Tesco have just pulled out of the Public Inquiry for their other planning application (which was also refused), because they obviously think they would lose that too.

So what happens now? Here are some frequently asked questions, and some answers:

Tesco say they can open without any further planning permission.

They can’t. Even if they used refrigeration units that required no external plant (which is what they are talking about), they’d still need air conditioning which would require external plant, and so would need planning approval. This just puts them back to square one of the planning process.

If Tesco could open a store without any further planning permission, why haven’t they done it already?

Last summer, they went to all the trouble and expense of making a planning application just for refrigeration and air conditioning. When they lost that, they went to the even greater trouble and expense of spending several months preparing for a public inquiry (which they have backed out of because they obviously think they would lose that too). Now they say that they can open exactly the same store without any permission at all. If that were really true, they would never have spent 9 months trying to get their equipment approved, when all this time they could have been trading.

Every time Tesco lose here, they try to spin it as a success by saying they are about to open anyway. They’ve been doing this for a year now, and they still haven’t managed to open a store on Mill Road.

When Tesco reapply for planning permission for air conditioning, won’t such a small application automatically be approved?

No, because they will have most of same problems that caused them to lose all their previous planning applications and the first inquiry. That’s because approval of the application would be necessary for the store to open. This means approving the application would cause them to start making deliveries, and they still plan to make deliveries in exactly the type of lorry that councillors and the planning inspector decided could not deliver safely to this site.

Can’t they just use smaller delivery vehicles?

They told the public inquiry that it would not be possible to run a store using only smaller vehicles. This is one of the reasons their appeal was turned down.

Tesco say the store would create 25 new jobs.

It won’t. It won’t even create the 20 extra jobs they were suggesting a year ago.

A Tesco Express here wouldn’t create extra jobs in the area. It would replace existing, full-time jobs, in the stores they put out of business, with part-time jobs. (Almost all jobs in Express stores are part-time, with only a couple of full-time posts).

The evidence from other towns tells us that the opening of a Tesco Express on Mill Road would force the closure of some of the existing shops, putting people out of work. If a Tesco Express opens, it is likely to take far more full-time jobs away from the area than it would create.

It’s not clear where Tesco have got the figure of 25 from anyway. In the original plans, they said that they didn’t know how many people they would need to employ. Then they said that the store with an extension would create 20 jobs. Now they are saying that a store without the extension will create 25 jobs. So, they are saying that a much smaller store will need more people working in it. This doesn’t seem very likely, but it looks like useful spin in the middle of a recession.

Won’t a Tesco Express be cheaper than existing shops on Mill Road?

No, it will be more expensive.

That’s because it doesn’t sell any of the Tesco Value range or have any of the cheaper product lines of the bigger Tesco stores. A shopping basket comparison between a Tesco Express and a larger Tesco in Dorset in November found that the Express was 19% more expensive than the larger Tesco. A comparison we did last year showed that the prices in the Cherry Hinton Tesco Express were 26% higher than in the Newmarket Road Tesco.

At the same time, we compared prices in the Cherry Hinton Tesco Express with prices in existing shops on Mill Road (Londis, Hilarys, the Co-op, Bangla Bazar, Yasrab and Balvs). The Mill Road shops were 11% cheaper than the Tesco Express.

If people don’t like Tesco, they can shop elsewhere

Unfortunately, they are unlikely to have that choice. The evidence from all over the country is that the opening of a Tesco Express puts existing, independent shops out of business. The House of Commons All-Party Small Shops Group Report says that the closure of independent stores where the big supermarket chains open convenience stores is “inevitable”. A Tesco Express is likely to force the closure of several existing shops on Mill Road.

If people chose to shop at a Tesco and other shops eventually close wouldn’t that just be fair competition?

No. Small, local independent retailers in an area like Mill Road inevitably struggle to compete with a company as powerful and aggressive as Tesco, however good they are. Supermarket giants like Tesco use a variety of means to draw customers away from other shops – some legal, some not. For example, Tesco and the other big supermarkets have enough economic power to enable them to sell staple goods at a loss as a way of drawing in new customers (‘loss leaders’).

Their wealth also enables them to run short-term voucher schemes in new stores, offering huge discounts until the viability of rival shops is threatened. Then the prices go up again. Obviously, local independent shops don’t have the resources to run similar schemes.

