Tuesday, March 12, 2013

Pontyclun Cllrs Paul and Margaret Griffiths speech to RCT planning meeting

Margaret Griffiths

I have sat on the fence for over a year wanting to believe that the predicted benefits of this retail park could be realised and that it would benefit the people of Rhondda Cynon and Taff.
But now I too have got to speak against this development.
Planning applications of this sort are like looking into a crystal ball.
As I travel around the UK and see chaos caused by misjudged developments, I remind myself that in every case there was an  expert report saying that everything would be all right on the night.
This proposal for a new town was conceived 10 or more years ago and life has moved on. There is no extra demand in our economy. But if demand shifts this retail park will kill 
Pontypridd,
Porth
Tonypandy,
Tonyrefail
Aberdare,
Talbot Green,
Pontyclun  
Phase 1
If people are going to transfer their shopping from existing retail centres they must travel and this plan does not address the serious highway infrastructure problems that we have now and will become worse.
I accept that the new supermarket is not a big issue for the roads although I think it will kill all the small supermarkets in Talbot Green and Pontyclun.
Shoppers will move from the existing Tesco and the road network will not be adversely affected.
We have an LDP objective that we encourage walking and cycling instead of car use.  But there is no provision for walking from the Talbot Green retail park, to the new retail park. This will be a very strange new town in which a shopper wishing to visit Marks and Spencer and Boots and Sainsbury will need to travel half a mile by car.
So we will double the amount of traffic on the road as shoppers  drive between one retail park and another. The effect is chaos .
Phase 2
In Phase Two we will not just be shifting shoppers around the Talbot Green area. The applicant states that 40% of shoppers would previously have shopped in Cardiff and 10% in Pontypridd. These shoppers will be new to the roads of Talbot Green and will add substantially to the current congestion.

The applicant states that 30% of the shoppers will travel from the south and through the village of Pontyclun. The density of traffic on Brynsadler Hill is now so bad that the Post Office has refused to deliver post to the residents on the east side because of the danger to their staff, from traffic. I believe there is no other street in south Wales which is suffering in the same way.
The developer is offering £150,000 to mitigate the effects of the extra traffic through Pontyclun. I know I should be grateful; but I have not seen one suggestion of how this money could actually be used to reduce the density of traffic, allow the post to be delivered, allow the sick to get to hospital on time. Nor is this enough
Looking outside of Pontyclun itself, have you travelled at any time between 2.30 and 6.30 on the A4119 travelling northwards from the M4 to get onto the road to the Rhondda or the road to Pontypridd.
You sit in your car and crawl from the time you leave the motorway till you get past the roundabout where the A473 and the A4119 cross.  
The original transport assessment provided by the developer,  notes that our own strategic transport infrastructure needs study identifies that we need a grade separated junction as a long term solution in order to mitigate the effects of additional traffic a flyover at the cost of approximately £19 million pounds.
There is a total of £4 million on the table with £2.5 million of this for this junction.
It is a requirement of our LDP paragraph 4.75 that we  “ensure that the provision of highways improvements necessary to deliver allocated sites and to ensure that the growth proposed by the LDP has no adverse impact on the highway network” 
This is an important provision because gridlock on the A4119 and A473, will be bad for our local economy, in Talbot Green and the Rhondda. Firms will move out of Coed Cae Lane and Llantrisant Business Parks simply because they cannot get their goods to the motorway. The Vale of Glamorgan are working with the new owners of the Bosch site at Miskin to develop a distribution centre on the motorway. So our ambition to attract new business further up the Rhondda along the A4119 will be undermined by this retail park
In my view it is not a price worth paying and it is contrary to the commitment in our LDP that development should not have an adverse effect on the highways network.
I would however, welcome a new application for a Sainsbury store resited to face onto Cowbridge Road.
Because I believe that there is no evidenced need for other retail shops I believe that Sainsbury’s should be located on the western side of the site, the brown field site and facing sympathetically onto Cowbridge Road.
1.    We would not be using a green field site.
2.    We would enable the rest of the brown field site to be developed for retail if the need arises far into the future, for offices, industry or for housing.
To conclude I cannot recommend that you support this application  and I don’t believe that an appeal will be successful.

Paul Griffiths

I speak in part as a representative of the village of Pontyclun. If there is any Nimby sentiment in Pontyclun I have not found it and I am not speaking for it.
Pontyclun has doubled in size in 1991. Pontyclun stands alongside one of South Wales most successful and rapidly growing business parks at Coed Cae Lane – which Geraint Hopkins always reminds me is in his ward. The people have Pontyclun have always supported this rapid growth.
The application is to develop two former factory sites – Purolite and Staedler. I have met no-one who does not want these sites developed for new economic activity. About a third of the development is on the green field of the Pant Marsh.
As I have developed a view on this application I have had in mind two questions:
1.     Is this application consistent with the Local Development Plan?
2.     What does this application do for jobs and the RCT economy?
Paragraph 4.68 of the LDP states that
“Proposals for edge of town /out of town retail developments will be assessed in accordance with guidance contained in Planning Policy Wales”
That guidance states “In deciding whether to identify sites for retail and leisure developments, local planning authorities should in the first instance consider whether there is a need for additional provision for these uses”.
The Planning Inspector who reviewed the LDP drew particular attention to this requirement.
I think there is a need for a new food based supermarket on this site. Everyone knows that Tesco at Talbot Green is over trading and that there is sufficient local demand for a second supermarket.
My problem is with the application for a new Department store and 40 other multiple stores. Let there be no doubt: this is a massive out-of-town retail park designed to draw in car based customers from across the region.
Look at the illustration in Appendix E and ask yourself if this is a town centre in any sense that anyone would recognise. Look at page 35 of the report: the Design Council is requiring you to assess whether this application is a town centre or an out-of town retail park. Look at page 97 and there is only one answer – it is a retail park, requiring car access and occupying private space which will exclude citizens who merely want a town centre experience.
The LDP requires that we ensure that such a development is in response to additional need – this means that it is responding to extra pounds being spent in shops.
I have spent the last year reading report after report on retailing in the UK. You will not be surprised to hear that each year as the recession continues we spend less in shops.
There is however something more long term happening. Most of the retail appraisals supporting this application were done in 2007 when the volume of internet sales was not even recorded. In the last year 15% of all retail sales were on the internet. By 2016 it is estimated that a quarter of all retail sales will be on the internet. This is the reason that so many firms are leaving the Retail Parks- HMV, Jessops, Comet, JJB, Clinton Cards, Game Group, Aquascutum, Blacks, Habitat – the list goes on and on. Peacocks are losing one third of their stores. Even the most successful firms like John Lewis are reducing their staff in stores and re-focussing on internet sales.
I predict that out-of town retail parks will become the derelict canals of the 21st century.. Just as the railway replaced the canal, the internet is replacing out-of-town shopping. Over the next few decades retail parks will fade into redundant lumps of derelict concrete. I believe that we are being asked to give a planning consent to an out-dated canal.
Does it matter? You might think that all the risk is with the developer and not with the local authority. But there is a risk. If we allow the expansion of this retail site in the context of a declining market, and it succeeds, it can only do so by transferring trade from existing retail centres to this one – taking trade from Talbot Green, from Tonypandy, from Pontypridd, from Tonyrefail, from Llanharan and every other town centre in the County Borough. This is the important point that is being made by the RCT Chambers of Trade and Commerce.
I must say that the officers’ report before you is far too relaxed about the effect on other centres in RCT. The report  predicts that trade in Talbot Green will fall by 10% and trade in Pontypridd by 6% and then says that this is not significant. I have to ask what world are we living in? Retail margins are tiny – a further fall of 6 or 10% in trade will kill of a large proportion of the current retailers in these towns. Read the companies’ annual reports and you will not come to the same conclusion as this officer report.
The applicant claims that the development will create 1900 jobs. The applicant is clever enough to know that this cannot be true. There may be 1900 jobs on this site but as there is no increase in spending in shops every one of these jobs must come from other shops. The net increase in jobs must be zero.
You may think that taking trade and jobs from Cardiff is a good thing. But let’s just think that through. As our LDP says, our future economic success requires that we attract and develop high quality manufacturing and knowledge based industries. We will only do that if we sit along side a successful city centre in Cardiff. If we turn SE Wales into an American doughnut – a region without a city centre, we will all go down the pan. Over 20,000 people commute from RCT into Cardiff each day. If a Debenhams worker commuting from Abercynon or Pontypridd is asked to commute to Pontyclun instead of Cardiff, will that be progress?
In fact, it is not the case that Cardiff retailing is sucking retail capacity out of RCT. Just over 20% of the RCT economy is currently devoted to retailing. That figure is no higher in Cardiff.
I am convinced that there is a successful future for retailing in RCT, despite the inevitable switch to the internet. But this requires that we focus on our existing town centres and not on out-of-date retail parks. We support our existing town centres to focus on the sort of face-to-face services that the internet cannot provide. Our High Streets will need to change and innovate; but they can have a future. In contrast out-of town retail parks have no future.
A new supermarket needs to be developed but currently it is in the wrong place. It is on the Greenfield at the back of the site with every chance that in twenty years time it will still be surrounded by derelict factory sites.
I would welcome a revised application which brings the supermarket forward on to the old Purolite site, alongside the existing Leekes site. The vacant space at the back of the site should then be made available in a flexible manner as the need develops – it may be for extra retail, it might be for distribution, it might be for other economic activity.
I have become convinced that you should turn down this application in its current form. The application is contrary to our LDP because it does not meet any additional retail need and cannot therefore create any new jobs. It would not succeed on appeal.
 

No comments:

Post a Comment