Wiltshire Council releases statement of objections to proposal

Wiltshire Times: The former Bowyers site at Stallard Street, Trowbridge The former Bowyers site at Stallard Street, Trowbridge

Wiltshire Council has released its argument for why the proposed £40m Innox Riverside development on the old Bowyers factory site in Trowbridge should be refused.

In June, members of the Western Area Planning Committee rejected plans for a Cineworld cinema, Morrisons supermarket, six restaurants and a pub on the former factory at Stallard Street. They said they had concerns about traffic problems.

Prorsus, the firm behind the application, has appealed against the decision and a planning inquiry will take place, at a date to be confirmed.

In its statement of submissions, which is available for public viewing, Wiltshire Council argues that the development would be contrary to the emerging Trowbridge Master Plan and Core Strategy.

It also argues that the development could have a harmful impact on footfall and trade at Asda and The Shires shopping centre and on the town centre.

It would, the council argues, also harm the approved Odeon cinema, an 80-bedroom hotel and a restaurants scheme at nearby St Stephen’s Place.

The submission also states the council feels the Innox Riverside plans are not sufficiently integrated with the town centre or adjacent railway station and traffic generated would severely harm the town.

Angus Horner, the managing director of Prorsus, said: “We welcome the fact that the council supports redevelopment of this site as a priority and recognises the heritage benefits of our scheme.

“It is disappointing that we still disagree about many other issues.

“The Innox Riverside team will be properly digesting the council's Statement of Case in the coming days and also continuing to prepare our own evidence.”

Mr Horner said looked likely any appeal would not be heard before January, but he was keen for it to be sooner.

A Wiltshire Council spokesman said: “As we are now in the formal appeal process, we cannot comment on enquiries regarding the case. We are submitting more information as and when required by the inspector.”

Comments (42)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:00am Fri 28 Sep 12

cght36 says...

More like theres a hidden agenda there and theyve already got plans for it!!
More like theres a hidden agenda there and theyve already got plans for it!! cght36

11:39am Fri 28 Sep 12

D@ve says...

What a load of tosh.

Wiltshire Council contradict themselves so much. In the same document, they state that this application has to be decided on their own merits regardless of the Odeon, yet they state further in that it will be harmful to the Odeon development.

They also contradict themselves on the trading side of things. Their own report commissioned to GVA into the Bowyers application, show that this development would bring in an additional £7.3m spend into the town centre. So are they sating their own commissioned report is wrong.

We all know their is a hidden agenda behind this, no matter what proposals go there, traffic will increase. But the problems are already there, caused by Wiltshire Councils own balls up, of the roundabouts, crossing to the Asda.

May i also ask why Wiltshire Council are refusing to give dates for when they are available for the appeal (meaning the inspector has to force a date on them), further adding delay and stonewalling this application?
What a load of tosh. Wiltshire Council contradict themselves so much. In the same document, they state that this application has to be decided on their own merits regardless of the Odeon, yet they state further in that it will be harmful to the Odeon development. They also contradict themselves on the trading side of things. Their own report commissioned to GVA into the Bowyers application, show that this development would bring in an additional £7.3m spend into the town centre. So are they sating their own commissioned report is wrong. We all know their is a hidden agenda behind this, no matter what proposals go there, traffic will increase. But the problems are already there, caused by Wiltshire Councils own balls up, of the roundabouts, crossing to the Asda. May i also ask why Wiltshire Council are refusing to give dates for when they are available for the appeal (meaning the inspector has to force a date on them), further adding delay and stonewalling this application? D@ve

12:25pm Fri 28 Sep 12

Trowrez says...

I realise this is probably stating the obvious. However, the basic principles seem to have been overlooked. Although, I sure the Appeal process will highlight these issues. Trowbridge desperately needs this site to be developed and I would hope that Wiltshire Council will be severely frowned upon if they fail to secure the £40 million investment being offered in the town. Wiltshire Council and Prorsus need to work together as a partnership to deliver a development that is suitable for the town's needs. It is not acceptable for the Council to continuously reject proposals because they don't like them. They need be pro-active in offering solutions or compromises to achieve the end goal. Equally, Prorsus also need to be pro-active in responding to this feedback and be much more creative in what they can offer to improve the facilities in Trowbridge rather taking the easy option of re-creating the same recipe of development that they've used else where. The principle of redeveloping this site has been established and therefore any type of development is going to generate traffic so none of the issues being quoted should be insurmountable. Its right to design out as many of these issues as possible. However, there will always be some issues that are impossible to design out on a site like this so these will need to be managed instead (the compromise) The infrastructure of the town is the responsibility of Wiltshire Council and they have the perfect opportunity using section 106 agreements/Condition
s to subsidise their budgets by insisting that Prorsus make improvements to the infrastructure/highw
ays & traffic control in that area that so they should grab this with both hands as they have failed to do this themselves. If the Council was developing this site how would they resolve these infrastructure issues? For example: Am I right in thinking that they will have reduced available parking at the Council Offices when they close the old Library site and charging employees for parking that has encouraged workers to abandon their Cars in surrounding housing Estates to avoid fees. This may reduce traffic flow into the Council Office Car Park that looks good but this hasn't solved a problem, It's created one.
I realise this is probably stating the obvious. However, the basic principles seem to have been overlooked. Although, I sure the Appeal process will highlight these issues. Trowbridge desperately needs this site to be developed and I would hope that Wiltshire Council will be severely frowned upon if they fail to secure the £40 million investment being offered in the town. Wiltshire Council and Prorsus need to work together as a partnership to deliver a development that is suitable for the town's needs. It is not acceptable for the Council to continuously reject proposals because they don't like them. They need be pro-active in offering solutions or compromises to achieve the end goal. Equally, Prorsus also need to be pro-active in responding to this feedback and be much more creative in what they can offer to improve the facilities in Trowbridge rather taking the easy option of re-creating the same recipe of development that they've used else where. The principle of redeveloping this site has been established and therefore any type of development is going to generate traffic so none of the issues being quoted should be insurmountable. Its right to design out as many of these issues as possible. However, there will always be some issues that are impossible to design out on a site like this so these will need to be managed instead (the compromise) The infrastructure of the town is the responsibility of Wiltshire Council and they have the perfect opportunity using section 106 agreements/Condition s to subsidise their budgets by insisting that Prorsus make improvements to the infrastructure/highw ays & traffic control in that area that so they should grab this with both hands as they have failed to do this themselves. If the Council was developing this site how would they resolve these infrastructure issues? For example: Am I right in thinking that they will have reduced available parking at the Council Offices when they close the old Library site and charging employees for parking that has encouraged workers to abandon their Cars in surrounding housing Estates to avoid fees. This may reduce traffic flow into the Council Office Car Park that looks good but this hasn't solved a problem, It's created one. Trowrez

12:31pm Fri 28 Sep 12

moonrakin wurzel says...

A Wiltshire Council spokesman said: “As we are now in the formal appeal process, we cannot comment on enquiries regarding the case. We are submitting more information as and when required by the inspector.”

Process... that's a lot of this is all about - how much public money has been expended with Wiltshire Council lurching about messing up without any personal consequences for the perpetrators?

The developers are risking their own (or their investors) funds whereas Wiltshire Council penpushers / councilors simply keep collecting their salaries, expenses and topping up their pensions... £250K out of the public puse - our taxes - a year for "Transforming Trowbridge"? - shameful doesn't even get close.

Meanwhile, Trowbridge continues to resemble a bomb site.
A Wiltshire Council spokesman said: “As we are now in the formal appeal process, we cannot comment on enquiries regarding the case. We are submitting more information as and when required by the inspector.” Process... that's a lot of this is all about - how much public money has been expended with Wiltshire Council lurching about messing up without any personal consequences for the perpetrators? The developers are risking their own (or their investors) funds whereas Wiltshire Council penpushers / councilors simply keep collecting their salaries, expenses and topping up their pensions... £250K out of the public puse - our taxes - a year for "Transforming Trowbridge"? - shameful doesn't even get close. Meanwhile, Trowbridge continues to resemble a bomb site. moonrakin wurzel

1:16pm Fri 28 Sep 12

PCS_Wilts says...

D@ve wrote:
What a load of tosh.

Wiltshire Council contradict themselves so much. In the same document, they state that this application has to be decided on their own merits regardless of the Odeon, yet they state further in that it will be harmful to the Odeon development.

They also contradict themselves on the trading side of things. Their own report commissioned to GVA into the Bowyers application, show that this development would bring in an additional £7.3m spend into the town centre. So are they sating their own commissioned report is wrong.

We all know their is a hidden agenda behind this, no matter what proposals go there, traffic will increase. But the problems are already there, caused by Wiltshire Councils own balls up, of the roundabouts, crossing to the Asda.

