Wednesday, February 27, 2008

The Tesco report

I know fourth entry today, but the DCC meeting PDF here is well worth reading. It's 46 pages long, but surprisingly chock-full of goodness despite some repetition.

I enjoy the fact it points out that under the current links to town the development would be out of centre unless the Mitton Street pavements were widened and traffic control points put in at Severn Road/Mitton and Lion Hill/Vale Road. We're getting jams simply by extending the timing on the lights in Bridge Street what the hell will this do?

I also like the fact that it suggests both High Street and Co-op are robust enough not to be significantly harmed by the development, well yeah they are at the moment.

A balanced view must be taken with regard to the retail issue. On one hand it is clear that the pedestrian links between the town centre and the store are not ideal, essentially due to the physical constraints in Mitton Street. These have always been evident and in land use terms the site has nevertheless been earmarked for a retail store in the Local Plan and the Development Brief.
and that's the sound of me beating my head against a wall.
It should also be re-emphasised that at present, according to the retail analyses, a significant number of trips are made from the Stourport on Severn catchment area to other foodstores elsewhere, generating unnecessary trips by car. This proposal will clearly reduce much of that car mileage, a significant benefit in terms of sustainability.
Yeah 'cos everyone who travelled to Kiddy by car is now going to walk or take the bus to the new development; as if. As it stands now anyone on the 'wrong' side of the bridge travels through town and up the main drag and returns the same way via Gilgal. Anyone in Mitton is likely to take Wilden Lane both ways. Anyone in Lickhill can take the main drag there and back.

So the new development opens and those on the wrong side of the bridge are still using Gilgal, but now so are those from Lickhill and Mitton. Oh great you've reduced car mileage at the expense of having everyone trying to use the same roads and thus sitting in queues; beautiful.

I look at all the things that are being proposed and think "It can't just be me seeing all these flaws" sometimes it's just silly little simple things like the new route from Discovery Road means that any traffic trying to enter the supermarket from there has to turn right against the traffic from Mitton Street so why use that route when the other is just as easy? The cycle lane provision is a joke, are we going to get ones as per Lickhill Road and Lombard Street i.e. painted cycle signs on the road whoop-de-doo that'll help. The proposed traffic system on Severn Road and Lion Hill is bizarre, if it's sole purpose is for pedestrians then it won't assist anyone trying to leave Severn Road and if it's set up as a vehicle control point then you're going to have so may accidents or jams it's untrue as people turn the corner and crunch to a halt.

I'm sorry this just resonates so wrongly to me on so many levels I just can't get a handle on it; it just has the same tone to me as a proposed nuclear power plant in the middle of Birmingham and everyone arguing about how the fuel is going to be delivered.


Tav said...

All councillors on the Planning Committee should have recieved their Tesco postcard by now. When I spoke to a councillor in Norwich he said this is standard Tesco procedure. They send out a bulleted list of points to consider (only Tesco's points mind you) just before a planning meeting. I would just love a councillor to have the guts to publish their postcard!

FlipC said...

Every little bit helps.

Tav said...

By the way, at the Full Council meeting (27-Feb-2008) Cllr. Campion (the un-elected leader of the council) said although it was regrettable to use an outside contractor to prepare the Tesco application, he believed they had don’t an excellent job. Umm, I wonder if he actually read it!

Tav said...

* done

FlipC said...

Mind fuzzed by the amount I've read, is this a report I've already linked to?

Tav said...

Vacuity is the unwritten rule in council meeting _ they are minuted you know. The thing is I can't remember why Cllr. Campion mentioned it, it is certainly was not on the agenda. I suspect he was referring to the DCC meeting report as that's the only document produced by the Tyler-Parkes Partnership, as far as I know.

FlipC said...

Ah yes that one, the one I linked to in the very first sentence (duh me) they do tend to blur a little around the edges.

I notice Fran's mentioned taking 3 hours to read them all on the WFL blog, and John's um actually what the hell is going on over at WFC site?

Anyway, vacuity at council meetings! Makes me almost glad they keep holding them at times I can't attend them :-)