Wednesday, 5 June 2013

Sainsbury's submits 26% bigger Dorridge plan

SAINSBURY’S has submitted plans for 26 per cent bigger sales area than one approved for Dorridge in 2011.

                    130605 - Sainsbury's Dorridge (1)

The firm said it has put in plans to Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council to “amend elements” of its Forest Court scheme.
Click the headline or link below to read the rest of this story.


A 1,812sqm sales area plan was approved in November 2011 but Sainsbury’s said in February work would not start “in the year ahead” because of worsening economic conditions.

But it announced in April it would put in a bigger plan and work would start within six months if it is approved.

The new store would have a sales area of 2,276sqm. A 2,462sqm sales area plan was thrown out by the council in 2010 as too large.

That plan had 36 per cent bigger sales area than the one approved in 2011. The independent retail units will be cut from six to five.

In a statement Sainsbury’s said: “The changes within the application relate only to the internal layout and configuration of the building.

“The building footprint, the shop units and look of the building will not change from the scheme that has a planning consent.

“Sainsbury’s is seeking permission from the Council to increase the sales area to a maximum of 24,500 sq ft by reconfiguring the back of house areas of the proposed store.

“The increase would enable the inclusion of non-food goods that are not currently available in Dorridge. The car park has also been reconfigured to incorporate five additional spaces.”

And a unit in the development for Dyhouse Pharmacy has been changed in the plans.

Sainsbury’s said “the internal size and shape of their unit has been redrawn to give them the shop environment they require”.

It added: “Sainsbury’s also now intends to run the first floor café area. All of the other units will remain available to the open market.”

Regional development manager Ben Littman said: “Subject to planning being approved on these changes, we would aim to start work with a view to opening the store by Christmas 2014.”



What do you think? Leave your comments below. No registration required. Posts must abide by the terms and conditions. Report comments at news@thesilhillian.co.uk.
Click here to get stories by email.

101 comments:

  1. Good news, the sooner it's approved and built the better!

    ReplyDelete
  2. As above, the sooner its open the better, bring Dorridge into the 21st century.

    There are lots of great things going for Dorridge which is why it is an affluent area, lets give it a good reason to shop locally and leave the car on the drive.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Excellent news. This will transform the scruffy village centre into somewhere useful. I just hope they get on with it and get it completed as soon as possible.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. as all the above - good news. Lets get on with it!

      Delete
  4. We, our elected representatives and other community leaders should be outraged by these blatent attempts by this corporate giant to manipulate our democratic local planning system. This proposal would, in effect, overturn a planning decision which responded to a very reasonable concern that a store of the size proposed was simply inappropriate for Dorridge. Many of us feel that the loss of quiet Sundays, the substantial increase in traffic, noise and congestion in and around Dorridge is a high price to pay for a marginally more convenient Sainsburys, especially given the increasing ease of internet shopping. I have yet to see convincing evidence that the traffic management scheme and the parking provision will be adequate for the even the currently approved size of store. It is simply misleading to suggest that a 25% increase in floor space will not increase pressure on parking in particular. If shoppers' dwell time increases by say, 25%, that would translate directly to a 25% increase in parking time. I, for one, would be extremely disappointed if the Council were to rubber-stamp this proposal. Surely the correct response of the Council would be to defer any decision on increasing the store size until Sainsburys and the Highways Department can demonstrate convincingly, as claimed, that the approved store can operate with minimal environmental degradation and that the proposed 'traffic plan' (re-engineering Dorridge to suit Sainsburys) does, indeed, work.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I agree 100% with Chris.
    I think this is perhaps how big business aways get it't way. Sainsburys knew that this was how to get a store the size they always wanted, they are also doing the same with the petrol station delivery times. Solihull Planning must not let them win and Dorridge must arrange to take as many people to the planning meeting as they can.
    There plan I think was always to make Dorridge look a mess then when we complained, get their own way!!!!!!!! DON'T LET THEM WIN.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Am for the store - sooner the better. However, not impressed with Sainsbury's tactics overall and understand people feeling frustrated. Really the real problem is that the area is becoming busier and busier because of increase in housing and people on the road. Facilities like this are appropriate - an empty run down precinct which will never be able to fill it's units is not.
    There are just more people to accommodate and that's all there is to it. delaying things further would just be counter-productive - especially as it is internal rearrangement of space - anyone can apply to do this with a commercial property and get it passed. Let's get on with it.