May i also ask why Wiltshire Council are refusing to give dates for when they are available for the appeal (meaning the inspector has to force a date on them), further adding delay and stonewalling this application?
Own merit was only relative up until the point planning consent was given for the Odeon - after that it become an issue of SUSTAINABILITY.

You know that if the farce that is this application in its current form continues it is likely ALL you will end up with on that site is one big Morrisons right?
[quote][p][bold]D@ve[/bold] wrote: What a load of tosh. Wiltshire Council contradict themselves so much. In the same document, they state that this application has to be decided on their own merits regardless of the Odeon, yet they state further in that it will be harmful to the Odeon development. They also contradict themselves on the trading side of things. Their own report commissioned to GVA into the Bowyers application, show that this development would bring in an additional £7.3m spend into the town centre. So are they sating their own commissioned report is wrong. We all know their is a hidden agenda behind this, no matter what proposals go there, traffic will increase. But the problems are already there, caused by Wiltshire Councils own balls up, of the roundabouts, crossing to the Asda. May i also ask why Wiltshire Council are refusing to give dates for when they are available for the appeal (meaning the inspector has to force a date on them), further adding delay and stonewalling this application?[/p][/quote]Own merit was only relative up until the point planning consent was given for the Odeon - after that it become an issue of SUSTAINABILITY. You know that if the farce that is this application in its current form continues it is likely ALL you will end up with on that site is one big Morrisons right? PCS_Wilts

2:10pm Fri 28 Sep 12

AMVanquish007 says...

Once again D@ve hits the nail on the head. And PCS when are you going to realise that the Appeal going through includes the supermarket. Cinema and restaurants - AND IT AIN'T GOING TO CHANGE. No matter what you like to believe ,Cineworld are not pulling out and are still committed. What I do find particularly strange though after going through the SSP plans for 3 hours in county hall yesterday I discovered some interesting facts which leaves me in no doubt that a cinema should not have been put on this site. Firstly the assessment of traffic flows are a complete nonsense. To use a 3 screen Odeon on Tottenham Court Road in Central London and a 12 screen Vue Cinema at York that has hundreds of dedicated car parking spaces is absolutely pointless. And the figures were derived on a Friday outside of a holiday date and just goes to prove that whoever collated this information no NOTHING about multiplexes. What I read was drivel .
But what I still find particularly strange is the figure of approx 1228 seats that this Odeon supposedly is going to have. A figure given to the planners and for the councillors in Feb when SSP was passed. Well after some investigation. It turns out that 1228 seats is the seating capacity of the old Odeon cinema that was where HJ Knees is and that shut in 1971. So who is pulling the wool over who's eyes?
Once again D@ve hits the nail on the head. And PCS when are you going to realise that the Appeal going through includes the supermarket. Cinema and restaurants - AND IT AIN'T GOING TO CHANGE. No matter what you like to believe ,Cineworld are not pulling out and are still committed. What I do find particularly strange though after going through the SSP plans for 3 hours in county hall yesterday I discovered some interesting facts which leaves me in no doubt that a cinema should not have been put on this site. Firstly the assessment of traffic flows are a complete nonsense. To use a 3 screen Odeon on Tottenham Court Road in Central London and a 12 screen Vue Cinema at York that has hundreds of dedicated car parking spaces is absolutely pointless. And the figures were derived on a Friday outside of a holiday date and just goes to prove that whoever collated this information no NOTHING about multiplexes. What I read was drivel . But what I still find particularly strange is the figure of approx 1228 seats that this Odeon supposedly is going to have. A figure given to the planners and for the councillors in Feb when SSP was passed. Well after some investigation. It turns out that 1228 seats is the seating capacity of the old Odeon cinema that was where HJ Knees is and that shut in 1971. So who is pulling the wool over who's eyes? AMVanquish007

2:23pm Fri 28 Sep 12

PCS_Wilts says...

AMVanquish007 wrote:
Once again D@ve hits the nail on the head. And PCS when are you going to realise that the Appeal going through includes the supermarket. Cinema and restaurants - AND IT AIN'T GOING TO CHANGE. No matter what you like to believe ,Cineworld are not pulling out and are still committed. What I do find particularly strange though after going through the SSP plans for 3 hours in county hall yesterday I discovered some interesting facts which leaves me in no doubt that a cinema should not have been put on this site. Firstly the assessment of traffic flows are a complete nonsense. To use a 3 screen Odeon on Tottenham Court Road in Central London and a 12 screen Vue Cinema at York that has hundreds of dedicated car parking spaces is absolutely pointless. And the figures were derived on a Friday outside of a holiday date and just goes to prove that whoever collated this information no NOTHING about multiplexes. What I read was drivel .
But what I still find particularly strange is the figure of approx 1228 seats that this Odeon supposedly is going to have. A figure given to the planners and for the councillors in Feb when SSP was passed. Well after some investigation. It turns out that 1228 seats is the seating capacity of the old Odeon cinema that was where HJ Knees is and that shut in 1971. So who is pulling the wool over who's eyes?
Doesn't matter how committed Cineworld are unless planning consent is given - THAT AINT GONNA HAPPEN.

The rest of your comments are irrelevant - YET AGAIN!

Or is that what was hidden in the three closed documents you were harping on about a few weeks ago? I think we both know the answer to that though don't we...
[quote][p][bold]AMVanquish007[/bold] wrote: Once again D@ve hits the nail on the head. And PCS when are you going to realise that the Appeal going through includes the supermarket. Cinema and restaurants - AND IT AIN'T GOING TO CHANGE. No matter what you like to believe ,Cineworld are not pulling out and are still committed. What I do find particularly strange though after going through the SSP plans for 3 hours in county hall yesterday I discovered some interesting facts which leaves me in no doubt that a cinema should not have been put on this site. Firstly the assessment of traffic flows are a complete nonsense. To use a 3 screen Odeon on Tottenham Court Road in Central London and a 12 screen Vue Cinema at York that has hundreds of dedicated car parking spaces is absolutely pointless. And the figures were derived on a Friday outside of a holiday date and just goes to prove that whoever collated this information no NOTHING about multiplexes. What I read was drivel . But what I still find particularly strange is the figure of approx 1228 seats that this Odeon supposedly is going to have. A figure given to the planners and for the councillors in Feb when SSP was passed. Well after some investigation. It turns out that 1228 seats is the seating capacity of the old Odeon cinema that was where HJ Knees is and that shut in 1971. So who is pulling the wool over who's eyes?[/p][/quote]Doesn't matter how committed Cineworld are unless planning consent is given - THAT AINT GONNA HAPPEN. The rest of your comments are irrelevant - YET AGAIN! Or is that what was hidden in the three closed documents you were harping on about a few weeks ago? I think we both know the answer to that though don't we... PCS_Wilts

2:28pm Fri 28 Sep 12

Beardy Mike says...

AMVanquish007 -

But what I still find particularly strange is the figure of approx 1228 seats that this Odeon supposedly is going to have. A figure given to the planners and for the councillors in Feb when SSP was passed. Well after some investigation. It turns out that 1228 seats is the seating capacity of the old Odeon cinema that was where HJ Knees is and that shut in 1971. So who is pulling the wool over who's eyes?


What are you saying? How is that infomation relevant?
AMVanquish007 - But what I still find particularly strange is the figure of approx 1228 seats that this Odeon supposedly is going to have. A figure given to the planners and for the councillors in Feb when SSP was passed. Well after some investigation. It turns out that 1228 seats is the seating capacity of the old Odeon cinema that was where HJ Knees is and that shut in 1971. So who is pulling the wool over who's eyes? What are you saying? How is that infomation relevant? Beardy Mike

2:36pm Fri 28 Sep 12

mazzer76 says...

So who the hell is going to create 400 + jobs in this dump of a town, sure as hell not going to be Wilts council, the town traders or anyone else. I am sick of the lot of them denying me and 100's more made redundant in the last 2 yrs of work! but if they want to keep me in the dole queue living off their taxes so be it, I won't be spending any of it in Trowbridge town thats for sure, I have boycotted it since this farce began and shop out of town or with online retailers.
So who the hell is going to create 400 + jobs in this dump of a town, sure as hell not going to be Wilts council, the town traders or anyone else. I am sick of the lot of them denying me and 100's more made redundant in the last 2 yrs of work! but if they want to keep me in the dole queue living off their taxes so be it, I won't be spending any of it in Trowbridge town thats for sure, I have boycotted it since this farce began and shop out of town or with online retailers. mazzer76

2:41pm Fri 28 Sep 12

Beardy Mike says...

Arn't the Cinema and Restuarants the reason that the application will struggle at the appeal. I can't see how it offers anything that Trowbridge isn't already getting. That will be apparent when the appeal is processed.