Less legally, Tesco was also one of four supermarkets involved in a cartel with dairy companies to fix the prices of milk, butter and cheese, according to the Office of Fair Trading last year. This isn’t the only ruling relating to Tesco’s anti-competitive practices the last couple of years: in September 2007, the Competition Commission found that Tesco had acted to block competition in Slough.

Fair competition requires something like a level playing field, not a situation where one player has the wealth and the determination to force everyone else off the pitch.

More news as we receive it.

The company had wanted to build a single-storey extension at the back of the former Wilco store and install plant equipment. 

The application was made along with proposals for a shop front, ATM and two signs. 

But while Cambridge City Council approved two of Tesco’s planning applications, it rejected the proposed extension and installation of refrigeration equipment. 

Tesco appealed against the refusal of planning permission. It also lodged an appeal on the grounds of non-determination. 

A four-day hearing was held at the beginning of October and now planning inspector David Nicholson has dismissed both appeals. 

He concluded the servicing options for the store would “pose unacceptable risks to highway safety”. Sonia Cooter, co-ordinator of the No Mill Road Tesco campaign, said: “We are very happy. 

“The planning inspector quite comprehensively ruled out any safe delivery options. It’s up to Tesco now to decide whether they want to go any further. 

“We are delighted that the planning inspector realised just how dangerous it would be to deliver to the site.” 

Martin Lucas-Smith, co-ordinator of Cambridge Cycling Campaign, who gave evidence at the public inquiry, said: “Cambridge Cycling Campaign is delighted to hear that Tesco’s ridiculous proposals for deliveries directly from Mill Road or by sending large lorries down the narrow streets of Romsey have been comprehensively and unequivocally thrown out by the Government inspector. 

“We objected to the plans and the Government inspector has accepted the evidence we put forward at the public inquiry that cyclists and indeed everyone else using Mill Road would be badly affected by Tesco’s delivery proposals. 

“We hope now that Tesco will stop wasting taxpayers’ money and everyone’s time, and withdraw their second appeal, in which exactly the same issues apply.”

A statement released by Tesco read: “We are obviously extremely disappointed by this decision. We will be considering the report and looking at our options. 

“However, we still remain committed to Mill Road and think that a Tesco Express will add to the vibrancy of the area. We now await the Inquiry date for air conditioning and refrigeration plant.”

Cambridge Evening News, 12/11/2008

Breaking news: Tesco have LOST their first appeal (and the associated non-determination appeal) for the Mill Road site.

The Inspector concluded:

“I find that both of the realistically available servicing options would pose unacceptable risks to highway safety, which would not be outweighed by benefits or the fallback position. I therefore conclude that both appeals should be dismissed.”

Read the full Appeal decision letter from the Government Inspector.

It remains to be seen if Tesco will pursue their second appeal (for an application to instal plant with no extension).

For now, though, we would like to thank everyone who has made this possible. Thank you if you came on the march, wrote letters of objection, emailed your councillors, formed part of our human lorry, trudged around delivering leaflets and posters or just spoke to people about Tesco’s plans. This campaign has been a huge community effort and everyone’s contribution has been vital.

Have a look at the new counter on the right-hand side of this page to see how many days we as a community have so far managed to keep Tesco off Mill Road!

rachel.extance@cambridge-news.co.uk

The former Wilco site where Tesco wants to move in.

OPPONENTS of Tesco’s plans for a branch in Mill Road, Cambridge, are anxiously waiting for a decision on a planning appeal which has closed after four days of evidence.

The appeal, heard at The Guildhall, finished yesterday following a site visit to the former Wilco store.

Now David Howarth, Cambridge’s MP, is calling for planning rules to be changed so councils can keep supermarkets out of areas dominated by independent shops.

He spoke out as Tesco waits to hear if its appeal to build an extension and install plant equipment at a shop in Mill Road, which will allow it to open an Express store, has been successful.

Mr Howarth sat in on day three of the appeal in front of inspector David Nicholson.

One of the issues Mr Nicholson quizzed the council’s witnesses on was whether its approach would have been different if the shop’s previous owners Wilco had made the application.

Despite widespread concern at the supermarket giant’s decision to move into Mill Road, a desire to maintain the street’s independent image is not a planning consideration and Mr Howarth believes it should be.

He is backing local councillors Nichola Harrison and Kilian Bourke’s efforts to have Mill Road designated an Independent Business Zone and would like to see the Retail Development Bill, which has been going through the House of Lords, to become law.