    ReplyDelete
  7. What's all the fuss about

    “The building footprint, the shop units and look of the building will not change from the scheme that has a planning consent."

    Just approve it and build it ASAP......

    ReplyDelete
  8. I think this is good news and am really looking forward to the opening.

    I know people have concerns about it being busy - but a few years a ago it was - VERY! And as for concerns about the lorries - remember Evesons Coal?! I just think we have got used to living in a ghost town.

    Its a shame Sainsburys are scratching around to make every last £ they can from the site, and they've not handled it very well at all; The extra space will be mostly Clothes I understand I can't see too much of a problem. Its internal space - what do you expect?

    Lets all get behind this, shop locally and on foot if we can, and lets get on with it!

    ReplyDelete
  9. The fuss is about two things. Chris Baker neatly summarises the first, the problem of the sheer size of this + a lack of parking above.

    The other is that Sainsbury's have been so cynical in the way they've operated to achieve a store this big. Can we trust them to do the right thing by for the people living here, to be a hub of the community in future? Can we heck.

    By my reckoning, this development would be only around 7% smaller than the one the originally applied for - the one that was vociferously opposed and refused by Solihull MBC in March 2011. And they want to sell non-food items. And run the petrol station. And run the cafe.

    "Internal rearragement of space" - whoever coined that phrase must be laughing their heads off.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Matthew - so what? so its bigger.... and?.... Even the first plan wasn't as vociferously opposed as you might like to think.

      More like a few middle aged men, some of whom were - are - so unpleasant, bullying, and unreasonable that they drove support into the shadows.

      Dorridge will indeed be Orange. Had it been Waitrose it would be green, Tesco's and blue/red....you get the picture; Sainsbury's ARE rearranging the internal space. Its a shame they have done it this way, another PR gaff, but there you go.

      For what its worth I WILL walk to Sainsburys when its built, and will also pop in a couple of times a week when I get off the train from London.

      Delete
    2. For the record Anonymous the DROVS committee was made up of a good mix of men and women - there were several parents of school-age children and a good number of over 70s. A poll at the two Dorridge schools showed the parents were hugely against a store the size applied for. That the opposition came from 'middle-aged men is a myth.

      Delete
  10. Oh, PS - people saying "let's shop locally and leave the car on the drive", clearly don't live round here. I rarely see anyone walking their kids to school or strolling back from Tesco with their groceries. The people of Dorridge love their cars. Fair enough, each to their own, but get real 08:54 - I bet you work for Gough Bailey Wrong!

    ReplyDelete
  11. OMG

    Sainsbury think they have us over a barrel.
    If they operate the café and push the chemist out into a retail unit just think how much more of the total space has the floor painted orange.

    When permission was granted the petrol station was not under their ownership.

    Dorridge will become an Orangeopoly

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 13:11.... I think the pharmacy has been given the unit they asked for actually. Shame about the café though.

      Delete
  12. As I recall Sainsbury told us all that the car parking requirement was a direct relationship with the sales floor area.....does that mean that we can expect a second storey of car parking to accommodate the extra customers that a 25% increase will attract?

    If not what are patients trying to visit the doctors meant to do , travel by taxi?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Look back at the questions that were asked about the back store and staff space in the approved application. Sainsbury cynically told us that was normal and not a ploy to add extra retail floor space at a later date.

    Where is the voice of DDRA in this fiasco?

    Where are you Mr Spencer you told us this was a minor reconfiguration?

