Superstore developments

User avatar
Tardis
Senior Member
Posts: 1897
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 14:21
Location: Barnoldswick
Contact:

Re: Superstore developments

Post by Tardis » 22 Aug 2012, 09:40

For the record:

The AH submission is only outline planning permission. No actual plans have been submitted to the council that have met any approval. That was explained at the meeting.

Thus when they are it will go back to the committee for approval

Meanwhile the committee's decision is now referred to the Secretary of State for him to adjudicate (it was never the committee's to decide)

Thus, the Council will have to say "we prefer this one to that one" in the consultation and then the decision will be made by Mr Pickles

Meanwhile the Tesco appeal will be heard in October, and the Council will ask for a deferrment of that until the other is decided.

Timescales, maybe over a year before AH can turn a brick or just over a month until we know that Barnoldswick has a Tesco.

In the meantime, however, the Aldi application can also appeal because the figures (it can be argued) demonstrate that there may be room for it too. Again the committee will not be able to decide on that.

The bit in the Lancashire Telegraph today covers all these points, and it also points to the fact that we don't know who the supermarket at AH is. It could well be Tesco again

User avatar
Thomo
Senior Member
Posts: 1517
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:08

Re: Superstore developments

Post by Thomo » 22 Aug 2012, 12:15

I have mailed AH and asked if they can supply any information regarding the old Drill Hall, I have also asked for permission to photograph this part of their complex.
Thomo. RN Retired, but not regretted!

User avatar
Tardis
Senior Member
Posts: 1897
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 14:21
Location: Barnoldswick
Contact:

Re: Superstore developments

Post by Tardis » 22 Aug 2012, 13:27

Another bit just got shared:

The WCAC decision went against everything that the Planning Officer recommended, but as anyone who was at the meeting will observe I have quite a low opinion of Mr Watson's competance

I'm told that Tesco will fight this hard, and they don't usually just push bravado.

If Tesco win, all the Cllrs and the Council will be liable for the costs :surprised:

Info would suggest Tesco is in the stronger position because of all the legal technicalities

The only bit I don't know at the moment is whether or not the Aldi bid will appeal

User avatar
Tardis
Senior Member
Posts: 1897
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 14:21
Location: Barnoldswick
Contact:

Re: Superstore developments

Post by Tardis » 22 Aug 2012, 13:29

here's the Lancashire Telegraph link:

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/ne ... d/?ref=twt

User avatar
Whyperion
Senior Member
Posts: 1474
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 22:13
Location: Now in Burnley , After leaving Barnoldswick , except when I am in London

Re: Superstore developments

Post by Whyperion » 22 Aug 2012, 14:22

The only hint of what might be on Tesco's side is that the store is closer to the established town centre , the traffic problems already noted though I think go against the Tesco proposed site and that with either superstore the economic pull or attachment of the town is of no greater or lesser amount even if one site is distance wise closer than the other.

User avatar
Tardis
Senior Member
Posts: 1897
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 14:21
Location: Barnoldswick
Contact:

Re: Superstore developments

Post by Tardis » 23 Aug 2012, 10:40

Whyperion wrote:The only hint of what might be on Tesco's side is that the store is closer to the established town centre , the traffic problems already noted though I think go against the Tesco proposed site and that with either superstore the economic pull or attachment of the town is of no greater or lesser amount even if one site is distance wise closer than the other.
Distance is not important, as there are barely yards between the 3 sites, and the WCAC decided that they weren't linked to the Town Centre

The L&P site allows Tesco to buy up the rest of the site and expand, because L&P is only warehousing and can easily relocate with the money

User avatar
Tardis
Senior Member
Posts: 1897
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 14:21
Location: Barnoldswick
Contact:

Re: Superstore developments

Post by Tardis » 30 Aug 2012, 09:43

According to the Pendle WCAC agenda for Tuesday, there will be an update on the AH planning permission.

There are no details currently online, although I have asked for them.

