NOVA Web Editorial

Last

page

update

Display Advertising

February 2012

Adverts

Web Editorial

Newport and Church Aston development
Church Aston Gateway Signs

Mile long development!

Hundreds of houses, supermarket, filling station and industrial area on a mainly green field site from the A41 to Church Aston – massive intrusion on existing housing and a substantial threat to Newport’s town centre.

For more information visit the Save Newport link on the right.

The argument against Sainsbury’s Reproduced below is the case presented to Telford & Wrekin Council by a concerned Church Aston resident in opposition to the development, updated to take account of the newly amended plans. To fight developers you have to speak their language so it’s a long and often technical document but it's also a good read. If it motivates more to voice their disapproval then so much the better.

Make a hot drink and carry on from here...

TWC/2011/0916: Application Amendments/Addendums to Proposals for Superstore to west of Station Rd, Newport I note the Amendments and Technical Addendums provided by the developers consultants to the original proposals but see these as predominantly matters of detail and as such they do not materially affect my original objections to the proposed development. There remains no policy justification for the building of a Superstore in this location, no quantifiable or qualitative need for a development of this scale and nature, given that it is well in excess of that needed to meet local needs, and it will have a significant detrimental impact upon the vitality and viability of Newport Town Centre.

Therefore the Retail Assessment Addendum does not change my view that the scale of the proposed store is completely anachronistic in the context of the size of Newport, it will impact adversely on the viability of the existing High St and two supermarkets, and it will need to rely on a substantial inflow of external expenditure to be profitable. The fixation of the developers in trying to change people’s shopping patterns, to reduce an identified (by spurious household telephone survey) outflow of car shoppers, predominantly to Asda at Donnington, primarily by providing a comparison shopping offer, would seem to be completely contrary to any model of a natural shopping hierarchy. Large urban areas can support the scale of store proposed, a small rural market town cannot without damaging the existing shopping offer and relying on externally generated shopping trips.

It is also somewhat ironic, that the Council is proposing to close the Community Recycling Centre in Newport as part of its budget savings, which will mean additional car borne trips to the nearest alternative at Donnington, virtually next door to Asda. A combined shopping and recycling trip would therefore surely be a far more sustainable solution, thus negating the apparent need for a superstore to the west of Station Rd, the purpose of which is to reduce the outflow of car borne main food shoppers and therefore their carbon footprint.

In addition, since the publication of the original Retail Assessment (October 2011) a number of reports have been published and economic forecasts revised:

Portas Report The Portas Report into the future of the nation’s High Streets identifies that nationally they have reached a crisis point and that if action is not taken now, much of Britain will lose, irretrievably, something that is fundamental to our society and which has real social as well as economic worth. This Report provides a salutary warning for what an out of town Superstore on Station Rd will mean for the future viability of Newport Town Centre and its unique High St, both economically and socially. The Town Council are currently looking at supporting an application to become a pilot town to test out the Report’s recommendations.

New Economics Foundation Also the argument put forward by the developers that expenditure in a new out of town Superstore will benefit the Newport economy has been shown to be fallacious by the New Economics Foundation, whose research shows that money spent off the High Street is more likely to leave the local area straight away, having less economic impact than spending in retailers with a more localised supply chain.

The Communities & Local Government Select Committee Report The Select Committee Report on the Government’s draft National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) has surely confirmed that there should be no presumption that the proposed greenfield developments on the periphery of Newport should go ahead. The supporting documents published by the developers of land at Station Rd, (and Grove Farm and Audley Avenue) have cited Government economic policy as providing the basis on which development should proceed, and this was then supported by the publication of the Government’s draft planning guidance. This suggested that there should be a presumption in favour of sustainable (economic) development, and that environmental and social criteria should be considered of less importance when local planning authorities decide on planning applications. However, the Select Committee Report states that environmental and social factors should be seen as equally important as economic, and concludes that there is a real danger that the new planning system will be used to implement poorly planned and unsustainable development, as in the case of Newport, in particular the proposed Superstore off Station Rd. It also suggests that the policy to build on brownfield sites first is reinstated. The Select Committee Report therefore gives credence to the arguments that the proposed (housing and) superstore development should be judged on environmental and social criteria, as well as economic, and that brownfield sites should be considered first for any prospective new developments. This reinforces the findings of the Planning Inspector at the Mere Park Enquiry, where alternative brown field sites (including Water Lane) were identified as suitable for (smaller scale) retail development. The current fencing, footpath diversion and tree cuttings work being carried out by the Council as landowner ‘to secure the site’ (from what?) suggest that the Council has already presumed that development will take place which is clearly illegal and will be subject to legal challenge should the Plans Board decide to approve the application.