I think it would be a wise move to offer something new. Something we dont already have. Sports and Leisure maybe?
Arn't the Cinema and Restuarants the reason that the application will struggle at the appeal. I can't see how it offers anything that Trowbridge isn't already getting. That will be apparent when the appeal is processed. I think it would be a wise move to offer something new. Something we dont already have. Sports and Leisure maybe? Beardy Mike

2:49pm Fri 28 Sep 12

PCS_Wilts says...

mazzer76 wrote:
So who the hell is going to create 400 + jobs in this dump of a town, sure as hell not going to be Wilts council, the town traders or anyone else. I am sick of the lot of them denying me and 100's more made redundant in the last 2 yrs of work! but if they want to keep me in the dole queue living off their taxes so be it, I won't be spending any of it in Trowbridge town thats for sure, I have boycotted it since this farce began and shop out of town or with online retailers.
Mazzer - its only this application which will not get consent - as soon as the developer starts to see sense you will see a completely different application put forward which will not contain an almost carbon copy of the SSP site regards the leisure aspect.

If left too long you may even see the owners of the Bowyers site (Morrisons) ask Prorsus to put the leisure aspect aside while they get their supermarket sorted. A petrol station would be nice too.

Although Mazzer it seems a little whimsical to place all your employment eggs into the Bowyers basket. Hitachi have just been given planning consent at North Bradley and they will be looking to employ people, more than likely sooner than Morrisons would be.
[quote][p][bold]mazzer76[/bold] wrote: So who the hell is going to create 400 + jobs in this dump of a town, sure as hell not going to be Wilts council, the town traders or anyone else. I am sick of the lot of them denying me and 100's more made redundant in the last 2 yrs of work! but if they want to keep me in the dole queue living off their taxes so be it, I won't be spending any of it in Trowbridge town thats for sure, I have boycotted it since this farce began and shop out of town or with online retailers.[/p][/quote]Mazzer - its only this application which will not get consent - as soon as the developer starts to see sense you will see a completely different application put forward which will not contain an almost carbon copy of the SSP site regards the leisure aspect. If left too long you may even see the owners of the Bowyers site (Morrisons) ask Prorsus to put the leisure aspect aside while they get their supermarket sorted. A petrol station would be nice too. Although Mazzer it seems a little whimsical to place all your employment eggs into the Bowyers basket. Hitachi have just been given planning consent at North Bradley and they will be looking to employ people, more than likely sooner than Morrisons would be. PCS_Wilts

4:22pm Fri 28 Sep 12

Bowers-peterblack-tescos says...

This development would be great for Trowbridge. With regard the argument "the development could have a harmful impact on footfall and trade at Asda and The Shires shopping centre " perhaps this will give the traders of trowbridge a kick up the backside it needs. After all they are not building Mobile Phone outlets, low end clothes shops or card shops they would be building shops that this town needs. Since when do we decide on what we should have in our town by saying "well we have these shops we dont need any more choice or quality, lets stick with the cr@p shops we have now!"
Do the Council not understand how much revenue is being lost because we have such poor / low quality shops in the town. I can only think of three shops I use in the center.
TROWBRIDGE DESERVES BETTER!
This development would be great for Trowbridge. With regard the argument "the development could have a harmful impact on footfall and trade at Asda and The Shires shopping centre " perhaps this will give the traders of trowbridge a kick up the backside it needs. After all they are not building Mobile Phone outlets, low end clothes shops or card shops they would be building shops that this town needs. Since when do we decide on what we should have in our town by saying "well we have these shops we dont need any more choice or quality, lets stick with the cr@p shops we have now!" Do the Council not understand how much revenue is being lost because we have such poor / low quality shops in the town. I can only think of three shops I use in the center. TROWBRIDGE DESERVES BETTER! Bowers-peterblack-tescos

9:05pm Fri 28 Sep 12

snazzle says...

Bowers-peterblack-te
scos
wrote:
This development would be great for Trowbridge. With regard the argument "the development could have a harmful impact on footfall and trade at Asda and The Shires shopping centre " perhaps this will give the traders of trowbridge a kick up the backside it needs. After all they are not building Mobile Phone outlets, low end clothes shops or card shops they would be building shops that this town needs. Since when do we decide on what we should have in our town by saying "well we have these shops we dont need any more choice or quality, lets stick with the cr@p shops we have now!"
Do the Council not understand how much revenue is being lost because we have such poor / low quality shops in the town. I can only think of three shops I use in the center.
TROWBRIDGE DESERVES BETTER!
The argument that we do not require another supermarket or cinema is absolute rubbish and in my mind a stupid statement. Morrisons and Cineworld have obviously done some homework as businesses of their size do not plan new sites with a view of making a loss. At the end of the day "sustainability" comes down to survival of the ones who demonstrate better business enterprise and shrewdness.
If Mr A runs a shoeshop for years and suddenly Mr B opens an identical shoeshop right next door that has been vacant for years, why?.... because Mr. B assumes he can either undercut Mr A and still make a decent profit or he assumes that there will be enough consumers to sustain both shoeshops. Who is the winner in this scenario? the consumer as he has more choice and a possible competitive market.

But my 3 points are that

Mr B has every right to open the shop, as it is his own risk and his own money he will lose if things dont work out.

Mr A does not have sole rights to the marketing shoes in that area because he was there first with the assumumption he can slightly overprice as there is no competition.

At least the empty shop has not stood vacant and money has been generated for alot of people in rent, income tax, purchased stock, business rates, staff wages, utility bills.......the list goes on and on.
[quote][p][bold]Bowers-peterblack-te scos[/bold] wrote: This development would be great for Trowbridge. With regard the argument "the development could have a harmful impact on footfall and trade at Asda and The Shires shopping centre " perhaps this will give the traders of trowbridge a kick up the backside it needs. After all they are not building Mobile Phone outlets, low end clothes shops or card shops they would be building shops that this town needs. Since when do we decide on what we should have in our town by saying "well we have these shops we dont need any more choice or quality, lets stick with the cr@p shops we have now!" Do the Council not understand how much revenue is being lost because we have such poor / low quality shops in the town. I can only think of three shops I use in the center. TROWBRIDGE DESERVES BETTER![/p][/quote]The argument that we do not require another supermarket or cinema is absolute rubbish and in my mind a stupid statement. Morrisons and Cineworld have obviously done some homework as businesses of their size do not plan new sites with a view of making a loss. At the end of the day "sustainability" comes down to survival of the ones who demonstrate better business enterprise and shrewdness. If Mr A runs a shoeshop for years and suddenly Mr B opens an identical shoeshop right next door that has been vacant for years, why?.... because Mr. B assumes he can either undercut Mr A and still make a decent profit or he assumes that there will be enough consumers to sustain both shoeshops. Who is the winner in this scenario? the consumer as he has more choice and a possible competitive market. But my 3 points are that Mr B has every right to open the shop, as it is his own risk and his own money he will lose if things dont work out. Mr A does not have sole rights to the marketing shoes in that area because he was there first with the assumumption he can slightly overprice as there is no competition. At least the empty shop has not stood vacant and money has been generated for alot of people in rent, income tax, purchased stock, business rates, staff wages, utility bills.......the list goes on and on. snazzle

9:47pm Fri 28 Sep 12

PCS_Wilts says...

snazzle wrote:
Bowers-peterblack-te

scos
wrote:
This development would be great for Trowbridge. With regard the argument "the development could have a harmful impact on footfall and trade at Asda and The Shires shopping centre " perhaps this will give the traders of trowbridge a kick up the backside it needs. After all they are not building Mobile Phone outlets, low end clothes shops or card shops they would be building shops that this town needs. Since when do we decide on what we should have in our town by saying "well we have these shops we dont need any more choice or quality, lets stick with the cr@p shops we have now!"
Do the Council not understand how much revenue is being lost because we have such poor / low quality shops in the town. I can only think of three shops I use in the center.
TROWBRIDGE DESERVES BETTER!
The argument that we do not require another supermarket or cinema is absolute rubbish and in my mind a stupid statement. Morrisons and Cineworld have obviously done some homework as businesses of their size do not plan new sites with a view of making a loss. At the end of the day "sustainability" comes down to survival of the ones who demonstrate better business enterprise and shrewdness.
If Mr A runs a shoeshop for years and suddenly Mr B opens an identical shoeshop right next door that has been vacant for years, why?.... because Mr. B assumes he can either undercut Mr A and still make a decent profit or he assumes that there will be enough consumers to sustain both shoeshops. Who is the winner in this scenario? the consumer as he has more choice and a possible competitive market.

But my 3 points are that

Mr B has every right to open the shop, as it is his own risk and his own money he will lose if things dont work out.

Mr A does not have sole rights to the marketing shoes in that area because he was there first with the assumumption he can slightly overprice as there is no competition.

At least the empty shop has not stood vacant and money has been generated for alot of people in rent, income tax, purchased stock, business rates, staff wages, utility bills.......the list goes on and on.
The problem with your argument is that SUSTAINABILITY is a key factor in the core strategy for developing the town.

