Skip to content

ASDA planning application online

June 16, 2011

Just a quick post to link to the online details and documents for ASDA’s planning application: click here.

We only have until the 7th July to get in comments and objections. It’s important that objections are well though out and about the potential IMPACT of the development on the area – traffic, business, environment, ecology, economy etc. Just saying you don’t want/like it is not enough and planning will ignore it.

My feelings are that impact on traffic is going to be a key issue. At the neighbourhood forum lots of concerns were raised about this – safety, congestion, volume of traffic, loss of parking, carpark used as rat run, deliveries 24 hours etc…

The other big issue for me is that the development is against what the City Council have identified as their ambitions for Stirchley in the ‘Core Strategy 2026’ draft, which states about areas outside of the ‘retail core’ (which is at the northern end around where Co-op is now and Tesco will be): “Outside the core encouragement will be given to conversion and redevelopment for high quality residential, office and non retail uses.” see it by clicking here. ASDA’s site is firmly outside of the retail core and would pull business away from it.

What do you think are the main issues to object on? And should we write a draft objection letter that people can use as a template?

Cheers, Tom.


  1. June 23, 2011 11:23 pm

    Afraid I can’t make the meeting on 28 June, but this is the objection that I have submitted:

    I strongly object to the proposal on the following grounds:

    Intensity of development: this is an inappropriate development for Stirchley given the presence of the Co-Op supermarket and the already approved Tesco development. The retail core of Stirchley is at the north end of the High Street, and that should be the focus of regeneration, with concentration of independent retail close to the Co-Op and Tesco. The draft Core Strategy (S10) talks of ‘consolidating the retail core’ – this development is in direct opposition to that aim. Public comments from local residents on the core strategy show opposition to further supermarket developments.

    Highways: The car park has spaces for 398 vehicles, which means 398 more vehicles on the Pershore Road, already congested yet supposedly to be a low carbon corridor (Core Strategy draft S9). The mitigation consists entirely of provision of traffic signals, which would merely control the resulting traffic jams. The application talks of excellent public transport access and use by local people who currently shop outside Stirchley, so it is not clear why 398 spaces would be necessary.

    Impact on community facilities
    This unsympathetic adjacent development would damage the character of the Rea Valley walking and cycling route, a valuable green space. Additonal connections to the High Street are proposed but unnecessary at this point given access from Hazelwell Lane and Fordhouse Lane.

    Change of use from industrial land: the Planning and Economic Statement states ‘Following a period of marketing of approximately 15 months it was
    established that there was no active market for a property of this size and specification, in this location.'(para 5.14). However this marketing took place from March 2008, when the current recession was beginning. It is by no means clear that the site is unviable for uses other than a supermarket in the long term.

    I request that the council withholds permission for development.

  2. Michelle Alexis Allsopp permalink
    June 29, 2011 1:52 pm

    I have also submitted my grounds for objection today and sent a copy to my local mp and councillors i will also be adding more information regarding the matter to my FB profile to inform my friends and family of the issue, as well as photo copy the information that was handed out to give to the local people and traders in my area, as i believe they have not been properly informed about the impact ASDA will have to Strichley, Cotteridge, Kings Norton, Bournville and possilbly Northfield.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: