Second Trowbridge cinema takes top billing at start of Bowyers site hearing

Wiltshire Times: Members of the public at the Civic Centre today for the start of the Bowyers site hearing Members of the public at the Civic Centre today for the start of the Bowyers site hearing

Supporters of a scheme to build a Cineworld multiplex on Trowbridge’s former Bowyers site came out in force for a planning appeal today.

The hearing, taking place at Trowbridge Civic Centre, sees developer Prorsus appealing against Wiltshire Council’s decision, in June 2012, to reject plans for an eight-screen cinema, a Morrisons store, six restaurants and a pub to be built on the derelict site.

The venue’s council chamber welcomed 68 members of the public, many of whom hope planning inspector David Nicholson allows the £46 million project to go ahead.

Paul Tucker QC, representing the developer, said: “The level of support, here today, shows that it (the cinema scheme) is considered to be a good thing and will allow Wiltshire’s county town to punch at its weight.”

In February 2013, the developer saw plans for a ‘reserve’ application – which substituted the cinema for an unspecified leisure facility and added a petrol station – accepted by the council.

Despite this, the company has decided to pursue their earlier plans.

Stephen Sauvain QC asked Mr Nicholson not to overturn the council’s rejection as the authority believe it will have a negative impact on the recently opened £17m St Stephens Place Leisure Park which homes a seven-screen cinema and restaurants.

He said: “St Stephens Place is well located to strengthen the town centre, however it can only contribute if it operates successfully and if it doesn’t it cannot act as an anchor.

"The introduction of a new cinema has the potential to put that at risk and at worse this scheme could cause St Stephens Place to fail – wasting investment.”

Gillian Jones, a town planner with Nathaniel Lichfield and Partners, gave evidence supporting Mr Sauvain’s claim, suggesting that Odeon could lose up to £2.6m of a potential £3.6m turnover if a Cineworld was built on the Bowyers site.

She said that Trowbridge’s potential catchment area was 164,074 people, within a 20-minute drive, and using national average cinema admission figures the town would only require the maximum of 10 screens as opposed to the 15 it would have with both cinemas.

Mrs Jones said: “This clearly demonstrates that there will be an adverse affect on St Stephens Place to such a level that Odeon could close and the failure of the cinema would affect retail there, making it a realistic threat that the site could become a white elephant and damage the vitality of the town.”

Robert Walton QC, representing Legal & General, developer of St Stephens Place, also raised concerns about the viability of two cinemas in Trowbridge.

After the Bowyers cinema plan was rejected, in 2012, around 400 residents staged a protest march against Wiltshire Council’s decision, from Bowyers to County Hall.

Video footage of the march is expected to be shown during the planning appeal, which is scheduled to run for four days, while interested parties will be able voice their opinion on the plans for Bowyers when Mr Nicholson will hear public statements at the Civic Centre from 10am tomorrow.

The inquiry continues.

Comments (64)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

4:06pm Tue 7 Jan 14

PCS_Wilts says...

400 people marching is still a dubious figure - However, if you accept that figure it still only amounts to 0.01% of the Trowbridge population - this of course does not take into account the population of the "catchment area" - not that popular really is it?

Regarding the petition people signed - how many of those people would sign that petition now considering the Odeon is up and running?
400 people marching is still a dubious figure - However, if you accept that figure it still only amounts to 0.01% of the Trowbridge population - this of course does not take into account the population of the "catchment area" - not that popular really is it? Regarding the petition people signed - how many of those people would sign that petition now considering the Odeon is up and running? PCS_Wilts
  • Score: -1

7:42pm Tue 7 Jan 14

markinmelksham says...

Looking at the wiltshire population statistics 2011, Trowbridge has around 41,700 innhabitants and Chippenham, the most populus town in Wiltshire (excluding Swindon) has 44,530.

Given this information, it is absurd the Prorsus are even appealing the decision given the fact that Odeon has opened and their reserve application was approved.

Prorsus or another developer should look to put a Cineworld in Chippenham as the town would easily be able to support a cinema of this size.
Looking at the wiltshire population statistics 2011, Trowbridge has around 41,700 innhabitants and Chippenham, the most populus town in Wiltshire (excluding Swindon) has 44,530. Given this information, it is absurd the Prorsus are even appealing the decision given the fact that Odeon has opened and their reserve application was approved. Prorsus or another developer should look to put a Cineworld in Chippenham as the town would easily be able to support a cinema of this size. markinmelksham
  • Score: 2

9:58pm Tue 7 Jan 14

brandx says...

Another cinema.

Build it and they will come.

In your dreams.
Another cinema. Build it and they will come. In your dreams. brandx
  • Score: -1

11:07pm Tue 7 Jan 14

jigsaw 5 says...

Build the cineworld. I'll be first to pay £16 a month view all the films i want and shop at Morrisons. Bring it on. Maybe if the council knocked bowyers down into rubble they would soon enough have a new cinema built. Still prefer Bath odeon though, better for night out meals/drinks etc...my choice.
Build the cineworld. I'll be first to pay £16 a month view all the films i want and shop at Morrisons. Bring it on. Maybe if the council knocked bowyers down into rubble they would soon enough have a new cinema built. Still prefer Bath odeon though, better for night out meals/drinks etc...my choice. jigsaw 5
  • Score: 6

9:44am Wed 8 Jan 14

loosewoman says...

If a second cinema is to be built, it might mean that prices at the Odeon come down. We wanted to go and see The Hobbit after Christmas, but found that tickets were £10 each, plus online booking fee. At the Cineworld in Swindon I could get a 10% discount for online registration, no booking fee, and the total bill for five of us came out at under £40 (with a couple of concessions) - so we went there instead, despite the fact that Trowbridge is much closer.
If a second cinema is to be built, it might mean that prices at the Odeon come down. We wanted to go and see The Hobbit after Christmas, but found that tickets were £10 each, plus online booking fee. At the Cineworld in Swindon I could get a 10% discount for online registration, no booking fee, and the total bill for five of us came out at under £40 (with a couple of concessions) - so we went there instead, despite the fact that Trowbridge is much closer. loosewoman
  • Score: 9

9:48am Wed 8 Jan 14

PCS_Wilts says...

loosewoman wrote:
If a second cinema is to be built, it might mean that prices at the Odeon come down. We wanted to go and see The Hobbit after Christmas, but found that tickets were £10 each, plus online booking fee. At the Cineworld in Swindon I could get a 10% discount for online registration, no booking fee, and the total bill for five of us came out at under £40 (with a couple of concessions) - so we went there instead, despite the fact that Trowbridge is much closer.
So you spent almost 2 hours of your time on a round trip and the best part of £10 on fuel to break almost even.

Seems legit...
[quote][p][bold]loosewoman[/bold] wrote: If a second cinema is to be built, it might mean that prices at the Odeon come down. We wanted to go and see The Hobbit after Christmas, but found that tickets were £10 each, plus online booking fee. At the Cineworld in Swindon I could get a 10% discount for online registration, no booking fee, and the total bill for five of us came out at under £40 (with a couple of concessions) - so we went there instead, despite the fact that Trowbridge is much closer.[/p][/quote]So you spent almost 2 hours of your time on a round trip and the best part of £10 on fuel to break almost even. Seems legit... PCS_Wilts
  • Score: -3

11:23am Wed 8 Jan 14

Mrs Donnyfly says...

loosewoman wrote:
If a second cinema is to be built, it might mean that prices at the Odeon come down. We wanted to go and see The Hobbit after Christmas, but found that tickets were £10 each, plus online booking fee. At the Cineworld in Swindon I could get a 10% discount for online registration, no booking fee, and the total bill for five of us came out at under £40 (with a couple of concessions) - so we went there instead, despite the fact that Trowbridge is much closer.
Did you walk to Swindon?
[quote][p][bold]loosewoman[/bold] wrote: If a second cinema is to be built, it might mean that prices at the Odeon come down. We wanted to go and see The Hobbit after Christmas, but found that tickets were £10 each, plus online booking fee. At the Cineworld in Swindon I could get a 10% discount for online registration, no booking fee, and the total bill for five of us came out at under £40 (with a couple of concessions) - so we went there instead, despite the fact that Trowbridge is much closer.[/p][/quote]Did you walk to Swindon? Mrs Donnyfly
  • Score: 2

12:32pm Wed 8 Jan 14

jigsaw 5 says...

I agree loosewoman, odeon is far dearer than any other cinema chain. Cineworld may/may not be built but its certainly cheaper. Why does everyone think because theres a cinema in town we all have to go to it? Are you in Trowbridge Odeon mafia? lol.
I agree loosewoman, odeon is far dearer than any other cinema chain. Cineworld may/may not be built but its certainly cheaper. Why does everyone think because theres a cinema in town we all have to go to it? Are you in Trowbridge Odeon mafia? lol. jigsaw 5
  • Score: 7

1:09pm Wed 8 Jan 14

PCS_Wilts says...

jigsaw 5 wrote:
I agree loosewoman, odeon is far dearer than any other cinema chain. Cineworld may/may not be built but its certainly cheaper. Why does everyone think because theres a cinema in town we all have to go to it? Are you in Trowbridge Odeon mafia? lol.
Sustainability is the issue - I'd rather have one good cinema than 2 struggling or back to square one with none.

Seems idiotic to risk the millions invested in either development just so an individual can save 50p each visit.

Fortunately it is less than 0.01% which would like to see a second cinema...
[quote][p][bold]jigsaw 5[/bold] wrote: I agree loosewoman, odeon is far dearer than any other cinema chain. Cineworld may/may not be built but its certainly cheaper. Why does everyone think because theres a cinema in town we all have to go to it? Are you in Trowbridge Odeon mafia? lol.[/p][/quote]Sustainability is the issue - I'd rather have one good cinema than 2 struggling or back to square one with none. Seems idiotic to risk the millions invested in either development just so an individual can save 50p each visit. Fortunately it is less than 0.01% which would like to see a second cinema... PCS_Wilts
  • Score: 0

1:35pm Wed 8 Jan 14

moonrakin wurzel says...

People are unaware that business rates must still be being paid on both the Peter Black site and Bowyers - thanks to the previous government. - it is costing ODL (probably more than you think) more money to just simply stay still.

The council's argument that they're supporting retail in the town would be amusing if it weren't totally at odds with the reality - they are not risking their own money - merely hosing ours to indulge their whims.

ODL think their scheme is viable and are prepared to to take the risk and they should be allowed to proceed.

The council meanwhile allowed the orphaned Shires Gateway, have done nothing to alleviate the chronic traffic congestion in the town, have fouled up miserably with parking and continue to shed responsibilities to uncapped bodies who can presently wind up council tax unhindered by central government....

All these houses, retail and leisure facilities - where are the businesses + jobs to pay the wages to pay for it all?
People are unaware that business rates must still be being paid on both the Peter Black site and Bowyers - thanks to the previous government. - it is costing ODL (probably more than you think) more money to just simply stay still. The council's argument that they're supporting retail in the town would be amusing if it weren't totally at odds with the reality - they are not risking their own money - merely hosing ours to indulge their whims. ODL think their scheme is viable and are prepared to to take the risk and they should be allowed to proceed. The council meanwhile allowed the orphaned Shires Gateway, have done nothing to alleviate the chronic traffic congestion in the town, have fouled up miserably with parking and continue to shed responsibilities to uncapped bodies who can presently wind up council tax unhindered by central government.... All these houses, retail and leisure facilities - where are the businesses + jobs to pay the wages to pay for it all? moonrakin wurzel
  • Score: 7

2:29pm Wed 8 Jan 14

PCS_Wilts says...

moonrakin wurzel wrote:
People are unaware that business rates must still be being paid on both the Peter Black site and Bowyers - thanks to the previous government. - it is costing ODL (probably more than you think) more money to just simply stay still.