When it comes to what shops we have in this town currently you would be wise not to think that this is a condition Trowbridge suffers alone.

The current economic climate, the changes in business models regards usage of the internet amongst other reasons are responsible for the transformation that predominately smaller towns and cities across the country are going through. Charity shops are given huge reductions on rent & rates etc, coffee beans will soon be worth more per kilo than gold at this rate and this is all the more reason for councils to scrutinise not only the plans put before them but the motives aswell.

To say this town could sustain 2 cinemas, 13 new restaurants and yet another pub is idiotic.

If your argument is competition and let the best man win then you simply enter back into the game of soon to be derelict buildings and if for example half the Bowyers Site and half the SSP site were closed I wonder how many of you arguing that point would think yourselves worthy of a pat on the back - I myself would rather see one thriving site and another site waiting to be developed if it means waiting for the right development. Ultimately ending in 2 thriving sites. Morrisons bought Bowyers - one way or another it will be developed - what a lot of you fail to see is that we could end up with JUST a supermarket.

Lets have a Morrisons store and petrol station but for crying out loud will someone please convince Prorsus/Morrisons that the rest as it stands is just not right.
[quote][p][bold]snazzle[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bowers-peterblack-te scos[/bold] wrote: This development would be great for Trowbridge. With regard the argument "the development could have a harmful impact on footfall and trade at Asda and The Shires shopping centre " perhaps this will give the traders of trowbridge a kick up the backside it needs. After all they are not building Mobile Phone outlets, low end clothes shops or card shops they would be building shops that this town needs. Since when do we decide on what we should have in our town by saying "well we have these shops we dont need any more choice or quality, lets stick with the cr@p shops we have now!" Do the Council not understand how much revenue is being lost because we have such poor / low quality shops in the town. I can only think of three shops I use in the center. TROWBRIDGE DESERVES BETTER![/p][/quote]The argument that we do not require another supermarket or cinema is absolute rubbish and in my mind a stupid statement. Morrisons and Cineworld have obviously done some homework as businesses of their size do not plan new sites with a view of making a loss. At the end of the day "sustainability" comes down to survival of the ones who demonstrate better business enterprise and shrewdness. If Mr A runs a shoeshop for years and suddenly Mr B opens an identical shoeshop right next door that has been vacant for years, why?.... because Mr. B assumes he can either undercut Mr A and still make a decent profit or he assumes that there will be enough consumers to sustain both shoeshops. Who is the winner in this scenario? the consumer as he has more choice and a possible competitive market. But my 3 points are that Mr B has every right to open the shop, as it is his own risk and his own money he will lose if things dont work out. Mr A does not have sole rights to the marketing shoes in that area because he was there first with the assumumption he can slightly overprice as there is no competition. At least the empty shop has not stood vacant and money has been generated for alot of people in rent, income tax, purchased stock, business rates, staff wages, utility bills.......the list goes on and on.[/p][/quote]The problem with your argument is that SUSTAINABILITY is a key factor in the core strategy for developing the town. When it comes to what shops we have in this town currently you would be wise not to think that this is a condition Trowbridge suffers alone. The current economic climate, the changes in business models regards usage of the internet amongst other reasons are responsible for the transformation that predominately smaller towns and cities across the country are going through. Charity shops are given huge reductions on rent & rates etc, coffee beans will soon be worth more per kilo than gold at this rate and this is all the more reason for councils to scrutinise not only the plans put before them but the motives aswell. To say this town could sustain 2 cinemas, 13 new restaurants and yet another pub is idiotic. If your argument is competition and let the best man win then you simply enter back into the game of soon to be derelict buildings and if for example half the Bowyers Site and half the SSP site were closed I wonder how many of you arguing that point would think yourselves worthy of a pat on the back - I myself would rather see one thriving site and another site waiting to be developed if it means waiting for the right development. Ultimately ending in 2 thriving sites. Morrisons bought Bowyers - one way or another it will be developed - what a lot of you fail to see is that we could end up with JUST a supermarket. Lets have a Morrisons store and petrol station but for crying out loud will someone please convince Prorsus/Morrisons that the rest as it stands is just not right. PCS_Wilts

9:57pm Fri 28 Sep 12

PCS_Wilts says...

cght36 wrote:
More like theres a hidden agenda there and theyve already got plans for it!!
How could the council have plans for something they don't own?
[quote][p][bold]cght36[/bold] wrote: More like theres a hidden agenda there and theyve already got plans for it!![/p][/quote]How could the council have plans for something they don't own? PCS_Wilts

2:02am Sat 29 Sep 12

AMVanquish007 says...