I will post them if I find them

User avatar
Tardis
Senior Member
Posts: 1897
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 14:21
Location: Barnoldswick
Contact:

Re: Superstore developments

Post by Tardis » 30 Aug 2012, 13:45

as if by magic:

http://www.pendle.gov.uk/egov_downloads ... itions.pdf
That the application be referred to the Secretary of State under the Shopping
Direction with an indication that the Council is minded to approve the
application subject to the following conditions and a satisfactory Section 106
agreement that has been agreed by the Director (Regeneration) in
consultation with the Chairman, including the provision of a bridge over the
beck into Victory Park and the new industrial unit being occupied by Albert
Hartleys prior to the building of the foodstore.

User avatar
Whyperion
Senior Member
Posts: 1474
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 22:13
Location: Now in Burnley , After leaving Barnoldswick , except when I am in London

Re: Superstore developments

Post by Whyperion » 07 Sep 2012, 12:24

Popped into mum's local ASDA 9en route to/from elsewhere ), which opened on Monday , causing much price cutting and offers from nearby Superstores. Prices now 5 days later don't seem any cheaper than elsewhere ( its in a location although in London has for some reason historically been expensive for shopping and at one time Tesco ( at two front small shop much the same size as OneStop) closed down in the town citing too little demand and profit ). ASDA opened on what had previously been a B&Q then a toy superstore site. Anyway sometimes in stores pre-packed goods can be more expensive than loose - Tomatoes and Carrots I have noted , anyway the Bannanas were packed plastic in 5s at £1 per pack , a quick note that loose were 64p per kilo , despite not being able to see scales I guessed that 5 were about a lb or so. Indeed 5 loose weighed in at 46pence. Quite enough for me. Though on the pre pack cooked meats - shared between mum and the cat - my normal supplier does the BM turkey at £2 a pack , expensive but convienent. ASDAs same price but has 9 in a pack , indeed marked up at 20g extra too, so worth watching when comparing as I am certain Sainsbury's brand match is not looking at the per KG pricing on branded goods.

So should Barnoldswick gain (additional) superstores be aware of the mental arthimetic if you are trying to find low prices as a consumer.

User avatar
Tardis
Senior Member
Posts: 1897
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 14:21
Location: Barnoldswick
Contact:

Re: Superstore developments

Post by Tardis » 02 Nov 2012, 10:26

Tesco appeal turned down.

I got the tweet last night, but see it managed to make it to the B&E (no actual details)

User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 46632
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: Superstore developments

Post by Stanley » 03 Nov 2012, 06:30

I saw the BET report but was confused by the reason given for rejecting the appeal, that Barlick didn't need two supermarkets. Does this mean whoever it is? Where do the other two proposals stand now?
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!

David Whipp
Senior Member
Posts: 2874
Joined: 19 Oct 2012, 18:26

Re: Superstore developments

Post by David Whipp » 03 Nov 2012, 09:19

In total, there were four applications for large foodstores.

The Tesco/L&P/Liberty Properties one (on the former Wellhouse Mill site) was submitted twice.

The first of the Tesco/L&P/Liberty Properties applications was taken to appeal after councillors deferred a decision on it to allow other applications to be considered alongside it. (The applicants then submitted an identical application to be considered locally; they had two horses in the race.)

By the time the appeal was heard, the local committee and the secretary of state had approved the alternative Albert Hartley application and rejected the Wellhouse one. The defence against the appeal by Tesco and co was that the town couldn't sustain two such large format stores.

The appeal decision on this original application backs the local decisions taken in each and every respect. (The full decision of the government inspector can be seen on the Pendle Council planning website).

As mentioned, the Albert Hartley application has been confirmed by the secretary of state as approved and the planning authority has issued a decision notice.

Tesco and co have stated that they are going to challenge this decision in the High Court by judicial review. (They haven't specified their grounds for such a challenge. I'm pretty confident that we haven't left them any chinks that would lead to a sustainable challenge, but there's a few weeks yet before the time limit for such challenges is reached, so we'll have to see.)