The council's argument that they're supporting retail in the town would be amusing if it weren't totally at odds with the reality - they are not risking their own money - merely hosing ours to indulge their whims.

ODL think their scheme is viable and are prepared to to take the risk and they should be allowed to proceed.

The council meanwhile allowed the orphaned Shires Gateway, have done nothing to alleviate the chronic traffic congestion in the town, have fouled up miserably with parking and continue to shed responsibilities to uncapped bodies who can presently wind up council tax unhindered by central government....

All these houses, retail and leisure facilities - where are the businesses + jobs to pay the wages to pay for it all?
I don't see any parking problems in Trowbridge - only traffic problems which everyone knows the worst affected area like you mention is the proposed entrance / exit to the Morrisons site...
[quote][p][bold]moonrakin wurzel[/bold] wrote: People are unaware that business rates must still be being paid on both the Peter Black site and Bowyers - thanks to the previous government. - it is costing ODL (probably more than you think) more money to just simply stay still. The council's argument that they're supporting retail in the town would be amusing if it weren't totally at odds with the reality - they are not risking their own money - merely hosing ours to indulge their whims. ODL think their scheme is viable and are prepared to to take the risk and they should be allowed to proceed. The council meanwhile allowed the orphaned Shires Gateway, have done nothing to alleviate the chronic traffic congestion in the town, have fouled up miserably with parking and continue to shed responsibilities to uncapped bodies who can presently wind up council tax unhindered by central government.... All these houses, retail and leisure facilities - where are the businesses + jobs to pay the wages to pay for it all?[/p][/quote]I don't see any parking problems in Trowbridge - only traffic problems which everyone knows the worst affected area like you mention is the proposed entrance / exit to the Morrisons site... PCS_Wilts
  • Score: 3

5:01pm Wed 8 Jan 14

DawnSDunne says...

Odeon do cheap tickets on a Tuesday and 2 for 1 orange Wednesdays.

Dont buy the food and drink, take your own.

We dont need another cinema, what about a swimming pool that runs free sessions all year round for under 16s rather than having to rely on the Trowbridge Sports Centre which yet again was closed last night for Club swiming due to chloriine issues!!
Odeon do cheap tickets on a Tuesday and 2 for 1 orange Wednesdays. Dont buy the food and drink, take your own. We dont need another cinema, what about a swimming pool that runs free sessions all year round for under 16s rather than having to rely on the Trowbridge Sports Centre which yet again was closed last night for Club swiming due to chloriine issues!! DawnSDunne
  • Score: 5

5:06pm Wed 8 Jan 14

AMVanquish007 says...

Where the hell have you been PCS- I've seen and experienced car parking issues at St Stephens Place on several occasions blocking back up Mortimer street and county way especially over the holiday period. Nothing happened between Oct 25th - Nov 6th because it appears despite the promises that Nandos Prezzos and the Premiere inn would be open that the delay therefore meant unfettered use of the 111 car parking spaces. They must have listened to what I said and took it on board.
As for the enquiry you should come to it - you would find it most enlightening countering the rubbish you've been consistently peddling for the last few years. But I'm sure the WT will report the meaty bits for you
Where the hell have you been PCS- I've seen and experienced car parking issues at St Stephens Place on several occasions blocking back up Mortimer street and county way especially over the holiday period. Nothing happened between Oct 25th - Nov 6th because it appears despite the promises that Nandos Prezzos and the Premiere inn would be open that the delay therefore meant unfettered use of the 111 car parking spaces. They must have listened to what I said and took it on board. As for the enquiry you should come to it - you would find it most enlightening countering the rubbish you've been consistently peddling for the last few years. But I'm sure the WT will report the meaty bits for you AMVanquish007
  • Score: 2

5:22pm Wed 8 Jan 14

westburychap says...

i cannot understand how anyone thinks 2 cinemas will be viable in Trowbridge. i went to the new complex for the first time and was very impressed with the whole area, A first class site, well done to all involved. Why on earth would you then build something else to take business awat from something only just built?

The only people who think this is viable are the developers who are obviously going to benefit financially. Do we really believe its for the sake of Trowbridge and not their own bank balance?
i cannot understand how anyone thinks 2 cinemas will be viable in Trowbridge. i went to the new complex for the first time and was very impressed with the whole area, A first class site, well done to all involved. Why on earth would you then build something else to take business awat from something only just built? The only people who think this is viable are the developers who are obviously going to benefit financially. Do we really believe its for the sake of Trowbridge and not their own bank balance? westburychap
  • Score: 5

6:09pm Wed 8 Jan 14

BathBadger says...

westburychap wrote:
i cannot understand how anyone thinks 2 cinemas will be viable in Trowbridge. i went to the new complex for the first time and was very impressed with the whole area, A first class site, well done to all involved. Why on earth would you then build something else to take business awat from something only just built?

The only people who think this is viable are the developers who are obviously going to benefit financially. Do we really believe its for the sake of Trowbridge and not their own bank balance?
Viable enough to bring you in from Westbury it would seem?

The catchment area is huge and Odeon are operating at capacity.

Going on the concept above, should we only have one supermarket, one mobile phone shop, one coffee shop, one petrol station etc?

The new Odeon is great, but a ticket to see "Gravity" cost me £11.50. It wouldn't have been with some competition around. Cineworld offer an unlimited £15.90 per month ticket which is great value.

My son wanted to see a later showing of the Harry Hill Movie on Saturday and the only one was at 10:40am. When he asked why this was the only one, he was told "We don't have enough screens to show all the films customers want at the times they want".

As for number on the petition, it's the only gauge out there. Even with prompting, no-one could be bothered to set up any other amended petition or one opposing it. Just because you take a % of a catchment area and say that's only 0.01% of the population doesn't mean the outstanding amount oppose it. It's an amazing amount considering it was organised by a member of the public with bits of paper! If only 35% of a local population vote in an election, does that mean the other 65% don't have an opinion?

68 members of the public on a weekday seems pretty good to me, with how many 'naysayers' turning up? Or should the whole of the Trowbridge populous have turned up to the Civic Centre as well for it to count?

The fact of the matter is, there is a developer with vendors in place to support a supermarket and Cinema for the site. There is no Bowling alley, Ice Rink, Swimming Pool vendor in the frame and we will end up with another derelict site. Knee's talked about the sustainability of the Town, and even they have decided to jump ship to a retail park. We should be welcoming developments like this, not hindering them. The council may be better off diverting their efforts to cleaning up the Peter Black site perhaps?
[quote][p][bold]westburychap[/bold] wrote: i cannot understand how anyone thinks 2 cinemas will be viable in Trowbridge. i went to the new complex for the first time and was very impressed with the whole area, A first class site, well done to all involved. Why on earth would you then build something else to take business awat from something only just built? The only people who think this is viable are the developers who are obviously going to benefit financially. Do we really believe its for the sake of Trowbridge and not their own bank balance?[/p][/quote]Viable enough to bring you in from Westbury it would seem? The catchment area is huge and Odeon are operating at capacity. Going on the concept above, should we only have one supermarket, one mobile phone shop, one coffee shop, one petrol station etc? The new Odeon is great, but a ticket to see "Gravity" cost me £11.50. It wouldn't have been with some competition around. Cineworld offer an unlimited £15.90 per month ticket which is great value. My son wanted to see a later showing of the Harry Hill Movie on Saturday and the only one was at 10:40am. When he asked why this was the only one, he was told "We don't have enough screens to show all the films customers want at the times they want". As for number on the petition, it's the only gauge out there. Even with prompting, no-one could be bothered to set up any other amended petition or one opposing it. Just because you take a % of a catchment area and say that's only 0.01% of the population doesn't mean the outstanding amount oppose it. It's an amazing amount considering it was organised by a member of the public with bits of paper! If only 35% of a local population vote in an election, does that mean the other 65% don't have an opinion? 68 members of the public on a weekday seems pretty good to me, with how many 'naysayers' turning up? Or should the whole of the Trowbridge populous have turned up to the Civic Centre as well for it to count? The fact of the matter is, there is a developer with vendors in place to support a supermarket and Cinema for the site. There is no Bowling alley, Ice Rink, Swimming Pool vendor in the frame and we will end up with another derelict site. Knee's talked about the sustainability of the Town, and even they have decided to jump ship to a retail park. We should be welcoming developments like this, not hindering them. The council may be better off diverting their efforts to cleaning up the Peter Black site perhaps? BathBadger
  • Score: 9

6:27pm Wed 8 Jan 14

westburychap says...

So why didn't you go to the cinema in bath bath badger. Actually bath is a good example that had two cinemas in close proximity that both struggled for business and have been replaced by one. And I am guessing bath has a bigger catchment area and university and more tourists
So why didn't you go to the cinema in bath bath badger. Actually bath is a good example that had two cinemas in close proximity that both struggled for business and have been replaced by one. And I am guessing bath has a bigger catchment area and university and more tourists westburychap
  • Score: 2

6:31pm Wed 8 Jan 14

BathBadger says...

The planning rules in Bath are totally different. The two cinemas weren't both Multiplexes either. Just look at the woes of Bath Rugby who can't get an arena built after 10 years of trying. Bath is a World Heritage site. Trowbridge isn't.
The planning rules in Bath are totally different. The two cinemas weren't both Multiplexes either. Just look at the woes of Bath Rugby who can't get an arena built after 10 years of trying. Bath is a World Heritage site. Trowbridge isn't. BathBadger
  • Score: 5

7:14pm Wed 8 Jan 14

PCS_Wilts says...

@AMVanquish - you are the only person in Trowbridge to mention "parking problems" - my business as you know is in Castle Place - not a single customer, trader or anyone else I've spoken to has ever mentioned parking to be a problem. The only problem is traffic which as we all know is down to traffic light and roundabout systems we have in place. These systems are not a result of either development but still need to be addressed as a seperate issue.

The council members are there to represent not only their own views but the views of the people that elected them and clearly people who want to see a second cinema are in the minority. The Bowyers campaign asked for people to support it and the numbers gathered for support were and are pitiful.
@AMVanquish - you are the only person in Trowbridge to mention "parking problems" - my business as you know is in Castle Place - not a single customer, trader or anyone else I've spoken to has ever mentioned parking to be a problem. The only problem is traffic which as we all know is down to traffic light and roundabout systems we have in place. These systems are not a result of either development but still need to be addressed as a seperate issue. The council members are there to represent not only their own views but the views of the people that elected them and clearly people who want to see a second cinema are in the minority. The Bowyers campaign asked for people to support it and the numbers gathered for support were and are pitiful. PCS_Wilts
  • Score: -1

7:35pm Wed 8 Jan 14

BathBadger says...

