Author Topic: Fitness first/lidl application 2016/00664/pa  (Read 7514 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline lynnew

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 16
Fitness first/lidl application 2016/00664/pa
« on: June 02, 2016, 08:14:22 PM »
Does anyone know about any progress on this application? Birmingham council website still just shows application as registered

Offline Kwacky

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 274
    • Tankslap
Re: Fitness first/lidl application 2016/00664/pa
« Reply #1 on: June 08, 2016, 02:57:16 PM »
A decision is due by the end of July.

From what I've heard the owner wants to sell, regardless. 


Offline Kwacky

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 274
    • Tankslap
Re: Fitness first/lidl application 2016/00664/pa
« Reply #3 on: October 13, 2016, 12:17:57 PM »
The fitness first gym is the only gym in the area, the closest alternatives are in Kings Heath or Cotteridge.  One is much smaller and the other is mostly free weights.  I use fitness first 3 times a week and in the evenings it is very busy catering for a wide range of ages.  It offers a varied selection  of activities with good support from helpful and knowledgeable staff. 

The bowling alley frequently has offers for families which we take up.  It's a nice friendly venue and a good place to go with my wife and two children.  There is nothing similar for quite a distance.

On the other hand there are plenty of shops available.  The co-op is close by as is Farmfoods and a smaller supermarket on the high street.  There is no business requirement for an additional supermarket.

Tesco maintain their intention to build a supermarket.  If they do so and this application is granted we will have 4 supermarkets within a square mile, but no gym and no family based activity centre for older children. 

The removal of fitness first and PSL will erode two key community centres.  At a time when health is a key concern it makes little sense to replace two activity centres with yet another food store.

Lidl cannot demonstrate the requirement for another supermarket in this area when it is already well served by several large and small food and grocery outlets. 

If the council are minded to give permission for Lidl to build in the area may I suggest that first Tesco be put to task to commit firmly its intentions in Stirchley either way.

The staff at fitness first are trained and qualified and would struggle to find alternative employment.

The traffic in the area is already heavy and congested for most of the day. The recent changes to the road layout have done little to alleviate the issue. The introduction of a supermarkket outside a busy road and opposite and near to other busy junctions will increase road traffic congestion.

That traffic is due to increase with the building of additional properties further along the Perhsore Road at the other end of Stirchley. 

Stirchley High street will be affected  by the introduction of another supermarket, just as it is beginning to develop.  Shops such as PCafe, Wildcat Tap and Loaf improve the area, another supermarket will not.
 
National planning guidance PPS6 states that “to deliver the Government’s objective of promoting vital and viable town centres, development should be focused in existing centres in order to strengthen and, where appropriate, regenerate them.”

By approving construction of another supermarket whilst replacing existing useful business the local authority will be directly contravening this guidance.

Offline Brain80

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: Fitness first/lidl application 2016/00664/pa
« Reply #4 on: October 18, 2016, 04:35:00 PM »
I lodged my objection against the original PA, and its the same ref so I pfresume my objection still stands? Or do I need to add again?

Offline suzysue

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: Fitness first/lidl application 2016/00664/pa
« Reply #5 on: October 18, 2016, 06:22:57 PM »
Good question I'd object again as will I

Offline Kwacky

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 274
    • Tankslap
Re: Fitness first/lidl application 2016/00664/pa
« Reply #6 on: October 24, 2016, 12:49:20 PM »
you need to object again. 

Offline Brain80

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: Fitness first/lidl application 2016/00664/pa
« Reply #7 on: October 25, 2016, 09:31:57 PM »
You're right Kwacky.just found my letter explaining the plans have changed and it does mention objecting again . Objection done! Again!
Both me and my husband have just started going based on ur advice the other week (via twitter) and I'm really enjoying it I'm signing up properly tomorrow for 12 months , and they've waived the joining fee ! My husband has already joined up and that was something I thought I'd never see as he's been going iron works for 20 yrs!

Offline Kwacky

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 274
    • Tankslap
Re: Fitness first/lidl application 2016/00664/pa
« Reply #8 on: October 30, 2016, 08:35:57 PM »
Glad to hear you're both enjoying it,  I've not been for a couple of weeks but I've been away.  Back at it this week. 

Offline RippleRoad

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 84
Re: Fitness first/lidl application 2016/00664/pa
« Reply #9 on: November 02, 2016, 09:25:59 PM »
objected.....AGAIN  :)

Offline oldboy81

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: Fitness first/lidl application 2016/00664/pa
« Reply #10 on: November 14, 2016, 12:49:17 PM »
Fitness First is not just a gym which contributes to keeping Stirchley residents healthy and well. It is a modern version of a community centre, where families, late teens to senior citizens meet up and are an active community. It is the only gym in this half of the city you could say is a true health and fitness club. The personal trainers are all so professional and fantastic. They are polite to everyone and respect is promoted as a key value of the club. The student population use it regularly too, and many 2nd 3rd year and post grads use Fitness First over the University gym because they move into Stirchley in their later years. The club could benefit from having a refurb, there's enough land for example to build a pool and possibly extend the club's catering facilities to make room for a healthy cafe.  Sainsburies at the Maypole has a gym but unfortunately this wouldn't work for the FF site in Stirchley and the business model for Lidl would be anything but accomodating of such a facility. 

As for the Stirchley Bowling alley, this has been around since the 80s and people travel here from all over South Birmingham. It would be a huge shame to end this Birmingham establishments long history because of a supermarket.

Cllr Mary Locke will be at the Stirchley Forum this evening. 14th November and everyone should urge Mary to make a fuss about the gym in any council meeting she can. It is diabolical that Lidl could create 20 jobs, but also cut another 20 or 30 in the process....???

But, have we established if Fitness First has made a bid to purchase the site from the landlord? Is this on the cards too?

As one very sensible member on here stated:
 
"National planning guidance PPS6 states that “to deliver the Government’s objective of promoting vital and viable town centres, development should be focused in existing centres in order to strengthen and, where appropriate, regenerate them.”

By approving construction of another supermarket whilst replacing existing useful business the local authority will be directly contravening this guidance."

Offline Kwacky

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 274
    • Tankslap
Re: Fitness first/lidl application 2016/00664/pa
« Reply #11 on: November 14, 2016, 04:37:53 PM »
My understanding is that Fitness First is not in a position to invest in property.  Although they turned a profit they were looking for buyers earlier in the year. 


Offline atomicjam

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
Re: Fitness first/lidl application 2016/00664/pa
« Reply #12 on: December 08, 2016, 05:46:02 PM »
'Councillors have thrown out plans to replace a popular bowling alley and gym with discount superstore Lidl'.

Story here:-

http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/business/lidl-plans-thrown-out-save-12291892

Offline Kwacky

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 274
    • Tankslap
Re: Fitness first/lidl application 2016/00664/pa
« Reply #13 on: December 13, 2016, 12:02:46 PM »
Great news.  Let's hope that is the last of it.

Offline Chris

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 37
Re: Fitness first/lidl application 2016/00664/pa
« Reply #14 on: December 14, 2016, 10:13:11 AM »
I believe LIDL will be appealing, and as the vote was only 6-5 against them they could well still win.