Tesco reveals plans for Metro store in Ashtead
TESCO has unveiled plans for a smaller store in Ashtead than originally intended, following concerted action by campaigners.
On Tuesday, the supermarket giant announced fresh proposals for a store on empty land it owns at 53 to 57, The Street.
-
Picture by Kenn Jordan
Campaigners opposed two previous plans on the site but Tesco won planning permission for a 750 square metre store following a public inquiry last August.
However, permission was granted on condition that 74 long-term parking spaces at Ashtead Peace Memorial Hall (APMH) were relocated by Mole Valley District Council to allow 181 short-stay parking spaces at the store.
After lobbying by Ashtead Residents' Association and campaign group Save Our Village Environment (SAVE), the council said it would not move spaces without a mandate from residents.
With that public support not forthcoming, Tesco has revealed new plans for a smaller "Metro" store, which has been welcomed by locals spoken to by the Advertiser.
Jim Malynn, acting chairman of the residents' association, said: "From what I have heard so far this is a very good outcome, with the proviso that we have yet to see the proposals and plans as drawn or the submission going to the council."
The new store will be just under ten per cent smaller than previous plans, but with no rear entrance, no trolleys at the store front and no changes to the APMH car park required.
Mr Malynn added: "From my perspective I welcome some activity on this as it will do away with a dead hole in the village which is not good for the high street."
SAVE spokeswoman Gillian Russell said: "This third application is a vast improvement on the previous two in that Tesco has listened to some of our concerns.
"Given that a store has to be built, we are extremely pleased that the APMH car park would be left as it is under the control of Mole Valley District Council; that there is no back entrance which would have drawn shoppers away from the high street; and there are no noisy trolleys outside the store.
"We are however extremely disappointed that Tesco has only reduced the site size by less than 10 per cent, so it would still be almost three times the size of the Tesco in Craddocks Parade."
Tesco has said the new plans will include nine flats above the store and create 50 to 65 jobs.
Corporate affairs manager Simon Petar said: "We believe our Metro will offer the local community additional choice and value. We have now informed Ashtead's councillors of our outline proposals. We are very much looking forward to consulting with the wider local community as our proposal progresses."
Comments
by mrslm
Monday, January 02 2012, 4:38PM
“As a resident of Ashtead, I find the comments from Mr Malynn of the Ashtead Residents' Association (ARA) somewhat puzzling as they seem to be completely at odds with the publicly expressed views of the residents of Ashtead. The ARA's own survey (in the form of a questionnaire) of Ashtead residents in late 2010 showed that 78% hold the view that any new store on the site "should be restricted to a convenience store ie one intended to meet 'top-up' needs". In the context of the ongoing debate on the Tesco proposals over the previous three years, there would have been no doubt in the minds of residents who completed the questionnaire (and the ARA who prepared it) that the reference to "a convenience store" was intended to mean a store similar in size to the Tesco store in Craddocks Parade. Residents of Ashtead clearly did not, and do not, support a store nearly three times that size as is apparently now being proposed. Just how such a large store could be considered a "very good outcome" by the ARA in complete contradiction of the clearly expressed views of the Ashtead residents it represents will no doubt cause a great deal of concern in Ashtead.
Just because the store has "no trolleys" does not make it a convenience store. In any event, what is to stop Tesco from introducing trolleys at some future point?
Perhaps Mr Malynn, who is new to his role in the ARA, is unfamiliar with the results of the ARA survey and the history and context in which it was prepared and circulated to Ashtead residents. If this is the case, I hope Mr Malynn will familiarise himself with the position as, after all, what is the point in the ARA going to the trouble of obtaining the views of the residents it represents only to then ignore those views?”