PCS_Wilts wrote:
@AMVanquish - you are the only person in Trowbridge to mention "parking problems" - my business as you know is in Castle Place - not a single customer, trader or anyone else I've spoken to has ever mentioned parking to be a problem. The only problem is traffic which as we all know is down to traffic light and roundabout systems we have in place. These systems are not a result of either development but still need to be addressed as a seperate issue.

The council members are there to represent not only their own views but the views of the people that elected them and clearly people who want to see a second cinema are in the minority. The Bowyers campaign asked for people to support it and the numbers gathered for support were and are pitiful.
Not the only one, the Chamber of Commerce seem to think it's an issue: http://www.wiltshire
times.co.uk/news/108
75936.Knees_reaction
__Parking_is_key_iss
ue__says_chamber_of_
commerce/

Just go to Lovemead or the car park behind LLoyds during the day and they are empty beacuse they are expensive. Shoppers and workers now park residentially and the top two tiers of the Multi-Storey fill up quick in the morning - which we only have because of the covenant on it.

Out of interest,of the customers and traders you have spoken to, how are they represented as a % of the Trowbridge population? As that seems to be the benchmark you are setting? Or are we changing the rules for that debate?

However pitiful you perceive it to be, 1000+ signatures, 400 marchers and 68 at the appeal hearing is 100% more than those who have put anything else forward or have expressed they don't want the development.
[quote][p][bold]PCS_Wilts[/bold] wrote: @AMVanquish - you are the only person in Trowbridge to mention "parking problems" - my business as you know is in Castle Place - not a single customer, trader or anyone else I've spoken to has ever mentioned parking to be a problem. The only problem is traffic which as we all know is down to traffic light and roundabout systems we have in place. These systems are not a result of either development but still need to be addressed as a seperate issue. The council members are there to represent not only their own views but the views of the people that elected them and clearly people who want to see a second cinema are in the minority. The Bowyers campaign asked for people to support it and the numbers gathered for support were and are pitiful.[/p][/quote]Not the only one, the Chamber of Commerce seem to think it's an issue: http://www.wiltshire times.co.uk/news/108 75936.Knees_reaction __Parking_is_key_iss ue__says_chamber_of_ commerce/ Just go to Lovemead or the car park behind LLoyds during the day and they are empty beacuse they are expensive. Shoppers and workers now park residentially and the top two tiers of the Multi-Storey fill up quick in the morning - which we only have because of the covenant on it. Out of interest,of the customers and traders you have spoken to, how are they represented as a % of the Trowbridge population? As that seems to be the benchmark you are setting? Or are we changing the rules for that debate? However pitiful you perceive it to be, 1000+ signatures, 400 marchers and 68 at the appeal hearing is 100% more than those who have put anything else forward or have expressed they don't want the development. BathBadger
  • Score: 3

8:08pm Wed 8 Jan 14

beetawix says...

PCS_Wilts wrote:
loosewoman wrote:
If a second cinema is to be built, it might mean that prices at the Odeon come down. We wanted to go and see The Hobbit after Christmas, but found that tickets were £10 each, plus online booking fee. At the Cineworld in Swindon I could get a 10% discount for online registration, no booking fee, and the total bill for five of us came out at under £40 (with a couple of concessions) - so we went there instead, despite the fact that Trowbridge is much closer.
So you spent almost 2 hours of your time on a round trip and the best part of £10 on fuel to break almost even.

Seems legit...
loosewomen has not revealed a starting location which could possibly be not actually in trowbridge as you assume so fuel costs could be less than you suggest..

thanks for the tip loosewomen. I dont watch films but now know i can save more money by not going to trowbridge to watch it than i can save by not not going to swindon to watch it. i can also save more by not buying the dvd
[quote][p][bold]PCS_Wilts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosewoman[/bold] wrote: If a second cinema is to be built, it might mean that prices at the Odeon come down. We wanted to go and see The Hobbit after Christmas, but found that tickets were £10 each, plus online booking fee. At the Cineworld in Swindon I could get a 10% discount for online registration, no booking fee, and the total bill for five of us came out at under £40 (with a couple of concessions) - so we went there instead, despite the fact that Trowbridge is much closer.[/p][/quote]So you spent almost 2 hours of your time on a round trip and the best part of £10 on fuel to break almost even. Seems legit...[/p][/quote]loosewomen has not revealed a starting location which could possibly be not actually in trowbridge as you assume so fuel costs could be less than you suggest.. thanks for the tip loosewomen. I dont watch films but now know i can save more money by not going to trowbridge to watch it than i can save by not not going to swindon to watch it. i can also save more by not buying the dvd beetawix
  • Score: -1

10:38pm Wed 8 Jan 14

PCS_Wilts says...

BathBadger wrote:
PCS_Wilts wrote:
@AMVanquish - you are the only person in Trowbridge to mention "parking problems" - my business as you know is in Castle Place - not a single customer, trader or anyone else I've spoken to has ever mentioned parking to be a problem. The only problem is traffic which as we all know is down to traffic light and roundabout systems we have in place. These systems are not a result of either development but still need to be addressed as a seperate issue.

The council members are there to represent not only their own views but the views of the people that elected them and clearly people who want to see a second cinema are in the minority. The Bowyers campaign asked for people to support it and the numbers gathered for support were and are pitiful.
Not the only one, the Chamber of Commerce seem to think it's an issue: http://www.wiltshire

times.co.uk/news/108

75936.Knees_reaction

__Parking_is_key_iss

ue__says_chamber_of_

commerce/

Just go to Lovemead or the car park behind LLoyds during the day and they are empty beacuse they are expensive. Shoppers and workers now park residentially and the top two tiers of the Multi-Storey fill up quick in the morning - which we only have because of the covenant on it.

Out of interest,of the customers and traders you have spoken to, how are they represented as a % of the Trowbridge population? As that seems to be the benchmark you are setting? Or are we changing the rules for that debate?

However pitiful you perceive it to be, 1000+ signatures, 400 marchers and 68 at the appeal hearing is 100% more than those who have put anything else forward or have expressed they don't want the development.
I think you will find people are moaning about the cost of parking rather than the lack of it.

Even the most expensive car parking in Trowbridge falls in line with other cities and towns - people would like more free/cheap car parking - not more spaces as you clearly stated some car parks are empty. As a town we are spoilt for having the cheap/free spaces that we have - you'll find no such spaces in Bath, Bristol etc.

Ask your 1000 signatures to sign for a second cinema because you were asking them to sign for "a" cinema previously.
[quote][p][bold]BathBadger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PCS_Wilts[/bold] wrote: @AMVanquish - you are the only person in Trowbridge to mention "parking problems" - my business as you know is in Castle Place - not a single customer, trader or anyone else I've spoken to has ever mentioned parking to be a problem. The only problem is traffic which as we all know is down to traffic light and roundabout systems we have in place. These systems are not a result of either development but still need to be addressed as a seperate issue. The council members are there to represent not only their own views but the views of the people that elected them and clearly people who want to see a second cinema are in the minority. The Bowyers campaign asked for people to support it and the numbers gathered for support were and are pitiful.[/p][/quote]Not the only one, the Chamber of Commerce seem to think it's an issue: http://www.wiltshire times.co.uk/news/108 75936.Knees_reaction __Parking_is_key_iss ue__says_chamber_of_ commerce/ Just go to Lovemead or the car park behind LLoyds during the day and they are empty beacuse they are expensive. Shoppers and workers now park residentially and the top two tiers of the Multi-Storey fill up quick in the morning - which we only have because of the covenant on it. Out of interest,of the customers and traders you have spoken to, how are they represented as a % of the Trowbridge population? As that seems to be the benchmark you are setting? Or are we changing the rules for that debate? However pitiful you perceive it to be, 1000+ signatures, 400 marchers and 68 at the appeal hearing is 100% more than those who have put anything else forward or have expressed they don't want the development.[/p][/quote]I think you will find people are moaning about the cost of parking rather than the lack of it. Even the most expensive car parking in Trowbridge falls in line with other cities and towns - people would like more free/cheap car parking - not more spaces as you clearly stated some car parks are empty. As a town we are spoilt for having the cheap/free spaces that we have - you'll find no such spaces in Bath, Bristol etc. Ask your 1000 signatures to sign for a second cinema because you were asking them to sign for "a" cinema previously. PCS_Wilts
  • Score: 0

11:07pm Wed 8 Jan 14

BathBadger says...

Yes, the lack of affordable parking, and it's inadequate. This was a highlighted BEFORE SSP, but it still got the go ahead. Can't see how you compare Trowbridge to Bath or Bristol. Or if you do, how many multiplexes in Bristol?

Rather than posing more questions, how about addressing mine?

"Out of interest,of the customers and traders you have spoken to, how are they represented as a % of the Trowbridge population? As that seems to be the benchmark you are setting? Or are we changing the rules for that debate?

However pitiful you perceive it to be, 1000+ signatures, 400 marchers and 68 at the appeal hearing is 100% more than those who have put anything else forward or have expressed they don't want the development."

Even if you dismiss the 1000 signatures, 68 more attendees than those against or with other options at the Civic centre.

Will you be attending tomorrow to put your views forward, or will you hide behind the keyboard as usual and just throw stones?
Yes, the lack of affordable parking, and it's inadequate. This was a highlighted BEFORE SSP, but it still got the go ahead. Can't see how you compare Trowbridge to Bath or Bristol. Or if you do, how many multiplexes in Bristol? Rather than posing more questions, how about addressing mine? "Out of interest,of the customers and traders you have spoken to, how are they represented as a % of the Trowbridge population? As that seems to be the benchmark you are setting? Or are we changing the rules for that debate? However pitiful you perceive it to be, 1000+ signatures, 400 marchers and 68 at the appeal hearing is 100% more than those who have put anything else forward or have expressed they don't want the development." Even if you dismiss the 1000 signatures, 68 more attendees than those against or with other options at the Civic centre. Will you be attending tomorrow to put your views forward, or will you hide behind the keyboard as usual and just throw stones? BathBadger
  • Score: -1

11:24pm Wed 8 Jan 14

PCS_Wilts says...

BathBadger wrote:
Yes, the lack of affordable parking, and it's inadequate. This was a highlighted BEFORE SSP, but it still got the go ahead. Can't see how you compare Trowbridge to Bath or Bristol. Or if you do, how many multiplexes in Bristol?

Rather than posing more questions, how about addressing mine?

"Out of interest,of the customers and traders you have spoken to, how are they represented as a % of the Trowbridge population? As that seems to be the benchmark you are setting? Or are we changing the rules for that debate?

However pitiful you perceive it to be, 1000+ signatures, 400 marchers and 68 at the appeal hearing is 100% more than those who have put anything else forward or have expressed they don't want the development."

Even if you dismiss the 1000 signatures, 68 more attendees than those against or with other options at the Civic centre.

Will you be attending tomorrow to put your views forward, or will you hide behind the keyboard as usual and just throw stones?
You're a funny guy - I can't count the opinions of people that haven't voted or expressed an opinion - I can only count those that have. Given those figures against the available amount of people it seems only the minority are rushing to give support.

Neither the SSP nor Bowyers development have been or will be responsible for the the amount of car parking spaces we have we have in the town or what they are priced at so this is a completely irrelevant argument in respect of whether the majority would like to see a second cinema or not.

