Asda reports published

By Martin Neville

Tuesday, June 24, 2014

 

ASDA plans, due to go before Isle of Wight councillors next week, are at the centre of two reports published today (Tuesday).

Isle of Wight councillors are due to meet next Wednesday (2), when they will make a decision on plans to build a new supermarket on the outskirts of Newport.

They will consider two rival applications, one submitted by Asda and another by SCL, a group of Isle of Wight business people that own St George’s Park football ground.

Both plans would make use of land owned by the Isle of Wight Council.

Asda has said that it has no interest in building a new supermarket using SCL’s proposal, however SCL claims its plans would be better for Newport.

Both sets of plans have been recommended for conditional approval by Isle of Wight Council officers in their reports ahead of next week's meeting. Only one plan will be able to go ahead however, as both make use of a piece of council-owned land.

In a letter to the County Press in February, Doug Wilson, head of property communications for Asda, said: "Regarding its alternative site for Asda, the store wishes to make it absolutely clear it has no interest in pursuing the football club site for an Asda store.

"Asda has a contract with the Isle of Wight Council for its St George’s Way site.

"This site was chosen after considering all of the options, including the football club site, and was won by Asda through a formal tender process."

SCL has said however that its proposal was well supported by the community and the contract between the Isle of Wight Council and Asda should not be seen as having any influence on the planning application.

To view the reports, click here

Comments

Log-in or register to comment on this story. See our House Rules here.

By ticking "Remember me" you agree to a cookie being stored on your computer - no personal data is shared.

Forgotten your password?
Displaying the last 10 of 27 comments - Show All Comments

Log-in to Report

by alan naylor

28th June 2014, at 17:52:13

I am not familier with the asda situation how ever will someone correct me if I am wrong my point is if asda want to build a supermarket outside Newport what has it got to do with a third party with land to sell who have the OPINION it would be better for the town.... simplifyed

Log-in to Report

by roger mazillius

27th June 2014, at 21:27:29

"Open to interpretation" is no defence (as many litigants have found to their cost) but we are now at least agreed on one thing, we are now off topic!
Mind you, I am glad I managed to be credible enough to be elected time and time again over 20 years of serving my community - although you probably have no idea what that actually means!

Log-in to Report

by Owen Burson

27th June 2014, at 18:18:37

It wasn't intended as wit Roger. I've not said that I didn't say it, what I did say was that the statement was open to interpretation therefor your inference that it was libelous is as credible as your political career was. However if you are convinced about it being libelous please feel free to do something about it, rarther than trying to talk big. Your right about one thing, and one thing only, we are off topic. I also wait with interest.

Log-in to Report

by roger mazillius

27th June 2014, at 17:45:25

Well Owen, they do say that sarcasm is the lowest form of wit and it really is not nonsense to point out that your comment linking council officials with the SCL bid was potentially libellous. Now you are wriggling like mad to pretend that you did not make that comment.
Caught red-handed if you ask me although we are probably now off topic!
I look forward the Planning Committee's decision next week which hopefully will put us all out of our misery!

Log-in to Report

by Owen Burson

27th June 2014, at 15:42:58

Well Roger either my sarcasm didn't come through, or you are choosing to ignore it. I am well aware of the structure, aware that the officials carry out statutory duties as well as the political will of the elected local representatives.
I am also perfectly well aware that your nonsense threats of libel are to offset my suggestions of incompetence and a lack of vision.

Log-in to Report

by roger mazillius

27th June 2014, at 14:10:31

Thanks Owen. Officials/Officers are staff who actually do the work. Members are elected every four years and set the policies of the Council which are then put into practical form and carried out by the staff.
Much of this work is based on statutory necessity eg planning, social care, education etc, only part of the Council's functions are in the discretion of the ruling Group.
So I trust you now understand the sensitivity of claiming there is something going on between a planning applicant and a council official and then telling us that you do not understand the distinction between officials and members!
Triviality to some, a serious potential libel to others. I am sure those planning officers involved with the SCL planning application are, to say the least, not amused by your muddled assertion.

Log-in to Report

by Owen Burson

27th June 2014, at 12:00:20

Seems I've touched a nerve, but thanks for the clarification regarding terminology. So they are officials not members. Seems a trivial thing to be focussing on though. If only I could think of a role where that seems to be considered an essential skill. I'll have to remember: Not a bunch of members.

Log-in to Report

by roger mazillius

26th June 2014, at 18:02:12

Thanks Owen. First it is officers ,now members. Seems you have got your wires crossed or don't really know "jack s..t" about this subject.
So just what exactly did you mean by posting "there has to be something going on here between SCL and a council official"?
You now state you do not believe there has been or is any corruption so what could be "going on" between this company and a council official?
I think we should be told otherwise it would appear you are making allegations without any foundation whatsover!

Log-in to Report

by Owen Burson

26th June 2014, at 16:02:22

Thanks for your advice Roger but I'm quite happy for my comment to stand; my comment is open to interpretation. Further to your own interpretation and your question however; I dont believe there has been, or is any corruption as that would take the ability to do some 'joined up thinking'. Not a phrase that springs to mind when describing our senior council members over recent years.

Log-in to Report

by roger mazillius

26th June 2014, at 15:20:04

Thanks David. Why has the SCL application "no foundation"? It is irrelevant in planning terms that eg they do not have a ready customer. The test is whether or not it is capable of being developed for the use applied for. Similarly for example, land is given planning permission for residential development without any homes being sold beforehand.
Mind you I am no fan whatsoever of the SCL application, the opportunism of which has been well-described by other posters.
As regard the IWC, I would most strongly assert that it was about to be determined when the elections intervened.
Owen, with respect, that does not answer my question because to most readers, your comment appears to infer some corrupt activity between SCL and a council official. Corruption is one thing, incompetence quite another!
So unless you have evidence of corruption, you may feel it prudent to withdraw your comment.

Any views or opinions presented in the comments above are solely those of the author and do not represent those of the Isle of Wight County Press.

Most Read

  1. Dual carriageway crash

    Thursday, July 24, 2014

  2. New speed limit on dual carriageway

    Wednesday, July 23, 2014

  3. Ancient woodlands revealed

    Thursday, July 24, 2014

  4. Dramatic rescue for group trapped by tide

    Wednesday, July 23, 2014

  5. Scrutiny committee recommends parking charge review

    Wednesday, July 23, 2014

View our Elgin Traffic & Travel Map