Oswestry21

In recent posts, Oswestry’s unique position as a lively and vibrant town for music, arts and culture has been mentioned. It holds this status in North Shropshire and the surrounding region, and since the closure of the Shrewsbury Buttermarket, even more so. One venue that defines and supports this status is The Ironworks. It hosts music and performance events that you would have to travel to Chester and the NW or to the Black Country to see, and supports much of the local music and performance culture with local acts and events such as Umbrella Factory. It has been a hugely instrumental venue in making the cultural scene possible in Oswestry, enhancing the night time economy in strongly social ways and in building Oswestry’s reputation as a place to visit.

Due to a challenge by one neighbouring property, it seems that the Ironworks are having to apply for a variation to their original planning application in order to continue to operate as the type of venue that has bought benefit to the town. If these conditions are not granted, then it will be difficult, if not impossible for the Ironworks to continue in this way. It would appear that much of the challenge is based around soundproofing and extended hours - The Ironworks state that with regard to soundproofing “we had an exhaustive review last year and satisfied the requirements of the Environmental Health Department without having to impact upon the fabric of the building”. 

Extended hours up until 4 a.m. have been granted to a neighbouring licenesed premises - beyond the hours sought by The Ironworks.As The Ironworks state in their statement to  planners “The Ironworks is a highly regarded local, national and international venue and is an asset to the town.  It has been responsible for placing Oswestry in the vanguard of the development of music in Shropshire and Mid Wales.  Artists from around the world play here.  The Ironworks has taken Oswestry far beyond the geographical limitations of the British Isles………”

Today is decision day - the Council have recommended refusal, and it will be down to the Licensing Sub Committee to either comply with that recommendation or to allow the variation of the original conditions. It would be extraordinarily shortsighted to limit the function of this venue, or to see it close through lack of viability.  An appeal would be necessary if refused.

The Ironworks have a Facebook support group at www.facebook.com/theironworks

We heard this afternoon, 11th March, that the planning applications currently lodged with Oswestry Borough Council will not now be dealt with by OBC Special Development Control Committee on the 25th March, but will be passed onto the new Unitary Authority, North Shropshire.

This was always on the cards, along with the option that they would actually make a positive decision in favour of one of the applications, or that they would bin one of them and pass it on. It seems that unresolved traffic issues in the three current applications and the imminent announcement of the Central Car Park bid mean that the window of opportunity has closed for a March decision.

Pity that they didn’t find it possible to sit and just make the sane and simple call to bin the grossly inappropriate and outdated Smithfield out-of-town scheme before passing it on. 

More to follow as news comes in. 

Well, presentations of the three current applications have been put before the Special Development Control Committee. All were characterised by laughable overuse of the word “sustainable”, all got the violins out for the future of OCA, JT Hughes/Guttercrest and Burbidges respectively (notably no violins for the town centre), and Liberty Mercian and Vernons seemed sufficiently rattled by a potential Central Car Park proposal to forget about kicking each other and to jointly give the Central Car Park site a kicking instead.

The Smithfield doesn’t appear to have an operator on board, (though rumours persist of Tesco backing all horses - God knows they’ve been seen to be desperate enough for the Oswestry £ in the past, so why so coy now?), nor did the spokesman have answers as to who might occupy the other retail units, but made much of having a DIY operator interested, as if we can’t trip over DIY outlets already. The free bus service will operate for 5 years, with unspecified funding after that period. Mention of bus stops made considerable mention of on site bus stops at the Smithfield, but town bus stops were left off the Liberty Mercian drawings as they would have made the drawing “far too detailed”. Well…… indeed. A slick presentation that glossed over the “no operator” issue, and the implication that potential occupiers would seem to share the opinion that this ridiculous and out-dated out-of-town development is a dead duck.

