Protests continue as council approves plans for supermarket on Wentworth Street car park in Malton

Gazette & Herald: An artists’ impression of the new development at Wentworth Street car park An artists’ impression of the new development at Wentworth Street car park

PROTESTORS against proposals to build a supermarket on Wentworth Street car park, in Malton, have vowed that “this is not the end of the story” after plans were approved.

Six members of Ryedale District Council’s planning committee voted to approve officer-recommended plans for a store and petrol station on Thursday night after the other four councillors walked out in protest.

Malton Against SuperStore (MASS) said the only way to describe the decision was “perverse”.

The protest group, led by Totally Locally Malton and Norton, the Malton and Norton Chamber of Trade and Fitzwilliam (Malton) Estate, said the council had disregarded public opinion, including 4,000 local opponents who had signed a petition against the store.

A spokesman said: “Councillors have decided to approve a planning consent for a superstore which they are told can only be Tesco, in the knowledge that it is very low down in Tesco’s priorities, so there is no certainty that the store will be built. If so, the site will stand empty for years.

“They knowingly took an unsafe decision, posing massive risks that it will threaten a certain £15m development of a supermarket on the livestock market site, that is in line with their own Local Plan, where Booths had confirmed an interest, a development which would stimulate further revival and expansion of the town centre. This is not the end of the story and we hope that the Secretary of State “calls in” the application and refuses it. If not, a legal challenge is almost certain to follow. To have passed this application was an exercise in wishful thinking.”

The Fitzwilliam (Malton) Estate warned that the development of the town’s livestock market had now been put on hold following the council’s decision. Manager Roddy Bushell said: “The result was expected, with councillors voting on strict party lines.

"It is disappointing that the whole reorganisation of the livestock market and the use of its site to revitalise the town centre, embraced with a sense of real optimism for Malton by the whole community, has been put on hold again by another ill-considered decision by Ryedale’s councillors.

“I say ‘on hold’, because we are convinced their decision will not stand since it is not in accord with National Planning Policy, or in fact with their own Local Plan only recently adopted, and we will be asking the Secretary of State to call in the application and reverse it.”

Councillor Linda Cowling, leader of Ryedale District Council, said she was delighted the proposals had been accepted. She said: “We have reached the beginning of the end and I am very pleased, but disappointed four members walked out before that was made.

“The Fitzwilliam Estate has made a lot about the damage this will do to Malton, but I think it will be good for Malton and I have received many letters of support saying the same thing.”

A spokesman for the applicants GMI Holbeck Land said: “We are pleased the council supported their officer’s robust recommendation and approved our application. As is the process for applications of this type, this will now be considered by the Secretary of State before a final decision is made. We are keen to work with all parties to deliver a scheme which will benefit the whole community.”

 

How the battle started

THE latest round in the Malton “store wars” saga was played out on Thursday night witnessed by about 100 members of the public.

Plans for a supermarket on Wentworth Street car park were first unveiled in 2011, after Ryedale District Council voted to sell part of it for up to £5m. Developer GMI Holbeck said the Wentworth Project would bring people and employment to the area and prevent the millions of pounds lost by Malton shops each year through people travelling to York and Scarborough.

Opponents argued a store on the site would damage the centre of Malton and that the district council was selling the “family jewels”.

The same year a blueprint for the redevelopment of Malton’s livestock market and the creation of a new food store was also submitted to the planning authority.

The Fitzwilliam (Malton) Estate were the creators of the plan to demolish the livestock market and replace it with four retail units, including an “anchor” store, but their proposals were rejected at a special meeting of the district council’s planning committee in April 2012, while approval was given for Wentworth Street car park.

An appeal by the Estate led to a five-day public inquiry and the future of the site was thrown into uncertainty after the council’s decision was ruled to be flawed. A Government planning inspector said the council should reconsider approval of Wetworth Street plans and that proposals for Malton livestock market by the Fitzwilliam (Malton) Estate should be allowed.

An amended application for a foodstore and petrol station at Wentworth Street was submitted by GMI Holbeck Land Ltd last December and included plans for a walkway to Malton Market Place, free parking and a public piazza.

On Thursday, Ryedale District Council’s planning committee approved the plans and agreed that the Secretary of State be notified of the application and that outline permission be granted should the Secretary of State decide not to intervene.

Should permission be granted, subject to conditions and a section 106 agreement, there will be a period of six weeks during which the permission may be challenged through a judicial review.

 

‘Council has ignored warnings’

THE team behind the Totally Locally scheme said council members were ignoring the warnings of the harm the supermarket could do to Malton and Norton.

Totally Locally was set up last year as part of a scheme to encourage people to “love where they live”.

Since then a number of initiatives have taken place to encourage shoppers to use the services on their doorsteps, including a Fiverfest fortnight and Festive Fiver.

