Saturday 9 October 2010

Concerned Local Businesses & Residents Protest Against Tenbury Tesco Plans


Tesco resumed their charm offensive in Tenbury on friday 8th Oct - hoping to persuade Tenbury locals that their revised plans for a local store made more sense than the ones they were forced to withdraw in the summer. It was interesting to note that the Tesco representatives in the Pump Rooms were kept busy though and clearly earned their pay for the day. When I looked during the 3 occasions in the day I went in, they were almost constantly being buttonholed by irate local people disgruntled by Tesco's plans. When about 30 'TesNO' supporters went in after the above photo was taken, some of the Tesco staff apparently quickly took their name badges off - there's loyalty to the cause [not]. The resultant room full of annoyed local people left them disowning their employers - PR success or PR gaff?

The new plans aren't that dissimilar to the originals and still hang on Tesco's need to demolish the unique old workhouse Infirmary Building adjacent to the River Teme in Tenbury. The clear rejection of this idea by planners was one of the main reasons Tesco withdrew the original plans in the summer. Malvern Hills District Council's perspective on the original plans was quoted in the Shropshire Star 26th Jul 2010 as: “The 19th century building is considered to be too important because it frames views into the former Cattle Market site from both Teme Street and the bridge over the river.”. The Star added in the same article: "Tesco wanted conservation area consent to demolish the Russell Baldwin & Bright building but planning officers decided demolition would harm Tenbury Wells Conservation Area."

The Tenbury 'TesNO' group, a collection of local residents and shop owners were also there to put across their concerns about Tesco's plans for Tenbury. The concerns the group put over to both Tesco and local press were as follows:

• TESCO HGV’S WILL WRECK TEME BRIDGE
According to a Worcester County Council document titled: “Worcestershire’s Bridges Bid for Capital Maintenance Funding” [2006], the Teme Bridge in Tenbury is in a precarious structural state. A 2005 Principal Inspection recommended that “Major Repairs will be required for the Teme Bridge, and these will form a high priority.“ A subsequent inspection by structural engineers Fugro Aperio identified the following: “…The Tenbury Wells bridge, which is to undergo a £1 million scheme [2006] of masonry repairs and concrete strengthening at a future date..."


The only work that is recorded in the former document was in 1995 when steel beams were added to concrete slab sections on the south side of the bridge. This was before the 2005 and 2006 reports AND before the bridge was closed twice when structural damage was suspected during the town’s 2007 floods. No substantial work has been undertaken since 1995 despite the clear findings that it was in a very poor state of repair.


The bridge is a Scheduled Ancient Monument that enjoys the highest protection in the UK for any structure. It’s care is in part monitored by English Heritage’s Inspector of Ancient Monuments for Worcs – Tony Fleming. We have since passed all of the above documents to Tony Fleming urging that the bridge be assessed once more in the light of Tesco wanting to use it as their sole route into the town for their daily HGV traffic. Additionally, the route across the bridge and into Tenbury has a Traffic Regulation Order upon it and already states that it’s “Unsuitable for HGV’s, it would be madness to sanction Tesco to bring more over this bridge.


We maintain that the precarious structural state of the Teme Bridge will be substantially damaged further by Tesco’s potential HGV fleet.


• NEW STORE WILL MEAN 13% - 50% LOSS OF TRADE TO FOOD SHOPS
We’re also very concerned that a 1998 UK Govt Report found that when a large supermarket is built in a Market Town Centre or just outside that other highstreet food shops could lose between 13 and 50% of their existing trade. This can’t be good news for Tenbury – where shops are only just beginning to recover from closure after the floods and during the present economic slowdown.


We maintain that building a Tesco supermarket either in or just outside of Tenbury Wells will severely impact the health of our already fragile highstreet – causing shops to close.
* Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, October 1998. The Impact of Large Foodstores on Market Towns and District Centres.


• MEDIA EXPOSE TESCO DIRTY TRICKS
We don’t want the sort of business setting up in Tenbury that has been highlighted in UK press articles for forging their own letters of development support* and creating their own bogus statistics to try to convince locals that they needed a supermarket.**


We don’t want to be the next town on the receiving end of Tesco's dirty tricks.
* http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/tesco-dirty-tricks-and-the-battle-over-a-new-store-in-rural-norfolk-2023130.html

** http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1209095/Tesco-guilty-of-using-bogus-statistics-convince-town-needed-supermarket.html


• NEW STORE WON’T BENEFIT TENBURY FINANCIALLY
Finally, Tenbury Wells won’t benefit from a Tesco Supermarket being built on land that is situated at the heart of our community and which should be used to effectively support that community. A leading study* has found that £1 spent in a local shop puts twice as much money back into the local economy against £1 spent in a large supermarket. Instead, most of the money Tesco will potentially make out of Tenbury will be siphoned-off out of town – leaving our town no better off. Neither do we believe that potential Tesco customers are going to want to leave their chilled and frozen goods purchased in store within their cars while they walk off into Tenbury’s highstreet. Instead it is more likely that customers will want to get their purchased goods home as soon as possible so that they don’t spoil.