The council are well represented - I have nothing to offer the debate that they cannot put forward for themselves.

You are the one still hiding behind anonymity Mr Badger. Everyone knows who I am - where my business is and possibly heard the interview that I gave to BBC Wiltshire last year. Its on Youtube if you haven't. ;)
[quote][p][bold]BathBadger[/bold] wrote: Yes, the lack of affordable parking, and it's inadequate. This was a highlighted BEFORE SSP, but it still got the go ahead. Can't see how you compare Trowbridge to Bath or Bristol. Or if you do, how many multiplexes in Bristol? Rather than posing more questions, how about addressing mine? "Out of interest,of the customers and traders you have spoken to, how are they represented as a % of the Trowbridge population? As that seems to be the benchmark you are setting? Or are we changing the rules for that debate? However pitiful you perceive it to be, 1000+ signatures, 400 marchers and 68 at the appeal hearing is 100% more than those who have put anything else forward or have expressed they don't want the development." Even if you dismiss the 1000 signatures, 68 more attendees than those against or with other options at the Civic centre. Will you be attending tomorrow to put your views forward, or will you hide behind the keyboard as usual and just throw stones?[/p][/quote]You're a funny guy - I can't count the opinions of people that haven't voted or expressed an opinion - I can only count those that have. Given those figures against the available amount of people it seems only the minority are rushing to give support. Neither the SSP nor Bowyers development have been or will be responsible for the the amount of car parking spaces we have we have in the town or what they are priced at so this is a completely irrelevant argument in respect of whether the majority would like to see a second cinema or not. The council are well represented - I have nothing to offer the debate that they cannot put forward for themselves. You are the one still hiding behind anonymity Mr Badger. Everyone knows who I am - where my business is and possibly heard the interview that I gave to BBC Wiltshire last year. Its on Youtube if you haven't. ;) PCS_Wilts
  • Score: 0

11:34pm Wed 8 Jan 14

PCS_Wilts says...

Also - how many of your attendee's / supporters would actually visit the cinema more than 15 times per year in order to start saving money on their tickets because £16 per month (all you can watch deal) on a minimum 12 months agreement at Cineworld is a pretty big commitment to make. I think I go to the cinema often but I'm not sure I've actually been more than 15 times in one year...
Also - how many of your attendee's / supporters would actually visit the cinema more than 15 times per year in order to start saving money on their tickets because £16 per month (all you can watch deal) on a minimum 12 months agreement at Cineworld is a pretty big commitment to make. I think I go to the cinema often but I'm not sure I've actually been more than 15 times in one year... PCS_Wilts
  • Score: 2

11:45pm Wed 8 Jan 14

BathBadger says...

PCS_Wilts wrote:
BathBadger wrote:
Yes, the lack of affordable parking, and it's inadequate. This was a highlighted BEFORE SSP, but it still got the go ahead. Can't see how you compare Trowbridge to Bath or Bristol. Or if you do, how many multiplexes in Bristol?

Rather than posing more questions, how about addressing mine?

"Out of interest,of the customers and traders you have spoken to, how are they represented as a % of the Trowbridge population? As that seems to be the benchmark you are setting? Or are we changing the rules for that debate?

However pitiful you perceive it to be, 1000+ signatures, 400 marchers and 68 at the appeal hearing is 100% more than those who have put anything else forward or have expressed they don't want the development."

Even if you dismiss the 1000 signatures, 68 more attendees than those against or with other options at the Civic centre.

Will you be attending tomorrow to put your views forward, or will you hide behind the keyboard as usual and just throw stones?
You're a funny guy - I can't count the opinions of people that haven't voted or expressed an opinion - I can only count those that have. Given those figures against the available amount of people it seems only the minority are rushing to give support.

Neither the SSP nor Bowyers development have been or will be responsible for the the amount of car parking spaces we have we have in the town or what they are priced at so this is a completely irrelevant argument in respect of whether the majority would like to see a second cinema or not.

The council are well represented - I have nothing to offer the debate that they cannot put forward for themselves.

You are the one still hiding behind anonymity Mr Badger. Everyone knows who I am - where my business is and possibly heard the interview that I gave to BBC Wiltshire last year. Its on Youtube if you haven't. ;)
If you can't count the opinions of people that haven't voted or expressed an opinion, then you can't measure against those that have, that stands to reason! Taking your measure, that's 1000 to nil.

and AGAIN I ask - "Out of interest,of the customers and traders you have spoken to, how are they represented as a % of the Trowbridge population?"

Pretty low i'd guess?

The issue of parking is as relevant as the traffic. One would hope that a development attracts more customers, therefore more parking required. The Innox proposal has ample parking.

From your posts on here, you do seem to have something to put forward, and the council have no representatives from the public.

It's not just the council being represented though, L & G have there own QC.

Anonymous? I thought you thought i was Mike? I was at the protest, the petition handover and at the Civic Centre, where were you?

Yes everyone knows you Shaun, and you've become a bit of a lone voice, but the appeal isn't going to come to you.

If there are other views, or you have a Plan B with other Vendors interested, then it is only right and proper that your voice is heard.

Please do front up.
[quote][p][bold]PCS_Wilts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BathBadger[/bold] wrote: Yes, the lack of affordable parking, and it's inadequate. This was a highlighted BEFORE SSP, but it still got the go ahead. Can't see how you compare Trowbridge to Bath or Bristol. Or if you do, how many multiplexes in Bristol? Rather than posing more questions, how about addressing mine? "Out of interest,of the customers and traders you have spoken to, how are they represented as a % of the Trowbridge population? As that seems to be the benchmark you are setting? Or are we changing the rules for that debate? However pitiful you perceive it to be, 1000+ signatures, 400 marchers and 68 at the appeal hearing is 100% more than those who have put anything else forward or have expressed they don't want the development." Even if you dismiss the 1000 signatures, 68 more attendees than those against or with other options at the Civic centre. Will you be attending tomorrow to put your views forward, or will you hide behind the keyboard as usual and just throw stones?[/p][/quote]You're a funny guy - I can't count the opinions of people that haven't voted or expressed an opinion - I can only count those that have. Given those figures against the available amount of people it seems only the minority are rushing to give support. Neither the SSP nor Bowyers development have been or will be responsible for the the amount of car parking spaces we have we have in the town or what they are priced at so this is a completely irrelevant argument in respect of whether the majority would like to see a second cinema or not. The council are well represented - I have nothing to offer the debate that they cannot put forward for themselves. You are the one still hiding behind anonymity Mr Badger. Everyone knows who I am - where my business is and possibly heard the interview that I gave to BBC Wiltshire last year. Its on Youtube if you haven't. ;)[/p][/quote]If you can't count the opinions of people that haven't voted or expressed an opinion, then you can't measure against those that have, that stands to reason! Taking your measure, that's 1000 to nil. and AGAIN I ask - "Out of interest,of the customers and traders you have spoken to, how are they represented as a % of the Trowbridge population?" Pretty low i'd guess? The issue of parking is as relevant as the traffic. One would hope that a development attracts more customers, therefore more parking required. The Innox proposal has ample parking. From your posts on here, you do seem to have something to put forward, and the council have no representatives from the public. It's not just the council being represented though, L & G have there own QC. Anonymous? I thought you thought i was Mike? I was at the protest, the petition handover and at the Civic Centre, where were you? Yes everyone knows you Shaun, and you've become a bit of a lone voice, but the appeal isn't going to come to you. If there are other views, or you have a Plan B with other Vendors interested, then it is only right and proper that your voice is heard. Please do front up. BathBadger
  • Score: 2

11:51pm Wed 8 Jan 14

BathBadger says...

PCS_Wilts wrote:
Also - how many of your attendee's / supporters would actually visit the cinema more than 15 times per year in order to start saving money on their tickets because £16 per month (all you can watch deal) on a minimum 12 months agreement at Cineworld is a pretty big commitment to make. I think I go to the cinema often but I'm not sure I've actually been more than 15 times in one year...
I don't know, how many of yours wouldn't? I go to the Cinema at least every 2 weeks, so i'd save straight away. More screens, more choice and competitive pricing.
[quote][p][bold]PCS_Wilts[/bold] wrote: Also - how many of your attendee's / supporters would actually visit the cinema more than 15 times per year in order to start saving money on their tickets because £16 per month (all you can watch deal) on a minimum 12 months agreement at Cineworld is a pretty big commitment to make. I think I go to the cinema often but I'm not sure I've actually been more than 15 times in one year...[/p][/quote]I don't know, how many of yours wouldn't? I go to the Cinema at least every 2 weeks, so i'd save straight away. More screens, more choice and competitive pricing. BathBadger
  • Score: 2

8:53am Thu 9 Jan 14

westburychap says...

Bath badger,if you live in bath why dont you use the bath cinema ??
Bath badger,if you live in bath why dont you use the bath cinema ?? westburychap
  • Score: 3

8:56am Thu 9 Jan 14

BathBadger says...

westburychap wrote:
Bath badger,if you live in bath why dont you use the bath cinema ??
I don't live in Bath
[quote][p][bold]westburychap[/bold] wrote: Bath badger,if you live in bath why dont you use the bath cinema ??[/p][/quote]I don't live in Bath BathBadger
  • Score: 4

9:54am Thu 9 Jan 14

westburychap says...

silly me for assuming you live in Bath Bath badger!

but can i assume you do actually have something to do with the new site and will gain financially if it goes through?
silly me for assuming you live in Bath Bath badger! but can i assume you do actually have something to do with the new site and will gain financially if it goes through? westburychap
  • Score: 2

10:20am Thu 9 Jan 14

PCS_Wilts says...

"If you can't count the opinions of people that haven't voted or expressed an opinion, then you can't measure against those that have, that stands to reason! Taking your measure, that's 1000 to nil."

You have to be a politician spouting this rubbish.
"If you can't count the opinions of people that haven't voted or expressed an opinion, then you can't measure against those that have, that stands to reason! Taking your measure, that's 1000 to nil." You have to be a politician spouting this rubbish. PCS_Wilts
  • Score: 0

10:42am Thu 9 Jan 14

BathBadger says...

westburychap wrote:
silly me for assuming you live in Bath Bath badger!

but can i assume you do actually have something to do with the new site and will gain financially if it goes through?
The Bath doesn't refer to my location :)

i have nothing to do with or am connected to the new site, other than I supported the petition, went on the march and went to the civic centre. I am also not connected wither financially or politically.
[quote][p][bold]westburychap[/bold] wrote: silly me for assuming you live in Bath Bath badger! but can i assume you do actually have something to do with the new site and will gain financially if it goes through?[/p][/quote]The Bath doesn't refer to my location :) i have nothing to do with or am connected to the new site, other than I supported the petition, went on the march and went to the civic centre. I am also not connected wither financially or politically. BathBadger
  • Score: 8

10:46am Thu 9 Jan 14

BathBadger says...

PCS_Wilts wrote:
"If you can't count the opinions of people that haven't voted or expressed an opinion, then you can't measure against those that have, that stands to reason! Taking your measure, that's 1000 to nil."

You have to be a politician spouting this rubbish.
Nope, it's clear the rubbish is coming from you Shaun. How do you measure 2 figures when you only have one? (The amount that signed the petition). You cannot automatically assume the figures you don't have all equate to being against the development.