Emma Brooksbank, from the group, said: “Totally Locally is a national movement to underpin independent shops, jobs and healthy communities. Its ideals are supported by the Conservative Party through Localism. But it is painfully clear the local Conservative ruling group does not support Totally Locally.

"It is the Conservative councillors who have – twice now – voted to give permission for a store, ignoring all warnings of the harm that would do to Malton and Norton and the independent shops.

 

Gazette & Herald:

Approval for store

PLANS to build a supermarket on Wentworth Street car park, in Malton, were approved by Ryedale district councillors – despite four members of the planning committee walking out before the crucial vote.

Lindsay Burr, who represents Malton, Peter Walker, Luke Richardson and Tommy Woodward left the meeting and a motion recommending the plan be refused was lost.

The six remaining councillors – Janet Sanderson, Caroline Goodrick, Eric Hope, Stephen Arnold, David Cussons and John Windress, vice-chairman of the committee, approved the plan, subject to conditions.

About 100 members of the public attended the meeting, at Malton School, to discuss the application by Leeds-based developer GMI Holbeck for a supermarket and petrol station on the site.

Those speaking against the plans included Malton’s deputy mayor Councillor Paul Andrews, Malton Town Council clerk Mike Skehan, district councillor Fiona Croft and Councillor James Fraser, representing Malton and Norton Area Partnership.

District councillor Edward Legard, who also opposed the application, said the last time came before the council it had cost taxpayers £200,000.

“Some in this council will stop at nothing to force this application through despite the overwhelming public opposition,” he said. “If you do approve then there is a real and substantial risk that we may lose the livestock market development, which will mark the collapse of the Eden Camp project on which so many jobs depend and we are left with an out-of-town bog-standard Tesco.”

Roddy Bushell, estate manager for the Fitzwilliam (Malton) Estate, which has entered negotiations with family-owned supermarket Booths to lease a proposed store in the livestock market redevelopment scheme, said approval would be high-risk for the town. “There is not room for two supermarkets and approval will lead to zero investment and a challenge in the courts, which will bring further cost to the taxpayer,” he said.

Retired shop owner Jane Bradley said a supermarket would be a step forward for the town. “This is a superb site and will reduce traffic congestion and ease parking problems in the market place. There has been some unnecessary scaremongering.”

Speaking on behalf of the developer, Jonathan Wallace said: “Malton cannot afford to stand still while Monks Cross continues to improve. There is significant public support for this application.”

Proposing that the application be refused, Councillor Burr said: “There is a real possibility that the life will be sucked out of Malton if this is passed. The democratic view of local people should be listened to.”

Councillor Peter Walker, who seconded the motion, said he was concerned about the traffic levels and the impact on the surrounding areas. “It is going to be intolerable for those living nearby,” he said.

Councillor Eric Hope said: “This is about Ryedale, not just Malton. People need this so there is no longer a need to trek to Monks Cross.”

After the motion was lost six votes to four, councillors Burr, a Liberal Democrat, Walker, an independent and Liberals Richardson and Woodward walked out, along with the majority of the public.

Coun Sanderson said it was disappointing that they had chosen to leave and not listen to the views of others and moved for approval.

Councillor Goodrick said that with every planning application there were pros and cons. “The issues have been clouded by toxic relations,” she said. “Many believe this will be the ruination of Malton, but I believe it will increase footfall in town and make it more attractive to retailers, leading to more jobs and prosperity. It is it time for us all to work together instead of across the divide to secure the best future for Malton.”

 

Your views

Kate Barnard, 32, Norton: “I think Malton has got a lot of independent shops that are just starting to pick up again and it’s possibly going to be a bit of a backward step. I don’t think we need another supermarket because we have got lots already. I think the loss of the car park is a bit of a blow as well.”

Councillor Stephan Arnold, at Thursday’s meeting: “The livestock market plans are good for Malton and this is also good for the town. I am satisfied this development will bring benefits to Malton and Ryedale.”

Sammie Delaney, 28, Malton: “I think it’s a really good idea. I shop in York because there aren’t the shops in Malton and I think it will help to keep people shopping in the town. I know a lot of local businesses have mixed views, but surely the more people who stay in Malton the better.”

Anna Wheldon, 28, Scampston: “The thing that does bother me is the car park. I think there will be an impact because of that because at the moment everyone struggles at the best of times to park.”

Councillor Janet Sanderson, at Thursday’s meeting: “Malton has changed and we cannot prevent the leakage if infrastructure is not good. Look at Northallerton, which has a number of food stores – it is always busy with independent shops next to national retailers.”

Comments (14)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:45pm Wed 30 Apr 14

Teaboy2 says...