The gas works yard (Aldi) application was turned down locally. The applicants have a period of time within which they can appeal. As this is for a smaller format store than the one just rejected on appeal, the applicants could argue that their store and a larger one would be sustainable. My view is that the same argument used to defeat the Tesco application (not enough trade for two) would apply.

I'd expect the Albert Hartley developers to come back with a detailed planning application when they've signed up a supermarket operators for their speculative proposal. (the current consent is an outline [in principle] application).

A footnote to all this is that we (council tax payers) could have ended up forking out a fortune in defending appeals and high court challenges with these store wars. We're not out of the woods yet, but so far the way we've handled this has avoided mega legal bills. Long may this continue!

PS My own view is that Leggat and Platt will go ahead with building their new warehouse at Wellhouse irrespective of the supermarket decision. It makes operational sense and the company has ample liquidity for the investment. No doubt their shareholders would have appreciated the extra farthing on their dividend from getting supermarket value from part of the site, but it won't be the decisive factor affecting the company's investment decisions.

User avatar
Tardis
Senior Member
Posts: 1897
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 14:21
Location: Barnoldswick
Contact:

Re: Superstore developments

Post by Tardis » 03 Nov 2012, 10:58

Stanley wrote:I saw the BET report but was confused by the reason given for rejecting the appeal, that Barlick didn't need two supermarkets. Does this mean whoever it is? Where do the other two proposals stand now?
Albert Hartley's still has to build their new warehousing before they can build the approved supermarket according to the planning permission. I do wonder who will get ownership of the chimney, but that be sorted firther down the line by them.

What is noticeable is that a lot of commercial property in the town is now on the market and can not be any coincidence.

Just because L&P/Liberty/Tesco was beaten, does not mean that Tesco will not move into the Albert Hartley one, if it ever gets built.

I'd rather not tell Mark how to win his appeal, he is a good man, but it is far simpler than outlined by Cllr Whipp and there is an awful lot of supporting eveidence for it, and the Aldi store could be up and trading long before a brick was put down for the Albert Hartleys one.

The town did not need a superstore, without a substantial increase in housing and population.

User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 46632
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: Superstore developments

Post by Stanley » 04 Nov 2012, 06:47

Thanks for the clarification. I have supported the AH proposal ever since I became aware of it. That site makes much more sense and preserves one of the oldest employers in the town. As for the stack, if it's redundant it will go, no point accepting the maintenance costs simply for heritage reasons. Thirty years ago I could have pointed them at a buyer but those days have gone.
I have a story about chimney preservation. I once had a visit to Bancroft by the director of Leicester museum and his treasurer. We were talking about my mate Robert and his collection of redundant chimneys and after a while the treasurer interjected "I foresee one insuperable difficulty, transport" I had to educate him....
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!

David Whipp
Senior Member
Posts: 2874
Joined: 19 Oct 2012, 18:26

Re: Superstore developments

Post by David Whipp » 04 Nov 2012, 08:23

Tardis wrote:The town did not need a superstore, without a substantial increase in housing and population
Whether Barnoldswick 'needs' a large foodstore or not isn't a question that the planning regime in this country takes into account.

What would be (and was) taken into account were the studies that showed how much spending on groceries by Barlickers is going through the tills at stores in Colne, Skipton and Burnley etc. And we all know that these figures relate to the real world, as Barlickers shopping in those stores constantly bump into other Barlickers doing their weekly grocery shop. I can (and did) dispute some of the assumptions made in these studies and conclusions drawn from them, but the overall message was one that any government inspector would accept: that a large store was sustainable on the basis of retaining a proportion of the existing out of town spend within the town. More arguable was (and is) the impact such a store would have on small retailers in Barnoldswick.

So, on the evidence presented, at least one of the foodstore proposals was going to get an approval at some stage of the planning process. During the period that applications were being considered, the national planning regime shifted to make such an outcome even more certain. If all applications were turned down at a local level, the almost certain outcome would be approvals for who knows what by a government inspector.