    I don't regard 26% as minor.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Dorridge is not a ghost town.
    Evesons did not bring 9 massive lorries through the village creating 18 thunderous journeys a day.
    The amount of traffic circulating round Dorridge has not reduced since the demise of Forest Court, it has increased, the number of buses circulating has increased, most of which are empty.
    The people of Dorridge are not fans of public transport.
    the people of Dorridge do not walk to get their shopping, many do not walk their children to school.
    Dorridge is a village which will become a supermarket destination known for gridlock, fumes and traffic chaos.
    Do Dorridge people really want to buy their clothes at a supermarket?
    Where will patients park, how will they deal with the massive increase in traffic.
    Would you like to hold your wedding at a hotel next to a heaving supermarket?
    How will the station cafe fare when Sainsburys cafe sells better and cheaper?
    when will the people of Dorridge wake up and smell the own brand coffee?
    when will DDRA get off their backsides and do what is right for all of Dorridge - face this one down to no more than the original sized store that was passed by Solihull in December 2011.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 14:03
      My understanding is that the Forest are in favour of the development - its quite difficult for them to sell weddings next to an abandoned site.
      Station Café Bar has a different clientele and opened knowing Sainsburys were coming and that there would be a coffee shop. They too are, on balance, are in favour of the development.
      Evesons lorries were forever trundling lorry's carrying filthy black stuff in and out of Dorridge.
      There are going to be 4 of the massive lorries a day - not 9 - and at least they will go into bays and not park on double yellow lines at the foot of a junction like Tesco's do several times a day.

      Its certainly not perfect, but its not half as bad as you are making out either.

      In truth its a ruddy great big site in the middle of a village and any development will bring huge challenges.

      Delete
    2. That "ruddy great big site" belongs to Sainsbury and they have chosen to make it an eyesore.

      We should not allow this corporate giant to blackmail us into accepting these changes.

      If they need more sale area to make the development viable that must equate to more customers or the same number of customers staying longer and buying more. Either way the result has to be increased pressure on the car park. The same car park which will provide the only option for sick people trying to visit a GP.

      Delete
  15. Well said 14.03

    ReplyDelete
  16. At what point do they apply for 24 hours opening?
    thank you Linda you've really helped to put Dorridge on the map

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This was to be expected, i sometimes wonder if the anti brigade live in the real world of commerce. Its cut throat in retailing at the moment. We knew this would happen, yet none of the antis has come up with a viable alternative. Perhaps the way to quiten everyone is for the council to turn it down. Sainsburys sells the lease to a property developer and they will build three ofour storie flats. I wonder what I would prefer?

      Delete
    2. I live in Knowle and have a business in Dorridge, as I see it the anti brigade have objected to everything, the marina, waitrose, sainsbury and just about everything else they can. I think they are club for old out dated, small minded men that do not like evolution, they have cost us jobs and income into the area on many ocassions and they continue to do so. The council should get wise to their petty objections and ignore them

      Delete
  17. Can anyone remind me what Linda sells. I want to start a petition requesting Sainsbury to added it to their list of goods stocked.

    ReplyDelete
  18. How about free flu jabs ......let's hit the doctors where it hurts.

    They have no respect for the patients or their surgery wouldn't be so neglected.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Orangeoploy. lol

    I wonder if Mr Spencer will paint his front door tangerine to show support for his best friend Justin King.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Flats please

    ReplyDelete
  21. Given how much the land cost, to make it pay you'd probably need flats 6-8 storeys high.....nice. anyway its not going to happen. I agree with 11:44 above. lets get on with it pleases

    ReplyDelete
  22. Those that keep on about how wonderful it will be yhat we can leave our cars on the drive and walk to the proposed Sainsburys in Dorridge should look properly at www.sainsburysdorridge.co.uk.
    Sainsburys themselves expect the catchment area to include Knowle, Hockley Heath, Lapworth perhaps as far out as Henley in Arden. Those customers,most certainly, will not be walking!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 20:54 I think that's a good thing, they come here for the train anyway. I live in Dorridge and will continue to walk to the station and will now walk to the supermarket too. I'm happy and am glad the store is bigger so I can get more of what I need. The sooner it is built the better.

      Delete
  23. Does the 26% increase include the café area now to be run by Sainsbury or is their hold over Dorridge to be increased by 26% + the café?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The increase is for the supermarket only

      Delete
    2. Thank you Silhillian.

      That means that the additional "orange" floor area is actually much more than 26% of the retail space.

      Delete
  24. The there is only one route to the proposed supermarket car park that doesn't involve crossing a "raised area". AVENUE ROAD

    You know how much motorist hate speed humps.

    Drivers will opt for the "smooth" arrival and departure and use Avenue Road ......footpath only on one side and trees jutting into the carriageway......great.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Mr Spencer...are you there?

    Why are we waiting?

    Let us all hear what you think?

    What to you intend doing?

    Why are you still chairman of DDRA?

    Actually why is there still a DDRA?