I do not think a new supermarket on the Wentworth street car park would be of any benefit for Malton in the long term. Short term, yes may be, but not 10-15 years down the line. The reason for this is one simple reason that no one so far has even mentioned. That reason is the increase of Online Grocery shopping delivered to the customers doorstep. Tesco's over the counter sales in December was significantly lower than during the like for like period the year before. Whilst online sales were up by the 14% for the same period, compared to the year before. There overall sales were down by over 2% compared to the same like for like period.

In other words, more and more people are turning to the internet to do their weekly shopping and having it delivered to their doorsteps, which is actually even cheaper than it costs in petrol to drive to York or Scarborough, and is more convenient to the customer too. So the trend of over the counter sales dropping and online sales increasing will continue and will pick up pace. 14% increase in online sales for Tesco last December, could easily increase to 18-20% this coming christmas (2014). What will happen when they reach the pivotal point where they make more online sales than over the counter sales? The answer is where the profit is!

So whilst we may have a Supermarket on the Wentworth Street car park for 5 - 6 years, i doubt it will be there in 10 to 15 years and instead will be yet another an empty shell, and nothing but a scar on malton. Tesco and other supermarket companies are in business for profit, they care nothing about local people, or the towns they are in, unless it makes them a profit. As soon as it becomes more profitable in an area to simply offer online sales, then they will close the store and jobs will be lost. Eventually supermarkets will be a thing of the past, and will only exist as online eCommerce sites, with central distribution hubs across the country, where they will pick, pack and dispatch peoples shopping from. It will cost more than the £5 million the district council make from the sale of the site, to redevelop the site once the supermarket shuts its doors.

Some may disagree with me, but for the record i own an online eCommerce Business, i know how people are switching more and more to doing their shopping online - Its not just a Fact its an inevitability that eventually supermarkets will cease to exist in town centres as there will be no need for them.

Yes the same trend, regarding online shopping, also effects independent traders, but not as much, as a lot of independent traders also trade online as well. But because their goods are more specialised, the impact of lower over counter sales and increased online sales is actually a benefit to them and likely increases their annual sales and profit margins, which in turn enables them to keep their high street shops open for the benefit of local customers and tourist

Tourism is the key to making Malton thrive (The food festival and amount of people that draws in to town is evidence of that - I've never seen the town so busy and full with people), but i see no more museum, a roman fort that's not even promoted (except for a sign at the entrance and grotty fence and picnic benches. Old malton has the only remaining church of the Gilbertine Order in regular use in the UK, with a rich history - Yep not promoted either. We have the site for the castle, which not many people knew Malton had till castle gardens came about - Unless you know where it is, you'll never find it due to lack of signage in town itself. This is what we should be promoting, along with the towns other rich history and connections (Dickens for example - Yep no signage to the counting house either) - But this can only happen if the council throws its support behind promoting Malton and developing its tourism assets, which am sure the vast majority of local businesses would throw their weight behind.

Though new independent traders setting up high street shops are few and far between now - Instead we have seen an increase in cafe/bars etc. And a lot that took the plunge in setting up a high street shop have failed, though granted some have been successful. But majority now set up business online, due to low overheads, i.e. no rent and the ability to operate from home and have goods drop shipped directly to the customer by their supplier or manufacturer.

What Malton really needs, is not another supermarket, but for Ryedale District Council to have an adviser who is knowledgeable on current shopping trends, marketing strategies, and who can go and talk directly to local business owners, to help and advise them on how to take advantage of current trends and use of the internet to build there own online presence - This person should also be allowed to work with all relevant local groups and the estate as well. Same for tourism too!