In the circumstances, the committee made the best decision for Barnoldswick. The approved application gives the best support to retain manufacturing jobs in Barlick. To help mitigate potential impact of a new foodstore on the town centre, I successfully pressed for as large a package of support to enhance and promote the town as could be justified. This is written into the Albert Hartley approval. (Also written in, and agreed by the applicants, is the retention of the landmark mill chimney. The cost of future maintenance will have to be part of the operating cost of the site. The owners could apply to demolish it in future, but we'll deal with that if it happens.)

Several surveys established that Barlick is split roughly down the middle as to whether townsfolk want a new foodstore. There are also divisions about who people would prefer as an operator. (The planning system is blind about operators; a foodstore is a foodstore whoever operates it...)

PS. I note Tardis's professed expertise as a planning consultant. If we'd followed his advice during this process, the huge costs I mentioned in the previous post arising from fighting appeals and JRs would probably be hitting home anytime around now...

User avatar
Whyperion
Senior Member
Posts: 1474
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 22:13
Location: Now in Burnley , After leaving Barnoldswick , except when I am in London

Re: Superstore developments

Post by Whyperion » 04 Nov 2012, 11:28

There is a potential legal argument that would have allowed Tardis to achieve the desire for no superstores. So far as I know its untested in the courts and relates to the EU Services directive, where the inclusion of retailing as a service is expressly stated , and that there is a general principle of the right of establishment without discrimination by an operator. But there are a few controls , which come down to two levels of localism , the country's policies on the grounds of social policy - no dominant operator in an area and the encouragement of local suppliers where possible (I simplify) , and a more local - undefined but I would guess either French Department or English County Level or possibly more local than that , again relating to would one operator's approvals lead to either local domination or removal of local diversity of suppliers. There are also the normal considerations of the types of land suitable for the chosen service - so no superstores on designated woodland without good reason for example [ Good reason might be a national edict for the construction of a new town ] - but a (mobile) hut selling seasonal local fresh goods in a safe lay-by might have a case for permission not to be refused.

I think this directive has elements of the former English planning policies and guidelines in it , despite what some anti-EU persons might think the UK had input into the drafting and agreement of the Directive as can be seen in some of the (translated) language. I am less sure that current English planning guidelines now correctly follow the Services Directive.

User avatar
Thomo
Senior Member
Posts: 1517
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:08

Re: Superstore developments

Post by Thomo » 04 Nov 2012, 13:15

Try as I may, I cannot see a new store killing off the town centre, it may even bring people in. And! there is nothing wrong with a bit of decent competition. We have over a dozen takeaways and only one Veg shop, the suppliers of which are definitely lower end. Stanley has made a point over his tobacco issue with the Co-op, I have one over the brands of rum available there, no doubt I could have got some good stuff somewhere in the town , but at what price? Also two weeks ago I went up town for something at about 4.30 pm and many shops were already closed, that smacks of complacency to me. There are people working hard to make Barlick attractive, a better retail base may just aid their cause.
Thomo. RN Retired, but not regretted!

User avatar
Whyperion
Senior Member
Posts: 1474
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 22:13
Location: Now in Burnley , After leaving Barnoldswick , except when I am in London

Re: Superstore developments

Post by Whyperion » 04 Nov 2012, 20:39

One Tesco I noted recently was providing in its foyer area a space for independent traders in a market style environment.

I cannot see that any store locate along Skipton Road is going to extensively , on its own , draw massive amounts ( if any ) shoppers into the Town Centre. Small shops closing at 16:30 are not unique to Barnoldswick , its only where there is a reasonable expectation of passing trade that opening times beyond around 5pm are viable for smaller shops that have been staffed since early morning. Barnoldswick's vacant shops remain 20% overpriced , but are potentially in good locations for the clicks and mortar / local service and delivery that I think will be the only differentiation that the static traditional high street can expect to compete on in the next 20 years of the C21st.

User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 46632
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: Superstore developments

Post by Stanley » 05 Nov 2012, 06:29

You are getting good value out of the site aren't you. Isn't it about time you stopped freeloading? Every post you make is a poke in the eye for donors.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!