Still nicely avoided you answering my question of your comprehensive poll of shoppers and traders on parking (or anything else raised).

A debate would be great, but it does involve you responding after firing off salvos of soundbites. Still time for you to turn up at the Civic.
[quote][p][bold]PCS_Wilts[/bold] wrote: "If you can't count the opinions of people that haven't voted or expressed an opinion, then you can't measure against those that have, that stands to reason! Taking your measure, that's 1000 to nil." You have to be a politician spouting this rubbish.[/p][/quote]Nope, it's clear the rubbish is coming from you Shaun. How do you measure 2 figures when you only have one? (The amount that signed the petition). You cannot automatically assume the figures you don't have all equate to being against the development. Still nicely avoided you answering my question of your comprehensive poll of shoppers and traders on parking (or anything else raised). A debate would be great, but it does involve you responding after firing off salvos of soundbites. Still time for you to turn up at the Civic. BathBadger
  • Score: 6

10:55am Thu 9 Jan 14

GP & JK GOT IT WRONG says...

BathBadger/ AMVanquish/Mike Baxter .Well sussed westburychap.
BathBadger/ AMVanquish/Mike Baxter .Well sussed westburychap. GP & JK GOT IT WRONG
  • Score: 1

11:30am Thu 9 Jan 14

BathBadger says...

GP & JK GOT IT WRONG wrote:
BathBadger/ AMVanquish/Mike Baxter .Well sussed westburychap.
Only one login Shaun, unlike some other WUM's! Shall be get back on topic?
[quote][p][bold]GP & JK GOT IT WRONG[/bold] wrote: BathBadger/ AMVanquish/Mike Baxter .Well sussed westburychap.[/p][/quote]Only one login Shaun, unlike some other WUM's! Shall be get back on topic? BathBadger
  • Score: 2

11:53am Thu 9 Jan 14

PCS_Wilts says...

BathBadger wrote:
GP & JK GOT IT WRONG wrote:
BathBadger/ AMVanquish/Mike Baxter .Well sussed westburychap.
Only one login Shaun, unlike some other WUM's! Shall be get back on topic?
????
[quote][p][bold]BathBadger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GP & JK GOT IT WRONG[/bold] wrote: BathBadger/ AMVanquish/Mike Baxter .Well sussed westburychap.[/p][/quote]Only one login Shaun, unlike some other WUM's! Shall be get back on topic?[/p][/quote]???? PCS_Wilts
  • Score: -3

12:14pm Thu 9 Jan 14

D@ve says...

PCS_Wilts

It was already made clear that you logged in on multiple accounts in previous threads, you even admitted this and blamed it on your 'housemate'. There is only one person using multiple accounts on here, isn't that right Shaun!

Are you doing this to pretend there is more opposition to the Bowyers scheme then what is believed.

It's pretty clear to me that the people of the area have been fighting the council for some time regarding this application. If the councillors, who represent us did their job, you would of had a cinema on the Bowyers complex and not SSP.

Oh, and for your record, I have been to the cinema several times, it's a fantastic complex don’t take that away although in the wrong place. I’ve also been to the restaurants. On 5 of the 7 times I visited, I was unable to park on the site, in the lower multi and court street due to it being full.

What parking problems.....

This to me would indicate the scheme is in the wrong place, not enough parking, or that demand is simply too high. All the reasons for granting the planning permission to the Bowyers scheme.
PCS_Wilts It was already made clear that you logged in on multiple accounts in previous threads, you even admitted this and blamed it on your 'housemate'. There is only one person using multiple accounts on here, isn't that right Shaun! Are you doing this to pretend there is more opposition to the Bowyers scheme then what is believed. It's pretty clear to me that the people of the area have been fighting the council for some time regarding this application. If the councillors, who represent us did their job, you would of had a cinema on the Bowyers complex and not SSP. Oh, and for your record, I have been to the cinema several times, it's a fantastic complex don’t take that away although in the wrong place. I’ve also been to the restaurants. On 5 of the 7 times I visited, I was unable to park on the site, in the lower multi and court street due to it being full. What parking problems..... This to me would indicate the scheme is in the wrong place, not enough parking, or that demand is simply too high. All the reasons for granting the planning permission to the Bowyers scheme. D@ve
  • Score: 11

12:42pm Thu 9 Jan 14

PCS_Wilts says...

D@ve wrote:
PCS_Wilts

It was already made clear that you logged in on multiple accounts in previous threads, you even admitted this and blamed it on your 'housemate'. There is only one person using multiple accounts on here, isn't that right Shaun!

Are you doing this to pretend there is more opposition to the Bowyers scheme then what is believed.

It's pretty clear to me that the people of the area have been fighting the council for some time regarding this application. If the councillors, who represent us did their job, you would of had a cinema on the Bowyers complex and not SSP.

Oh, and for your record, I have been to the cinema several times, it's a fantastic complex don’t take that away although in the wrong place. I’ve also been to the restaurants. On 5 of the 7 times I visited, I was unable to park on the site, in the lower multi and court street due to it being full.

What parking problems.....

This to me would indicate the scheme is in the wrong place, not enough parking, or that demand is simply too high. All the reasons for granting the planning permission to the Bowyers scheme.
You still parked a lot closer than you would have if you visited Bristol Deluxe or Odeon Bath. The fact you didn't park on your preferred level is not an indication of a lack of spaces is it?
"I cannot take advantage of this FREE parking as its not where I want it to be!" Such reluctance to use even free parking just goes to show how idiotic your whole campaign is.

For something so "wrong" you sure seem to have got the hang of using it often enough.
[quote][p][bold]D@ve[/bold] wrote: PCS_Wilts It was already made clear that you logged in on multiple accounts in previous threads, you even admitted this and blamed it on your 'housemate'. There is only one person using multiple accounts on here, isn't that right Shaun! Are you doing this to pretend there is more opposition to the Bowyers scheme then what is believed. It's pretty clear to me that the people of the area have been fighting the council for some time regarding this application. If the councillors, who represent us did their job, you would of had a cinema on the Bowyers complex and not SSP. Oh, and for your record, I have been to the cinema several times, it's a fantastic complex don’t take that away although in the wrong place. I’ve also been to the restaurants. On 5 of the 7 times I visited, I was unable to park on the site, in the lower multi and court street due to it being full. What parking problems..... This to me would indicate the scheme is in the wrong place, not enough parking, or that demand is simply too high. All the reasons for granting the planning permission to the Bowyers scheme.[/p][/quote]You still parked a lot closer than you would have if you visited Bristol Deluxe or Odeon Bath. The fact you didn't park on your preferred level is not an indication of a lack of spaces is it? "I cannot take advantage of this FREE parking as its not where I want it to be!" Such reluctance to use even free parking just goes to show how idiotic your whole campaign is. For something so "wrong" you sure seem to have got the hang of using it often enough. PCS_Wilts
  • Score: -4

12:59pm Thu 9 Jan 14

BathBadger says...

PCS_Wilts wrote:
D@ve wrote:
PCS_Wilts

It was already made clear that you logged in on multiple accounts in previous threads, you even admitted this and blamed it on your 'housemate'. There is only one person using multiple accounts on here, isn't that right Shaun!

Are you doing this to pretend there is more opposition to the Bowyers scheme then what is believed.

It's pretty clear to me that the people of the area have been fighting the council for some time regarding this application. If the councillors, who represent us did their job, you would of had a cinema on the Bowyers complex and not SSP.

Oh, and for your record, I have been to the cinema several times, it's a fantastic complex don’t take that away although in the wrong place. I’ve also been to the restaurants. On 5 of the 7 times I visited, I was unable to park on the site, in the lower multi and court street due to it being full.

What parking problems.....

This to me would indicate the scheme is in the wrong place, not enough parking, or that demand is simply too high. All the reasons for granting the planning permission to the Bowyers scheme.
You still parked a lot closer than you would have if you visited Bristol Deluxe or Odeon Bath. The fact you didn't park on your preferred level is not an indication of a lack of spaces is it?
"I cannot take advantage of this FREE parking as its not where I want it to be!" Such reluctance to use even free parking just goes to show how idiotic your whole campaign is.

For something so "wrong" you sure seem to have got the hang of using it often enough.
But not as close if it was on the Bowyers plan, with proper parking allowance? If you want to use Bristol examples, just look at the excellent Longwell green.

What were the results of your extensive poll of traders and shoppers again on parking? i missed the answer.
[quote][p][bold]PCS_Wilts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]D@ve[/bold] wrote: PCS_Wilts It was already made clear that you logged in on multiple accounts in previous threads, you even admitted this and blamed it on your 'housemate'. There is only one person using multiple accounts on here, isn't that right Shaun! Are you doing this to pretend there is more opposition to the Bowyers scheme then what is believed. It's pretty clear to me that the people of the area have been fighting the council for some time regarding this application. If the councillors, who represent us did their job, you would of had a cinema on the Bowyers complex and not SSP. Oh, and for your record, I have been to the cinema several times, it's a fantastic complex don’t take that away although in the wrong place. I’ve also been to the restaurants. On 5 of the 7 times I visited, I was unable to park on the site, in the lower multi and court street due to it being full. What parking problems..... This to me would indicate the scheme is in the wrong place, not enough parking, or that demand is simply too high. All the reasons for granting the planning permission to the Bowyers scheme.[/p][/quote]You still parked a lot closer than you would have if you visited Bristol Deluxe or Odeon Bath. The fact you didn't park on your preferred level is not an indication of a lack of spaces is it? "I cannot take advantage of this FREE parking as its not where I want it to be!" Such reluctance to use even free parking just goes to show how idiotic your whole campaign is. For something so "wrong" you sure seem to have got the hang of using it often enough.[/p][/quote]But not as close if it was on the Bowyers plan, with proper parking allowance? If you want to use Bristol examples, just look at the excellent Longwell green. What were the results of your extensive poll of traders and shoppers again on parking? i missed the answer. BathBadger
  • Score: 6

1:01pm Thu 9 Jan 14

D@ve says...

Do you want to explain how I can watch a film when parked in a 2hr parking bay on the rest of the levels.

And yes, i parked elsewhere, a friends house and walked in. There are manay people in the town who have simply given up on the Odeon and travelled elsewhere due to the same problem.

I'm not sure if you have difficulties reading Shaun, but I stated that 'it's a fantastic complex' did I not? I simply said it is in the wrong location.

If it was the other way around, Cineworld on SSP and Odeon wanting to build on IR, I would be supporting the IR scheme.
Do you want to explain how I can watch a film when parked in a 2hr parking bay on the rest of the levels. And yes, i parked elsewhere, a friends house and walked in. There are manay people in the town who have simply given up on the Odeon and travelled elsewhere due to the same problem. I'm not sure if you have difficulties reading Shaun, but I stated that 'it's a fantastic complex' did I not? I simply said it is in the wrong location. If it was the other way around, Cineworld on SSP and Odeon wanting to build on IR, I would be supporting the IR scheme. D@ve
  • Score: 8

1:03pm Thu 9 Jan 14

PCS_Wilts says...

BathBadger wrote:
PCS_Wilts wrote:
D@ve wrote:
PCS_Wilts

It was already made clear that you logged in on multiple accounts in previous threads, you even admitted this and blamed it on your 'housemate'. There is only one person using multiple accounts on here, isn't that right Shaun!

