21 February 2011.  Once again the Strategic Planning Committee failed to do what they were told by planning officers and their masters. After a fracas at the beginning where the officers changed their recommendation from that printed in the briefing papers, the meeting did not improve. There were good presentations on all sides of the issue - except for ING whose representative is widely recognised as having given a very poor showing. It doesn't pay to be over-confident.

The outcome: defer ING, ASDA and Morrisons for 5 months and reject Sainsbury does, at least, give an opportunity to see if the proposals can be improved.

In the end it shows that World Heritage Status does count for something and the Strategic Planning Committee gave it more weight that the 'sequential test' under PPS4 that ING was betting the store on (pun intended).

03 December 2010.  There are some interesting comments on supermarkets, both in-town and out-of-town, here.

For example:

Creating jobs?

When a new store is planned, supermarkets frequently claim that they will benefit the local economy by bringing jobs to the area. What they don't say is that the arrival of the supermarket also means job losses due to the closure of small shops and associated businesses, and these are not compensated for by supermarket openings.

The National Retail Planning Forum, embarrassingly financed by the supermarkets themselves, found that despite the job gains when a large supermarket opens, on average there is a net loss of 276 full time jobs within a 15km zone around the store, through the closure of smaller specialist food retailers and other small businesses that previously serviced the small shops.

Note: while a lot of negative analysis of supermarkets mentions Tesco, this is purely because it is the largest chain (in the USA it is Walmart that is most often mentioned for its negative effects. Walmart owns ASDA in the UK). The results apply whichever major chain is involved. The big four in the UK are Tesco, Asda, Sainsbury and Morrison whose combined market share is around 75% of UK groceries..

02 December 2010.  There is to be a public meeting to discuss the supermarket applications for Hayle. It will be at the Hayle Community School on January 19th at 6-30pm and Hayle Town Council will make a formal response on the following evening at 7-15pm at the Hayle Community Centre, Queensway. If you have a view - be there!

To cheer you up read this comment from yesterday's Guardian about supermarkets and their impacts on towns.

26 November 2010.  This week's Cornishman reports that our MP, George Eustice, has made a 'plea to support plans for South Quay'. Mr. Eustice feels that no surveys have 'produced a truly independent picture of how the people in Hayle really would like to see shaping the future of their town' (sic) The final figures of the Hayle Residents Association's survey (as close to a fair and unbiased survey as we are likely to get) gives the following results:

Do you think we need a new supermarket in Hayle?

• Yes: 72.62%
• No: 27.38%

Where should it be located?

• 37.8%, Jewsons
• 37.3%, Rugby Club
• 16.3%, Behind M&S
• 04.2%, South Quay
• 04.4%, Other

There were 767 responses and, assuming a voting population of 10,000 in the area, this gives a margin of error of 3.4% and a confidence level of >99%. This means that 99% of the time a sample of this size will be within 3.5% of the true answer.

It is nice to see Mr. Eustice taking an interest in Hayle, albeit with views at odds with many of his constituents. He says, "I want to discuss the plans with people" perhaps forgetting that the plans were discussed and agreed (and concessions made) prior to issuing planning permission for South Quay. We now are looking at a supermarket on South Quay which will affect traffic and local business. The rule of thumb is that 30 small local businesses close for every supermarket that opens. Our World Heritage Site will proudly display a supermarket (most likely Tesco?) and Mr. Eustice laments that Marks and Spencer, Next and Boots are not on South Quay too. "Hayle has a colourful heritage and industrial history", says our MP, but he seems happy to cover it with cloned high street shops that you can find anywhere. CABE and ICOMOS may not have the same vision - and the Residents Association survey indicates that the people of Hayle don't have it either.

Warning over supermarket-led regeneration

Supermarket-led developments in town centres risk becoming a liability rather than an asset to the community, a new report from the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE) has warned.

The report is based on reviews by CABE of 30 major schemes from around the country by retailers including Tesco, Asda, and Sainsbury’s.

The report pointed out that new stores and mixed used developments by these supermarkets are transforming large parts of urban areas and may be the only regeneration on offer in the foreseeable future.

CABE reported that many schemes are simply repeating old out-of-town proposals – typically big plain buildings in a large car park – which are unsuitable for town centres. It warns that short-term economic gain will not compensate for the loss of local character and ability to change and adapt easily over time. 

08 October 2010.  The Hayle Residents Association has been conducting a survey about supermarkets in Hayle. The survey simply asks:

Do you think Hayle needs another supermarket?

If so, do you think it should be: on South Quay; on Jewsons' site; on Marsh Lane; or at the Rugby Club?

With 500+ replies received, about 71% want another supermarket and the breakdown of preferred location is:

• 34.2%, Rugby Club
• 14.2%, Marsh Lane
• 42.8%, Jewsons
• 03.1%, South Quay
• A number wrote in another location or more than one location.

The unrepresentative 'Harbour Support Group' consisting of 5 local residents with their own agenda, issued a press release about the ING supermarket plan:

"We hope the townsfolk will embrace the plans and strongly voice their support for them."

It appears that they will be disappointed. The same group supported the first ING plans that were unanimously rejected by the town council, recommended for refusal by Cornwall Council and withdrawn by ING. It seems they are most of the 3.1% that support the South Quay development! Perhaps doing the opposite of what the HSG recommends is the right thing to do. Alas, they do not seem to have the subtlety or planning competence to get what is best for the people of Hayle. 'ING Support Group' might be a more appropriate name!

08 October 2010. It did not take long for ING to turn down the Walker offer (www.hayleharbour.com). Interestingly, at a meeting of the town council, Actoris/Morrisons/Savills also reported that their attempts to negotiate with ING were also rebuffed. The Morrison team is willing to offer to cover the cost of repairing the South Quay walls and to build the footbridge over Penpol Creek. This would free up ING to build according to their current planning permission without an excuse of viability to delay the project.