Changing Shopping Patterns Most recently, given reports in the national press, it would seem that that the days of the out-of-town Superstore are numbered. According to retail analysts, following the announcement of a major fall in profits, Tesco plans to build no further superstores selling both food and non-food, and instead focus on on-line shopping and smaller sized food-stores. Shopping patterns are clearly changing with increasing numbers of people choosing to shop online, both for grocery and particularly for non-food items, with shoppers either collecting from the store or having it delivered. The home delivery market is growing rapidly and it is forecast that more people will have their fortnightly shop delivered and then top up from local convenience stores. Tesco’s new TV advertising strategy now reinforces this change in shopping patterns.

If this is the future of retailing, then the need for an out-of-town Superstore in Newport must surely be questioned. Not only is the proposed store completely out of scale with the size of local demand and the population of Newport, it would seem to be premised on an out of date retail model, which suggests it may become something of a ‘white elephant’ if it were to be built. The worse possible scenario would be for the proposed Sainsbury’s Superstore to be approved, it then lead to the decimation of the existing High St and the current supermarkets, and then itself become redundant as a result of a change in shopping patterns driven by the internet, where ordering on line and home delivery becomes the norm for both the main bulk food shop and virtually all non-food purchases. Sainsbury’s public relations offensive, beginning with the full page advertorial in the Newport Advertiser offering increased choice and a saving on time and fuel, needs to be viewed in the context of these forecasts of rapidly changing shopping patterns if Newport is not to be sacrificed on the altar of a redundant retail model.

I therefore remain strongly opposed to the proposed superstore development for the following reasons:

There is no proven need for a development of this scale on an out of town greenfield site Having read the original consultant’s/developers’ Supporting Statements and the Retail Assessment addendum, the case for additional food/non-food floorspace of this size remains unproven. The Council’s rejection of the out of town Mere Park low cost smaller scale supermarket on the grounds that it would adversely impact on the Town Centre, a decision which was upheld by the Planning Inspector, does not lead to the conclusion that what Newport needs is a superstore twice the size offering both convenience and comparison goods. As far as I am aware the need for additional retail space has never been identified either previously through the Wrekin Local Plan/Newport Plan or more recently through the Local Development Framework planning process - the Core Strategy identifies no retail development sites and a Land Allocation DPD has not been progressed.

The Council’s own Retail and Leisure Study (2006) states that ‘convenience floorspace provision in the centre is above the national average’, and the May 2009 update concludes that by 2016 there is capacity for additional convenience retail floorspace of between 50-210 sq.m. (net) and by 2026 of between 405-1,050 sq.m. (net), depending on which population growth scenario is adopted’. The proposed superstore envisages a net retail area of 4,645sq.m. (net), which is predominantly designed to cater for food shopping (convenience) trips, which is over 4 times the additional requirement forecast for 2026 on the most optimistic population growth scenario.

As such, this proposal is opportunistic and more than premature, being driven by the demand of landowners and developers, not by the needs of local people. If there is a need, it is for an in-town low cost supermarket built on brownfield land, as identified by the Planning Inspector, which will enhance the choice and competitiveness of the existing main food retail offer, and strengthen the High St not serve to undermine it. This would seem to support Government policy to put the ‘Town Centre First’ and the Portas Report. It would be unforgivable if Newport were to go the same way as many other Market Towns both locally and nationally as a result of this speculative development.

