Way back in 1995 John Gummer, Tory Secretary of State for
the Environment, in a fit of temporary sanity, declared war on out of town superstores, saying that
they should not get planning permission if they harm the vitality and viability of nearby town centres.
In a sign of how far we’ve regressed since then in the last
year alone Cornwall Council’s Strategic Planning Committee gave permission for
four new stores, three of which are basically out of town. All four of these
permissions went to Sainsburys. Add in their new store at Helston that opened
in July 2010 and they’re the clear victors in Cornwall’s ongoing store wars.
 |
| Sainsburys Helston. But could be any town. |
The Sainsburys brand suspiciously suits Cornwall Council’s
not so hidden agenda to gentrify Cornwall.
With Waitrose waiting in the wings at the bizarrely named Truro Eastern District
Centre (of what? an unannounced suburb??) and TV programmes not so subtly
designed to entice a better class of person altogether to move to Cornwall,
Tesco’s monopoly looks set to crumble and Morrisons are left out in the cold.
First to get permission last year after a long struggle was
the Sainsburys at Wadebridge. In 2010 the Committee had refused three planning
applications at Wadebridge – from Sainsburys, Morrisons and for an extension at
the existing Tesco. Tesco’s extension got the go-ahead early in 2011 but the
other two were heavily rejected by majorities of 12 and 14, with most
opposition to the Sainsburys.
What a turnaround by October though. In the face of appeals
lodged by both Sainsburys and Morrisons the planners suddenly discovered that a
re-designed Sainsburys (which just happened to be on Council owned land)
re-sited a full six metres, was now perfectly OK. This was despite their own
pet consultants GVA Grimley concluding that there would be a drop of 17-29%
fall in takings in the convenience food sector in Wadebridge town centre and an
overall drop of 7-8%. Morrisons, although offering ‘endless’ benefits and
£750,000 of Section 106 agreement bribes money, was refused 10-2 and Sainsburys
approved by 14-3.
Meanwhile, downalong at Hayle, the supermarket saga was
running and running. In February there had been four separate applications in
the field – Asda, Sainsburys, Morrisons and the Dutch bankers ING’s development
on South Quay. In a chaotic vote Asda’s bid was deferred and Sainsburys refused
despite the supermarket giant offering a 26 hectare nature reserve to offset
the loss of land.
Sainsburys promptly did a deal with ING and popped up again
at South Quay in October. At that meeting Morrisons’ application was refused
15-5. Then Asda went the same way 12-5, before the Committee voted 13-6 to
approve Sainsburys in its new location.
In the votes four councillors (Mann, Bull, Pascoe, Nolan)
voted to approve more than one of the three applications. On the other hand
only one (Cllr Pearce) could steel himself to approve none of them.
Also in October, Sainsburys applied to redevelop Penzance
heliport, replacing the boring old helicopter to the Scillies with yet another
out of town supermarket (aren’t the two existing stores within a quarter of a
mile from the heliport enough?) and offering the council the lure of a park and
ride into the soon-to-be retail desert of Penzance. Now park and rides are guaranteed
to get councillors drooling and their pulses racing as they’re the latest big daft
idea, offering less congestion but in fact encouraging more traffic.
Sure enough, the Committee voted overwhelmingly for approval
by 14-5 and Sainsburys number 3 was a done deal. They then followed that up in December
by giving Sainsburys yet another approval to build their biggest store yet in
the west at Ponsharden, Falmouth.
Again despite an estimated inpact of 11-12% in reduced takings in Falmouth town centre. But
then town centres are so old Cornwall.
 |
| Helston - no-one around |
And in a parallel universe councillors still insist they can
control these over-fed corporate monsters despite all the evidence to the contrary. Indeed, the decline of town centres is blamed on us consumers for not
shopping in them rather than the Council committee members with stars in their
eyes from that bottomless pit of goodies the supermarket chains dangle in front
of them.
Posts
As always, an interesting blog and topic. I can reassure you I do not live in a parallel universe, but firmly in this one.
ReplyDeleteThe report you mention in your last paragraph is the first serious report to have been conducted since Sainbury's and Tesco opened. I did not say there had not been an effect on the high-street, but not as bad a popular myth.
Knowing and speaking to the many traders of Helston it is not easy for them, but they do adapt. They also agree the non-food element of a supermarket has a huge impact on trading. This is why I said conditions should be imposed on supermarkets.
Councillors are often accused of not listening to local feelings on planning matters, but in most cases, supermarkets do have support from both the local population, and town and parish councils.
It is a little hard to turn down a application when there is public support,the local council support it, and the current planning rules/evidence supports it.
My last point is on people using a town centre more is valid. However, shops have to adapt to what a customer wants, and maybe the opening times. The majority of shops still open on 1960/70 hours. With many families having to have two or more breadwinners, working 9-5, it is a little hard to shop in the high-street when they are closed.
You only have to go into a supermarket between 5pm-7pm to see people shopping after work.
Lastly, and the real danger to the high street, especially non-food, is the internet. I believe this has had a far greater impact on the high-street than many of the common reasons blamed to the decline of the high-street.