That same person will then also be in a position to go back and tell the council what is really needed for local businesses and economy and not what they presume is needed from advise given to them by people that have a lack of knowledge in current commercial trends. My evidence for lack of said knowledge is that fact no one has mentioned the increase of online sales and decline of over the counter sales for supermarkets like Tescos. But more importantly, the councilors need to remember that its their job to listen to what the local businesses and public want, not what they themselves want, for their own wards at the expense of another ward - The council is not a business or cooperation, its a public body where its members are democratically elected who should act in the best interest of all wards and not just their own person wards for short term gain at a very costly long term expense that will cost all wards in the long term.
I do not think a new supermarket on the Wentworth street car park would be of any benefit for Malton in the long term. Short term, yes may be, but not 10-15 years down the line. The reason for this is one simple reason that no one so far has even mentioned. That reason is the increase of Online Grocery shopping delivered to the customers doorstep. Tesco's over the counter sales in December was significantly lower than during the like for like period the year before. Whilst online sales were up by the 14% for the same period, compared to the year before. There overall sales were down by over 2% compared to the same like for like period. In other words, more and more people are turning to the internet to do their weekly shopping and having it delivered to their doorsteps, which is actually even cheaper than it costs in petrol to drive to York or Scarborough, and is more convenient to the customer too. So the trend of over the counter sales dropping and online sales increasing will continue and will pick up pace. 14% increase in online sales for Tesco last December, could easily increase to 18-20% this coming christmas (2014). What will happen when they reach the pivotal point where they make more online sales than over the counter sales? The answer is where the profit is! So whilst we may have a Supermarket on the Wentworth Street car park for 5 - 6 years, i doubt it will be there in 10 to 15 years and instead will be yet another an empty shell, and nothing but a scar on malton. Tesco and other supermarket companies are in business for profit, they care nothing about local people, or the towns they are in, unless it makes them a profit. As soon as it becomes more profitable in an area to simply offer online sales, then they will close the store and jobs will be lost. Eventually supermarkets will be a thing of the past, and will only exist as online eCommerce sites, with central distribution hubs across the country, where they will pick, pack and dispatch peoples shopping from. It will cost more than the £5 million the district council make from the sale of the site, to redevelop the site once the supermarket shuts its doors. Some may disagree with me, but for the record i own an online eCommerce Business, i know how people are switching more and more to doing their shopping online - Its not just a Fact its an inevitability that eventually supermarkets will cease to exist in town centres as there will be no need for them. Yes the same trend, regarding online shopping, also effects independent traders, but not as much, as a lot of independent traders also trade online as well. But because their goods are more specialised, the impact of lower over counter sales and increased online sales is actually a benefit to them and likely increases their annual sales and profit margins, which in turn enables them to keep their high street shops open for the benefit of local customers and tourist Tourism is the key to making Malton thrive (The food festival and amount of people that draws in to town is evidence of that - I've never seen the town so busy and full with people), but i see no more museum, a roman fort that's not even promoted (except for a sign at the entrance and grotty fence and picnic benches. Old malton has the only remaining church of the Gilbertine Order in regular use in the UK, with a rich history - Yep not promoted either. We have the site for the castle, which not many people knew Malton had till castle gardens came about - Unless you know where it is, you'll never find it due to lack of signage in town itself. This is what we should be promoting, along with the towns other rich history and connections (Dickens for example - Yep no signage to the counting house either) - But this can only happen if the council throws its support behind promoting Malton and developing its tourism assets, which am sure the vast majority of local businesses would throw their weight behind. Though new independent traders setting up high street shops are few and far between now - Instead we have seen an increase in cafe/bars etc. And a lot that took the plunge in setting up a high street shop have failed, though granted some have been successful. But majority now set up business online, due to low overheads, i.e. no rent and the ability to operate from home and have goods drop shipped directly to the customer by their supplier or manufacturer. What Malton really needs, is not another supermarket, but for Ryedale District Council to have an adviser who is knowledgeable on current shopping trends, marketing strategies, and who can go and talk directly to local business owners, to help and advise them on how to take advantage of current trends and use of the internet to build there own online presence - This person should also be allowed to work with all relevant local groups and the estate as well. Same for tourism too! That same person will then also be in a position to go back and tell the council what is really needed for local businesses and economy and not what they presume is needed from advise given to them by people that have a lack of knowledge in current commercial trends. My evidence for lack of said knowledge is that fact no one has mentioned the increase of online sales and decline of over the counter sales for supermarkets like Tescos. But more importantly, the councilors need to remember that its their job to listen to what the local businesses and public want, not what they themselves want, for their own wards at the expense of another ward - The council is not a business or cooperation, its a public body where its members are democratically elected who should act in the best interest of all wards and not just their own person wards for short term gain at a very costly long term expense that will cost all wards in the long term. Teaboy2
  • Score: 9

8:31am Thu 1 May 14

flyfisher says...

Well done Councillors of RDC for sticking up against the bullying tactics of Fitzwilliam Estate. The right decision has been made and I look forward to the opening of the new supermarket soon
Well done Councillors of RDC for sticking up against the bullying tactics of Fitzwilliam Estate. The right decision has been made and I look forward to the opening of the new supermarket soon flyfisher
  • Score: 0

9:04am Thu 1 May 14

Jon Boreman says...

Teaboy, you make some very valid points and no-doubt they along with all other common sense objections will be ignored by RDC who are in this to line their own pockets. That's the actual truth here, not what is the right thing for Malton - only the securing of jobs that lead to Final Salary Pensions. The sooner this is realised and acknowledged the sooner people will realise that RDC will hammer this through regardless of how much damage it does to the town and the district, there is nothing that will surpass personal greed... if you want to take from public coffers, get a job at RDC - Simples!