    Destroy
    Dorridge
    Rapidly
    Association

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 21:25 if you don't like it, then stand to be on the committee yourself, or better still the Chairperson. Too scared? thought so.....

      Delete
    2. Why would anyone want to be associated with such a discredited organisation as the DDRA.

      Delete
  26. I think that the Drs will be the losers in all this as when most of their patients who at the moment have to either stand outside the surgery from 7-30am or start ringing from 8am not able to leave the phone until they get throught, often about 1 hour then all the appointments have gone, so then make an appointment about 3 to 4 weeks on. Find that after all this effort they can't park, so will go in droves to either Knowle of Downing Close surgeries. They will have to because they will never get to see their GP. Have the Drs. thought about this at all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  27. Sadly you are correct 00.05.
    Sad not for the Doctors who should know better, but sad for their patients who will never be able to park anywhere near the surgery.

    ReplyDelete
  28. 21.25: Where were you at the AGM? Why didn't you put yourself forward for the committee?

    Don't forget that as well as Eveson's we used to have car transporters going to the Poplar Road site. In "the old days" people used to come from far and wide for the independent shops in Dorridge and it was difficult to get into the car park.

    We can't turn the clock back; many other communities are suffering because of increased rents and resultant closure of small businesses. Dorridge's demise had started long before Sainsury's stepped in and certainly wasn't helped by the reluctance of locals to use the few shops remaining, in no small measure due to grumpy staff.

    No flats, PLEASE. Sainsburys's, just be open with us, please, and you may regain support.

    ReplyDelete
  29. There's no point expecting DDRA to do anything. I emailed them to question their 'just a few small internal changes' stance and was told I had a warped view of the world and that I should desist from contacting them! Charming!

    Why is it that when someone wants to turn a bungalow into new houses, they're all over it like a rash but this mammoth development gets their unequivocal support? Anyone think it's fishier than Sainsbury's fish counter?





    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 08;51 ..... maybe you are one sandwich short of a picnic??

      Delete
  30. 17.43 Quite correct, in that some people from Knowle and Hockley Heath no doubt come to Dorridge to commute by train. Lapworth has its own station but not direct to London. However it is not just commuters that will be using Sainsburys Dorridge.

    ReplyDelete
  31. A quote from Ian Spencer of DDRA

    “We suspect that the relatively small change is not going to have a significant impact.”

    26% is not a small change.

    If the extra floor space wasn't going to attract more customers or encourage those already at the store to browse for longer why would Sainsbury need to re-configure (what a weasel word) the lay-out.

    How fortunate that the approved scheme had all that back-store/staff area just waiting to be incorporated into the sales area......and pigs can fly.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Silhillian can you publish the planning number so that people can post their objections to the council? I don't suppose sainsburys or smbc will put up notices for an amendment.
    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  33. Surely the councils response should be build to the agreed design and size and if there are no problems with traffic parking noise etc we'll consider letting you increase the size.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Anonymous 9-6-2013 - Planning Application number is 2013/934

    ReplyDelete
  35. The change is not a problem. Look at the size of co-op bentley heath now - and no additional parking there - haven't seen gridlock down there yet! Will be great to see it up and running and all this catastrophe theory stuff can be shelved.

    ReplyDelete
  36. You haven't seen gridlock in Bentley Heath? When do you go 6am it's crazy most of the time and particularly Friday and Saturday. At least a lot of those shoppers are using the independent butchers do you think they will suffer when sainsburys arrives?

    ReplyDelete
  37. "busy" does not equal "bad"10 June 2013 at 17:24

    16:43 surely the fact that it is busy is a good thing -it means people are using the stores. You can't have a store selling what people want, in a place where people want to shop, without it being busy!!

    Why do half the posts here automatically assume busy=bad?

    I am looking forward to Sainsbury's being built, and to Dorridge being really busy again - even if it means I am inconvenienced sometimes.

    I'd much rather see Dorridge thriving again - traffic and all.



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. busy does not equal bad10 June 2013 at 17:26

      "busy does not equal "bad" - quotation marks in title don't work!!

      Delete
  38. Dorridge has to expect to be busier. People in Dorridge seem happy to come up to Knowle and use all the facilities - parking for short and long periods - with a regenerated Dorridge centre (which will be a million times better than it is now) they will get more traffic. Of course! Just because you have a house on avenue road and want to keep the traffic down for you doesn't mean that letting the village centre rot is a sensible option. Overall the whole area will be be better off.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Gridlock, that's not gridlock, it's busy !!! Don't you get it??!! People out shopping in shops. It's called normality. Whereas the tumbleweed blowing across Forest Court car park is just sad. join the real world!

    ReplyDelete
  40. It's one thing shopping in shops, but surely said shops should be suitably sized. There are very few, if any, residential areas in the whole of the UK with a town-centre sized superstore (the size of Morrisons Solihull) in their midst.

    I assume everyone understands by now that this isn't another Co-op or even a Tesco Knowle. This planning application will allow Sainsbury's to build a very large store. I think people will be staggered when the thing is built.

    A store this size turns Dorridge from a fairly safe, self-contained, growing community, that's centred around our schools, doctors surgery, churches, pubs and local shops into a magnet for shoppers from all over the south of the borough. If I'd wanted to send my children to school in the shadow of a very large supermarket, I'd have chosen to live elsewhere.

    We can't stop this juggernaut now, but we can stand in the way for a while and make our point by objecting to these plans.

    ReplyDelete
  41. The point is Dorridge is centered around Forest Court and Forest Court has failed. It was in a dire state before Sainsbury's arrived. I'm not keen on the development up Manor Road, Glendon Way etc which started after I moved here, my friend lived here before Purnell's way etc was even thought of, but really its just life moving on. The centre will be different - more appropriate to the type of place Dorridge has become , many more houses and families. Let's not pretend that individual shops are always that attractive - Konstanze Flowers was an eyesore and the old shoe shop very odd. Saleem Bagh much better with the makeover. Will be a great when its done.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Sainsbury`s will be a thriving vibrant seven days a week success .Estate agents will be saying " Within easy walking distance of the new Sainsbury`s . The objections and whining are identical to the handwringing that accompanied the opening of Touchwood , that seems to have done quite well.

    ReplyDelete
  43. You miss the point 12:33.

    Touchwood is in the town centre - an established hub for business, socialising and shopping. Not a formerly quiet-ish, safe residential area.

    Surely that's the point of good planning - to balance nice places to live with accessible vibrant places to shop and work. The two aren't the same - then you chuck a vital local 'service' like the doctors into the mix. KABOOM!

    Anyway, I'm off to wring my hands before whinning practice.








    ReplyDelete
  44. I'm with you Matthew. I don't understand these people who want busy busy busy. Why did you move to live in Dorridge in the first place. If you wanted busy, why didn't you buy a nice flat in the heart of Birmingham or somewhere nearer Touchwood.
    My biggest issue is with traffic and most particularly on Sundays and bank holidays. I live close to the centre and always used the old shops, was probably one of the only locals who did. People did used to walk to what were local shops for predominantly local people and you're right it obviously wasn't what people wanted. But by opening such a huge town/out of town sized store in the middle of a very restricted residential road network, it might suit those up Glendon way who will most definitely drive down to do their shopping, but what about the families who enjoyed walking, cycling, running even riding round on Sundays and quiet bank holidays.
    Basically it will change Dorridge from the peaceful weekend semi-rural village into something very different and there an awful lot of families who would rather have the status quo than VIBRANT BUSY REGENERATED MOVE WITH THE TIMES sort of place that some of the people on this site seem to want.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think a lot of younger families are against it 14:24 - just look at the school governors' survey last time round. And a lot of oldies - like our local councillors and the DDRA committee - are strongly in favour.

      Perhaps it's the antis who are the progressive ones. Those in favour - the baby-boomers and empty nesters - value convenience over any remanants of character and community we might have left. Maybe I will too when I'm their age.

      Anwway, in the time it's taken me to type this inconsequential nonsense, I could have driven to a massive Tesco at the end of Gate Lane. But we must have choice!

      Delete
    2. I'm interested in why 'those up Glendon' have been singled out as potential drivers to the new store? Does that also include those in Mill Lane or Knowlewood Road perhaps?
      It strikes me that many 'new' families to Dorridge are against this development whilst the more 'established' residents who remember the village as a vibrant retail centre are more receptive. It's only returning to something like it once was!
      The character and convenience of the once busy Dorridge Precinct may not be what's in store ('cuse the pun!) but what was once a thriving village centre is no more and I believe this development will revitalise our village.
      It's unrealistic to think that it's viable to expect Sundays and Bank Holidays to be some kind of idyll that should be a prerequisite of living in Dorridge. That was only a result of the dereliction of our village and not sustainable.
      Someone has previously pointed out that there used to be lorries delivering to Evesons and the MAT depot in Poplar Road back in the day, we've been flattered by the 'lack' of traffic in recent times. Any redevelopment will bring an increase in traffic compared to what we have now.
      This is a village moving forward with the times, rather than stagnating. Times change and so will Dorridge, don't live in the past with rose tinted spectacles on.

      Delete
  45. what does that campaigning woman think of the increased size? she has gone very quiet

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Distorted of Dorridge14 June 2013 at 14:56

      Lynda Hatcher, Peace and Quiet snatcher?

      the justinkinghome group are still active on Twitter and, I believe, on Facebook, although not being a complete moron, I don't have an account.

      They post frequently in support of the new plans - yesterday they were posting pictures of Tesco lorries parked on the double-yellows with the caption ##allthesame. Yes, Tesco is a pain in the **** so a few (a lot!) more HGVs will be fine eh Lynda? In for a penny, in for a pound.

      Ah well, at least the scouts have got a nice new kayak out of it...

      Delete
    2. Lynda has already stated her views on the blog, elsewhere. Due to the unpleasant nature of some of the comments posted, and inaccurate assertions, she will no longer be contributing to this blog.....

      Delete
  46. People don't 'want' there to be more traffic on the roads, increase in housing etc. but it's the way it is. Telling people to go and live somewhere else if they accept that Sainsbury's is the best thing for Dorridge, even if it isn't their dream scenario, is really a cheek. Nobody chose to live in Dorridge because or Forest Court. Even back 25 years ago when I moved here Forest Court was a negative rather than a positive. No good going on about smaller stores and bespoke shops - pure fantasy. Sainsbury's is the only game in town.


    ReplyDelete
  47. I despair of Dorridge residents. If Sainsburys is the only game in town then we are surely doomed. no wonder the high street and independent shops are so much in decline.
    I don't think everything from the good old days is better, but this wish/need for everywhere to be the same is so sad.
    if you look at the Tescopoly site there are hundreds of communities fighting this sort of thing because they know there is better for their community if they stand firm. Dorridge wants to hand it over on a plate.
    the sooner I can move out the better I can leave the orange village to all those morons who want to live in a supermarket state.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One of the morons15 June 2013 at 16:12

      Bye Bye John!

      Delete
    2. Well said John. I wouldn't mind so much if there weren't a huge Tesco at the end of Gate Lane. Clearly too many people value convenience over community!

      Delete
  48. As a resident of Avenue Road, I should like to see a ban on parking in Avenue Road, with the exception of deliveries/essential service etc. It is not a wide road and only has one pavement which cars often half park on in an attempt to keep the traffic moving. With the inevitable future increase in traffic it will be even more difficult for the elderly or school children to either cross or reverse onto the road whilst visibility is blocked by parked vehicles. Neither the doctors or Sainsbury's should be relying on this area to supplement their parking obligations.

    The traffic on Avenue/Forest/Station Road will need to be kept moving to avoid congestion. No parking will ensure two lanes of traffic. Believe me it is bad enough now at times and it will only get worse. Perhaps throw the odd speed bump in too to keep this residential area safe for those who live there.

    If the proposed developments cannot cope without street parking in this relatively quiet purely residential area then the development is inappropriate for the site.

    Please could someone give details of Sainsbury's/Council's plan for parking/traffic etc,in this area I don't remember seeing it anywhere.I presume there is one as it seems a bit silly to grant permission to develop without considering all adverse effects and steps taken to prevent them.




    ReplyDelete
  49. Forest Road will be wider allowing for 2 lanes of traffic plus short term parking lane. At present you can park without restriction on Forest road on the one side and this causes the traffic to stop along there.
    Don't know about other parking but traffic flow was obviously studied and considered when granting planning permission.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are correct about Forest Road but what you have failed to mention is that this "widening" is at the cost of the pedestrian footpath.

      The pavement along Forest Road adjacent to the side of the new development is to be high-jacked to provide parking spaces for cars. This is necessary because of the inadequate number of bays in the new car park.

      It doesn't seem fair to use the footpath to supplement the car parking.

      Delete
  50. Can I just say - bemoaning the fact that Britain's shopping habits have changed and telling people they 'should' support local businesses isn't going to achieve anything. Sainsbury's is the only game in town because no-one else wanted to take on the precinct, some units were empty and the problem could only get worse as people people retired no-one wanted to take their businesses on (this is a nationwide issue) because they are not viable.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mr or Mrs (or Dr?) "Can I just Say" - I agree that Sainsbury's is the only game in town. That doesn't mean it's a game without any rules where you're allowed to take your ball home when you dont' get what you want, then cheat, lie and generally trample all over people.




      Delete
    2. And the rules are that you read the application, point out its problems to the council based on planning grounds. I do not like it doesn't work (all the I want it built comments on the solihull web site don't matter either). I think it is too big doesn't work unless you can show why. They need evidence.

      Delete
  51. I'm not going to cry over the loss of a pavement - especially when there is a perfectly adequate one on the other side of the road. This sort of fixation on minute details is really unhelpful.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you check the plans there is no loss of pavement, the pavement is moved - it seems that Sainsbury's have "hijacked" part of the site to retain the pavement and widen the road. The change is that introducing parking restrictions takes away 12 hour free weekday parking for the station.

      Delete
  52. So what is the plan for Avenue Road?

    ReplyDelete
  53. Well the free 12 hour parking is at present used by at least 2 massive camper vans that seem to belong to residents of Forest Road and they are obviously there for long periods of time - days/weeks. Completely legal but not necessarily what the parking was intended to be used for.
    Station parking is an issue but as Forest Court parking has always been restricted to a couple of hours so not really part of the picture re sainsbury's.

    ReplyDelete
  54. If we lose a pavement where are the shoppers to Tescos going to park. Haven't you seen the parking on the pavement outside the Salam Bagh ? People in Dorridge don't appear to want to walk anywhere.
    Are we being forced to have an increase in the size due to economic conditions ? I didn't know that it was a reason for a planning change. In any event Sainsburys have increased profit for the last 34 quarters so the Council should refuse the alterations; however I'm not betting on it.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Don't understand you - more short term parking with changes to Forest Road, not less!!
    Also all supermarkets struggling at present so economic circumstances are a large consideration.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Justin King's Sunbed24 June 2013 at 13:03

    If anyone's interested in why we should be suspicious of a company that doesn't want to set limits on their ambition, this article is interesting. I suspect I am preaching to the converted and the rest of you are, like, whatever...


    http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2013/06/the-perfect-crime.html

    ReplyDelete
  57. Wait for Make Money online from home..? Here is a Best Genuine website where you can earn money online with just clicking. Best PTC Paying Site, Genuine Income and Get 10$ to 15$ Daily without any investment or Charges
    HotProClicks.com

    ReplyDelete
  58. Thanks Kamran. You don't mention if you are favour of this giant-sized Sainsbury's though? I bet you don't even live in Dorridge.

    ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  59. I went into Solihull store today and its pretty big. I can't believe the one destined for dorridge is twice the size. It can't be much smaller than the one in Shirley. What's going on?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Solihull store is similar size to one they already have planning to build I think - not 100% sure.

      Delete
    2. Sainsbury's have provided the following information in response to this post:

      For the sake of clarification, the proposed Dorridge store is not twice the size of the existing Solihull store. Solihull has a sales area of 21,434 sq ft (1,992 sqm). The proposed sales area in Dorridge will be up to 24,500 sq ft (2,276 sqm).
      The Sainsbury's store in Shirley is 58,275 sq ft (5,414 sq m).

      Delete
  60. As I understand it submissions cannot use devaluing of property as a reason to object but applicants seem to be able to use economic viability as a reason to apply for expansion, seems a little unfair to me!!!

    ReplyDelete
  61. HILARIOUS! most of the comments here are utterly irrelevant.

    Sainsbury's have ALREADY GOT PLANNIHNG PERMISSION TO BUILD.

    There is ONE issue only - will the change in internal space proposed make a material difference.

    All this clap-trap about pavements and shopping habits - pleeease stay with the programme.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Roger Irrelevant16 July 2013 at 13:57

      Er, "HILARIOUS!" you are hugely mistaken. Stainsbury's don't have planning permission to build a store this size - that's what they're trying to get their greedy little paws on, by any means, fair or foul.

      They *do* have permission to build a smaller store, but they don't want to.

      If enough people were to object to this development (unlikely, given "protestor fatigue") then I suppose they'd either stop sulking and build a smaller, less damaging one as was agreed, sell up or leave the site peacefully sitting there as it is now.

      Oh, in planning terms, there's not "ONE issue only" (your capitals) - there are two. 1) the size increase 2) the fact that they wish to sell 'non-food goods'

      Hilarious indeed!

      Delete
    2. Well expressed Roger

      Delete
  62. Who made you teacher!

    ReplyDelete
  63. Roger Irrelevant -
    I understand that the physical size of the building will not be changed from the plans that have been approved. The revised plans are for re-configuration of internal space only?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Roger Irrelevant29 July 2013 at 13:35

      Yes exactly. And it was Sainsbury's who throughout have stressed that there is a connection between sales area and perceived 'damage' (i.e traffic, noise, impact on local businesses all that...). Now they are distancing themselves from that connection, so that they can cynically get a bigger store they want without too much hoo-haa. And by hoo-haa I mean democratic input via the planning process. What a lovely upstanding business to have as a neighbour :)

      Delete
  64. So Sainsbury’s have applied to the Council to increase the sales area of the proposed store. Presumably they got their sums wrong and to make the store viable need to sell more profitable items, cloths etc. This will of course have knock on effects, an extra lorry or two a day, more staff and more cars to add further strain on the already inadequate car park. One solution would be to build a multi-storey car park on that scruffy bit of land with the few trees opposite the doctors’ surgery, an ideal site.
    The café we learn is to be managed by Sainsbury’s and will be an integral part of the “shopping experience” so please use it, it would be very sad if it proved unprofitable and had to be merged into the supermarket and we ended up with the inappropriately large super store for which they originally applied – surely Sainsbury’s would not be that devious!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oooh, Sainsbury's wouldn't do that would they? I expect the Starbucks is still going strong in their Shirley store and has not been converted to retail space. Obviously, it's way too far for me to drive and see. If only there was a branch slightly nearer...

      Delete
  65. Sainsbury , devious , perish the thought.

    When they offer the independent units at sky high rents with horrid leases they can play the white knight again.

    Just to save us poor plebs from being faced by untidy empty units , albeit that they are owned by The Jolly Orange Giant, they could apply for planning permission to incorporate them into the store too.

    When will we learn to be grateful to this magnanimous supermarket for protecting the quality of our lives here in Dorridge?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ken Aye, Lynda Hand31 July 2013 at 13:16

      Don't you worry. If them retail units ever becomes empty, we will be launching a massive Facebook campaign to get it sorted!!!!!!!

      Delete
    2. Imagine if the pharmacy couldn't pay the rent and Sainsbury's had to step in to run it. I gather it's a growing part of their comprehensive retail offering. That would be, like, so helpful. PLEASE RETWEET! #ondrugs

      Delete
  66. The Autumn version of the DDRA newsletter is out.

    Full of self congratulatory twaddle and not a single word about Sainsbury's proposal.

    Do these folk live in the same world as the rest of us.

    Fiddling whilst Rome burns.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Matthew, I thought you wanted the DDRA to keep their noses out of it and stick with the gardening and benches? Looks like your abuse on this site has paid off.

      Make your mind up.

      Delete
    2. I didn't write the comment above, but I heartily agree with it.

      For the record, I don't think DDRA should stick to hanging baskets etc. I think they should provide a voice for residents; all residents.

      If DDRA had polled the village or even acknowledged that there was strong opposition to a store this size, I would have no problem with their pro Sainsbury's stance.

      As it is, I find it mysterious that they would back such a huge development that will change the face of Dorridge forever when they have been quick to condemn quite small residential developments before now.

      I would simply love to know on what basis they decided to roll out the red carpet for Sainsbury's - was it puerly down to the shopping preferences of their committee? (Most of whom share the same social profile; white, male, over-50.) Or were there more sinister forces at work?

      Either way, they've let down quite a few of the people they're supposed to be representing. I wish them luck with their litter picking and looking out for anti-social behaviour - I bet there will be a whole lot more of that to do, once this mini retail park is up and running.

      Delete