The superstore proposals do not just seek to satisfy local needs It is clear that the proposed superstore is not designed just to meet the needs of local people given that a store of this size will, as the Retail Assessment and Addendum suggest, need to attract around 20% of its turnover from outside Newport and its immediate catchment area if it is to be profitable. The Retail Assessment Addendum suggests this is predominantly passing traffic on the A518, which would not reduce the overall number of local shopping trips and not lead to reduced carbon emissions. Newport alone cannot support this scale of retail development, only at an enormous cost – economically, socially and environmentally. In particular, it will mean additional car trips and increased congestion on the local transport infrastructure, particularly on Station Rd itself, which, together with the massive demand for power needed to operate a store of this size, suggests that the proposed superstore will not meet the desired sustainability criteria as set out in the Council’s Core Strategy.

The proposed superstore will have a significant adverse impact on the viability of the existing High St – an important Conservation Area The proposed superstore will not benefit Newport Town Centre as it will undoubtedly lead to the closure of either one/both existing in-town local supermarkets, given that they are already trading below their optimum turnover/profitability, and, as a result of the loss of linked shopping trips, the closure of many independent High St retailers. This will serve to reduce rather than augment local shopping choice, undermining the viability of the High St and Newport as a Market Town, thereby negating one of the main justifications for building a store of this size on an out-of-town greenfield site. The Retail Assessment Addendum does not provide any evidence, only assertion, that a new superstore will generate increased footfall in the Town Centre; evidence from similar developments on the periphery of other small towns would suggest the converse to be true.

The proposed superstore will be environmentally damaging with no net benefit, only a substantial cost, to the local community The degradation of this important, if not significant, green open space on the main approach into Newport from the south will result in both the loss of a much used public amenity and be visually damaging. There is currently an application for Village Green status for this land lodged with the Local Authority (the ‘Registration Authority’), which has been validated and is now to be subject to a 6 week consultation process to gauge the views of local people. This is an out of town development which will destroy not only the natural environment but also a much valued informal recreational area, and as such is inherently unsustainable; it would seem that environmental and social factors are being ignored for the sake of a dubious economic imperative. Because there is no democratically agreed Local Development Plan, this should not provide a void in which decisions are made in a vacuum and the environment is destroyed forever. The costs of this development far outweigh any its suggested benefits, which themselves are based more upon supposition rather than fact.

There is already sufficient choice and competition within a relatively short distance of Newport People have chosen to live in Newport because it is a traditional Market Town and as such accept that if they wish to do their main food shopping at a large superstore, and not on a traditional High St with two existing supermarkets, there is a wide range of choice within a relatively short car drive. The suggestion that improved bus services and improved footways/cycleways will change consumers’ main food shopping patterns and reduce the number of shopping trips by car, is fallacious. With the majority of Newport’s working population out-commuting by car to employment outside the town, many elect to do their main food shopping from work rather from than home, which is more sustainable than making a specific shopping trip. In addition, more people are now electing to do their shopping on-line, an even more sustainable shopping experience. The need to build a large superstore in every small community would seem to be self defeating as competition for a finite amount of food shopping expenditure leads to existing stores becoming marginal and closing, with a resultant increase in car journeys - a good example of unsustainable development. There would seem to be the need for an independent retail impact assessment before any decision on this planning application is made; the consultant’s small scale telephone survey, the Indigo commissioned survey and the Council’s updated Retail & Leisure Study (to support the Central Telford Area Action Plan) together demonstrate a somewhat incoherent picture of what the need for additional retail floorspace in Newport actually might be. I await the findings of the Council’s retail consultants (Whyte, Young, Green) for a definitive view of Newport’s longer term retail floorspace requirements.

Fewer jobs will be created by the proposed superstore than is being forecast As regards employment generation, the suggestion that the superstore will create around 240 full time equivalent jobs is misleading. This forecast should be shown as a net figure, to allow for the loss of jobs within the existing supermarkets and High St, in line with the National Retail Planning Forum report (1998) which concluded that superstores destroy considerably more jobs than they create.