Fortunately, the Morrison team can put these arrangements in a S106 agreement and do not require the agreement of ING.

30 September 2010. The Friends of Hayle Harbour has learned that Walker Developments, the property developer for the ASDA proposal on the Hayle Rugby Ground, has made an offer to ING to purchase part of South Quay.

In a letter to ING's commercial agents dated 23 September, Walker Developments made an offer to purchase 35% of the site proposed for ING's supermarket for a sum of £5 million. The land would be gifted to Hayle Town Council to 'assist them with their initiatives for the regeneration of this part of Hayle'.

ING would be free to develop the remaining 65% in accordance with the outline planning approval based on their master plan.

The advantages of this plan are:

• A supermarket (most probably Tesco) would not be built near Foundry with its potential negative impacts on the local shops
• There would be a reduction in traffic
• A supermarket would not be built in a World Heritage Site
• There would be a gain in land that could be used for public benefit projects such as the Pioneerium
• ING would not have to go through a difficult planning application that could well be rejected.

It will be interesting to see how ING responds to this offer.

26 September 2010. On June 8th, Andrew Simms wrote the following letter to the Guardian. Hayle is unique in the way Foundry has developed from a company store to front-garden shops and a Tesco is unlikely to enhance that. Will fruit and veg shops thrive? - we have two of those. What about a butcher? A hardware store where the most profitable items are undersold at a supermarket? Perhaps you like estate agents? That's may be all we have left.

Ah, you say, it won't be Tesco. One thing about planning law is that planning permission cannot specify which company goes into a site - that's anti-competitive. The supermarket that goes in there will be the high bidder when ING has obtained permission. Be careful what you wish for.

Click on the image for a larger version (2Mb)

Reactions I have received after the viewing were generally of disappointment: this was not a consultation; it is still traffic lights and not a mini-roundabout; access to the petrol station from both directions is still problematic.

The design of the bridge is probably as good as it can get - but why is it needed?

Complaint

In accordance with Section 57A(2) of the Local Government Act 2000, as amended, the Assessment Sub Committee decided to refer the matter to the Monitoring Officer for action other than investigation.
The Assessment Sub Committee resolved that the Monitoring Officer be directed to write to the Clerk of Hayle Town Council to request the Clerk to remind Members of Hayle Town Council of the procedures relating to personal and/or prejudicial interests and the importance of declaring any interests. (Read the whole document here)

Incidentally, the Standards for England guidance on this states:

• It is not a problem for councillors to be predisposed to a particular view. That predisposition can be strong and can be publicly voiced. They may even have been elected specifically because of their views on this particular issue. It might be in favour of or against a particular point of view, for example an application for planning permission.
  However, the councillor must be open to the possibility that, however unlikely, they will hear arguments during the debate about the issue that will change their mind about how they intend to vote. As long as they are willing to keep an open mind about the issue they are entitled to take part in any vote on it.

The current government has stated in the Queen's speech that they intend to abolish the standards system and especially the need to declare a predisposition.

22 July 2010. The Cornishman and West Briton reported the recent town council meeting at which the so-called Harbour Support Group (Don McGeorge (chair), Owen Philp, Colin Philp and Jim Wright) attempted to attack Cllr. John Bennett in his role as mayor for speaking out on harbour issues. (See below, 29 June). Councillors and the Harbour Support Group were left under no illusion that the citizens of Hayle are giving unbridled support to the harbour development!

Cllr. Bennett's statement in response to their attack can be read here.

Click on image for larger version

30 June 2010. The Hayle harbour planning applications have been approved and the Decision Notices issued.

Infrastructure Works:

Ref. No: W1/08-1721 | Status: Approved with conditions

Outline Planning Application:

Ref. No: W1/08-0613 | Status: Approved with conditions

29 June 2010. The letter below was published in the Cornishman last Thursday. The town clerk today received a copy of this letter which has been sent to the local papers:

Dear Sir,

In response to a recent letter and an article in the Press written by John Bennett, may we, the Hayle Harbour Support Group (part of the Hayle Area Forum), strongly disagree with the position he has assumed on the Regeneration of Hayle Harbour.

As Mayor of Hayle, we feel that John Bennett should be supporting the view of the citizens of Hayle who have in the past made their views clear that they want the harbour regenerated. They are willing to accept that they may not agree with 100% of the Plans but accept it as a clear improvement.
This will supply many jobs and environmental improvements.

So Mr. Bennett, we consider that as the Mayor, i.e. No. 1 Citizen, you should remember that you represent ALL points of view and that siding with a small minority group is not acceptable.

Yours faithfully, Don McGeorge, Chairman, for and on behalf of Hayle Harbour Support Group.

I thought my letter related to details of the S106, particularly the issues of traffic congestion. Perhaps the letter was too difficult to understand?

Also, I think I have missed the definitive study that identified where the citizens of Hayle made their views clear. I have received many phone calls, emails and letters with strong reservations about aspects of the redevelopment.

And I did not sign the letter as mayor or make representations about the views of the council. A little research on the role of the mayor might be called for!

21 June 2010. The Hayle Harbour Trust board has been considering advice from its legal advisors about calling for a Judicial Review of the Hayle Harbour planning permissions should the S106 agreement be concluded in its current unsatisfactory state. Sir John Banham's recent successful Judicial Review of another planning consent highlighted a number of serious issues at Penwith and there are some questions about the rushing through of the decision on the harbour applications just days before Penwith District Council closed.

The Trust has contacted charitable organisations focused on this kind of litigation and has started a 'legal fund'.