Once and for all-I will say it one more time ---the appeal is going to include the supermarket ,cinema and restaurants. How many times does this have to be drummed into you lot who seem to be in some sort of denial.
And PCS your use of block capitals as a retort saying it 'Aint going to happen' doesnt cut any ice-clearly you havent seen the number of appeals that have been overturned within this county by the planning inspectorate.
Nobody else is going to come to invest £46m in our town.After seeing exactly what this council has said in its summing up in its case against Innox Riverside-if i was a developer or retailer I'd put two fingers up and go elsewhere?
This council needs to be very very careful how it treats developers.
Ahh but the council want Innox Riverside for their sports hub or campus dont they?.
I say to those officials -youve got plenty of space at the back of the Trowbridge Technical college-Build your Campus and Sports Hub there.
And start listening to what the people want and not what you think they should have in a place they clearly dont want it.
And if I hear one more crass comment about SSP and that 'a cinema is already being built so why build another one' I will go ballistic.
That cinema is in the wrong place and despite what all of you say-Innox Riverside was first and should have been heard first.I dont care whether SSP ticked all the boxes. Cineworld were first-Not Odeon. Its an absolute disgrace.
And none more so than than the transport and highways document that was used as a basis to approve it.
How on earth a 3 screen Odeon slap bang in the middle of Central London, a 12 plex Cineworld in Falkirk and a 12 plex Vue in York bears any relation to what goes on in Trowbridge is beyond comprehension.
The other cinemas used were the Cineworld Shrewsbury/Liverpool and the Vue Hartlepool, but not one point was raised or any figures used about traffic flows on holiday dates. The figures used stemmed from a date between Jan2003-Oct 2009 using one day- a friday as the basis for traffic flows. Its an absolute nonsense quite apart from the fact that all the cinemas except the Odeon in London have dedicated car parking with hundreds of spaces just for the cinemas. If you dont believe me just look on Google Earth. Whoever submitted this garbage should be seriously be taken aside and given a grilling. Traffic flows were an important part of my job necessary to determine performance schedules of popular films in difficult cinemas. Clearly this Odeon is going to have its work cut out, so much so that the management may have to resign themselves to the fact that it may end up as a town cinema only and not what a true multiplex is designed to cater for-the hundreds of cars that will descend on it on holiday dates from a 20 mile radius.
But then again I did read that Odeon are reliant on L and G to come up with parking solutions that will be reviewed on a 3 monthly basis.If this cinema opens on a holiday date they will be reviewing it on the first day All I can say is that I will be waiting to record on camera the chaos that will happen. I dont wish to see any cinema fail=but this will be all the more reason for the Planning Inspectorate to pass Innox Riverside and the Cineworld so this council doesnt lose face.
This 250000 catchment can easily cater for 2 multiplexes and with market share between Odeon, Cineworld and Vue being a neck and neck thing-why should a cinema be turned down especially if an operator wants to build it.
It is quite obvious that the majority of the planners have never lived in this town. What they should do is to start listening and read up about the history of Trowbridge before making totally unjustified statements about traffic volumes near Bowyers just so as to add fuel to their 'holistic planning' ideology.
And to put in their document that Innox Riverside should be turned down because it will affect SSP and the cinema and restaurants is disgraceful. Since when did deciding an application on merit be changed to deciding whether competition and monoploy should be a part of it or is this a new interpretation of the word sustainabilty.
Thankfully the Planning Inspectorate will leap on this line with venom and have a field day with that line of reasoning.
The fact is that initially Innox Riverside was passed with approval. The councillors were not against the supermarket,cinema or restaurants-just highways and network rail considerations.
The Planning Inspectorate will leap on this too and after looking back at the history of Trowbridge and past volumes of traffic, plus the new injections of capital recently announced for western region stations-it wont take a lot of convincing or in council speak be 'mindful of approving ' the scheme
And if he/she looks at the groundswell of support the Bowyers site has and what with quite clearly is the edict sent down from 10 Downing Street that Jobs,Investment and Construction are a priority in a very weak economy-I cannot see that Innox Riverside will be rejected without incurring a backlash against Trowbridge that will be very hard to recover from in future decades.Nobody will look at Trowbridge ever again and that should be a major worry for all town traders.If Mary Portas rejected this town then this development at Innox Riverside really is the last chance saloon.I suggest that some of the contributors on this blog take that on board rather than making suggestions to the developer that it should change the IR plans to suit their hair brained schemes.Innox Riverside was submitted first and should have been heard first-thousands are of the same opinion in Trowbridge and that is what all those in power should take on board rather than discarding the opinions of people as irrelevant.Ultimatel
y the ballot box will point the way next year if the public arent listened to.
Once and for all-I will say it one more time ---the appeal is going to include the supermarket ,cinema and restaurants. How many times does this have to be drummed into you lot who seem to be in some sort of denial. And PCS your use of block capitals as a retort saying it 'Aint going to happen' doesnt cut any ice-clearly you havent seen the number of appeals that have been overturned within this county by the planning inspectorate. Nobody else is going to come to invest £46m in our town.After seeing exactly what this council has said in its summing up in its case against Innox Riverside-if i was a developer or retailer I'd put two fingers up and go elsewhere? This council needs to be very very careful how it treats developers. Ahh but the council want Innox Riverside for their sports hub or campus dont they?. I say to those officials -youve got plenty of space at the back of the Trowbridge Technical college-Build your Campus and Sports Hub there. And start listening to what the people want and not what you think they should have in a place they clearly dont want it. And if I hear one more crass comment about SSP and that 'a cinema is already being built so why build another one' I will go ballistic. That cinema is in the wrong place and despite what all of you say-Innox Riverside was first and should have been heard first.I dont care whether SSP ticked all the boxes. Cineworld were first-Not Odeon. Its an absolute disgrace. And none more so than than the transport and highways document that was used as a basis to approve it. How on earth a 3 screen Odeon slap bang in the middle of Central London, a 12 plex Cineworld in Falkirk and a 12 plex Vue in York bears any relation to what goes on in Trowbridge is beyond comprehension. The other cinemas used were the Cineworld Shrewsbury/Liverpool and the Vue Hartlepool, but not one point was raised or any figures used about traffic flows on holiday dates. The figures used stemmed from a date between Jan2003-Oct 2009 using one day- a friday as the basis for traffic flows. Its an absolute nonsense quite apart from the fact that all the cinemas except the Odeon in London have dedicated car parking with hundreds of spaces just for the cinemas. If you dont believe me just look on Google Earth. Whoever submitted this garbage should be seriously be taken aside and given a grilling. Traffic flows were an important part of my job necessary to determine performance schedules of popular films in difficult cinemas. Clearly this Odeon is going to have its work cut out, so much so that the management may have to resign themselves to the fact that it may end up as a town cinema only and not what a true multiplex is designed to cater for-the hundreds of cars that will descend on it on holiday dates from a 20 mile radius. But then again I did read that Odeon are reliant on L and G to come up with parking solutions that will be reviewed on a 3 monthly basis.If this cinema opens on a holiday date they will be reviewing it on the first day All I can say is that I will be waiting to record on camera the chaos that will happen. I dont wish to see any cinema fail=but this will be all the more reason for the Planning Inspectorate to pass Innox Riverside and the Cineworld so this council doesnt lose face. This 250000 catchment can easily cater for 2 multiplexes and with market share between Odeon, Cineworld and Vue being a neck and neck thing-why should a cinema be turned down especially if an operator wants to build it. It is quite obvious that the majority of the planners have never lived in this town. What they should do is to start listening and read up about the history of Trowbridge before making totally unjustified statements about traffic volumes near Bowyers just so as to add fuel to their 'holistic planning' ideology. And to put in their document that Innox Riverside should be turned down because it will affect SSP and the cinema and restaurants is disgraceful. Since when did deciding an application on merit be changed to deciding whether competition and monoploy should be a part of it or is this a new interpretation of the word sustainabilty. Thankfully the Planning Inspectorate will leap on this line with venom and have a field day with that line of reasoning. The fact is that initially Innox Riverside was passed with approval. The councillors were not against the supermarket,cinema or restaurants-just highways and network rail considerations. The Planning Inspectorate will leap on this too and after looking back at the history of Trowbridge and past volumes of traffic, plus the new injections of capital recently announced for western region stations-it wont take a lot of convincing or in council speak be 'mindful of approving ' the scheme And if he/she looks at the groundswell of support the Bowyers site has and what with quite clearly is the edict sent down from 10 Downing Street that Jobs,Investment and Construction are a priority in a very weak economy-I cannot see that Innox Riverside will be rejected without incurring a backlash against Trowbridge that will be very hard to recover from in future decades.Nobody will look at Trowbridge ever again and that should be a major worry for all town traders.If Mary Portas rejected this town then this development at Innox Riverside really is the last chance saloon.I suggest that some of the contributors on this blog take that on board rather than making suggestions to the developer that it should change the IR plans to suit their hair brained schemes.Innox Riverside was submitted first and should have been heard first-thousands are of the same opinion in Trowbridge and that is what all those in power should take on board rather than discarding the opinions of people as irrelevant.Ultimatel y the ballot box will point the way next year if the public arent listened to. AMVanquish007

9:15am Sat 29 Sep 12

PCS_Wilts says...

Hey Mike firstly there is already a cinema being built - why do we need another one? If that cinema is in such a wrong place how come Morrisons and cineworld were in talks with L&G about building Morrisons and Cineworld at SSP prior to Morrisons purchasing Bowyers?

When you say Morrison were first with the idea of a cinema do you mean first for Bowyers because if you get your facts absolutely correct you will remember that Morrisons were in talks with L&G regards putting their store at St Stephen's Place - L&G turned them down and showed them the plans they had for SSP which included the cinema.

Or did you mean the cinema idea and plans that L&G had been discussing with the council for 14 months before Morrisons even purchased the Bowyers site?

But I'm pretty convinced you will mean the the hap dash plans Prorsus hastily threw into the planning office before L&G submitted their full, complete, concise and ticking all the boxes plans.

I also think you should stop thanking the planning inspectorate - you don't even have a date yet.

I know you have seen the cinema display in Castle Place, if you spend some time there listening to the opinions of the people who stop and take the information in I think you will find the councillors have absolutely nothing to fear when it comes to the ballot box.
Hey Mike firstly there is already a cinema being built - why do we need another one? If that cinema is in such a wrong place how come Morrisons and cineworld were in talks with L&G about building Morrisons and Cineworld at SSP prior to Morrisons purchasing Bowyers? When you say Morrison were first with the idea of a cinema do you mean first for Bowyers because if you get your facts absolutely correct you will remember that Morrisons were in talks with L&G regards putting their store at St Stephen's Place - L&G turned them down and showed them the plans they had for SSP which included the cinema. Or did you mean the cinema idea and plans that L&G had been discussing with the council for 14 months before Morrisons even purchased the Bowyers site? But I'm pretty convinced you will mean the the hap dash plans Prorsus hastily threw into the planning office before L&G submitted their full, complete, concise and ticking all the boxes plans. I also think you should stop thanking the planning inspectorate - you don't even have a date yet. I know you have seen the cinema display in Castle Place, if you spend some time there listening to the opinions of the people who stop and take the information in I think you will find the councillors have absolutely nothing to fear when it comes to the ballot box. PCS_Wilts

6:34pm Sat 29 Sep 12

upnunder says...

Well said pcs . Factual and as ever
Well said pcs . Factual and as ever upnunder

2:23pm Sun 30 Sep 12

AMVanquish007 says...

I suggest you come up with the newspaper report and documentation to prove what you say. As far as I am led to believe Cineworld looked at SSP in 1999 and turned it down when it was under the control of Allied London and not Legal and General.They may well have gone there if it had been just a cinema with 400 dedicated spaces- a fact I have long suggested and advocated. But they may have been approached by L and G to revisit it but certainly they would have turned it down emphatically if sharing was going to be the order of play. They know the SSP site and certainly would not have entertained such a small development.
As for Innox , Cineworld signed in July 2011 and Odeon contractually in March 2012. Bit of a time difference there I think. And you are talking rubbish in the ' idea of ' notion that you're trying to use. The plans that were presented by Prorsus were far more detailed and ready more so than you assume. I consider it a fact that what was presented in the WT a week after the Prorsus presentation as regards SSP-was---- well it looked like a child had knocked it up as regards the SSP.They weren't ready either because no Cinema operator had even been signed and neither
was it finalised as an eight but a 7 plex. What I call final and first is a company that's done it's calculations and has decided to contractually sign way before any body else ever did.
Many planning officers that I and D@ve know have looked at this site. The ones I know in London have said that they can see nothing wrong with IR and would have considered it a priority to get it passed . Unlike here where it appears to many that it was deliberately stalled to allow SSP to be heard first. And that is a disgrace
I suggest you come up with the newspaper report and documentation to prove what you say. As far as I am led to believe Cineworld looked at SSP in 1999 and turned it down when it was under the control of Allied London and not Legal and General.They may well have gone there if it had been just a cinema with 400 dedicated spaces- a fact I have long suggested and advocated. But they may have been approached by L and G to revisit it but certainly they would have turned it down emphatically if sharing was going to be the order of play. They know the SSP site and certainly would not have entertained such a small development. As for Innox , Cineworld signed in July 2011 and Odeon contractually in March 2012. Bit of a time difference there I think. And you are talking rubbish in the ' idea of ' notion that you're trying to use. The plans that were presented by Prorsus were far more detailed and ready more so than you assume. I consider it a fact that what was presented in the WT a week after the Prorsus presentation as regards SSP-was---- well it looked like a child had knocked it up as regards the SSP.They weren't ready either because no Cinema operator had even been signed and neither was it finalised as an eight but a 7 plex. What I call final and first is a company that's done it's calculations and has decided to contractually sign way before any body else ever did. Many planning officers that I and D@ve know have looked at this site. The ones I know in London have said that they can see nothing wrong with IR and would have considered it a priority to get it passed . Unlike here where it appears to many that it was deliberately stalled to allow SSP to be heard first. And that is a disgrace AMVanquish007

5:21pm Sun 30 Sep 12

PCS_Wilts says...