Concluding Comments

The superstore proposals are of the wrong scale and in the wrong location. They are not a genuine response to an articulated need for additional convenience/comparison shopping in the Newport area, more a speculative attempt to generate a profit for landowners and developers at the expense of existing retailers and the High St. The proposals do not meet the sustainability criteria set out in the Council’s Core Strategy, which itself is an insufficient planning document on which to base a decision on a planning application of this scale and significance. The Retail Assessment Addendum provides no argument which would negate this conclusion.

I trust the Plans Board will view the application purely on planning criteria, and will not be swayed by the need to deliver a large capital receipt to meet the requirements of the Council revenue budget. Moreover, in light of the other two proposed retail developments at Audley Avenue (TWC/2012/0011) and the legal challenge over the Section 192 Proposed Use order at Mere Park Garden Centre (TWC/2011/1086), it would seem appropriate that the Plans Board should not determine the Station Rd application until both appeals have been heard. Decisions in favour of either/both of these would clearly impact on the amount of retail floorspace available in the future on the periphery of Newport and so need to be taken into account in any planning decision on the Station Rd application.

Should the application be approved by the Plans Board, I would hope this would be subject to a legal challenge and be called-in by the Secretary of State, on the grounds both of pre-determination (given the manner and scale of works carried out to ’secure the site’) and that the application is a departure from the current Local Development Plan (Core Strategy).

Friday 13th! It’s official, it’s Sainsbury’s and a full page advertisement in the local paper confirms it. Would it be churlish to suppose that the major reason for revealing their hand now is to soften the opposition from the newspaper with much needed advertising revenue? There’s nothing to celebrate, 530 parking spaces says it all – this is a disaster for Newport. The opposition must continue, the fight isn’t over yet.

An Exhibition put on by the developers at Burton Borough School July 2011 was crowded with concerned local residents and business owners. There’s no doubt that the quality of the display graphics was impressive but the fundamentals remain. Newport is being targeted for this development because Telford has to build 26,000 houses and they have to go somewhere, don’t they! What emerged was that the northern section of the project had been under discussion for two years and the remainder for about one year. The factor that pushed it into the open was the advancement of the proposed 300 new houses on Wellington Road.

The Supermarket in particular: Why are the planners so dim? They drone on about residents spending outside Newport and their answer is another supermarket. Supermarket spending isn’t the issue for the health of Newport – it’s everything else. It hardly matters a jot to Newport where you do your main food shopping. But a new supermarket with a ridiculously broad but wafer thin offer of random merchandise would prey on the existing ones and many of the other businesses in the town. Would it open 24 hours and become The Pits for performance car racing on the bypass? So let’s be happy to allow shoppers to go to whichever supermarket suits them and make it as pleasant and relaxed as possible to do all their other shopping in the comfort of Newport. There’s another aspect – taking Sainsbury’s in particular, they aim to lure national retailers into their stores. Already there are Clarks shoe shops in some Sainsbury’s.

The Development in general: You have to ask how this huge development fits into the plan for Newport, is there a plan for Newport? You must reach a point when an ever increasing population changes the character from market town to bland conurbation. Excellent schools are a major asset of Newport but if you continue to increase the numbers they will, in turn, degrade into bland education factories and everything good will be gone forever.

The Telford & Wrekin press release reproduced below misses these points completely. Whoever wrote it doesn’t understand Newport and its like at all. It has the Telford mentality stamped all over it and it would be a desperate shame if it bamboozled people into thinking it offered something good.

Let’s face it, this isn’t about white knights coming in to save Newport’s economy. This is about big business with an eye on profit, taking the easy option of building on prime rural land – much of it outside the Newport boundary – with little regard for the many existing residents of Newport and Church Aston who will have their outlook ruined – swapping hedgerows for concrete.