Are you doing this to pretend there is more opposition to the Bowyers scheme then what is believed.

It's pretty clear to me that the people of the area have been fighting the council for some time regarding this application. If the councillors, who represent us did their job, you would of had a cinema on the Bowyers complex and not SSP.

Oh, and for your record, I have been to the cinema several times, it's a fantastic complex don’t take that away although in the wrong place. I’ve also been to the restaurants. On 5 of the 7 times I visited, I was unable to park on the site, in the lower multi and court street due to it being full.

What parking problems.....

This to me would indicate the scheme is in the wrong place, not enough parking, or that demand is simply too high. All the reasons for granting the planning permission to the Bowyers scheme.
You still parked a lot closer than you would have if you visited Bristol Deluxe or Odeon Bath. The fact you didn't park on your preferred level is not an indication of a lack of spaces is it?
"I cannot take advantage of this FREE parking as its not where I want it to be!" Such reluctance to use even free parking just goes to show how idiotic your whole campaign is.

For something so "wrong" you sure seem to have got the hang of using it often enough.
But not as close if it was on the Bowyers plan, with proper parking allowance? If you want to use Bristol examples, just look at the excellent Longwell green.

What were the results of your extensive poll of traders and shoppers again on parking? i missed the answer.
I merely commented that NO ONE had mentioned a "parking problem"
[quote][p][bold]BathBadger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PCS_Wilts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]D@ve[/bold] wrote: PCS_Wilts It was already made clear that you logged in on multiple accounts in previous threads, you even admitted this and blamed it on your 'housemate'. There is only one person using multiple accounts on here, isn't that right Shaun! Are you doing this to pretend there is more opposition to the Bowyers scheme then what is believed. It's pretty clear to me that the people of the area have been fighting the council for some time regarding this application. If the councillors, who represent us did their job, you would of had a cinema on the Bowyers complex and not SSP. Oh, and for your record, I have been to the cinema several times, it's a fantastic complex don’t take that away although in the wrong place. I’ve also been to the restaurants. On 5 of the 7 times I visited, I was unable to park on the site, in the lower multi and court street due to it being full. What parking problems..... This to me would indicate the scheme is in the wrong place, not enough parking, or that demand is simply too high. All the reasons for granting the planning permission to the Bowyers scheme.[/p][/quote]You still parked a lot closer than you would have if you visited Bristol Deluxe or Odeon Bath. The fact you didn't park on your preferred level is not an indication of a lack of spaces is it? "I cannot take advantage of this FREE parking as its not where I want it to be!" Such reluctance to use even free parking just goes to show how idiotic your whole campaign is. For something so "wrong" you sure seem to have got the hang of using it often enough.[/p][/quote]But not as close if it was on the Bowyers plan, with proper parking allowance? If you want to use Bristol examples, just look at the excellent Longwell green. What were the results of your extensive poll of traders and shoppers again on parking? i missed the answer.[/p][/quote]I merely commented that NO ONE had mentioned a "parking problem" PCS_Wilts
  • Score: 0

1:12pm Thu 9 Jan 14

Wurzel-wise says...

We don't need a new cinema on Bowyer's site (not now anyhow)! In ten to fifteen years time who's not too say how many of us will be streaming new films via internet (pay to view) on 3-D hi-res screens, sat in the comfort of our own homes (and with decent healthy food available). Cinema has made a come back but as technology advances, we'll be re-developing these sites within many peoples lifetime.

The traffic management to Bowyers site needs greater consideration - my suggestion would be to exclude access via station, provide access for service vehicles at bottom end of Stallard St and form a brand new access and river crossing at the junction of Shails Lane & Riverway. Most people know what traffic is like now - but if Bowyers had stayed chaos.

I'm afraid the our wonderful Planners have really cocked Trowbridge up in the last few years. If anything the Bowyers site should have been the entertainment site, with multiplex, hotel, etc. etc. Well sited, being close to the station, bus stops and Shires.

We don't really have a town centre as such, Silver Street & Roundstone Street are left out in the cold. Knees uping and sticks is another demise. The Knees store will be demolished for shaw, it's not readily adaptable and it's on many split levels. May be some more Charity, Phone & Coffee shops could move in. We have new shops built in Bythesea Road again devolving shopping from our main area.

I really hope that the Bowyers can be developed for need that provides a legacy for the Town and a least one further generation.
We don't need a new cinema on Bowyer's site (not now anyhow)! In ten to fifteen years time who's not too say how many of us will be streaming new films via internet (pay to view) on 3-D hi-res screens, sat in the comfort of our own homes (and with decent healthy food available). Cinema has made a come back but as technology advances, we'll be re-developing these sites within many peoples lifetime. The traffic management to Bowyers site needs greater consideration - my suggestion would be to exclude access via station, provide access for service vehicles at bottom end of Stallard St and form a brand new access and river crossing at the junction of Shails Lane & Riverway. Most people know what traffic is like now - but if Bowyers had stayed chaos. I'm afraid the our wonderful Planners have really cocked Trowbridge up in the last few years. If anything the Bowyers site should have been the entertainment site, with multiplex, hotel, etc. etc. Well sited, being close to the station, bus stops and Shires. We don't really have a town centre as such, Silver Street & Roundstone Street are left out in the cold. Knees uping and sticks is another demise. The Knees store will be demolished for shaw, it's not readily adaptable and it's on many split levels. May be some more Charity, Phone & Coffee shops could move in. We have new shops built in Bythesea Road again devolving shopping from our main area. I really hope that the Bowyers can be developed for need that provides a legacy for the Town and a least one further generation. Wurzel-wise
  • Score: 1

1:15pm Thu 9 Jan 14

BathBadger says...

PCS_Wilts wrote:
BathBadger wrote:
PCS_Wilts wrote:
D@ve wrote:
PCS_Wilts

It was already made clear that you logged in on multiple accounts in previous threads, you even admitted this and blamed it on your 'housemate'. There is only one person using multiple accounts on here, isn't that right Shaun!

Are you doing this to pretend there is more opposition to the Bowyers scheme then what is believed.

It's pretty clear to me that the people of the area have been fighting the council for some time regarding this application. If the councillors, who represent us did their job, you would of had a cinema on the Bowyers complex and not SSP.

Oh, and for your record, I have been to the cinema several times, it's a fantastic complex don’t take that away although in the wrong place. I’ve also been to the restaurants. On 5 of the 7 times I visited, I was unable to park on the site, in the lower multi and court street due to it being full.

What parking problems.....

This to me would indicate the scheme is in the wrong place, not enough parking, or that demand is simply too high. All the reasons for granting the planning permission to the Bowyers scheme.
You still parked a lot closer than you would have if you visited Bristol Deluxe or Odeon Bath. The fact you didn't park on your preferred level is not an indication of a lack of spaces is it?
"I cannot take advantage of this FREE parking as its not where I want it to be!" Such reluctance to use even free parking just goes to show how idiotic your whole campaign is.

For something so "wrong" you sure seem to have got the hang of using it often enough.
But not as close if it was on the Bowyers plan, with proper parking allowance? If you want to use Bristol examples, just look at the excellent Longwell green.

What were the results of your extensive poll of traders and shoppers again on parking? i missed the answer.
I merely commented that NO ONE had mentioned a "parking problem"
and I pointed out the President of the chamber of commerce had! But what would he know?

You actual words were: "you are the only person in Trowbridge to mention "parking problems" - which was incorrect

"my business as you know is in Castle Place - not a single customer, trader or anyone else I've spoken to has ever mentioned parking to be a problem. " - inferring that you had spoken to them on the matter. or were you just expecting it to come up?

As you are such a fan of statistical evidence, i was keen to know the results of your findings.
[quote][p][bold]PCS_Wilts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BathBadger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PCS_Wilts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]D@ve[/bold] wrote: PCS_Wilts It was already made clear that you logged in on multiple accounts in previous threads, you even admitted this and blamed it on your 'housemate'. There is only one person using multiple accounts on here, isn't that right Shaun! Are you doing this to pretend there is more opposition to the Bowyers scheme then what is believed. It's pretty clear to me that the people of the area have been fighting the council for some time regarding this application. If the councillors, who represent us did their job, you would of had a cinema on the Bowyers complex and not SSP. Oh, and for your record, I have been to the cinema several times, it's a fantastic complex don’t take that away although in the wrong place. I’ve also been to the restaurants. On 5 of the 7 times I visited, I was unable to park on the site, in the lower multi and court street due to it being full. What parking problems..... This to me would indicate the scheme is in the wrong place, not enough parking, or that demand is simply too high. All the reasons for granting the planning permission to the Bowyers scheme.[/p][/quote]You still parked a lot closer than you would have if you visited Bristol Deluxe or Odeon Bath. The fact you didn't park on your preferred level is not an indication of a lack of spaces is it? "I cannot take advantage of this FREE parking as its not where I want it to be!" Such reluctance to use even free parking just goes to show how idiotic your whole campaign is. For something so "wrong" you sure seem to have got the hang of using it often enough.[/p][/quote]But not as close if it was on the Bowyers plan, with proper parking allowance? If you want to use Bristol examples, just look at the excellent Longwell green. What were the results of your extensive poll of traders and shoppers again on parking? i missed the answer.[/p][/quote]I merely commented that NO ONE had mentioned a "parking problem"[/p][/quote]and I pointed out the President of the chamber of commerce had! But what would he know? You actual words were: "you are the only person in Trowbridge to mention "parking problems" - which was incorrect "my business as you know is in Castle Place - not a single customer, trader or anyone else I've spoken to has ever mentioned parking to be a problem. " - inferring that you had spoken to them on the matter. or were you just expecting it to come up? As you are such a fan of statistical evidence, i was keen to know the results of your findings. BathBadger
  • Score: 4

1:23pm Thu 9 Jan 14

PCS_Wilts says...

D@ve wrote:
Do you want to explain how I can watch a film when parked in a 2hr parking bay on the rest of the levels.

And yes, i parked elsewhere, a friends house and walked in. There are manay people in the town who have simply given up on the Odeon and travelled elsewhere due to the same problem.

I'm not sure if you have difficulties reading Shaun, but I stated that 'it's a fantastic complex' did I not? I simply said it is in the wrong location.

If it was the other way around, Cineworld on SSP and Odeon wanting to build on IR, I would be supporting the IR scheme.
I do not believe for one second that anyone that intends to visit Trowbridge Odeon has failed to find a parking space in Trowbridge and has then driven atleast 8 miles to the next Cinema and paid for parking there rather than pay the price of parking in say Love Mead Car Park @ £2.60 for 3 hours, £3.10 for 4 hours or the Shires Car Park @ 80p for 3 hours. Bath and Bristol charge circa £6 for 3 hours parking.
[quote][p][bold]D@ve[/bold] wrote: Do you want to explain how I can watch a film when parked in a 2hr parking bay on the rest of the levels. And yes, i parked elsewhere, a friends house and walked in. There are manay people in the town who have simply given up on the Odeon and travelled elsewhere due to the same problem. I'm not sure if you have difficulties reading Shaun, but I stated that 'it's a fantastic complex' did I not? I simply said it is in the wrong location. If it was the other way around, Cineworld on SSP and Odeon wanting to build on IR, I would be supporting the IR scheme.[/p][/quote]I do not believe for one second that anyone that intends to visit Trowbridge Odeon has failed to find a parking space in Trowbridge and has then driven atleast 8 miles to the next Cinema and paid for parking there rather than pay the price of parking in say Love Mead Car Park @ £2.60 for 3 hours, £3.10 for 4 hours or the Shires Car Park @ 80p for 3 hours. Bath and Bristol charge circa £6 for 3 hours parking. PCS_Wilts
  • Score: 1

1:27pm Thu 9 Jan 14

D@ve says...

