Speaking to the St Albans Review website, he said that further delays would make residents 'suspicious' of Tesco, adding,
"We know how developers carry on. They did it with the Mile House and they've done it with other developments. But Tesco haven't even put in a planning application.
"If it hasn't really changed that much then it could just be seen as trying to wear down residents by spinning it out as long as possible.
"I'm more than aware that there are some people who would like to have a Tesco there but it has to be of benefit to the community living in that area and across the city and, from what was produced last time around, it wouldn't have been. It would have done damage to the environment and our infrastructure."
We'd agree with everything he says, although we've yet to meet more than a couple of people who would like a Tesco!PS - Good to see that Tesco's Michael Kissman is also quoted. Apparently he said,
"We've already taken many comments from the community on board and we want to get input again for the new proposals before we submit."
Please stop these weasel words, Michael. You know that the vast majority of local people and local businesses don't want a Tesco store, which is why you're not going ahead with the previous scheme. Unfortunately, you've been told by your bosses to try to get around this, with the help of your army of highly paid 'planning consultants'. Please, if you have any respect for the people of St Albans, you'll go back and tell your bosses to try elsewhere - there are places in the country that want Tesco, but not here!
PPS - and as if by magic, to underscore Cllr Donald's point, here's a link to an article in the Norwich Evening News - Tesco is set to put in a FOURTH application to build a store in the city. Local councillor Chris Hull told the paper,
“Our campaign is still as strong as ever, and we are determined to fight Tesco all the way.
“We were expecting them to submit another application as they hope over the years the will to resist will weaken, but now there are even more people who have moved into the Unthank Road area who do not want Tesco here, so we have a strong case.”
2 comments:
According to our most reverend council leader "...(Tesco) has to be of benefit to the community living in that area and across the city and, from what was produced last time around, it wouldn't have been. It would have done damage to the environment and our infrastructure."
What a stupid comment. He should remain silent until Tesco submit their planning application - or sell off the site and beat a retreat. And Cllr. Brazier as cabinet beard responsible for planning should hold fire in case he's accused of pre-judging the application - if it ever comes.
Can anyone say - and provide the evidence - that 250 flats the size of a wardrobe aimed mainly at buy-to-let speculators would be less harmful and less damaging to the environment and the local infrastructure (whatever that is - traffic presumably) than a big foodstore?
Hi Sisyphus - I think we've covered the traffic/environment damage from housing in the blog - it's much better to build housing next to good transport links than on the Green Belt where everyone will use cars - as it is most people in the local area walk/use the train/even cycle to work.
Hopefully the buy-to-let bubble is already bursting and property developers will start noticing the dearth of 3/4 bed family properties and the premium on them given the number of growing families in the area!
Post a Comment