User avatar
Nolic
Avid User
Posts: 996
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:10
Location: Barrowford

Re: Superstore developments

Post by Nolic » 05 Nov 2012, 07:04

I agree wholeheartedly with Stanley. I shall continue to ignore your posts until you contribute. Nolic
"I'm a self made man who worships his creator." Image

User avatar
Tardis
Senior Member
Posts: 1897
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 14:21
Location: Barnoldswick
Contact:

Re: Superstore developments

Post by Tardis » 05 Nov 2012, 11:05

The preservation for the chimney is in the Council documentation. We may be an old mill town but there is only a point in retaining the heritage if it does actually work IMHO, because otherwise it becomes a burden on future generations

I would like to see AH succeed, if only for historical reasons, but I understand that there is storage capacity up at their Carlisle plant if they decided to move the whole operation.

User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 46632
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: Superstore developments

Post by Stanley » 06 Nov 2012, 06:19

Thanks for that Comrade. I do the same......
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!

User avatar
Tardis
Senior Member
Posts: 1897
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 14:21
Location: Barnoldswick
Contact:

Re: Superstore developments

Post by Tardis » 07 Dec 2012, 12:53

The Aldi development in Barnoldswick has submitted an appeal, according to the B&E

User avatar
Pluggy
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 1803
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:13
Location: Barnoldswick
Contact:

Re: Superstore developments

Post by Pluggy » 07 Dec 2012, 14:49

Irrespective of the rights and wrongs of a large chainstore moving to Barlick, I have a soft spot for the Co-op and they'll be hurt most I think. I know its not as cheap as Asda, Tesco etc etc. But their own brand stuff is good, often as good or sometimes better than the best selling brands.

We just discovered our cat who has to be the fussiest animal alive likes Co-op cat biscuits, We had been buying it Go-Cat at almost twice the price. Their "butter wannabe" Co-op Buttery IMO is much better than 'I can't believe' (tastes more like lard to me) and 'Utterly Butterly' and on a par with 'Clover'. My mate thinks their spreadable butter is better than the Kerrygold and Lurpack equivalents. Their frozen fish in breadcrumbs is vastly superior to Tesco's and better than Asda's (The tesco one has gone downhill a lot, probably to get the price down).

I went to Asda a couple of weeks ago because I gave a lift to my daughter and we thought we'd do a bit of shopping whilst we were there. I got half way round the aircraft hanger sized building and I was losing the will to live. It's just too da*n big. I like oatcakes, and found that in that vast place, they only had 1 choice. Crumby little Co-op in Barlick has 4. Maybe something to do with the number of Scots in Barlick compared to Colne and Nelson.

My wife needed some A4 paper quick and I got sent to Tesco in Skipton, must have hit it at the wrong time, I was waiting in queues for the automated checkout for 15 minutes behind hordes of people with trolleys full of booze. I can be in and out of the Co-op in ten minutes, but they don't sell reams of A4 paper......

Just my opinion.
Pluggy's Home Monitor : http://pluggy.duckdns.org
Barlick Computers : http://barlickcomputers.co.uk

User avatar
Whyperion
Senior Member
Posts: 1474
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 22:13
Location: Now in Burnley , After leaving Barnoldswick , except when I am in London

Re: Superstore developments

Post by Whyperion » 08 Dec 2012, 00:25

Barnoldswick does seem to be short of a commercial printers/stationery place ( OK Newsagent on Albert Road has some stuff but does not seem to be in the bulk one might expect ) I guess demand is less than in other towns I've been in or one is hidden somewhere. For A4 paper at odd ( but not 24 ) hrs ) , try Sainsbury's in Colne.

Co-op took over Somerfield in wife's home town , and have now closed the store completely (arguably affected by a much larger 24hrTesco about 5miles away)- The Co-op's original much smaller shop on the town's housing estate remains open, as does the one in the adjoining town, so I have no great affection for the Co-Op and find although their quality might be OK , the depth of their range just did not match what Somerfield had.

Post Reply

Return to “General Miscellaneous Chat & Gossip”