In simple terms, Malton will NOT suffer at all if this supermarket is not built.
It will rule the day if it is, but that doesn't matter to RDC staff who are on the make from this.
Teaboy, you make some very valid points and no-doubt they along with all other common sense objections will be ignored by RDC who are in this to line their own pockets. That's the actual truth here, not what is the right thing for Malton - only the securing of jobs that lead to Final Salary Pensions. The sooner this is realised and acknowledged the sooner people will realise that RDC will hammer this through regardless of how much damage it does to the town and the district, there is nothing that will surpass personal greed... if you want to take from public coffers, get a job at RDC - Simples! In simple terms, Malton will NOT suffer at all if this supermarket is not built. It will rule the day if it is, but that doesn't matter to RDC staff who are on the make from this. Jon Boreman
  • Score: 6

10:16am Thu 1 May 14

Yorkybob says...

Jon Boreman wrote:
Teaboy, you make some very valid points and no-doubt they along with all other common sense objections will be ignored by RDC who are in this to line their own pockets. That's the actual truth here, not what is the right thing for Malton - only the securing of jobs that lead to Final Salary Pensions. The sooner this is realised and acknowledged the sooner people will realise that RDC will hammer this through regardless of how much damage it does to the town and the district, there is nothing that will surpass personal greed... if you want to take from public coffers, get a job at RDC - Simples! In simple terms, Malton will NOT suffer at all if this supermarket is not built. It will rule the day if it is, but that doesn't matter to RDC staff who are on the make from this.
"RDC staff who are on the make .....". Pretty libellous stuff. I hope John Boreman has some good evidence to back up his claim.
[quote][p][bold]Jon Boreman[/bold] wrote: Teaboy, you make some very valid points and no-doubt they along with all other common sense objections will be ignored by RDC who are in this to line their own pockets. That's the actual truth here, not what is the right thing for Malton - only the securing of jobs that lead to Final Salary Pensions. The sooner this is realised and acknowledged the sooner people will realise that RDC will hammer this through regardless of how much damage it does to the town and the district, there is nothing that will surpass personal greed... if you want to take from public coffers, get a job at RDC - Simples! In simple terms, Malton will NOT suffer at all if this supermarket is not built. It will rule the day if it is, but that doesn't matter to RDC staff who are on the make from this.[/p][/quote]"RDC staff who are on the make .....". Pretty libellous stuff. I hope John Boreman has some good evidence to back up his claim. Yorkybob
  • Score: 5

5:13pm Thu 1 May 14

Maltonian says...

There's an obsession from some in trying to dictate other people's shopping habits. You can't. The fact is that many of us choose to shop in supermarkets rather than traditional local shops. If so many people are against a Wentworth Street store, then why is it a worry to the competition? Surely all those thousands won't go near the new store on principle? Just don't shop there if you're against it, but don't restrict the choice for others. Maybe we should erect checkpoints on the A64 to stop all those deviants going to Monks Cross when they should be made to spend all their dosh in Malton.
There's an obsession from some in trying to dictate other people's shopping habits. You can't. The fact is that many of us choose to shop in supermarkets rather than traditional local shops. If so many people are against a Wentworth Street store, then why is it a worry to the competition? Surely all those thousands won't go near the new store on principle? Just don't shop there if you're against it, but don't restrict the choice for others. Maybe we should erect checkpoints on the A64 to stop all those deviants going to Monks Cross when they should be made to spend all their dosh in Malton. Maltonian
  • Score: 1

6:05pm Thu 1 May 14

bobthejob says...

What i cannot understand is why the future development of Wentworth St. carpark is being decided upon by a planning committee that is made up of only 2 members who live in Malton/Norton. It will ever happen , but why not put it too the residents of these two towns, have a vote yes or no?
What i cannot understand is why the future development of Wentworth St. carpark is being decided upon by a planning committee that is made up of only 2 members who live in Malton/Norton. It will ever happen , but why not put it too the residents of these two towns, have a vote yes or no? bobthejob
  • Score: 6

7:04pm Thu 1 May 14

Maltonian says...

bobthejob wrote:
What i cannot understand is why the future development of Wentworth St. carpark is being decided upon by a planning committee that is made up of only 2 members who live in Malton/Norton. It will ever happen , but why not put it too the residents of these two towns, have a vote yes or no?
That's a great idea Bobthejob, but I'd exclude people from Norton and those on benefits from such a referendum to ensure a better outcome............
[quote][p][bold]bobthejob[/bold] wrote: What i cannot understand is why the future development of Wentworth St. carpark is being decided upon by a planning committee that is made up of only 2 members who live in Malton/Norton. It will ever happen , but why not put it too the residents of these two towns, have a vote yes or no?[/p][/quote]That's a great idea Bobthejob, but I'd exclude people from Norton and those on benefits from such a referendum to ensure a better outcome............ Maltonian
  • Score: 1

9:39pm Thu 1 May 14

twotonethomas says...