Instead of playing the numbers game of how many jobs may be created, wouldn’t it be better if the focus was on improving the heart of Newport instead of helping developers grab land which just happens to be on the wrong side of the Newport bypass? The fact there are as many houses as there are estimated new jobs does little or nothing to improve Newport’s overall situation. The fact that St Modwen’s existing Audley Avenue units are to be demolished in favour of housing seems to indicate an overall deficit.

The Mere Park managers must be wondering where they went wrong. Their application for a supermarket was fought vigorously by Telford & Wrekin. This proposal on Station Road is the same distance from the centre of Newport but perhaps even better poised to cause maximum damage to town centre trade. And, we would like to know what stage this latest scheme was at when the Mere Park application was submitted. Incidentally, St Modwen have enough derelict land in the town centre to build a supermarket there – that would draw trade into the town.

It’s a clever move to pretend that developments at Burton Borough are an integral part of the plan when they clearly are not and are to be funded separately. And, if you’ve seen a leaflet put out by Telford & Wrekin and the developers, do not take it at face value – it’s appallingly misleading!

We urge everyone to take the keenest possible interest in this proposal as it will have an impact on the whole area.

Press Release: Telford & Wrekin Council has announced a multi million pound scheme that would see Newport’s main secondary school extensively refurbished through the Building Schools for the Future grant, hundreds of homes built and new jobs created through retail and business developments.

The proposals include a major supermarket development and the creation of a modern business park for Newport off the A518.

The plans are being prepared in partnership with developers Davidsons Developments and St. Modwen.

An informative exhibition is being held at Burton Borough School between 4-8pm on July 7 so that local residents and businesses can learn more about the scheme. A further event will then be held later in the summer ahead of a joint planning application.

Under the scheme, a new teaching block would be built at Burton Borough School funded by Building Schools for The Future grant. Following resident feedback to the council, the scheme will provide open space and sports recreation facilities in Newport. This is likely to also include an all weather pitch.

The new supermarket development together with a petrol filling station would be built off Station Road. Plans also include the provision of a new bus service around Newport Town connecting the development with existing residential and commercial areas as well as significant public realm improvements in Newport Town Centre.

Land off the A518 would also be transformed to include a modern business park, providing much-needed new employment land in Newport as well as creating hundreds of jobs.

Councillor Paul Watling, cabinet member for Children & Young People, said: “The scheme means that the current Burton Borough School will be substantially upgraded and refurbished to address current capacity issues using money from the Building Schools for the Future funding.

“The development will also mean that much-loved local green space at Shuker’s Field will be preserved. This is something that residents have told us they are keen to keep.”

Councillor Richard Overton, cabinet member for Borough Towns Development, said: “These are massive and extremely exciting plans for Newport which will bring huge benefits and complement the £1.5m regeneration work that has already been completed in the town.

“It’s an extensive scheme that will provide a major boost for the town’s economy and will play a key part in creating and keeping jobs and business in Newport

“This is absolutely key to ensuring Newport has a vibrant and sustainable future. It is expected that the development will create more than 500 jobs as well as providing a range of housing from starter accommodation through to three and four bed family properties.

“A council survey has shown that many people in Newport do their main food shopping outside of the town. This development will keep that money in Newport and attract people from the surrounding area to the town.

“The exhibition on July 7 will give residents the opportunity to find out more about the details of the scheme.”

St. Modwen’s senior asset manager Juliet Rossiter said: “We know the area well having had a long established land holding there for more than 10 years.

“We feel that Newport will benefit from the development that we and our partners are proposing and that it is well placed to serve as a catalyst for future investment and growth.”

If the scheme receives planning approval, it is expected that the first phase of the development would commence in 2012.

Church Aston Gateway Signs
In the 18 December 2009 Newport Advertiser there was a photo feature on the new Church Aston Gateway Signs stating that the cost was around £3,500. When we later learned the actual cost was more like £6,500 we asked the Parish Council for more information about how the project had been handled, in an effort to explain the discrepancy. Specifically we asked for a copy of the project document and the minutes of the meeting when the project had been approved.

After a long delay and further correspondence we received a CD containing a huge number of files but no coherent project document. We have been assured by Cllr. Simon Stacey, Chair of Church Aston Parish Council (CAPC) that all the available information has been supplied on the CD. So, we have copied references to the Gateways, mainly from Minutes of CAPC meetings and listed them below.

Minutes are supposed to give a clear picture of the business of the council without reference to other documents. We submit that the Minutes spectacularly fail to do this and, from the evidence they contain, the project appears to have been literally out of control.

We have reproduced the extracts without attempting to correct the many obvious errors in grammar and spelling.

CAPC Minutes June 2007

GATEWAY SIGNS: Cllr. A. O'Connor gave a presentation of what was being proposed, where they would be sited and what type of signs were available. A great deal of debate ensured and it was decided to go with 2 larger signs at the main entrances to the Village with 2 smaller signs within the Village boundaries.

Telford & Wrekin would pay £2500 towards the cost of red matting, installation of entry posts with speed limit signs. Parish Council has £1000 in balances towards the cost additional features. There is potentially some advertising revenue to be obtained from local business. No planning application needs to be submitted for these signs.

It was agreed that Cllr. O'Connor go away and find costing for suggested signs and report back to next meeting. He is also to approach [name redacted by NOVA Magazines] and [name redacted by NOVA Magazines] for sponsorship.

He is also to contact Lilleshall Parish Council to get details of how they achieved their signs.

It was proposed and seconded for Cllr. O'Connor to obtain costs for a sign similar to Lilleshall and if within budget to set plans in motion.

CAPC Minutes July 2007

GATEWAY SIGNS: The Lilleshall signs cost £1200 each. Nick Kitchen of Telford and Wrekin has been formerly asked to put £2500 into budget for new style signs, and also for signs in Wallshead Way. Charles Corfield is to contact Blists Hill with regard to casting some signs for us.

CAPC Minutes Sept 2007

GATEWAY SIGNS: No information from Te1ford & Wrekin received. AOC to contact Cllr. Eade to get involved again to get matters moving again. Cllr. Corfield to approach Blists Hill soon

CAPC Minutes 21 Feb 2008

CAPC/ TW 21/02/08/001

Contact land registry in connection with the land of the proposed sites. CAPC

CAPC/ TW 21/02/08/002

Obtain costing for the CAPC metal sign inclusive of costs of Pattern. CAPC

CAPC/ TW 21/02/08/003

Apply to Telford & Wrekin planning department to see in application will be required. This to include costs for application (One or five separate applications?) T&W

CAPC/ TW 21/02/08/004

Apply to TWS re Bulbs (planting) for the immediate area of the proposed signs (Rob Hoof). CAPC

CAPC/ TW 21/02/08/005

Seek a Stine Mason to carry out work as prescribed. CAPC

CAPC/ TW 21/02/08/006

Produce schematic diagram of sign. CAPC

CAPC/ TW 21/02/08/007

Calculate Funding form CAPC. CAPC

CAPC/ TW 21/02/08/008

Calculate available funding (T&W). T&W

CAPC/ TW 21/02/08/009

Document requirements needed to adhere to Department of Transport regulations (i.e. Sign to be 0.5 meter away from carriageway). T&W

CAPC Minutes 7 April 2008

Gateway: Councillor Mike Stacey presented a full report on the progress of the gateway signs

CAPC Minutes 12 May 2008

Gateway: Mike Stacey made a report to the council after Charles Corfiled and he had visited some quarries. Andrew O’Connor asked them to get proper quotes for all the work to be done and report back to council next meeting. Telford and Wrekin may contribute to the signs, amount to be agreed. Then the sites to be determined to get planning permission for each gateway, site meetings required. Charles Corfield proposed to get the gateway signs painted. Agreed by Council.

CAPC Minutes 2 June 2008

Gatteway: Councillor Mike Stacey reported that professional drawings were being done, the gateway sign was being painted and proper quotes for the work were being sought. The need for four planning applications was discussed and agreed. Suggestions that a meeting is held with the Planning and Highways Officers first to discuss any issues before submission may save the Parish Council money. Michelle Wilson clerk to obtain the planning forms in preparation.