We maintain that a Tesco Supermarket in or nearby to Tenbury will make the town worse off financially and deplete highstreet trade.

* New Economics Foundation Study [NEF].

11 comments:

  1. "When I looked during the 3 occasions in the day I went in, they were almost constantly being buttonholed by irate local people disgruntled by Tesco's plans"

    I only got to go in twice yesterday, once for a chat and once a pop in, om both occasions the attending public appeared to be supportive and in favour of the plans.

    Would be nice to know the numbers from the ballot box Tesco had in there from both times they attended.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well I guess we witnessed different moments then by the sounds of it.

    One of the TesNO group also did 3x 'straw polls' on whether or not individuals in the Pump Rooms at different points supported or were against Tesco's plans.. Guess what? All 3 polls came out as against the plans.. Not conclusive evidence but an indication of the growing groundswell of opinion against these plans.

    Given Tesco's previous double-dealings with ballots and polls [see link above] - I wouldn't trust anything they said in respect of that ballot box in there. They'll 'dissapear' the ones that didn't seem to support them and hype the ones that did [as in the Essex example].. They've burnt their bridges when it comes to polls - no public trust..

    ReplyDelete
  3. An explanation for the result of the straw polls by the no camp could be as simple as the plan viewing hours were on a week day through working hours.
    A time when a lot may not have been able to get to the venue, so result may be slanted.

    ReplyDelete
  4. It's a fair point.. Far be it for me to criticise Tesco's wisdom in having the consultation on a friday though, they [think] they know their audiences but clearly don't.. They could have organised something on a saturday I'm sure.. Many more would have had the option then to go and have a look at their latest efforts. If they really wanted this application to go ahead you'd have thought they'd gone the extra mile wouldn't you?

    Having said that though, many think that they're deliberately putting in a stinker at the cattle market - knowing it'll be thrown out again. This means they'll have constrained to planning regs and applied/been denied a brownfield site - so they can go for the real goodies - a greenfield site out of town.

    Both options would be detrimental to Tenbury's highstreet of course and both will be contested repeatedly.

    ReplyDelete
  5. tesno you are talking utter rubbish tenbury as got to move with the times
    i say knock spar down

    ReplyDelete
  6. spar and bowketts uses dirty tricks

    ReplyDelete
  7. I wouldn't say that Tenbury Spar tallies with vernacular buildings of Tenbury Wells - I think that's fair comment.. Then again the groovy new Tesco plan isn't exactly a carbon copy of an old local building either - more Pompidou Centre than Pump Rooms I'd say..

    Ooh, that sounds juicy though about Spar and Bowketts.. Can you lay out your evidence please? If it strays too close to anything legally challenging you may find your wording changed but don't keep us in suspense!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Why will "Tesco's HGVs wreck Teme Bridge" and not those delivering to Spar & Bowketts (or to me for that matter)?

    Surely the state of Teme Bridge is a town problem, not Tesco's.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The state of the Teme bridge is primarily a Town problem - I'd agree. If there was a single company in the wings though who had aspirations to bring 20 additional weekly HGV's over it [possibly 44 tonners] then I think it's fair game to focus on this as a related concern given it's proven fragile state.

    Bowketts use HGV's and Spar do - both of these aquired 'access' though the TRO. Given the state of the bridge though I suggest that no new access through the TRO should be granted for regular HGV deliveries. Tesco as ever will want to use economies of scale - that most likely means deliveries of 44 tonnes. Spar are willing to reduce the size of their HGV deliveries - I doubt whether Tesco would think this way to save the bridge though.

    Let's look at some figures put out by Tesco related to this.. On Wed 15th Sept the Tenbury Blog said:

    "Tesco's say that the store will be serviced by just 9 large lorries a week, plus a number of deliveries by local suppliers, bakery & crisp suppliers."

    This is a transcript of a conversation with a Tesco rep on friday 8th Oct:

    Q: "How many deliveries are you expecting to receive in one week"

    A: "Sundays x2, Mondays x2, Tuesdays x2, Wed x2, Thursdays x3, Fridays x3, Sats x3. Total extra 17 big HGV's per week."

    Q: "In addition to these deliveries we presume there will be other suppliers delivering?"

    A: "Yes... These are Warburton, Kingsmill and Hovis" [plus the aforementioned crisp and local suppliers].

    Now maths isn't my strong point but even I can extrapolate that that likely amounts to 20 HGV's a week. A big difference between "9" and "20" though I'd suggest? Bit like the difference between the initial headline grabbing figure of "180 jobs" and the revised figure on friday of "150 jobs" - it'll probably be "110" next time we ask..

    Your new bessie mates at Tesco are feeding you what they think you want to hear WR15..

    ReplyDelete
  10. A recent traffic survey in Teme Street recorded 23 HGVs in an hour. (4pm to 5pm from memory) So even at 20 a week (They won't be 44 tonners, at least not until they buy some new ones) Tescos deliveries do not present much of a percentage increase.

    ReplyDelete
  11. 7 deliveries per day at Tesco in Ludlow plus Walkers Crisps ,Wisemans milk, Bread X 2 .Remember all these will be going through their own customer car-park at Tenbury .One word AWFULL

    ReplyDelete