We would have turned down £50m Tesco superstore scheme for Bath, say councillors
Councillors have objected to a £50 million Tesco superstore scheme for Bath ahead of a public inquiry.
The project, which is planned for the old Bath Press site in Lower Bristol Road, will now be looked at by a Government-appointed inspector, who will have the final say.
-
Developer SJI appealed to Communities Secretary Eric Pickles’ department over the length of time B&NES Council has taken to deal with the scheme.
At a meeting of the authority’s development control committee, councillors agreed they would have refused the application because of the traffic disruption it would cause and the damaging effect it would have on shops at nearby Moorland Road.
Chair of the committee Councillor Gerry Curran (Lib Dem, Twerton) said: “I am going to support the recommendation to refuse the application.
“This has many complex issues and we have had some very good quality advice by officers which has helped us to understand the issues.
“There are worries that cannot be ignored, in relation to traffic disruption.
“The application will now go to a public appeal, we have just been asked what we would have done."
Councillor Les Kew (Con, High Littleton) said: “I feel that the committee has no option but to reject the application.
“We have to take into consideration the retail impact it will have.”
Christopher Borkowski, managing director of SJI, said the application would benefit Bath as a whole and bring creative workshops like those at Paintworks in Bristol.
He said: “This would create in excess of 600 jobs and will allow Bath to have the equivalent of the successful Paintworks.
“We were disappointed to have had to take this to the Government but we had to protect our interests."
Federation of Bath Residents’ Associations chairman Henry Brown spoke against the application.
He said: “We have one concern, the effect on the traffic congestion and pollution.
“This new supermarket is bound to generate more traffic, every parking space will be used several times a day.
“It will attract thousands more people to the area.
“As the main road through Bath, the Lower Bristol Road needs to be more accessible not less.
“As the proposal stands it will make the problems worse not better.”
Eleven councillors said they would have rejected the proposal, with one abstention.
Another application from SJI, which also includes a community space, is still pending a decision by the council.
Both schemes include offices and homes.
 |
|||
| Read your comments |
|||
|
58 Comments
View all
by arkle1066
Saturday, January 28 2012, 6:40PM
“lets be honest,it all comes down to money,who will give the biggest back hander out has won,if it was a proper vote by the real bathonians i mean people who have lived here all there lives,it probably have gone to TESCO weve got lots of little sainsburys popping up every where me and thousands of other bathonians would have prefered a ASDA store,its cheaper,better quality,when i was driving me and my wife would rather go to ASDA at longwell green than shop at sainsburys,im not a very good shopper personaly i hate food shopping because of the cost,thats why we the real people not the councillors, they probably use the internet to go on line shopping,too tired after a hard days work ( joke ) so in future let US have a say in what happens in OUR city”
by MajorFlack
Tuesday, January 24 2012, 6:24PM
“...I find myself proven right...
I think if you take the time to read and fully understand what's been written you'll find you've actually been proven completely wrong.”
by Chidley
Tuesday, January 24 2012, 4:14PM
“Well done. I find myself proven right within twenty minutes. Well meaning I'm sure but really quite unnecessary.”
by joning
Tuesday, January 24 2012, 2:02PM
“@ Chidley
''...enlightened debate.'' Yeah on one side maybe (capndave, rogerh, majorflack in this instance) but then there's you on the other.”
by Chidley
Tuesday, January 24 2012, 1:22PM
“I always feel rather pleased when a certain style of excessively exposed contributors to these pages disagree with me especially when they define themselves by resorting to boorishness. If such people agreed with me I would assume that I must be wrong. Having said that I am always happy to be involved in rational differences of opinion, such being the essence of enlightened debate.”
by MajorFlack
Tuesday, January 24 2012, 10:39AM
“Chidley, your comments here are about as trustworthy as anything ever attributed to the fictional villain Moriarty.
You appear to have attempted to create an illusion that you believe no evidence exists but then betray the truth in writing: "An intelligent man with an enquiring mind would be extremely 'curious' as to how and why any evidence to substantiate this gut feeling is being so well hidden."
If it is hidden evidence then it exists. Please make up your mind or be clear about what is true.
You also seem to deliberate mislead in writing: "Sainsbury's can do no wrong whereas Tescos are unwelcome in this City."
I refer you to a previous comment, January 19, 5:39, by Bathman, who quite rightly recorded: "Tesco have 5 with a potential of 2 more and Sainsburys who only have 4."
Only a fool would endeavour to fabricate evidence in the absence of any in support of a weak standpoint.”
by rogerh3
Tuesday, January 24 2012, 10:30AM
“No, a handful of commenters here repeat it endlessly largely because of their ignorance about the planning system. And the reason there's no evidence to be found is not because it's 'well hidden'. How stupid can you get?”
by Chidley
Tuesday, January 24 2012, 9:51AM
“Numerous people have strongly hinted that there is 'something rotten' about the idea that seemingly, Sainsbury's can do no wrong whereas Tescos are unwelcome in this City. However, to date there is no firm evidence of this. An intelligent man with an enquiring mind would be extremely 'curious' as to how and why any evidence to substantiate this gut feeling is being so well hidden. And of course, only a fool would be so stupid as to suggest that, being intrigued by such a lack of evidence, the investigator may consider such a deficiency to be real evidence in itself albeit grounds for contemplation.”
by capndave
Monday, January 23 2012, 10:04PM
“Is it evidence or lack of any evidence that few if any people have been endangered or may have been endangered over all the decades the gasometers have been in situ?
Whatever the application of evidence or lack thereof, what circumstance have altered so drastically that our forebears were safe in their beds or cash registers within a stones throw of those large tins, yet we are not?”
by aurea_flamma
Monday, January 23 2012, 7:37PM
“rogerh3
"Only a fool would argue that the lack of any evidence is itself evidence."
I have to disagree there are many gUK Government and local Council themes that rely on that very statement for their basis in fact.
There is no evidence to suggest that XXXXXX is harmful to health, or there is no evidence to suggest that there is a risk from...... the list goes on, and on, and on.
Then on second thoughts - your right - Only a fool would argue that the lack of any evidence is itself evidence!”