Parking in Bath is free after 7!
Parking in Bath is free after 7! D@ve
  • Score: 3

1:32pm Thu 9 Jan 14

PCS_Wilts says...

D@ve wrote:
Parking in Bath is free after 7!
Parking is free after 6pm in Bath the same as it is in Trowbridge...
[quote][p][bold]D@ve[/bold] wrote: Parking in Bath is free after 7![/p][/quote]Parking is free after 6pm in Bath the same as it is in Trowbridge... PCS_Wilts
  • Score: 2

1:37pm Thu 9 Jan 14

BathBadger says...

I still don't get the comparisons of a market town with 2 cities, one a world heritage site with restrictive planning laws. You should be comparing with retail park multiplexes, with free parking.

oh, and as said above, SSP is a great development, but shouldn't have gone through without the parking in place - or a commitment to clean up the Peter Black site for parking.
I still don't get the comparisons of a market town with 2 cities, one a world heritage site with restrictive planning laws. You should be comparing with retail park multiplexes, with free parking. oh, and as said above, SSP is a great development, but shouldn't have gone through without the parking in place - or a commitment to clean up the Peter Black site for parking. BathBadger
  • Score: 4

1:53pm Thu 9 Jan 14

PCS_Wilts says...

BathBadger wrote:
I still don't get the comparisons of a market town with 2 cities, one a world heritage site with restrictive planning laws. You should be comparing with retail park multiplexes, with free parking.

oh, and as said above, SSP is a great development, but shouldn't have gone through without the parking in place - or a commitment to clean up the Peter Black site for parking.
But parking isn't an issue and Peter Blacks is not the responsibility of L&G so still very irrelevant and no reason to have turned down the development.
[quote][p][bold]BathBadger[/bold] wrote: I still don't get the comparisons of a market town with 2 cities, one a world heritage site with restrictive planning laws. You should be comparing with retail park multiplexes, with free parking. oh, and as said above, SSP is a great development, but shouldn't have gone through without the parking in place - or a commitment to clean up the Peter Black site for parking.[/p][/quote]But parking isn't an issue and Peter Blacks is not the responsibility of L&G so still very irrelevant and no reason to have turned down the development. PCS_Wilts
  • Score: -3

1:59pm Thu 9 Jan 14

D@ve says...

Of course parking is an issue!!! Why on earth do you think the council are trying to purchase the Peter Blacks site and convert it into a car park.

If parking wasn't an issue they wouldn't be doing this. Idiot!!
Of course parking is an issue!!! Why on earth do you think the council are trying to purchase the Peter Blacks site and convert it into a car park. If parking wasn't an issue they wouldn't be doing this. Idiot!! D@ve
  • Score: 7

1:59pm Thu 9 Jan 14

Mrs Donnyfly says...

Stick your finger in your ear and go ting-a-ling-a-loo.
Stick your finger in your ear and go ting-a-ling-a-loo. Mrs Donnyfly
  • Score: 4

2:00pm Thu 9 Jan 14

BathBadger says...

PCS_Wilts wrote:
BathBadger wrote:
I still don't get the comparisons of a market town with 2 cities, one a world heritage site with restrictive planning laws. You should be comparing with retail park multiplexes, with free parking.

oh, and as said above, SSP is a great development, but shouldn't have gone through without the parking in place - or a commitment to clean up the Peter Black site for parking.
But parking isn't an issue and Peter Blacks is not the responsibility of L&G so still very irrelevant and no reason to have turned down the development.
Very relevant, when you have to similar schemes, parking is an issue as demonstrated in the WT and referenced above. The council didn't heed this at the time. Both schemes should have been measured on their merit at the time, and one held back if need be. Parking on the site IS the responsibility of L & G though. Even you would have to admit the parking is superior on the Innox proposal. Where's you evidence on parking being no issue? Still waiting on the results of your poll.
[quote][p][bold]PCS_Wilts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BathBadger[/bold] wrote: I still don't get the comparisons of a market town with 2 cities, one a world heritage site with restrictive planning laws. You should be comparing with retail park multiplexes, with free parking. oh, and as said above, SSP is a great development, but shouldn't have gone through without the parking in place - or a commitment to clean up the Peter Black site for parking.[/p][/quote]But parking isn't an issue and Peter Blacks is not the responsibility of L&G so still very irrelevant and no reason to have turned down the development.[/p][/quote]Very relevant, when you have to similar schemes, parking is an issue as demonstrated in the WT and referenced above. The council didn't heed this at the time. Both schemes should have been measured on their merit at the time, and one held back if need be. Parking on the site IS the responsibility of L & G though. Even you would have to admit the parking is superior on the Innox proposal. Where's you evidence on parking being no issue? Still waiting on the results of your poll. BathBadger
  • Score: 5

2:12pm Thu 9 Jan 14

PCS_Wilts says...

D@ve wrote:
Of course parking is an issue!!! Why on earth do you think the council are trying to purchase the Peter Blacks site and convert it into a car park.

If parking wasn't an issue they wouldn't be doing this. Idiot!!
The council want parking for the hub - not what is here now - thanks for the compliment ;)
[quote][p][bold]D@ve[/bold] wrote: Of course parking is an issue!!! Why on earth do you think the council are trying to purchase the Peter Blacks site and convert it into a car park. If parking wasn't an issue they wouldn't be doing this. Idiot!![/p][/quote]The council want parking for the hub - not what is here now - thanks for the compliment ;) PCS_Wilts
  • Score: -1

2:17pm Thu 9 Jan 14

PCS_Wilts says...

BathBadger wrote:
PCS_Wilts wrote:
BathBadger wrote:
I still don't get the comparisons of a market town with 2 cities, one a world heritage site with restrictive planning laws. You should be comparing with retail park multiplexes, with free parking.

oh, and as said above, SSP is a great development, but shouldn't have gone through without the parking in place - or a commitment to clean up the Peter Black site for parking.
But parking isn't an issue and Peter Blacks is not the responsibility of L&G so still very irrelevant and no reason to have turned down the development.
Very relevant, when you have to similar schemes, parking is an issue as demonstrated in the WT and referenced above. The council didn't heed this at the time. Both schemes should have been measured on their merit at the time, and one held back if need be. Parking on the site IS the responsibility of L & G though. Even you would have to admit the parking is superior on the Innox proposal. Where's you evidence on parking being no issue? Still waiting on the results of your poll.
what poll? I haven't done a poll - you did a poll - pretty poor results which you keep trying to masquerade as good results.

If there was a parking issue I would imagine there would be hoards of people on here telling me I'm wrong - in actual fact there are a couple of Innox supporters on here wishing there was a parking problem.
[quote][p][bold]BathBadger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PCS_Wilts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BathBadger[/bold] wrote: I still don't get the comparisons of a market town with 2 cities, one a world heritage site with restrictive planning laws. You should be comparing with retail park multiplexes, with free parking. oh, and as said above, SSP is a great development, but shouldn't have gone through without the parking in place - or a commitment to clean up the Peter Black site for parking.[/p][/quote]But parking isn't an issue and Peter Blacks is not the responsibility of L&G so still very irrelevant and no reason to have turned down the development.[/p][/quote]Very relevant, when you have to similar schemes, parking is an issue as demonstrated in the WT and referenced above. The council didn't heed this at the time. Both schemes should have been measured on their merit at the time, and one held back if need be. Parking on the site IS the responsibility of L & G though. Even you would have to admit the parking is superior on the Innox proposal. Where's you evidence on parking being no issue? Still waiting on the results of your poll.[/p][/quote]what poll? I haven't done a poll - you did a poll - pretty poor results which you keep trying to masquerade as good results. If there was a parking issue I would imagine there would be hoards of people on here telling me I'm wrong - in actual fact there are a couple of Innox supporters on here wishing there was a parking problem. PCS_Wilts
  • Score: -1

3:04pm Thu 9 Jan 14

BathBadger says...

PCS_Wilts wrote:
BathBadger wrote:
PCS_Wilts wrote:
BathBadger wrote:
I still don't get the comparisons of a market town with 2 cities, one a world heritage site with restrictive planning laws. You should be comparing with retail park multiplexes, with free parking.

oh, and as said above, SSP is a great development, but shouldn't have gone through without the parking in place - or a commitment to clean up the Peter Black site for parking.
But parking isn't an issue and Peter Blacks is not the responsibility of L&G so still very irrelevant and no reason to have turned down the development.
Very relevant, when you have to similar schemes, parking is an issue as demonstrated in the WT and referenced above. The council didn't heed this at the time. Both schemes should have been measured on their merit at the time, and one held back if need be. Parking on the site IS the responsibility of L & G though. Even you would have to admit the parking is superior on the Innox proposal. Where's you evidence on parking being no issue? Still waiting on the results of your poll.
what poll? I haven't done a poll - you did a poll - pretty poor results which you keep trying to masquerade as good results.

If there was a parking issue I would imagine there would be hoards of people on here telling me I'm wrong - in actual fact there are a couple of Innox supporters on here wishing there was a parking problem.
The straw poll you based on "no parking issues" with your market traders and customers! Great results, and amazed you still say they are pitiful when you don't have any opposing ones to counter it. Stick your fingers in your ears all you like Shaun. If you look at the commenter's on the whole of the WT's website, you'll see they aren't in massive numbers. The subject of parking and its issues has been featured numerous times in the WT and on its letter pages as you well know.
[quote][p][bold]PCS_Wilts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BathBadger[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PCS_Wilts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BathBadger[/bold] wrote: I still don't get the comparisons of a market town with 2 cities, one a world heritage site with restrictive planning laws. You should be comparing with retail park multiplexes, with free parking. oh, and as said above, SSP is a great development, but shouldn't have gone through without the parking in place - or a commitment to clean up the Peter Black site for parking.[/p][/quote]But parking isn't an issue and Peter Blacks is not the responsibility of L&G so still very irrelevant and no reason to have turned down the development.[/p][/quote]Very relevant, when you have to similar schemes, parking is an issue as demonstrated in the WT and referenced above. The council didn't heed this at the time. Both schemes should have been measured on their merit at the time, and one held back if need be. Parking on the site IS the responsibility of L & G though. Even you would have to admit the parking is superior on the Innox proposal. Where's you evidence on parking being no issue? Still waiting on the results of your poll.[/p][/quote]what poll? I haven't done a poll - you did a poll - pretty poor results which you keep trying to masquerade as good results. If there was a parking issue I would imagine there would be hoards of people on here telling me I'm wrong - in actual fact there are a couple of Innox supporters on here wishing there was a parking problem.[/p][/quote]The straw poll you based on "no parking issues" with your market traders and customers! Great results, and amazed you still say they are pitiful when you don't have any opposing ones to counter it. Stick your fingers in your ears all you like Shaun. If you look at the commenter's on the whole of the WT's website, you'll see they aren't in massive numbers. The subject of parking and its issues has been featured numerous times in the WT and on its letter pages as you well know. BathBadger
  • Score: 3

3:27pm Thu 9 Jan 14

D@ve says...

PCS_Wilts wrote:
D@ve wrote: Of course parking is an issue!!! Why on earth do you think the council are trying to purchase the Peter Blacks site and convert it into a car park. If parking wasn't an issue they wouldn't be doing this. Idiot!!
The council want parking for the hub - not what is here now - thanks for the compliment ;)
Do you mean the community campus that is being located on the outskirts of the town? That would be a bit of a long walk after parking the car....
[quote][p][bold]PCS_Wilts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]D@ve[/bold] wrote: Of course parking is an issue!!! Why on earth do you think the council are trying to purchase the Peter Blacks site and convert it into a car park. If parking wasn't an issue they wouldn't be doing this. Idiot!![/p][/quote]The council want parking for the hub - not what is here now - thanks for the compliment ;)[/p][/quote]Do you mean the community campus that is being located on the outskirts of the town? That would be a bit of a long walk after parking the car.... D@ve
  • Score: 3

5:11pm Thu 9 Jan 14

18Years says...

I hate how people say parking is inaffordable in Trowbridge - the Shires car park is 30p for an hour for goodness sake! My three year old daughter can afford that! We've visited the complex several times and have had no parking issues by the way. We don't need a second cinema, the one we've got is amazing and not worth risking. Even if the cinema gets turned down the sote will be developed with another petrol station meaning more competitive prices for petrol - I'm sure more people are more concerned with saving money on petrol rather than cinema tickets. I hope it gets turned down - Innox will still be developed and we'll hopefully save money on petrol. PS - BathBadger clearly is Mike Baxter.
I hate how people say parking is inaffordable in Trowbridge - the Shires car park is 30p for an hour for goodness sake! My three year old daughter can afford that! We've visited the complex several times and have had no parking issues by the way. We don't need a second cinema, the one we've got is amazing and not worth risking. Even if the cinema gets turned down the sote will be developed with another petrol station meaning more competitive prices for petrol - I'm sure more people are more concerned with saving money on petrol rather than cinema tickets. I hope it gets turned down - Innox will still be developed and we'll hopefully save money on petrol. PS - BathBadger clearly is Mike Baxter. 18Years
  • Score: 1

1:24am Fri 10 Jan 14

AMVanquish007 says...

Actually I'm just the one and only amvanquish.
I don't masquerade as anybody else .
And as for you PCS- I think you will find that most of my arguments relate to the parking on the 13/14 weeks of holiday dates when SSP becomes fully occupied. That said, since the Premier Inn opened- after 5 its nigh impossible for cinemagoers to park because its now take up by reps and white van man.
I did see and experience block backs over the Christmas holiday period during the afternoons if you didnt
Actually I'm just the one and only amvanquish. I don't masquerade as anybody else . And as for you PCS- I think you will find that most of my arguments relate to the parking on the 13/14 weeks of holiday dates when SSP becomes fully occupied. That said, since the Premier Inn opened- after 5 its nigh impossible for cinemagoers to park because its now take up by reps and white van man. I did see and experience block backs over the Christmas holiday period during the afternoons if you didnt AMVanquish007
  • Score: 4

7:53am Fri 10 Jan 14

BathBadger says...

18Years wrote:
I hate how people say parking is inaffordable in Trowbridge - the Shires car park is 30p for an hour for goodness sake! My three year old daughter can afford that! We've visited the complex several times and have had no parking issues by the way. We don't need a second cinema, the one we've got is amazing and not worth risking. Even if the cinema gets turned down the sote will be developed with another petrol station meaning more competitive prices for petrol - I'm sure more people are more concerned with saving money on petrol rather than cinema tickets. I hope it gets turned down - Innox will still be developed and we'll hopefully save money on petrol. PS - BathBadger clearly is Mike Baxter.
How far away from SSP is the Shires? And it's closed at nighttime.

A second cinema ? Another experts view, John Sullivan, who i guess is also Mike Baxter in disguise! http://www.wiltshire
times.co.uk/news/109
26552.Cineworld_and_
Odeon_could_live_tog
ether_in_Trowbridge_
_says_cinema_expert/
[quote][p][bold]18Years[/bold] wrote: I hate how people say parking is inaffordable in Trowbridge - the Shires car park is 30p for an hour for goodness sake! My three year old daughter can afford that! We've visited the complex several times and have had no parking issues by the way. We don't need a second cinema, the one we've got is amazing and not worth risking. Even if the cinema gets turned down the sote will be developed with another petrol station meaning more competitive prices for petrol - I'm sure more people are more concerned with saving money on petrol rather than cinema tickets. I hope it gets turned down - Innox will still be developed and we'll hopefully save money on petrol. PS - BathBadger clearly is Mike Baxter.[/p][/quote]How far away from SSP is the Shires? And it's closed at nighttime. A second cinema ? Another experts view, John Sullivan, who i guess is also Mike Baxter in disguise! http://www.wiltshire times.co.uk/news/109 26552.Cineworld_and_ Odeon_could_live_tog ether_in_Trowbridge_ _says_cinema_expert/ BathBadger
  • Score: 3

7:52pm Fri 10 Jan 14

18Years says...

The Shires car park is a five minute walk away from SSP along Bythesea Road, don't be lazy. The top car park isn't closed at night either, plus it's free after six.
The Shires car park is a five minute walk away from SSP along Bythesea Road, don't be lazy. The top car park isn't closed at night either, plus it's free after six. 18Years
  • Score: 2

11:22pm Fri 10 Jan 14

jigsaw 5 says...

LOL who actually parks at Asda car park then walks nearly a mile to the cinema lol. You've got 3 levels of Multi car park, library car park and odeon car park. When hotel open maybe it be difficult to get in odeon car park with visitors and hotel workers etc but theres always Tesco car park, town council spaces n off street parking in Brown street/Longfield.
LOL who actually parks at Asda car park then walks nearly a mile to the cinema lol. You've got 3 levels of Multi car park, library car park and odeon car park. When hotel open maybe it be difficult to get in odeon car park with visitors and hotel workers etc but theres always Tesco car park, town council spaces n off street parking in Brown street/Longfield. jigsaw 5
  • Score: 1

8:37am Sat 11 Jan 14

bouchon says...

PCS_Wilts wrote:
jigsaw 5 wrote:
I agree loosewoman, odeon is far dearer than any other cinema chain. Cineworld may/may not be built but its certainly cheaper. Why does everyone think because theres a cinema in town we all have to go to it? Are you in Trowbridge Odeon mafia? lol.
Sustainability is the issue - I'd rather have one good cinema than 2 struggling or back to square one with none.

Seems idiotic to risk the millions invested in either development just so an individual can save 50p each visit.

Fortunately it is less than 0.01% which would like to see a second cinema...
Organise a march in opposition to it and see how many turn up.
[quote][p][bold]PCS_Wilts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jigsaw 5[/bold] wrote: I agree loosewoman, odeon is far dearer than any other cinema chain. Cineworld may/may not be built but its certainly cheaper. Why does everyone think because theres a cinema in town we all have to go to it? Are you in Trowbridge Odeon mafia? lol.[/p][/quote]Sustainability is the issue - I'd rather have one good cinema than 2 struggling or back to square one with none. Seems idiotic to risk the millions invested in either development just so an individual can save 50p each visit. Fortunately it is less than 0.01% which would like to see a second cinema...[/p][/quote]Organise a march in opposition to it and see how many turn up. bouchon
  • Score: 9

12:18pm Sat 11 Jan 14

jigsaw 5 says...

March? Why? Its a cinema. The decision is out of everyones hands now. Politics has now full control of this situation. As for peter Black can't the council do a deal with odeon/nandos,hotel chain to pay towards getting it sorted?? I would make a suggestion to them. It's in their best interest, parking revenue etc !!
March? Why? Its a cinema. The decision is out of everyones hands now. Politics has now full control of this situation. As for peter Black can't the council do a deal with odeon/nandos,hotel chain to pay towards getting it sorted?? I would make a suggestion to them. It's in their best interest, parking revenue etc !! jigsaw 5
  • Score: 0

2:47pm Sat 11 Jan 14

AMVanquish007 says...

Watching the Innox Riverside QC question the council was quite an education. You can use so many computer models but experience on the ground is so important . Because Odeon outside of Swindon virtually owns the catchment of Wiltshire and North east Somerset something has to be done to give people choice . The only thing is Trowbridge is now the battleground but it will be so beneficial to this area and WILL encourage retail and foot traffic to the town.
Watching the Innox Riverside QC question the council was quite an education. You can use so many computer models but experience on the ground is so important . Because Odeon outside of Swindon virtually owns the catchment of Wiltshire and North east Somerset something has to be done to give people choice . The only thing is Trowbridge is now the battleground but it will be so beneficial to this area and WILL encourage retail and foot traffic to the town. AMVanquish007
  • Score: 3

3:55pm Sun 12 Jan 14

18Years says...

jigsaw 5 wrote:
LOL who actually parks at Asda car park then walks nearly a mile to the cinema lol. You've got 3 levels of Multi car park, library car park and odeon car park. When hotel open maybe it be difficult to get in odeon car park with visitors and hotel workers etc but theres always Tesco car park, town council spaces n off street parking in Brown street/Longfield.
It's certainly not a mile, it takes five minutes to walk! Don't be lazy.
[quote][p][bold]jigsaw 5[/bold] wrote: LOL who actually parks at Asda car park then walks nearly a mile to the cinema lol. You've got 3 levels of Multi car park, library car park and odeon car park. When hotel open maybe it be difficult to get in odeon car park with visitors and hotel workers etc but theres always Tesco car park, town council spaces n off street parking in Brown street/Longfield.[/p][/quote]It's certainly not a mile, it takes five minutes to walk! Don't be lazy. 18Years
  • Score: 0

5:13pm Sun 12 Jan 14

jigsaw 5 says...

18years.Did i say i wouldn't?? Read carefully!! i live 2 mins away i could hop,skip n jump there but prefer Bath cinema, better pubs n restaurants there.. People won't park in Asda and walk to cinema. Theyve driven miles to get there and don't want to walk if there is parking available. If not they can pay to park. I wonder how many people have been caught by parking tickets so far. I know of two. As far as new cinema it's too late for anyone to say anything as it's in the lap of the gods (i mean your voted in government). Bowling would be better at Bowyers as nearest is Bristol. People get bored of cinema and bowling is perfect for family fun.
18years.Did i say i wouldn't?? Read carefully!! i live 2 mins away i could hop,skip n jump there but prefer Bath cinema, better pubs n restaurants there.. People won't park in Asda and walk to cinema. Theyve driven miles to get there and don't want to walk if there is parking available. If not they can pay to park. I wonder how many people have been caught by parking tickets so far. I know of two. As far as new cinema it's too late for anyone to say anything as it's in the lap of the gods (i mean your voted in government). Bowling would be better at Bowyers as nearest is Bristol. People get bored of cinema and bowling is perfect for family fun. jigsaw 5
  • Score: -3

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree