LCCC tactics

I recently received a copy of a letter sent to a local MP which is titled "Executive Summary of the Lancashire County Cricket Club/Tesco planning application" no author for this 2 page document but it is necessary to set the record straight on a number of points included in the letter.

1) Size of the store
The letter states:

"The retail sales floor area of the store is approximately 100,000 sq ft. Opponents of the store cite much larger gross areas but these are misleading as they include for a wide range of non retail space, for example, storage areas, staff rooms, cafes, toilets, atrium areas, escalators, fire escapes.

It is the sales area of the store which is the key consideration as this drives turnover and determines the level of impact a store will have."

LCCC's own consultation exercise initially failed to mention the size of the store on its display boards whilst asking people to say in a questionniare whether they were in favour of a supermarket as part of the develoment.

When this was pointed out as highly misleading the boards were amended to include a size of 140,000 sq. ft - which we were told at the time was the gross floorspace.

When the planning application finally went into TMBC it was for a store with a gross size of 166,847 sq. ft. LCCC is trying to give the impression that the store will be smaller than the initially stated size of 140,000 by publicising a net floorspace size of 100,000 sq. ft in all its press releases and this letter.

People understandably have no idea what all this means - how big is that? Well, inside and out its rougly the size of the Eastlands Asda at Sports City. Or for locals around 5 times the size of the PC World across the road. In terms of height - the equivalent of a 5 story building - but how many 5 storey buildings do you know with a footprint of that size?

Why must the local community live with a store this size when there is already planning permission for a store of 'anchor' size? Wouldn't local people who want a supermarket in their area be happy with a store the size of the Sainsbuy's in Urmston? They tell us they would. The planning inspector said in 2006 that a larger store (88,095 sq. ft) would have been too large and would impact adversely on other local centres.

2) Retail impact assessment (I think they mean retail need study)
The letter states:
"A detailed retail impact assessment is submitted with our application - this demonstrates (a) that there is a need for a store of this scale in this location (currently local people are forced to drive to alternative locations because of lack of provision) and (b) that the impact of the store (any new store will have some impact) is entirely within acceptable levels."

The retail need study fails to account for the considerable number of local shops in the proposed store's catchment area. In 2006 Tesco consultants GL Hearn provided a helpful map which showed 31 local and neighbourhood centres within the catchment area of the proposed 88,095 sq. ft. store. Such information is absent from this application. Will trafford planning department be asking for details or will they simply accept the flawed retail needs study provided?

The blog here about Ayres Road's 47 shops and services not mentioned in the retail need study provides an example of the vital contribution that a local centre can provide in a community - these shops will be affected by a mega store.
in 2006 the planning inspector said:

“local shops cater well for the needs of those shoppers who, in particular do not have their own means of transport. Those shops are a valuable aid to social inclusion. In this respect it seems to me that the shops at Gorse Hill, the Quadrant and along Ayres Road would be particularly vulnerable to the effects of a large store.”

Office of National Statistics data shows that 52% of people living in the area served by Ayers Road shops have no car. Is it right that such vulnerable stores and their customers should suffer so that Tesco can build a very very large store when they already have permission for a large store?

This is too high a price for local communities to pay so that Old Trafford might see Test cricket again (if the Welsh Assembly doesn't help Glamorgan to outbid LCCC again). LCCC should find another way to fund the re-development of their private members club ground.

Campaign in the media

A letter sent in by Richard Fowler in response to a story in the Metro News.
For some reason its not been reproduced online so we thought we'd make it visible here.


The claims made by Jim Cumbes and Councillor Colledge in their letters to Trafford Metro News (Metro News, 11 December 2009) are, at best, disingenuous.

For example, they include claims that the Tesco/LCCC proposal is the only option if international cricket is to return to Old Trafford. Perhaps, then, they can explain why tickets for two international cricket matches taking place in June 2010 are already advertised on the LCCC website.

As for a groundswell of opinion from local residents wanting LCCC to remain in Trafford, that depends on how you ask the question. If you ask “Would you like LCCC to stay in Trafford or move elsewhere?”, of course people will say yes, they want LCCC to stay. But if you ask “Would you like Trafford Council to hand over £21million of public funds to subsidise the privately owned LCCC, with a new and very large Tesco and all the increased traffic congestion that will entail, while local shops are put out of business?”, you will get a very different answer.

The term 'sports-led regeneration' is misleading and dishonest – the proposals won't do anything to regenerate the area in the interests of local people, instead only serving to benefit two private entities, LCCC and Tesco, at the expense of residents in the vicinity of the site and of Trafford in general who will ALL be subsidising this scheme. As for his claims of supporting community cohesion,what about the inevitable closure of local shops (and the loss of jobs that go with it)? The extra £16m per year won't be go into the local economy at all, so what possible benefits are there for local people? Don't spend too long pondering this, because the first answer you come up with is the right one – there won't be any.

Source: p4 of Trafford Metro News, 18th December 2009.

Save our local shops

Those who support the Tesco plans to build a 166,847 sq. ft superstore on Chester Road in Stretford will often say there are no local shops in the area - therefore its OK to have a (disproportionately) large supermarket in the area.

We would counter this argument by pointing out that the catchment area of the store is a 10 minute drive... which takes in independent local shops in Urmston, Stretford, Whalley Range, Sale, Ashton on Mersey and Chorlton as well as other smaller clusters such as Ayres Road shops in Old Trafford.

These shops are never included in any retail assessments in planning applications. Why? They are not chains - if you look closely at any documents on this subject you'll soon see that only chains are listed. Other shops are lumped together (e.g. Sale town centre) with inadequate research on the range of shops provided.

Case study: Ayres Road, Old Trafford
By way of a little case study lets look at the Ayres Road shops. Its a residential street close to the boundary between Trafford MBC and Manchester City Council. On this street you will find: a bakery, 5 butchers, 3 fabric and tailoring shops, 7 small grocery shops, an ice cream parlour, a household goods shop, 2 doctors surgeries, a dentist and four hair and beauty salons. Also (pausing for breath) 3 newsagents, 3 off licences, a pet shop, two pharmacies, a post office, two telecommunications shops, a betting shop, a cafe, 3 take aways, two travel agencies and a video/DVD hire outlet. Very close by, on Henrietta Street is All in One DIY - selling most of what a chain DIY shop will have, but for less. Not a chain amongst them.

Yet when you examine the retail assessment (74393-RetailAssessment.pdf) for the planning application the only Old Trafford shops listed are Aldi, Iceland and a Tesco Express. Needless to say they then go on to claim that there is a deficit of shops in the area - which is why a massive superstore is needed, in a location that people local to Ayers Road cannot easily access without a car.

Why aren't the Ayres Road shops mentioned? Because planners, the competition commission and government do not consider the small independent retailer. If you read the retail assessment it focuses on other chain stores despite the fact that in the catchment area for this application there are the Ayres Road shops, independent shops in Urmston, Stretford, Whalley Range, Sale, Ashton on Mersey and Chorlton which will all lose trade if this store is built.

Talk to any independent retailer at the moment and they will likely tell you that trade is down and for some it is a struggle to survive. It only takes a small dip in trade for a small retailer to become vulnerable and this is what a huge superstore on Chester Road represents. In contrast, does anyone know of a supermarket outlet closing in this recession?

What can you do?
- Object to the application
A Planning Inquiry in 2006 upheld Trafford Council’s refusal to grant Tesco permission to build a store of 88,095 sq ft. Reasons included the excessive negative effect it would have on local shops and on our environment

- write about the importance of your local shops to you - make the point that they have not been adequately considered in the evidence submitted by Tesco;

- Talk about the number of jobs these shops provide (research has shown that for every 20 jobs a supermarket creates 30 are lost in the lcoal economy);

- pose the question "How can this proposed store which is almost twice the size of the store refused in 2006 be of an appropriate scale?" (166,847 sq. ft now against 88,095 sq. ft in 2006);

Email your objection to simon.castle@trafford.gov.uk and/or Development.Control@ trafford.gov.uk and copy to our email address nomegatesco (at) googlemail.com
Also copy your email to your local councillor and MP.

Join our mailing list so we can keep up to date.

Follow this blog for news and updates.

Talk to your family and friends and ask them to object too.

Debbie Ellen

Planning Application is now in

The much anticipated planning application is now online.

Reference number 74393/FULL/2009

There are 120 documents (not all of which relate to the supermarket) but its a good deal to look at.

Headline: The Mega store element is not 140,000 sq feet - its 166,847 sq. feet (gross). That makes it roughly 3.4 times the size of the existing planning permission.

Any planning experts, do get in touch as we need to argue against the evidence they have submitted (PPG1, PPG6, RSS13 knowledge).

Contact us at nomegatesco@googlemail.com

Access all the documents here

Another weeks delay

We have just heard from the planning department that the application that includes the Mega Tesco will be further delayed. They are now saying it will be next week.

I wonder why all the delays? Our sources told us they expected the application to be submitted at the end of September.

If you are so inclined you can join the Facebook group - just search for No Mega Tesco. Make friends with the campaign!

Exchange of Views

We understand that the Tesco planning application is due into the Council on Wednesday 21st.

The campaigners will therefore be waiting to hold an "exchange of views" with councillors as they arrive for the full council meeting at Trafford town hall on Wednesday 21st from 17:30 to 18:45.

Supporters would be most welcome to join us!

Public Meeting

Last night (28th September) around 90 local people attended a public meeting to begin a new campaign to oppose plans to build a 140,000 square foot Tesco on Chester Road in Gorse Hill.

The majority of people at the meeting were local residents from Gorse Hill, Stretford, and Old Trafford with a handful of people coming from Chorlton and further afield. The meeting started with visitors from Kirby who told the meeting about their fight to stop a similar scheme in their area. Kirby residents campaigned for 18 months against plans for a large Tesco superstore linked to a new stadium for Everton football club, providing the meeting with a taste of what we may have to deal with ourselves. In our circumstance there is also a linked development, with a new cricket ground being tied to a Mega Tesco.

The meeting went on to air the concerns of local traders, both in the immediate vicinity of the proposed site and from other shopping areas, such as Ayers Road and Chorlton, both of which are easily within the catchment area - i.e. anyone living or working within a 10 minute drive of the site. Local traders are already considering selling up, such is their concern about the impact such a massive store would have on their trade.

The overwhelming feeling at the meeting was that the needs of local residents are not being considered; if they were then a store would have been built meeting planning consent obtained in 2004. Many local people want to see a supermarket built on the site, which has become an eyesore since the land was purchased by Tesco. What is also clear is that the scale of this new proposal is wrong and would have a negative impact on the area, threatening other shopping centres and drastically increasing traffic congestion with a supermarket of this size located between two international sporting venues. Residents fear a scenario where 'every day will be a match day'.

There was much discussion about the change in Trafford Council's position on the store - as they had opposed Tesco's application to expand the size of the store, a decision that was then upheld by the Planning Inspectorate at a public inquiry. People were not happy that despite the most recent ambitions to build an even bigger store the Council appear to have changed their position and support the development of a mega Tesco. All the local and national planning tests that were not met in 2006 (when the appeal for a larger 88,098 square foot was refused) still apply, yet now the Council appear to be in favour of it.

The link between the re-development of the Cricket Club and the supermarket was discussed at length, with people suggesting that other sources of finance should be investigated; other cricket grounds have been re-developed without requiring a mega Tesco as part of the deal.

Local councillors informed the meeting that a planning application for the store is expected next week. Once this is submitted there is a limited time frame for local people to object, and the group scheduled another meeting on 5th October to discuss what to do next.

Details of next meeting: Gorse Hill United Church, Wesley Street, Off Chester Road M32 0GL, 5th October at 7.30 pm

The Mega Tesco - It's Just Not Cricket

The list below raises some of the concerns we have with the development proposals for Old Trafford Cricket Ground.

