cllr Throup would have meant a majority but Cllr Whipp pulled it back and then made the same resolution himself after a bit more waffling



The rest as they say will only be proved by History

[Tardis]

Anyone who didn't go, I did a running commentary on twitter, where I tried to remain balanced

@Dark_Blue_Box

Best be quick tho' as it will be swamped by everything ese shortly

[Whyperion]

Thinking about superstores , am I right that there is little competition on the range of products in an area (M&S and Waitrose maybe a bit of an exception) , all one seems to get is me too , and on some things this week I might be cheaper. I miss , thanks to permitted take overs , Somerfield , which always seemed to have a better range at generally keener prices than the Co-Op , and Safeway , which to me looked like a more exotic place to shop , it seemed to have more things like spices and eastern european imported ranges compared to others for its given floorspace , which were lost in the takeover by Morrisons - a store which seems only to sell things that fall apart before one would expect them to. Basically most superstore operators are not going to realistically add to the Barnoldswick shopping experience other than a bit of diversion from Colne/Skipton but I hope the AH site at least some in the Coates area whom travel out of town do decide its close enough to get to to make it worth while.

[PanBiker]

I also thought it odd that one of the councillors proposed that a stipulation should be that AH retain the mill chimney? Probably at odds by saying this but why? The structure will not have any useful purpose other than being a liability on the firm as it will still need to be maintained, insured for 3rd party liability and protected for H&S issues. It will not be connected to a boiler so why keep it. We have an example of a functioning structure at Bancroft so we don't necessarily need another. Of course it would help to keep some of our steeplejack lads in work but a bit of a strange request under the circumstances I thought.

Tin hat on!

[Thomo]

This could be in another topic but I will post it here as well. The old Drill Hall and the stewards accommodation are presumably a part of all this and I have been asked by the Duke of Wellingtons Regiment Historian if I can get pictures and info on these two buildings before they disappear, they have an ongoing project concerning the Cadet Force and its buildings, I think a visit to AH is on the cards.

[PanBiker]

The attached PDF shows the proposed layout which does not show the Drill Hall as part of the plan. The area of land opposite the existing factory is designated as future expansion land for AH.

PlanningProposedLayoutPlans19308717.pdf

It will still be a good idea to get some pictures of the environs though I would think

This and all the other related planning documents, surveys and reports for this proposal can be found here:

13/12/0223P Ref: Albert Hartley Site Development Documents

[Whyperion]

AH volunteered in the application to retain chimney if it was desired , its of a different style to Bancroft , its retention could be used as a bit of bargaining point to reign in the numbers from the air town centre improvement figures. IKEA at Croydon had to retain that places former power station chimneys , adding their colours and logos to the tops , becoming quite an advert for the store.