Sour grapes can't hide the fact that L&G bought SSP 14 months before Morrisons bought Bowyers. Opinions are rife and the opinions of the many planning officers you know will tell you that is common for plans to be changed or tinkered with after planning consent is given - nothing devious about it as you would like people to believe.

As for stalling well if I remember correctly there were elements of the Innox plans that did not adhere to planning policy and Prorsus were given time to adjust those plans and make arrangements with Network Rail and the operator - these were the arrangements which Angus Horner had written a letter to the council saying he had reached an agreement and later turned out to be a lie. So it would seem these delays were caused by Prorsus rather than the council would it not? Or are you saying the council should have just ignored planning policies?

The Bowyers site is a fantastic development opportunity but it seems certain people really need to get their act together. I wouldn't be surprised if Morrisons get fed up with this whole scenario and pull the plug on the leisure aspect before it even gets to the planning inspectorate. After all - cinemas don't make money for landlords right?
Sour grapes can't hide the fact that L&G bought SSP 14 months before Morrisons bought Bowyers. Opinions are rife and the opinions of the many planning officers you know will tell you that is common for plans to be changed or tinkered with after planning consent is given - nothing devious about it as you would like people to believe. As for stalling well if I remember correctly there were elements of the Innox plans that did not adhere to planning policy and Prorsus were given time to adjust those plans and make arrangements with Network Rail and the operator - these were the arrangements which Angus Horner had written a letter to the council saying he had reached an agreement and later turned out to be a lie. So it would seem these delays were caused by Prorsus rather than the council would it not? Or are you saying the council should have just ignored planning policies? The Bowyers site is a fantastic development opportunity but it seems certain people really need to get their act together. I wouldn't be surprised if Morrisons get fed up with this whole scenario and pull the plug on the leisure aspect before it even gets to the planning inspectorate. After all - cinemas don't make money for landlords right? PCS_Wilts

5:22pm Sun 30 Sep 12

PCS_Wilts says...

Sour grapes can't hide the fact that L&G bought SSP 14 months before Morrisons bought Bowyers. Opinions are rife and the opinions of the many planning officers you know will tell you that is common for plans to be changed or tinkered with after planning consent is given - nothing devious about it as you would like people to believe.

As for stalling well if I remember correctly there were elements of the Innox plans that did not adhere to planning policy and Prorsus were given time to adjust those plans and make arrangements with Network Rail and the operator - these were the arrangements which Angus Horner had written a letter to the council saying he had reached an agreement and later turned out to be a lie. So it would seem these delays were caused by Prorsus rather than the council would it not? Or are you saying the council should have just ignored planning policies?

The Bowyers site is a fantastic development opportunity but it seems certain people really need to get their act together. I wouldn't be surprised if Morrisons get fed up with this whole scenario and pull the plug on the leisure aspect before it even gets to the planning inspectorate. After all - cinemas don't make money for landlords right?
Sour grapes can't hide the fact that L&G bought SSP 14 months before Morrisons bought Bowyers. Opinions are rife and the opinions of the many planning officers you know will tell you that is common for plans to be changed or tinkered with after planning consent is given - nothing devious about it as you would like people to believe. As for stalling well if I remember correctly there were elements of the Innox plans that did not adhere to planning policy and Prorsus were given time to adjust those plans and make arrangements with Network Rail and the operator - these were the arrangements which Angus Horner had written a letter to the council saying he had reached an agreement and later turned out to be a lie. So it would seem these delays were caused by Prorsus rather than the council would it not? Or are you saying the council should have just ignored planning policies? The Bowyers site is a fantastic development opportunity but it seems certain people really need to get their act together. I wouldn't be surprised if Morrisons get fed up with this whole scenario and pull the plug on the leisure aspect before it even gets to the planning inspectorate. After all - cinemas don't make money for landlords right? PCS_Wilts

6:44pm Sun 30 Sep 12

Tugger says...

What about opening a factory? maybe one that makes sausages or pork pies? maybe get live stock delivered and slaughter them onsite? Maybe have 400+ people working there? Or would that not be possible due to traffic restrictions.....
What about opening a factory? maybe one that makes sausages or pork pies? maybe get live stock delivered and slaughter them onsite? Maybe have 400+ people working there? Or would that not be possible due to traffic restrictions..... Tugger

7:08pm Sun 30 Sep 12

PCS_Wilts says...

Tugger wrote:
What about opening a factory? maybe one that makes sausages or pork pies? maybe get live stock delivered and slaughter them onsite? Maybe have 400+ people working there? Or would that not be possible due to traffic restrictions.....
A factory like Bowyers didn't have 200+ cars an hour going in and out between 10am and 6pm...

Not to mention Morrisons would like to have the bus stops and taxi ranks relocated to the bowyers site...
[quote][p][bold]Tugger[/bold] wrote: What about opening a factory? maybe one that makes sausages or pork pies? maybe get live stock delivered and slaughter them onsite? Maybe have 400+ people working there? Or would that not be possible due to traffic restrictions.....[/p][/quote]A factory like Bowyers didn't have 200+ cars an hour going in and out between 10am and 6pm... Not to mention Morrisons would like to have the bus stops and taxi ranks relocated to the bowyers site... PCS_Wilts

11:43am Mon 1 Oct 12

weasels ripped my flesh says...

PCS_Wilts said - "Not to mention Morrisons would like to have the bus stops and taxi ranks relocated to the bowyers site..."

Good idea!

Perhaps some of that site should be turned into a bus station of sorts. Maybe then we wont get all the buses piling up outside Castle Place two abreast with their engines running, blocking all the traffic and spewing out their diesel fumes.
PCS_Wilts said - "Not to mention Morrisons would like to have the bus stops and taxi ranks relocated to the bowyers site..." Good idea! Perhaps some of that site should be turned into a bus station of sorts. Maybe then we wont get all the buses piling up outside Castle Place two abreast with their engines running, blocking all the traffic and spewing out their diesel fumes. weasels ripped my flesh

12:20pm Mon 1 Oct 12

AMVanquish007 says...