1. Tesco already have permission for a store on the Chester Road site (adjacent to the Stretford Leisure Centre) for a 48,000 square feet store. This is bigger than the new Sainsbury’s store in Urmston Town Centre and this can go ahead irrespective of the current proposal
2. Tesco have already failed in a bid an extension to the Chester Road store which would have increased its size to nearly 90,000 square feet. This was refused by the Council and an appeal by Tesco against this refusal was dismissed by a government inspector only a couple of years ago – chiefly because of concern over its effects on nearby shopping centres.
3. The current proposal would result in a store of 140,000 square feet. This proposal goes against policies designed to protect existing shopping centres in the Council’s Development Plan and against proposed policies relating to town centres in the Council’s emerging Core Strategy document which will eventually supersede the existing Unitary Development Plan. It also goes against national planning policy guidance, which aims to protect and strengthen existing centres.
4. The proposal, because of its scale and because it would sell non-food as well as food items, would undoubtedly have a seriously harmful effect on local shops in Gorse Hill, Old Trafford, and Firswood, as well as the shopping centres in Stretford, Urmston and Chorlton (and possibly even Sale). The planning inspector at the recent appeal did not accept Tesco’s claims that it would have no harmful effect on existing shops and shopping centres, and common sense would back his views up.
5. A shop of this size would have significant implications for traffic along Chester Road and surrounding roads, as well as the probability of large lorries loading and unloading at all times of day and night.
6. There is a proposal by the government to introduce new guidelines relating to assessing the need for and implications of large new out-of-town shopping facilities. If Tesco can get their proposal dealt with before this is formally introduced, it would undoubtedly assist them in avoiding a full assessment of how their store would impact on the area.
7. The argument for the Tesco store is that, without finance from Tesco the proposed development of Lancashire County Cricket Ground could not go ahead. In effect the planning arguments against the proposal could be “outweighed” by the desirability of improving the Old Trafford Cricket Ground. This is effectively “buying” a planning permission for a massive development which in every other respect could be disastrous for the local community.
8. Remember, there is already a permission for a very large Tesco store - a Tesco store WILL be developed on Chester Road. The question is – do we want a store 3 x the size (one of the biggest in the country), with the disruption it will cause to local shops and local communities.
9. Tesco make great play of the number of jobs they will create in the new store. They do not make mention of the jobs lost when existing shops close down.
10. Even if it is felt that it would be good for Trafford to have a test match standard cricket ground again, how do we know that this is only possible through the financial support of Tesco? Why does the store have to be so big? What other forms of financing have been investigated? Note that other Cricket Grounds have achieved the standards necessary for international status without selling their soul to Tesco.:
    • Headingly, Leeds has funded improvements through money from the Regional Development Agency and through partnership with Leeds Metropoitan University that will result in direct benefits to the local community
    • Sophia Gardens, Cardiff has funded improvements through Council loans (which presumably it will pay back)
    • The Rosebowl, Southampton was funded partly by the Lottery fund. It went through traumas during the development, but it is completed and has hosted international test-match cricket.
    • Bristol Cricket Ground hosts one-day internationals with no significant improvements required.
11. So, even if Old Trafford achieves international test-match status again, there is competition and no guarantee that test matches will be held every year - whilst limited-over one-day internationals can be held here anyway. So does the possibility of 5 days of international cricket once every now and again warrant sacrificing the local shops and facilities in Stretford, Gorse Hill, Old Trafford, Urmston, Chorlton and Sale to the steamroller of Tesco?
12. The application for the proposed Tesco mega-store has not yet been submitted. It is expected this month. Once submitted, it will be advertised in a local paper and by a site notice outside the site. There will then be 21 days in which to submit comments or objections tot eh Council. It is important that everyone who is concerned about the possible impact of the proposal writes in to the Council. Individual letters are better than petitions. Sample letters can be provided. Public meetings will be arranged to allow for information to be passed on and discussions held.

Campaign Launched

We, the residents of Trafford and South Manchester, are concerned about the development of Old Trafford's Cricket Ground. We're worried about the impact that a Mega Tesco (seemingly the largest ever) may have on our area.
A large Tesco will be built on the site. Permission has already been given for a store plenty big enough to serve the needs of local people living in the vicinity. Why should we sacrifice our existing shops and shopping centres, not to mention our local identity, just so that Tesco can take over as sole provider of goods in the area. Once we have lost our existing local shops, we are subject to the monopoly of Tesco.
Here is a map of the site: