Welcome to Newburytoday.co.uk’s message boards where you can have your say and share your views on any number of issues.
Anyone can read messages, but only registered users can post messages, reply to messages or create new topics. As part of the free and simple registration, you will be asked to read and conform to the house rules.
To register, click here ……Enjoy the debate. Newbury Today Forum > Categories > Random Rants
|
|
NTC object to John Lewis |
|
|
|
Nov 18 2010, 01:08 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 6,056
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51
|
QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Nov 18 2010, 01:01 PM) Perhaps Xmas shopping will be free at that store for certain Town Councillors this year! WBC will pass it, so what NTC does is merely voice opinion. I found By filling this space with another store it is going to attract people into the wrong part of town and independent traders will see nobody a rather daft comment, as I would have thought building a ruddy great new development was meant to attract people to that part of town.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2010, 01:48 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 6,056
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51
|
QUOTE (Bloggo @ Nov 18 2010, 01:42 PM) I just wonder what will happen to the great void left by Debs when they move. There won't be much at that end of town to visit. It has to be said that sacrificing 65 badly needed parking spaces and a public open area is not a great result but maybe it was neccesary to encourage John Lewis to join up. allegedly Primark will be taking on the large unit in the KC. I have always thought that more glass & being able to see into the stores ( for instance to the walk down to the KC car park ) would help the KC no end. As it is it look like the units ( TK MAxx etc ) are boarded up.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2010, 01:51 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 168
Joined: 8-August 09
Member No.: 261
|
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Nov 18 2010, 01:08 PM) WBC will pass it, so what NTC does is merely voice opinion.
I found By filling this space with another store it is going to attract people into the wrong part of town and independent traders will see nobody a rather daft comment, as I would have thought building a ruddy great new development was meant to attract people to that part of town. That's the point. It will attract people to the same part of town that is currently the busiest. The other side of the river from the new centre is much quieter and has been since part pedestrianisation was implemented.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2010, 01:55 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 6,056
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51
|
QUOTE (Bartholomew @ Nov 18 2010, 01:51 PM) That's the point. It will attract people to the same part of town that is currently the busiest. The other side of the river from the new centre is much quieter and has been since part pedestrianisation was implemented. Moaning about one more store & saying no to the application is hardly going to change this. If it had just been on the loss of ammenity space & car parking I could have understood. But to reject additional retail space makes no sense when you have already said yes to a much bigger development.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2010, 02:02 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 168
Joined: 8-August 09
Member No.: 261
|
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Nov 18 2010, 01:55 PM) Moaning about one more store & saying no to the application is hardly going to change this.
If it had just been on the loss of ammenity space & car parking I could have understood. But to reject additional retail space makes no sense when you have already said yes to a much bigger development. Who's moaning? As far as I can see, the objection is because it will cause the other end of town to have less visitors.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2010, 02:05 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 6,056
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51
|
QUOTE (Bartholomew @ Nov 18 2010, 02:02 PM) Who's moaning? As far as I can see, the objection is because it will cause the other end of town to have less visitors. Less? - I don't see it that way. Vistitors who want to shop are going to be attracted to PW & N of the river regardless of JL being in town or not. The impact of JL in PW is a moot point.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2010, 02:31 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 168
Joined: 8-August 09
Member No.: 261
|
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Nov 18 2010, 02:05 PM) Less? - I don't see it that way. Vistitors who want to shop are going to be attracted to PW & N of the river regardless of JL being in town or not. The impact of JL in PW is a moot point. This is the comment I was referring to. "By filling this space with another store it is going to attract people into the wrong part of town and independent traders will see nobody" What I understand by this is that it will make the the town south of the river quieter because of exactly the reasons you have stated.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2010, 02:39 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 6,056
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51
|
QUOTE (Bartholomew @ Nov 18 2010, 02:31 PM) This is the comment I was referring to. "By filling this space with another store it is going to " What I understand by this is that it will make the the town south of the river quieter because of exactly the reasons you have stated. It is going to be quiet anyway, regardless of JL. One more shop is going to make so much difference? Nah, I don't believe the reasons given. If the NTC is now worried about attracting people into the wrong part of town and independent traders will seeing nobody , surely it is too late in the day for that? I have a feeling that if it had been another large clothing store there would have been no objection.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 18 2010, 04:34 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 462
Joined: 20-September 10
Member No.: 1,100
|
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Nov 18 2010, 01:48 PM) allegedly Primark will be taking on the large unit in the KC. Handy for the Gillespie's, what with the old man being away an' all....
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 20 2010, 01:56 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 1,722
Joined: 4-September 09
Member No.: 320
|
QUOTE (On the edge @ Nov 18 2010, 04:29 PM) Can't see NTC's views on retail count for anything. They can't even run the Charter Market properly! Well, they don't count for a lot in the planning system which is totally controlled by West Berks Council. The only influence they might have is that when a planning application comes up for a decision, their views will be taken into account but possibly with a little more weight than that of an individual. They, NTC, do also post positive comments to WBC. in certain cases. If you want to see what the Town Council are objecting to, you can see the full story here http://planning.westberks.gov.uk/rpp/index...10/02676/FULMAJJust in case you can't be bothered, they said as their objection. and I quote: Overdevelopment; loss of public amenity space, loss of parking, uninspiring and overpowering street scene, contrary to town design statement.end of quote. As you can see, they made only an oblique reference to the shopping situation in Newbury, referring to the town design statement. As far as the statement by Camp Hopson, of course they have to grin and bare it but other than making a formal objection, their statement should not carry any weight with the planning committee when coming to a decision. Don't get too carried away by the John Lewis thing though, it's not the full monte, it's only their furnishing department that they will bring to Newbury.
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 20 2010, 08:38 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 34
Joined: 20-December 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 571
|
QUOTE (Exhausted @ Nov 20 2010, 01:56 PM) If you want to see what the Town Council are objecting to, you can see the full story here http://planning.westberks.gov.uk/rpp/index...10/02676/FULMAJJust in case you can't be bothered, they said as their objection. and I quote: Overdevelopment; loss of public amenity space, loss of parking, uninspiring and overpowering street scene, contrary to town design statement.end of quote. As you can see, they made only an oblique reference to the shopping situation in Newbury, referring to the town design statement. Hi, there's been a mixed reaction to NTC's objection to the John Lewis/Parkway application. I thought you might like to understand our thinking on the subject: To enable John Lewis to move into the development they need more suitable floor space than currently available. To do this Standard Life have decided to remove, and build over, the public open space (Victoria Place) that was planned for the area near the main Parkway entrance to Victoria Park. At a stroke we would lose the public amenity that was considered an important focus of the development and lose an area that would be used for informal street markets, open theatre, etc. etc. I have no objection to John Lewis moving to Newbury. It would be good for the Town and form an important second anchor for the Parkway development. I made that clear at last week's NTC Planning and Highways meeting. But I did raise a formal objection on: loss of public open space; loss of car parking (lots of figures were quoted, ranging from 65 to 105); the design is frankly less than inspiring and will result in a solid mass of buildings stretching from the new Debenhams on the north side of the development to Camps on the south side. I believe this massing will be to the detriment to Victoria Park which already is overwhelmed and overlooked by the development. I also believe that the application is contrary to our Town Design Statement which states that Newbury Town Centre is on human scale - ie that the Parkway development should involve open spaces and public areas. As has been previously noted, NTC is a consultee to the planning process and does not make final decisions on such applications. We've stated our case, and now we wait for WBC's decision. Regards
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
|
|