So what if L and G bought SSP 14 months before??
It wasnt ready when Prorsus submitted their plans.Discussion is not the same as submission.
Your timelines are completely outaskew.
Morrisons arent going to pull either as you are making an assumption about.
They have plans for many stores in the south and west of England -so i doubt that its even a consideration to pull out.
As for the viability of a cinema on IR -an 8 plex cinema of 1442 seats over a 7 year plus payback scheme will be ok unlike the cinema on SSP.
Who knows ? to get the cinema operator to come on that site were incentives offered to do that, like a reduced rent or peppercorn lease for some years. If not then we will soon know if they are having to stand on their own feet by evening ticket prices regionally above the average. Then again Odeon have never been cheap and have always premium priced their seats everywhere. It will be interesting to see what part their Trowbridge site plays in having to recover the costs of 2 continuous years of loss.
In your response to Tugger-i find 200 cars per hour a lot better at IR than the 300 cars that might be coming and leaving at SSP on a fixed point of 1pm and 4pm on a holiday date between 8am and 6pm and when 4 or 5 screens may have popular sellout films. A 7 plex of 1228seats? I know that such a size can get anything up to 20000+ admissions a week and 15000 of those can be before 6pm. Divide 15000 by 7 days and thats 2200 people descending on 2 walk-ins as we used to call them i.e the 1pm and 4pm shows.
I used to run 8 x 7 plexes of compatible size so i know what im talking about here.
And if those people cannot find a space between 8am and 6pm its no good assuming Tescos will take the overspill they will start imposing ANPR cameras with a 2hr limit and £60 fines-NOT GOOD!!
Cinemagoers in cars tend to be fastidious and like to be very close to the cinema especially when its families with young kids--they dont want to lug them for half a mile or pay for the privilege of a £3 car ticket when its not even close. What with popcorn and coke and Odeons pricing policy a family of four may end up having to pay up to £40. For round here thats just not on.
Hence the reason why Cineworld has and always will be a much better bet with its £14.99 see as many films in a month pass(and a family of four pass too)-ample car parking on the IR site and close proximity to the railway station.
I can see sense PCS if you cant!
So what if L and G bought SSP 14 months before?? It wasnt ready when Prorsus submitted their plans.Discussion is not the same as submission. Your timelines are completely outaskew. Morrisons arent going to pull either as you are making an assumption about. They have plans for many stores in the south and west of England -so i doubt that its even a consideration to pull out. As for the viability of a cinema on IR -an 8 plex cinema of 1442 seats over a 7 year plus payback scheme will be ok unlike the cinema on SSP. Who knows ? to get the cinema operator to come on that site were incentives offered to do that, like a reduced rent or peppercorn lease for some years. If not then we will soon know if they are having to stand on their own feet by evening ticket prices regionally above the average. Then again Odeon have never been cheap and have always premium priced their seats everywhere. It will be interesting to see what part their Trowbridge site plays in having to recover the costs of 2 continuous years of loss. In your response to Tugger-i find 200 cars per hour a lot better at IR than the 300 cars that might be coming and leaving at SSP on a fixed point of 1pm and 4pm on a holiday date between 8am and 6pm and when 4 or 5 screens may have popular sellout films. A 7 plex of 1228seats? I know that such a size can get anything up to 20000+ admissions a week and 15000 of those can be before 6pm. Divide 15000 by 7 days and thats 2200 people descending on 2 walk-ins as we used to call them i.e the 1pm and 4pm shows. I used to run 8 x 7 plexes of compatible size so i know what im talking about here. And if those people cannot find a space between 8am and 6pm its no good assuming Tescos will take the overspill they will start imposing ANPR cameras with a 2hr limit and £60 fines-NOT GOOD!! Cinemagoers in cars tend to be fastidious and like to be very close to the cinema especially when its families with young kids--they dont want to lug them for half a mile or pay for the privilege of a £3 car ticket when its not even close. What with popcorn and coke and Odeons pricing policy a family of four may end up having to pay up to £40. For round here thats just not on. Hence the reason why Cineworld has and always will be a much better bet with its £14.99 see as many films in a month pass(and a family of four pass too)-ample car parking on the IR site and close proximity to the railway station. I can see sense PCS if you cant! AMVanquish007

7:04pm Mon 1 Oct 12

Cereal Killer says...

How about a Polish cash and carry outlet to compliment the deli in the town???

Now that's an idea I am sure the council would bow down to!!
How about a Polish cash and carry outlet to compliment the deli in the town??? Now that's an idea I am sure the council would bow down to!! Cereal Killer

9:09pm Mon 1 Oct 12

PCS_Wilts says...

I din't say Morrisons would pull out - I said they would drop the leisure aspect while they get their store built - my point is that I don't think you will ever get planning for the leisure side as it stands.

My timelines are not askew - what I have stated was also published by property international. After Prorsus kept feeding them false press statements. I still have copies if you would like to pop into the shop and grab one.

The rest is yet again a load of old tosh - let me ask you one question? Why are You still not running all those multi plexes? why are you freelance (as you put it) are you out of touch to the point the industry doesn't want to employ you full time? I don't know dude you tell me.

Go out and ask the people in the catchment area these 2 questions.

1: would you like a cinema in Trowbridge?

2: If so would you actually care about the technical details of the building, screens or seating sizes and audio system - If the answer is no - I rest my case.

If you get a yes then cinema geek your heart out.

As for seeing sense well that's a matter of opinion - we shall see how the people of Trowbridge vote when the Odeon opens won't we, because the only sense is whether or not people choose to use it isn't it.
I din't say Morrisons would pull out - I said they would drop the leisure aspect while they get their store built - my point is that I don't think you will ever get planning for the leisure side as it stands. My timelines are not askew - what I have stated was also published by property international. After Prorsus kept feeding them false press statements. I still have copies if you would like to pop into the shop and grab one. The rest is yet again a load of old tosh - let me ask you one question? Why are You still not running all those multi plexes? why are you freelance (as you put it) are you out of touch to the point the industry doesn't want to employ you full time? I don't know dude you tell me. Go out and ask the people in the catchment area these 2 questions. 1: would you like a cinema in Trowbridge? 2: If so would you actually care about the technical details of the building, screens or seating sizes and audio system - If the answer is no - I rest my case. If you get a yes then cinema geek your heart out. As for seeing sense well that's a matter of opinion - we shall see how the people of Trowbridge vote when the Odeon opens won't we, because the only sense is whether or not people choose to use it isn't it. PCS_Wilts

4:09am Tue 2 Oct 12

AMVanquish007 says...

PCS-How I chose to run my life is nothing to do with you-. Lets just say I know whats going on in cinema in London and sometimes know what happens even before the press get hold of it.
The wealth of knowledge and contacts one builds up after 20 years in cinema-in my case multiplexes-allows one to make judgements that are pretty damned well near to form.
Having had the experience of Cinema management and consequently head office experience, you know why things work and why they dont because you have the ability to dissect the information you were privy to coming from a mix of management, film buying, marketing and advertising, construction ,budgeting, personnel and technical departments in terms of exhibition and a major insight into how film distribution works.
That experience never leaves you and is why I am so passionate about the right cinema and in the right place for this area.
As for your 2 questions- neither you or SSP can commandeer the first one as IR also has a cinema in the designs.Ask anybody -yes they want a cinema in Trowbridge-its not even worth asking because you already know the answer.But we now come to the crux of the matter. Location.
Most people with a brain will know the difficulties of parking in the multi storey even without a cinema.If Odeon opens their cinema on the October holiday date-the big worry for them will be any adverse press. All it needs is for several families to miss the film because they cannot park or are stuck in traffic and were regulars at Longwell Green-just one bad piece of press and they just will not come back.
I can tell you that I have had to write many letters as a cinema manager and from a head office stance apologizing to cinema patrons and not only on the phone but also on the front line too.(this was when multiplexes were new and were finding their feet) It iwasnt nice and so any ways of resolving problems you build into new multiplexes.
As for your second question-it may surprise you to know that many,many people who came to the cinema always tended to ask prior on the phone or at the box office-'what is in your biggest screen(s)' if they hadnt made up their minds.
Thankfully 95% of the time I chose to put the films in the right size of screen but you would be amazed how switched on the public is to wanting to see a film in a big screen.And they are the first to complain if the film is a sellout and you had to put it into the 5th size of screen to cater for 3 or 4 new releases with huge advertising spends
Its one of the reasons why at the outset Warner Village(Vue) decided to build huge screens because they know people want the 'total experience'.
Cineworlds designs are excellent and for Trowbridge they have come up with the largest 8 plex offered to any market town anywhere in Gt Britain.
I await the screen sizes from Odeon-but they obviously must have got the feedback from the Castle Place display and my contesting L and G's proposed 8plex 800seater idea so much so that they had to go back to the drawing board to build a 7 plex with larger screen sizes but on a very restricted height and footprint.
Its going to be interesting to see whether all 7 screens are going to be full stadium too. Sightlines are very important when you build any new multiplex.
The figures in my previous post are correct and as such should not be dismissed either.
You may not like it but to an operator such figures are very, very important and if I can also educate the public at the same time who have a very limited idea of how cinemas work then i am happy to be the conduit.
I am astounded by the fact that you seem to dismiss any figures as irrelevant. If you were to start asking pertinent questions about why something didnt work regarding a new cinema -I could probably see the problem coming a mile off prior to it opening.
But then again you hold such experience in disdain.
Yes I might be a film geek of significant experience but people will be thanking me for getting it right and not getting it wrong. Its a bitter pill to swallow otherwise.
PCS-How I chose to run my life is nothing to do with you-. Lets just say I know whats going on in cinema in London and sometimes know what happens even before the press get hold of it. The wealth of knowledge and contacts one builds up after 20 years in cinema-in my case multiplexes-allows one to make judgements that are pretty damned well near to form. Having had the experience of Cinema management and consequently head office experience, you know why things work and why they dont because you have the ability to dissect the information you were privy to coming from a mix of management, film buying, marketing and advertising, construction ,budgeting, personnel and technical departments in terms of exhibition and a major insight into how film distribution works. That experience never leaves you and is why I am so passionate about the right cinema and in the right place for this area. As for your 2 questions- neither you or SSP can commandeer the first one as IR also has a cinema in the designs.Ask anybody -yes they want a cinema in Trowbridge-its not even worth asking because you already know the answer.But we now come to the crux of the matter. Location. Most people with a brain will know the difficulties of parking in the multi storey even without a cinema.If Odeon opens their cinema on the October holiday date-the big worry for them will be any adverse press. All it needs is for several families to miss the film because they cannot park or are stuck in traffic and were regulars at Longwell Green-just one bad piece of press and they just will not come back. I can tell you that I have had to write many letters as a cinema manager and from a head office stance apologizing to cinema patrons and not only on the phone but also on the front line too.(this was when multiplexes were new and were finding their feet) It iwasnt nice and so any ways of resolving problems you build into new multiplexes. As for your second question-it may surprise you to know that many,many people who came to the cinema always tended to ask prior on the phone or at the box office-'what is in your biggest screen(s)' if they hadnt made up their minds. Thankfully 95% of the time I chose to put the films in the right size of screen but you would be amazed how switched on the public is to wanting to see a film in a big screen.And they are the first to complain if the film is a sellout and you had to put it into the 5th size of screen to cater for 3 or 4 new releases with huge advertising spends Its one of the reasons why at the outset Warner Village(Vue) decided to build huge screens because they know people want the 'total experience'. Cineworlds designs are excellent and for Trowbridge they have come up with the largest 8 plex offered to any market town anywhere in Gt Britain. I await the screen sizes from Odeon-but they obviously must have got the feedback from the Castle Place display and my contesting L and G's proposed 8plex 800seater idea so much so that they had to go back to the drawing board to build a 7 plex with larger screen sizes but on a very restricted height and footprint. Its going to be interesting to see whether all 7 screens are going to be full stadium too. Sightlines are very important when you build any new multiplex. The figures in my previous post are correct and as such should not be dismissed either. You may not like it but to an operator such figures are very, very important and if I can also educate the public at the same time who have a very limited idea of how cinemas work then i am happy to be the conduit. I am astounded by the fact that you seem to dismiss any figures as irrelevant. If you were to start asking pertinent questions about why something didnt work regarding a new cinema -I could probably see the problem coming a mile off prior to it opening. But then again you hold such experience in disdain. Yes I might be a film geek of significant experience but people will be thanking me for getting it right and not getting it wrong. Its a bitter pill to swallow otherwise. AMVanquish007

7:37am Tue 2 Oct 12

Mrs Donnyfly says...

Have the cows come home yet?
Have the cows come home yet? Mrs Donnyfly

8:25am Tue 2 Oct 12

GP & JK GOT IT WRONG says...

Film industry wannabee or what ?????????. How the hell has it survived without him Give it a rest Mike .
Film industry wannabee or what ?????????. How the hell has it survived without him Give it a rest Mike . GP & JK GOT IT WRONG

11:16am Tue 2 Oct 12

AMVanquish007 says...

GP & JP-I'll treat your response with the utter contempt it deserves.You know absolutely nothing.
GP & JP-I'll treat your response with the utter contempt it deserves.You know absolutely nothing. AMVanquish007

6:05pm Tue 2 Oct 12

GP & JK GOT IT WRONG says...

What i do know is your still a WANNABEE.How many of your own trumpets have you still left to blow MIKE ??
What i do know is your still a WANNABEE.How many of your own trumpets have you still left to blow MIKE ?? GP & JK GOT IT WRONG

8:28pm Tue 2 Oct 12

PCS_Wilts says...

Facts are facts - Odeon is being built as we speak. All anyone in this town wants is A cinema - the ins and out don't really play party to that thought. Everyone I have spoken to regards Odeon are very happy with the idea and in turn don't feel the town needs two cinemas. Instead they agree in the majority that the Bowyers site could provide the town with something else that would compliment the rest of the towns facilities.

We know we're going to get a new Morrisons store and hopefully that will come with a petrol station. But we really do not need another clump of restaurants and another cinema. We could however enjoy having some other leisure facility of which there are many to choose from. I've said it before and hopefully in the new year it will happen - the Wiltshire Times should publish a wish list for people to have their say on what they would like to see on the Bowyers site taking into consideration what IS BEING BUILT AT SSP.

I hate to say it Mike because I understand how passionate you are about bringing Cineworld to the town - but it just aint gonna happen. If you don't see that now then you will by the time February comes around if not sooner.
Facts are facts - Odeon is being built as we speak. All anyone in this town wants is A cinema - the ins and out don't really play party to that thought. Everyone I have spoken to regards Odeon are very happy with the idea and in turn don't feel the town needs two cinemas. Instead they agree in the majority that the Bowyers site could provide the town with something else that would compliment the rest of the towns facilities. We know we're going to get a new Morrisons store and hopefully that will come with a petrol station. But we really do not need another clump of restaurants and another cinema. We could however enjoy having some other leisure facility of which there are many to choose from. I've said it before and hopefully in the new year it will happen - the Wiltshire Times should publish a wish list for people to have their say on what they would like to see on the Bowyers site taking into consideration what IS BEING BUILT AT SSP. I hate to say it Mike because I understand how passionate you are about bringing Cineworld to the town - but it just aint gonna happen. If you don't see that now then you will by the time February comes around if not sooner. PCS_Wilts

9:21pm Tue 2 Oct 12

GP & JK GOT IT WRONG says...

I Think i can see the cows on their way home !!!!1
I Think i can see the cows on their way home !!!!1 GP & JK GOT IT WRONG

4:02am Fri 5 Oct 12

AMVanquish007 says...

Doesnt matter whether an Odeon is being built or not!!!-Cineworld have said they will build and thats whats going in front of the planning inspectorate. I was in recent contact with them -and they reiterated that fact .
As for GP and JK and your Wannabee response-its pretty lame. Its a case of 'been there done that' in terms of my career.
Your clutching at straws if you think people should have the chance to vote what goes on the Bowyers site. Its not for you to determine nor anybody else whilst its in the hands of the planning inspector.
Finally, there are hundreds of marches that go on objecting to developments-but in Trowbridge's case, for a march to go in support of a development is rare indeed.
The site will be sorted out as it should have been and must--'on merit'.
It is not in the remit of the council to object to another cinema operator who clearly wishes to come here in what is quite clearly now an Odeon monopoly.The councils statement in last weeks WT is clearly anti-competitive and will be pounced on.
Your statements I'm afraid PCS will just continue to fall on deaf ears.
Doesnt matter whether an Odeon is being built or not!!!-Cineworld have said they will build and thats whats going in front of the planning inspectorate. I was in recent contact with them -and they reiterated that fact . As for GP and JK and your Wannabee response-its pretty lame. Its a case of 'been there done that' in terms of my career. Your clutching at straws if you think people should have the chance to vote what goes on the Bowyers site. Its not for you to determine nor anybody else whilst its in the hands of the planning inspector. Finally, there are hundreds of marches that go on objecting to developments-but in Trowbridge's case, for a march to go in support of a development is rare indeed. The site will be sorted out as it should have been and must--'on merit'. It is not in the remit of the council to object to another cinema operator who clearly wishes to come here in what is quite clearly now an Odeon monopoly.The councils statement in last weeks WT is clearly anti-competitive and will be pounced on. Your statements I'm afraid PCS will just continue to fall on deaf ears. AMVanquish007

7:51am Fri 5 Oct 12

PCS_Wilts says...

Deaf ears - that's exactly the problem...
Deaf ears - that's exactly the problem... PCS_Wilts

9:01pm Sat 6 Oct 12

GP & JK GOT IT WRONG says...

Been there done that , not wanted anymore , out of touch WANNABEE .
Been there done that , not wanted anymore , out of touch WANNABEE . GP & JK GOT IT WRONG

9:52am Mon 8 Oct 12

AMVanquish007 says...

How very little you know GP/JK-I am actually in demand for my experience and skills in London. Must be difficult for you trying to find something constructive to say.
How very little you know GP/JK-I am actually in demand for my experience and skills in London. Must be difficult for you trying to find something constructive to say. AMVanquish007

9:30pm Tue 9 Oct 12

GP & JK GOT IT WRONG says...

Dream on Mike.
Dream on Mike. GP & JK GOT IT WRONG

2:08pm Wed 10 Oct 12

PeterZahut says...

When does the Cinema open?
When does the Cinema open? PeterZahut

5:26pm Wed 10 Oct 12

PCS_Wilts says...

Cinema opens October 2013.

Did anyone else see William Hague stating that the country needed "sustainable" jobs on the news this morning?
Cinema opens October 2013. Did anyone else see William Hague stating that the country needed "sustainable" jobs on the news this morning? PCS_Wilts

5:48pm Wed 10 Oct 12

GP & JK GOT IT WRONG says...

Odeon opens in just over 12 months .You might just see a peterzahut /pizzahut on the site along with the other 6 restaurants opening at the same time . Not long to wait now !!!!!!
Odeon opens in just over 12 months .You might just see a peterzahut /pizzahut on the site along with the other 6 restaurants opening at the same time . Not long to wait now !!!!!! GP & JK GOT IT WRONG

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