Maltonian wrote:
bobthejob wrote:
What i cannot understand is why the future development of Wentworth St. carpark is being decided upon by a planning committee that is made up of only 2 members who live in Malton/Norton. It will ever happen , but why not put it too the residents of these two towns, have a vote yes or no?
That's a great idea Bobthejob, but I'd exclude people from Norton and those on benefits from such a referendum to ensure a better outcome............
And immigrants.

Oh and the moaning minnies ;)
[quote][p][bold]Maltonian[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobthejob[/bold] wrote: What i cannot understand is why the future development of Wentworth St. carpark is being decided upon by a planning committee that is made up of only 2 members who live in Malton/Norton. It will ever happen , but why not put it too the residents of these two towns, have a vote yes or no?[/p][/quote]That's a great idea Bobthejob, but I'd exclude people from Norton and those on benefits from such a referendum to ensure a better outcome............[/p][/quote]And immigrants. Oh and the moaning minnies ;) twotonethomas
  • Score: 3

11:00pm Thu 1 May 14

naomifulvia says...

Reading this article made me think about how the people without cars in Malton get their shopping, and they would benefit from having an (affordable) supermarket at the other end of town from Morrisons.
Also I can't see how the Booth's and it's car park would have been squeezed onto the cattle market site. Again I must emplore people to think about the long term benefit of any development to the town. The cattle market site really is a piece of history that should be preserved to maintain that vital link between us and our agricultural heritage. There is so much culture in Malton relating to farming, food, horses etc.
The thing with supermarkets is the architecture is purpose built and therefore not designed to be intricately beautiful like the crafted buildings of old and is not multi- use like many historical buildings.
What about people from York coming to visit a traditional market town because it retains so much of it's original character and doesn't have brash chain stores in every direction?
Hardly anything is made of the connection with Dickens, I imagine American tourists, or from all over the world would be interested to visit the inspiration for Scrooge and A Christmas Carol.
Just saying.
Reading this article made me think about how the people without cars in Malton get their shopping, and they would benefit from having an (affordable) supermarket at the other end of town from Morrisons. Also I can't see how the Booth's and it's car park would have been squeezed onto the cattle market site. Again I must emplore people to think about the long term benefit of any development to the town. The cattle market site really is a piece of history that should be preserved to maintain that vital link between us and our agricultural heritage. There is so much culture in Malton relating to farming, food, horses etc. The thing with supermarkets is the architecture is purpose built and therefore not designed to be intricately beautiful like the crafted buildings of old and is not multi- use like many historical buildings. What about people from York coming to visit a traditional market town because it retains so much of it's original character and doesn't have brash chain stores in every direction? Hardly anything is made of the connection with Dickens, I imagine American tourists, or from all over the world would be interested to visit the inspiration for Scrooge and A Christmas Carol. Just saying. naomifulvia
  • Score: 0

10:34am Sat 3 May 14

Jon Boreman says...

Yorkybob wrote:
Jon Boreman wrote:
Teaboy, you make some very valid points and no-doubt they along with all other common sense objections will be ignored by RDC who are in this to line their own pockets. That's the actual truth here, not what is the right thing for Malton - only the securing of jobs that lead to Final Salary Pensions. The sooner this is realised and acknowledged the sooner people will realise that RDC will hammer this through regardless of how much damage it does to the town and the district, there is nothing that will surpass personal greed... if you want to take from public coffers, get a job at RDC - Simples! In simple terms, Malton will NOT suffer at all if this supermarket is not built. It will rule the day if it is, but that doesn't matter to RDC staff who are on the make from this.
"RDC staff who are on the make .....". Pretty libellous stuff. I hope John Boreman has some good evidence to back up his claim.
The evidence is in their bank accounts, paid in out of the tax coffers each month.
They are employed by the community and are supposed to represent the community, not themselves. The community does not want this, so ask why they are hammering it through, despite their being no benefit to the community from this. Over the years, RDC have sold off millions of pounds worth of solid assets, all of which would be worth millions if not billions more now. The real question should be - what did they do with that cash? Answer: It's in the bank and the interest pays their wages and their final salary pension scheme. This is a cash rich district council, there is no real need to flog off assets in a town where a private developer is willing to invest many millions to do what is clearly better. Moving on from that, the worst people to plan any kind of business venture in Ryedale is RDC, they have demonstrated their narrow and short term vision on many occurrences and this as highlighted by Teaboy is yet another example. However, when the future day arrives when it becomes obvious, selling off the car park was a gross ****-up, those responsible will be cashing in their final salary pensions - will have moved on and those in their place will say "nothing to do with us, we weren't even here", just as the present bunch of no-hopers do when historic blunders are pointed to. If this was run by a bunch of private business operators they'd be on Watchdog, and labelled cowboys!
[quote][p][bold]Yorkybob[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jon Boreman[/bold] wrote: Teaboy, you make some very valid points and no-doubt they along with all other common sense objections will be ignored by RDC who are in this to line their own pockets. That's the actual truth here, not what is the right thing for Malton - only the securing of jobs that lead to Final Salary Pensions. The sooner this is realised and acknowledged the sooner people will realise that RDC will hammer this through regardless of how much damage it does to the town and the district, there is nothing that will surpass personal greed... if you want to take from public coffers, get a job at RDC - Simples! In simple terms, Malton will NOT suffer at all if this supermarket is not built. It will rule the day if it is, but that doesn't matter to RDC staff who are on the make from this.[/p][/quote]"RDC staff who are on the make .....". Pretty libellous stuff. I hope John Boreman has some good evidence to back up his claim.[/p][/quote]The evidence is in their bank accounts, paid in out of the tax coffers each month. They are employed by the community and are supposed to represent the community, not themselves. The community does not want this, so ask why they are hammering it through, despite their being no benefit to the community from this. Over the years, RDC have sold off millions of pounds worth of solid assets, all of which would be worth millions if not billions more now. The real question should be - what did they do with that cash? Answer: It's in the bank and the interest pays their wages and their final salary pension scheme. This is a cash rich district council, there is no real need to flog off assets in a town where a private developer is willing to invest many millions to do what is clearly better. Moving on from that, the worst people to plan any kind of business venture in Ryedale is RDC, they have demonstrated their narrow and short term vision on many occurrences and this as highlighted by Teaboy is yet another example. However, when the future day arrives when it becomes obvious, selling off the car park was a gross ****-up, those responsible will be cashing in their final salary pensions - will have moved on and those in their place will say "nothing to do with us, we weren't even here", just as the present bunch of no-hopers do when historic blunders are pointed to. If this was run by a bunch of private business operators they'd be on Watchdog, and labelled cowboys! Jon Boreman
  • Score: 0