CAPC Minutes 7 July 2008

Gateway: Councillor Mike Stacey reported the project is moving now and a professional planning application will be prepared very shortly. It was agreed that Councillor Brian Richards and Councillor Mike Stacey would meet up with planning to make sure that the application is accepted and there if there are any problems they can be ironed out before submission.

CAPC Minutes 1 Sept 2008

Gateway: Mike Stacey not available but will email up date.

CAPC Minutes 1 Dec 2008

Gateway: Councillor Mike Stacey reported back to committee that a meeting has been held with Telford and Wrekin planning department to discuss the gateway proposal and they will accept one application and charge half price. Stone had been selected and were being prepared. Powder coating completed. A budget for the cost was handed out. All site locations were agreed by committee, Liddles Bank x 2 The Mere, Wellington Road and Dog Bank.

CAPC Minutes 14 Jul 2009

Gateway: Cllr Stacey reported that it was still being held up. Three gateway signs had to be modified. Cllr Stacey A518 has been remedied. Recently the left hand side not happy with of the A518. The other location is at Dog Bank which had to be moved too. Hopefully will be resolved shortly, if not to get a meeting to get this sorted once and for all. Committee suggested a complaint to Telford and Wrekin but agreed to hold until we have approval.

CAPC Minutes 7 Sept 2009

Gateway: Approval given but now other areas need to fall into place. It is hoped that the signs will be in place by the next council meeting. There was an issue raised around keeping the areas around the gateways signs clear and having some planting. The clerk to speak to Lilleshall and Donnington about the cost of cutting back the grass and trees in the area.

CAPC Minutes 5 Oct 2009

Gateway: Cllr Corfields son [names redacted by NOVA Magazines] has been assisting in the shipping of signs to the quarry. Discussion around the replanting around the signs and proposal and full agreement to pay 50 for some bulbs under the 2:1 scheme with Telford and Wrekin. Clerk to contact Hort Society re the planning of these bulbs. It was also agreed that an individual should be responsible for one gateway sign to make sure they are kept looking neat and tidy.

CAPC Minutes 2 Nov 2009

Gateway: Cllr Stacey gave the update for the gateway signs and hopes to have them in place at the end of November. Telford and Wrekin rep Adrian Corney agreed to get his workmen to plant the bulbs this week.

CAPC Minutes 7 Dec 2009

Gateway: Mike Stacey informed council that they will be in place on Wednesday 9th Dec. Newport Advertiser will send a photographer to mark the event It was agreed to have an official opening on Saturday 12th Dec at 9:30 am. Chair O’Connor asked the clerk to calculate all the costs for the Gateway to let him know to access funds from Telford and Wrekin. Chair O’Connor thanked Charles Brain and especially Mike Stacey for all their hard work in this project which is finally coming to an end. The clerk is to calculate total spending on the gateway signs and inform the chair then Cllr.A O’Connor to write to Telford and Wrekin regarding their contribution.

CAPC Minutes 7 June 2010

Gateway: Chairman asked if Telford and Wrekin had made their contribution to the gateway signs. The clerk informed council that she had chased this but the representative in Telford and Wrekin accounts department had been away on holiday. Chairman asked if there was no response by end of business on Thursday to forward the emails onto Councillor Eade. Cllr O’Connor expressed concern as to the cutting of the grass around the gateway signs at Liddles Bank. The clerk will ask Adrian Corney to include the strimming of the grass around the signs.

OTHER INFORMATION

Extract from PowerPoint Presentation dated Thursday 21st February 2008

How much will it cost?

Allocated in budget from CAPC

£1,500.00 available from CAPC today

Additional funding from Telford & Wrekin (£2500.00)

Extract from Church Aston Parish Council Balance Sheet 2008/2009

Projects: Gateway

Expenditure to date £2230

Expenditure to end of year £6000

Information collated by NOVA Magazines 7 June 2011 •

050212