This would divide shops into three classes and allow councils to keep larger stores out of an area if they want to.

Mr Howarth told the News: “The law should be changed so that it’s clear local authorities have the power to shape their own areas.

“It should be possible for a council to choose to make a particular shopping street a zone for independent shops and businesses. If they want to promote national chains, big supermarkets, they can do that. If they want a mix they would be allowed to that.

“Very rarely is the identity of the person holding that permission relevant. One of the things this bill does is it has three different kinds of shops.

“What Cambridge City Council wants to be able to do is distinguish between independent businesses where the money is going to stay in the community more and national and international businesses.”

The city council rejected Tesco’s plans, saying they would pose a risk to public safety and did not provide sufficient parking spaces.

Tesco dispute this and say there is sufficient on-street car parking in the area and the store would benefit residents by meeting convenience shopping needs, increase footfall in the area and bring an empty shop back into use.

A decision is expected in November.

Cambridge Evening News, 4th October 2008 ]]> http://www.nomillroadtesco.org/2008/10/04/anxious-wait-as-tesco-appeal-hearing-closes/feed/ 0 http://www.nomillroadtesco.org/2008/10/03/weight-ban-of-no-use/ http://www.nomillroadtesco.org/2008/10/03/weight-ban-of-no-use/#comments Fri, 03 Oct 2008 11:00:26 +0000 admin http://www.nomillroadtesco.org/?p=601 TESCO has told a planning inspector its Mill Road store will be useless if large lorries are banned from making deliveries.
One of the reasons Cambridge City Council rejected the supermarket’s application for a single-story extension and installation of plant equipment at the former Wilco site was that the only way of servicing the store using 10.3 metre-long rigid axle vehicles was via Mill Road, putting public safety at risk and holding up traffic.

Planning inspector David Nicholson asked Rupert Lyons, director of Pinnacle Transportation Limited, appearing for Tesco, whether the store could operate without those vehicles.

He said: “If, for example, I were to apply a condition to a permission that said no vehicles above the size of, say, a transit van, could deliver, would that permission be worth anything to you?”

Mr Lyons replied: “I don’t believe so, no sir.”

There are three options for deliveries: stopping on Mill Road; driving around a loop of Catharine Street and Sedgwick Street, or vehicles being allowed to access Sedgwick Street from Mill Road, which would require a change to traffic rules.

The inquiry heard Cambridgeshire County Council is unlikely to grant a traffic regulation order to allow access to the rear yard from Mill Road, although Tesco is willing to pay for the move if the highway authority changes its mind.

Asked how he would service the Tesco Express, Mr Lyons said the “pragmatic approach” would be for deliveries of newspapers, mail and milk to be made from Mill Road before 8.15am and the larger deliveries made to the back of the store.

In the afternoon, Tesco’s second witness Matthew Roe, director of planning at CgMs Ltd, gave evidence.

He said Tesco’s plans would provide “a valuable facility to local residents and workers by meeting convenience shopping needs”.

He said the proposed extension would have a “positive impact” on Mill Road and increase footfall as well as bringing a vacant unit back into use.

The planning appeal concludes today.

Cambridge Evening News, 3rd October 2008

I would like to make a brief statement explaining to the inquiry the reason for the existence of the No Mill Road Tesco campaign, before handing over to my colleague Dr Deyermond, who will cover the campaign’s planning objections to Tesco’s applications.

After all, as a Planning Inspector you visit many towns, making decisions in accordance with national and local planning policy. For someone representing Tesco, this is simply another relatively small store in another street in another town. Next week, no doubt, there will be another case involving another store in another street in another town.

For us, though, this is our town, and our community, and we think it is worth fighting for.

The fact that Cambridge is a special place hardly needs saying. Iconic images of Kings College, of dons scurrying around in mortar boards, of hordes of cycling students have adorned many a teatowel. There is another aspect to Cambridge, however, which is rarely discovered by tourists, but which is equally valued by local residents. That other aspect is Mill Road. The Daily Telegraph recently described Mill Road as “perhaps Britain’s most internationally eclectic street“, and they did so with good reason. Although hard to verify, many believe that Mill Road is actually the longest street of independent businesses remaining in the country. Small, independent retailers from all over the world can be found along the street, and it is they who in large part form the hub of the vibrant and diverse community in Mill Road.

We, as a community, do all we can to protect these small businesses. Every year there is the Mill Road Winter Fair, for example; a celebration of the wide range of independent shops that make the character of Mill Road so special. Speaking in my capacity as a member of the Winter Fair committee, I would like to comment briefly on a statement by the appellants yesterday to the effect that Mill Road is not a through road – it is indeed regarded as a major trunk route into the city by the County Council, to the extent that the Mill Road Winter Fair is not allowed to close the road for a few hours once a year, such is the importance of the route. In another example of local residents’ desire to enhance the street, this year, we hope to declare Mill Road a plastic bag free zone. These are not initiatives imposed by some faceless Head Office, they are led by the community. By this community.

No wonder, then, that High Street Britain: 2015, the report produced by the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Small Shops, made the following comment, “The erosion of small shops is viewed as the erosion of the social glue that binds communities together”, before warning that if the expansion of the Big 4 is not controlled, high streets across Britain could lose all their small, independent shops within the next 10 years.

The 15 existing independent grocery stores on Mill Road can certainly look forward to a precarious future if up to £2.9 million a year is lost from their turnover (the figure that the lowest performing category of a Tesco Express expects to make). The creation of 2 full time jobs, outlined in Tesco’s submission regarding this store, will be scant comfort to employees of existing shops forced to close.

Plans are underway to recognise Mill Road formally as an Independent Business Zone, which would be an official recognition of the importance of those independent businesses. Another zone is already in place. Since May of this year, Mill Road has been a Cumulative Impact Zone, reversing the presumption in the granting of alcohol licences and making it virtually impossible for Tesco, or any other retailer new to Mill Road, to sell alcohol.

Although the absurdity of the Tesco delivery proposals was well outlined by Cllr Bourke yesterday, and Dr Deyermond will cover in more detail the campaign’s planning objections to the applications, I wish briefly to mention previous servicing arrangements for the site, as I appear to be the only person here who has actually spoken to the previous occupants, Wilco. They confirmed to me that they received one delivery per week, in a Transit van, made to the rear of the site. This would seem entirely in keeping with the servicing needs of a small motorists’ supplies shop. It has been asserted by various parties here that the existing planning condition has been breached but I have yet to see any evidence of that.

So, in the context of a street whose character is loved and appreciated both by local residents and by many people outside Cambridge who visit regularly to buy goods which cannot be found elsewhere in the region, perhaps it was not altogether surprising that when Tesco’s original planning applications became public knowledge, and I choose my words carefully as there was no public consultation, over 5,000 people signed a petition asking the Council to refuse them permission.

These people included many otherwise loyal Tesco shoppers (after all, with 8 Tesco-branded stores in Cambridge already, and a further 5 Tesco-owned One Stop shops, shopping at Tesco is not difficult). They included Tesco shareholders and Tesco employees, some of whom had used their lunchbreak to travel from the nearby Tesco superstore to sign the petition. What all these people had in common was the certainty that Mill Road is the wrong place for a Tesco Express.

Over 1,000 people took the time to write to the Council expressing their opposition to Tesco’s plans. No doubt Councillors from the East Area Committee would be able to confirm how many of their electorate also got in touch with them individually. The strength of community feeling was huge, and centred around the desire to protect the character of Mill Road.

In purely planning terms, of course, being certain that Mill Road is not the right place for a Tesco Express has no weight. As my colleague Dr Deyermond will explain, however, there are extremely solid planning grounds which meant the applications needed to be refused.

Before handing over to her, I would like to end with a direct quote from Tesco’s corporate responsibility website. On it, they say very clearly that “We need to listen and respond to communities throughout [the planning] process”. We agree. As a community, our message to Tesco has been very clear over the last year, but for some reason they have neither listened nor responded. Perhaps this will be the stage of the planning process when they finally hear what we are saying.

• Please download and display the poster

It’s very important as many people as possible come along to show the strength of local feeling.

Please be there by 9.45am.

The Campaign will be speaking, but anyone else wishing to speak (the more the better) may inform the Planning Inspector then, and you can say if you do not wish to be questioned by the lawyers present.

The atmosphere should be non-confrontational.

The Inquiry is scheduled to continue on Wednesday 1st and Thursday 2nd October.

You do not need to be there all the time, or every day – just for the 10am start on Tuesday 30th September and stay for as long as you can.