The local team, J T Hughes/Guttercrest, made much of “architectural opportunity”, “unique site”, “sustainable development(!)”, “gateway design statement” etc etc. And to be fair, it seems apparent that considerable thought has gone into these issues, and also tha- a successful traffic solution to this awkward junction has been seen as being essential to the proposal. Despite all reassurances, it would take a real life scenario to demonstrate whether a roundabout at the junction of two of the main roads into town, with truck deliveries, branches off to a supermarket,  to the cemetery, close to the garage, and adjacent to the blind bend on the railway bridge would actually work as described. James Evans of Samuel Wood Commercial rightly spoke of the devastation to Wrexham town centre since the coming of Eagles Meadow, but made the curious claim that the J T Hughes/Guttercrest supermarket would have a role in “control and protection of the town and town centre” without substantiating quite how an “out of centre” (Nathaniel Lichfield Retail Survey) would succeed in doing this. Considerable woolliness about re-location of existing businesses and the time scale of this and thus of delivery.

The Vernons/Burbidge/King Sturge presentation reflected the confidence of the only developer with a named operator on board. Much made of public consultation, permeability and linkage with the town centre and “improved” traffic flow, despite the odd situation on Whittington Road described in a post below. Described emphatically as “edge-of-town” despite the Nathaniel Lichfield tablet of stone that all three developers cling to so enthusiastically describing all three sites as “out of centre”. No mention of future mezzanine with the 20,000-25,000 sq. ft. added retail space that that would provide. King Sturge’s spokeswoman claims that “Tesco is unlikely to draw trade from traditional and independent shops in the town centre”, which flies in the face of all evidence to the contrary over the UK over the last 20+ years, so how Oswestry town centre independents, of all in the country, are going to flourish in the shadow of a potential “category killer” store was left unclear. Perhaps the Special Development Control Committee would like to ask. The Tesco’s as applied for at this date will be 60% food and 30% comparison goods, 23% larger than Sainsbury’s, and the car park will be “basically free” - err…….. how basically? Free or not free? Big claims for environmental issues and the building having the potential to be Tesco’s 2nd environmentally friendly store. This does not ring many bells with those who feel that the “green industry” is just a means of enabling us all to live in the manner to which we have become accustomed, and not actually encouraging us to face up to the reality of living with less, consuming less, eating less, wasting less etc. etc. in a world of finite and declining resources.

Questions that should be asked by the Special Dev. Control Committee should include those concerning plans for future mezzanines with the potential for expanding retail space in any of these stores by up to 30%, how any of these “out-of-centre” (Nathaniel Lichfield) schemes guarantee to regenerate a town centre already described as “dead” by some councillors. Councillors should also ask whether town centre vitality is important enough for developers to bias their linkages and transport systems with the town in order to favour inward bound trips rather than outward bound supermarket trips. There are any number of extremely pertinent questions that require clear answers, and perhaps readers would like to assist councillors by suggesting some below.

The Central Car Park came in for a kicking by both Vernons and Liberty Mercian, who, despite their seeming disparagement of the site’s potential, took some time to cover the ground regarding it’s unavailability. They both appear rattled enough about a PPS6 compliant site to have written on this website in the case of Liberty Mercian, and to the Advertizer in the case of King Sturge.  Three key words come up in relation to the Central Car Park - suitability, viability and availability. The Nathaniel Lichfield Retail Survey described the Central Car Parks suitability as “good”, as opposed to “reasonable” or “poor”. The viability of the site is up to a developer to resolve, it’s what they do, just as the other developers have endeavoured to do with their own respective sites and schemes. The availability of the site - it is only unavailable due to the Town Council’s own pecuniary interest in the Smithfield site. The case rests, M’lud.

It came to our notice back in last summer that there were rumours of a spoiler on the Vernon/Burbidge scheme. Interested parties had, allegedly, negotiated an option to buy a strip of land consisting of a small yard and a row of sheds on the B4580 Whittington Road, adjoining the Burbidge site, on the right hand side of the road as you pass under the railway bridge heading out towards the by pass and Whittington. If so, this has effectively prevented full land assembly by Burbidge developers Vernons and affects their original desired resolution of traffic issues at the entrance to the proposed supermarket on the Burbidge site.

It seems that attempts are now being made to arrange for a strip of land to be assembled on the opposite side of the road, consisting of part of the gardens of the terrace of houses (Bridge Terrace) on the left hand side of Whittington Road opposite the Burbidge site. From the relevant drawing from the Vernons planning application this would appear to affect a dozen houses and their owners and/or inhabitants. This land would seem to be required to resolve the traffic issues in the manner described in the application and is outside the outlined development area of the scheme.

This would appear to be an Achilles heel in the Vernon/Burbidge scheme. Any relevant information related to this issue would be gratefully and confidentially received at os21group@yahoo.com . We shall be observing this with interest and report on it as information filters to the massed ranks of computers and highly trained staff on the 18th floor of the OS21 offices.

With the three proposal all in and awaiting submission for Planning in September - we are told, now is the time to make objections known. OS21 have been doing this as individuals, both to Borough Councillors who will make up the Planning Committee and to the Chief Planning Officer. However, a weight of numbers is required if an indication of level of objection is to be seen. It’s not enough to have a handful of letters from a few individuals.

And also contact OS21 by e mail for a list of Borough Councillors who will be forming the Planning Committee.The fact is that without objection this will sail through in some form or other, with a reasonable degree of objection the process can be made a more democratic one, and with sufficient objection the judgement can be bought to appeal.

If you don’t write - then don’t moan after the event. If you do write, you could change events and made a stand. Your choice! Feedback to OS21 on here or by e mail re: action taken and responses would be very useful. Thank you.

Why have the Planning Department not requested the developers of the three potential supermarket/retail parks for Health Impact Assessments as an integral part of their proposals? This is not just common practise, but recommended practise in such cases (West Midlands Public Health Observatory, who have used the edge of town supermarket scenario as their model in their HIA guidance notes), and it would appear that none have been asked for or presented.

Each proposal will have significant impact on physical and mental health issues - localised traffic pollution and noise, increased traffic and associated risk, increased goods lorries movement, noise from refrigeration and air conditioning plant, the effect of restaurants selling high fat, high salt convenience foods, super markets selling cheap, loss leader alcohol, further tobacco sales outlets, the effect of job losses in the retail sector within the town centre and the stress of low pay, low skill jobs created by new retail development. These are all consideration which Health Impact Assessments are designed to analyse and take into account. If you were digging a hole in the road, you would need to supply a risk assessment. The same applies in this case. 

Are the Planning Dept. failing in their duty of care to the town in not requesting these when they are so commonly requested in similar cases? Why have they not been asked for in this case? Would anyone from the Planning Dept. be prepared to supply an answer? Letters will be sent asking for the same information as residents should know why developers are being relieved of the duty of supplying this particular component of their applications in the case of Oswestry. 

It couldn’t possibly be because they all think we’re a bunch of hicks who would never conceivably notice. Could it? 

Out of the stalls and away round the first bend, and it’s neck and neck. And how’s the field looking?

Well, there’s the lardy looking Liberty Mercian/Smithfield, carrying far too much weight, and despite the hype won’t like the heavy going, and then Vernons/Burbidges, looking flashy and in blinkers, another heavy horse and rider - keenly competitive, but over confidence could be it’s undoing, and then the outsider, riding in local colours, J T Hughes/Guttercrest, carrying less weight and may find current conditions more to it’s liking. And what’s this? Oh dear! Poor old Town Centre seems to be stuck in the stalls and it’s jockey, the veteran Town Council, appears to be doubling up on Liberty Mercian/Smithfield!! A very poor start indeed there for Town Centre……….what hope for a recovery?

Of course, there could well be a nasty pile up and a lengthy steward’s enquiry, and it’s a long race with a couple of months to run, so plenty of time to get those binocs out, enjoy a glass or two and watch them head out down the next straight and into the notoriously tricky Planning Application Corner.

So, who’s got a bet on?