7:10pm Sat 3 May 14

21stCenturyMalton says...

Thank goodness the Fitzwilliam estate are protesting and going to cost the taxpayer millions. I thought the council might be trying to ruin the town by raising extra revenue but Fitzwilliam are here to waste taxpayer money by challenging a democratic vote. For the second time. Funny how their plans for the cattle market disappeared when the council weren't discussing Wentworth Street... And let us please remember the Fitzwilliam Estate is actually a London based organisation with no interest on Malton itself
Thank goodness the Fitzwilliam estate are protesting and going to cost the taxpayer millions. I thought the council might be trying to ruin the town by raising extra revenue but Fitzwilliam are here to waste taxpayer money by challenging a democratic vote. For the second time. Funny how their plans for the cattle market disappeared when the council weren't discussing Wentworth Street... And let us please remember the Fitzwilliam Estate is actually a London based organisation with no interest on Malton itself 21stCenturyMalton
  • Score: 2

10:01am Mon 5 May 14

DWHDWH says...

How can the Ryedale councillors call themselves democratic? Malton council said NO; the petition had 3500 names saying NO, and I expect the 2 questionnaires also said NO - otherwise we would have seen them.

The Planning committee should remember that they are public servants. The serve the public, not the other way round. The vast majority of that public have said NO, and yet the committee think they know better and have decided to impose their superior knowledge on the town. I hope the voters of Ryedale remember this attitude when the elections come round.

So, what's next? Expensive, drawn-out appeals and appeals about appeals, no doubt. More wasted expense, and meanwhile Malton's revival is on hold.

And we are also looking at the shameful situation where the owners of the land (Ryedale council) are voting on a proposal to increase its value, to the undoubted benefit of their pension fund, and no clear benefit otherwise.

The planning committee members who voted for this should hang their heads in shame. They are, or seem to be, arrogant and self-serving, and they will personally cause huge damage to this town, which deserves much, much better than this.
How can the Ryedale councillors call themselves democratic? Malton council said NO; the petition had 3500 names saying NO, and I expect the 2 questionnaires also said NO - otherwise we would have seen them. The Planning committee should remember that they are public servants. The serve the public, not the other way round. The vast majority of that public have said NO, and yet the committee think they know better and have decided to impose their superior knowledge on the town. I hope the voters of Ryedale remember this attitude when the elections come round. So, what's next? Expensive, drawn-out appeals and appeals about appeals, no doubt. More wasted expense, and meanwhile Malton's revival is on hold. And we are also looking at the shameful situation where the owners of the land (Ryedale council) are voting on a proposal to increase its value, to the undoubted benefit of their pension fund, and no clear benefit otherwise. The planning committee members who voted for this should hang their heads in shame. They are, or seem to be, arrogant and self-serving, and they will personally cause huge damage to this town, which deserves much, much better than this. DWHDWH
  • Score: -4

8:04pm Mon 5 May 14

Yorkybob says...

DWHDWH wrote:
How can the Ryedale councillors call themselves democratic? Malton council said NO; the petition had 3500 names saying NO, and I expect the 2 questionnaires also said NO - otherwise we would have seen them. The Planning committee should remember that they are public servants. The serve the public, not the other way round. The vast majority of that public have said NO, and yet the committee think they know better and have decided to impose their superior knowledge on the town. I hope the voters of Ryedale remember this attitude when the elections come round. So, what's next? Expensive, drawn-out appeals and appeals about appeals, no doubt. More wasted expense, and meanwhile Malton's revival is on hold. And we are also looking at the shameful situation where the owners of the land (Ryedale council) are voting on a proposal to increase its value, to the undoubted benefit of their pension fund, and no clear benefit otherwise. The planning committee members who voted for this should hang their heads in shame. They are, or seem to be, arrogant and self-serving, and they will personally cause huge damage to this town, which deserves much, much better than this.
".............this town, which deserves much, much better than this." Malton revival on hold." What rubbish. Where were the Eatate in the boom years when Malton should have been taking advantage of an upbeat economy.. Just selling false dawns regarding the many sites they own in the town. There is a much better chance that we will see meaningful development on Wentworth Street than any other site in Malton.

The vast majority of the public have not said no. A tiny minority of the Ryedale Community, lead by the Estate, have said no. It looks like the Members on the Planning Committee who voted in favour have a better understanding of public opinion than the misguided nay sayers. Again the fact that 80+ residents took the time to write in support of the proposal is conveniently forgotten.

The wholly inaccurate comment regarding pension funds, which are contributory, and nothing to do with Council owned land transactions highlights the ignorance and blind bias of this contributor.
[quote][p][bold]DWHDWH[/bold] wrote: How can the Ryedale councillors call themselves democratic? Malton council said NO; the petition had 3500 names saying NO, and I expect the 2 questionnaires also said NO - otherwise we would have seen them. The Planning committee should remember that they are public servants. The serve the public, not the other way round. The vast majority of that public have said NO, and yet the committee think they know better and have decided to impose their superior knowledge on the town. I hope the voters of Ryedale remember this attitude when the elections come round. So, what's next? Expensive, drawn-out appeals and appeals about appeals, no doubt. More wasted expense, and meanwhile Malton's revival is on hold. And we are also looking at the shameful situation where the owners of the land (Ryedale council) are voting on a proposal to increase its value, to the undoubted benefit of their pension fund, and no clear benefit otherwise. The planning committee members who voted for this should hang their heads in shame. They are, or seem to be, arrogant and self-serving, and they will personally cause huge damage to this town, which deserves much, much better than this.[/p][/quote]".............this town, which deserves much, much better than this." Malton revival on hold." What rubbish. Where were the Eatate in the boom years when Malton should have been taking advantage of an upbeat economy.. Just selling false dawns regarding the many sites they own in the town. There is a much better chance that we will see meaningful development on Wentworth Street than any other site in Malton. The vast majority of the public have not said no. A tiny minority of the Ryedale Community, lead by the Estate, have said no. It looks like the Members on the Planning Committee who voted in favour have a better understanding of public opinion than the misguided nay sayers. Again the fact that 80+ residents took the time to write in support of the proposal is conveniently forgotten. The wholly inaccurate comment regarding pension funds, which are contributory, and nothing to do with Council owned land transactions highlights the ignorance and blind bias of this contributor. Yorkybob
  • Score: 4

11:10pm Mon 5 May 14

granny sue says...

I have hung back from saying anything especially with all the silly comments people are bringing into the discussion but, since Currys and Woollen and Harlands closed I have had very little reason to go to Malton. There is such an air of negativity coming out of the town.If this supermarket is the only way of getting people to visit then it won't do it for me. Food festivals, marketing organisations, expensive hotels and restaurants wont do it either.If anything, it makes me want to stay away. Sad really that the people who seem to be desperately trying to put some life into the town are doing the opposite. The gazette reporting of the same old stuff hashed over every week and the never ending letters from always the same people saying the same things over and over again is not likely to change anything. Malton is stagnant. No other word required.
I have hung back from saying anything especially with all the silly comments people are bringing into the discussion but, since Currys and Woollen and Harlands closed I have had very little reason to go to Malton. There is such an air of negativity coming out of the town.If this supermarket is the only way of getting people to visit then it won't do it for me. Food festivals, marketing organisations, expensive hotels and restaurants wont do it either.If anything, it makes me want to stay away. Sad really that the people who seem to be desperately trying to put some life into the town are doing the opposite. The gazette reporting of the same old stuff hashed over every week and the never ending letters from always the same people saying the same things over and over again is not likely to change anything. Malton is stagnant. No other word required. granny sue
  • Score: -2

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree