New Cathedral Plaza shopping centre plan unveiled for Worcester

New city centre shopping plaza vision is unveiled

VISION: How the new Cathedral Plaza would look

NOW: The scene from a similar viewpoint today

First published in News Evesham Journal: Photograph of the Author by , Reporter

A DEVELOPER has unveiled ambitious plans for a new shopping plaza in the centre of the city.

The Salmon Harvester Opportunity Fund wants to "remodel" the Cathedral Plaza, at the bottom of the High Street, and has unveiled the ambitious plans to the public.

The group showed off the plans on Thursday during a special exhibition ahead of submitting the proposal to the city council later this month.

If approved, the scheme could create 100 jobs and boast seven restaurants across two floors in the building, part of which formed the former Russell and Dorrell department store, new retail space and a new public square, which will include remodelling the roundabout outside Worcester Cathedral.

“We’re excited about our proposals for Cathedral Plaza and the possibility of creating a new public square for Worcester, and we hope the city is too," said Nick Webb from Salmon Harvester which owns the plaza, having bought it in February 2013.

The plans will remain in Unit 20 of the plaza until Wednesday (May 7) for the public to view.

The group says feedback received in the next week will be considered by its development team prior to the final scheme being agreed for submission to Worcester City Council.

Should plans be approved the building could be up and running by spring 2016.

Yesterday, visitors to the exhibition gave their thoughts on the plans.

"I think this would be a good thing for Worcester," said Vicky O'Connor, who runs the Books for Free charity in the Lychgate shopping centre.

"It looks good and the concept is right.

"I think the building as it is at the moment is a bit of a white elephant."

Meanwhile Jules Wells, who runs Blow Your Top gents hairdresser in nearby Friar Street, had doubts over the traffic in the area.

"I hope it will be a good thing and bring people to the area but the traffic is already bad here, particularly during rush hour," she said.

Meanwhile one women, who didn't want to be named, questioned the need for so many eating places.

She said: "We need the high end shops, yes, but we also need the low end, too.

"I think it''s a brilliant idea but we need more balance."

As previously reported by your Worcester News, the plans for Cathedral Plaza include seven new restaurants overlooking an extended public square in front of the cathedral.

Talks have already been held between Salmon Harvester and Worcestershire County Council over the roundabout, which would reduce in size, with a pedestrian crossing close to the current Elgar statue.

Comments (20)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:16pm Fri 2 May 14

i-cycle says...

That's more like it Worcester.

Better than all this out of town nonsense.
That's more like it Worcester. Better than all this out of town nonsense. i-cycle
  • Score: 18

5:24pm Fri 2 May 14

Sproutacus says...

Although I support any measure to beautify the area as I think as this as the "front" of Worcester, there doesn't appear to be a bus stop anymore.
If there is, then the road has been narrowed creating more of a bottle neck during busy times than currently.
Not to mention yet 'more' eateries that have to be delivered to, where are the delivery trucks going to off-load?
Although I support any measure to beautify the area as I think as this as the "front" of Worcester, there doesn't appear to be a bus stop anymore. If there is, then the road has been narrowed creating more of a bottle neck during busy times than currently. Not to mention yet 'more' eateries that have to be delivered to, where are the delivery trucks going to off-load? Sproutacus
  • Score: 15

6:47pm Fri 2 May 14

A Different View says...

Mmmm did the reported speak to the developer for more than 30 seconds? I spoke to them yesterday when they were displaying the scheme.

Firstly the focus is not on a shopping centre at all, it will be a leisure complex with a limited number of shops. The main focus for the developer is the restaurants as by their own admission 'retail is tough at the moment'. That said there is one large unit (2 joined together it seemed) for a specific tenant who has specified the type of unit they are after (no mention of names).

Talks with restaurants is well underway, I was told they are all in the mid-market sector or family places (like Pizza Express) but none of the 7 already had a presence in Worcester.

In terms of timescales they are hoping to have planning passed by early 2015 with construction completed around Spring 2016.

The 'plaza' appears to be a hard surface so I wouldn't be surprised if there was still provision for buses, although I wasn't really looking for that. Loading I would imagine could be handled the same way, or isn't the area around the back by the exit to the car park the loading dock with access to the rear of the units?

I am a bit concerned about the traffic, basically the large roundabout goes, and the roads in and out run alongside each other with a small 'turning roundabout' that you would only use if you needed to change direction which is obviously common the way traffic flows. The roads are 2 lanes so they seemed confident it would be easier but I would be concerned as that new small roundabout could only accommodate one or two cars at a time on it, meaning traffic will build up back on the road and create an obstruction. I am no expert though so it might be fine.

As you can see from the picture it looks very modern and they want to clad the Travelodge to make it look less offensive.

All in all I think it will be a big improvement to what is a very run down part of town.
Mmmm did the reported speak to the developer for more than 30 seconds? I spoke to them yesterday when they were displaying the scheme. Firstly the focus is not on a shopping centre at all, it will be a leisure complex with a limited number of shops. The main focus for the developer is the restaurants as by their own admission 'retail is tough at the moment'. That said there is one large unit (2 joined together it seemed) for a specific tenant who has specified the type of unit they are after (no mention of names). Talks with restaurants is well underway, I was told they are all in the mid-market sector or family places (like Pizza Express) but none of the 7 already had a presence in Worcester. In terms of timescales they are hoping to have planning passed by early 2015 with construction completed around Spring 2016. The 'plaza' appears to be a hard surface so I wouldn't be surprised if there was still provision for buses, although I wasn't really looking for that. Loading I would imagine could be handled the same way, or isn't the area around the back by the exit to the car park the loading dock with access to the rear of the units? I am a bit concerned about the traffic, basically the large roundabout goes, and the roads in and out run alongside each other with a small 'turning roundabout' that you would only use if you needed to change direction which is obviously common the way traffic flows. The roads are 2 lanes so they seemed confident it would be easier but I would be concerned as that new small roundabout could only accommodate one or two cars at a time on it, meaning traffic will build up back on the road and create an obstruction. I am no expert though so it might be fine. As you can see from the picture it looks very modern and they want to clad the Travelodge to make it look less offensive. All in all I think it will be a big improvement to what is a very run down part of town. A Different View
  • Score: 17

8:15pm Fri 2 May 14

CJH says...

Let's look at the wording here: ambitious; ahead of submitting the proposal; could create 100 jobs; if approved; possibility; should plans be approved; doubts over the traffic; the traffic is already bad here
.
This is an yet another overblown marketing proposal. When the push comes to shove we all know that there will neither be the finances available or the inclination to carry out ALL the work indicated. If the council says yes, it should be on the condition that everything in the proposal should be carried out, within a specified time frame, and absolutely no cost to the tax payer. I would love to see that ugly chunk of concrete covered up for good. Sadly I'm not holding my breath. And of course what's the one thing which will probably mess everything up? The situation with the traffic, roads and parking. Regrettably that's in the hands of shhh...you know who, so we're sunk before we start.
Let's look at the wording here: ambitious; ahead of submitting the proposal; could create 100 jobs; if approved; possibility; should plans be approved; doubts over the traffic; the traffic is already bad here . This is an yet another overblown marketing proposal. When the push comes to shove we all know that there will neither be the finances available or the inclination to carry out ALL the work indicated. If the council says yes, it should be on the condition that everything in the proposal should be carried out, within a specified time frame, and absolutely no cost to the tax payer. I would love to see that ugly chunk of concrete covered up for good. Sadly I'm not holding my breath. And of course what's the one thing which will probably mess everything up? The situation with the traffic, roads and parking. Regrettably that's in the hands of shhh...you know who, so we're sunk before we start. CJH
  • Score: 2

8:17pm Fri 2 May 14

CJH says...

Oh, and by the way, this is not really a 'new' plan is it? It's been on and off the table in various guises for about 7 or 8 years now at least.
Oh, and by the way, this is not really a 'new' plan is it? It's been on and off the table in various guises for about 7 or 8 years now at least. CJH
  • Score: 4

8:24pm Fri 2 May 14

truth must out says...

I moved to Worcester in 1978 and these 'developments' have regularly featured in the WN......and guess what??? They are all 'pie in the sky ' and NEVER happen. The city still looks very much the same as 1978....
I moved to Worcester in 1978 and these 'developments' have regularly featured in the WN......and guess what??? They are all 'pie in the sky ' and NEVER happen. The city still looks very much the same as 1978.... truth must out
  • Score: 4

9:20pm Fri 2 May 14

A Different View says...

Well to try and play devil's advocate, the property is in the hands of a private company who have only owned it since 2013. They have already got to the point that they have interested parties and firm plans so they must have been working on it pretty much since they owned it... so they are showing some pace.

They were quite clear that it wont be built unless a large percentage of the units are pre-let. However considering that they seemed to be very confident that the 7 restaurants are not already in Gloucester, and they type they were, I would suggest it is a tied up as is possible before planning is granted.

The traffic type people there seemed to indicate that based on calculations the changes would neither improve the traffic flow nor make it worse. I have some concerns but time will tell.

Hopefully money speaks and the private owners think they can make some...... it would be nice to see some real change and progress in the city.
Well to try and play devil's advocate, the property is in the hands of a private company who have only owned it since 2013. They have already got to the point that they have interested parties and firm plans so they must have been working on it pretty much since they owned it... so they are showing some pace. They were quite clear that it wont be built unless a large percentage of the units are pre-let. However considering that they seemed to be very confident that the 7 restaurants are not already in Gloucester, and they type they were, I would suggest it is a tied up as is possible before planning is granted. The traffic type people there seemed to indicate that based on calculations the changes would neither improve the traffic flow nor make it worse. I have some concerns but time will tell. Hopefully money speaks and the private owners think they can make some...... it would be nice to see some real change and progress in the city. A Different View
  • Score: 6

9:21pm Fri 2 May 14

A Different View says...

A Different View wrote:
Well to try and play devil's advocate, the property is in the hands of a private company who have only owned it since 2013. They have already got to the point that they have interested parties and firm plans so they must have been working on it pretty much since they owned it... so they are showing some pace.

They were quite clear that it wont be built unless a large percentage of the units are pre-let. However considering that they seemed to be very confident that the 7 restaurants are not already in Gloucester, and they type they were, I would suggest it is a tied up as is possible before planning is granted.

The traffic type people there seemed to indicate that based on calculations the changes would neither improve the traffic flow nor make it worse. I have some concerns but time will tell.

Hopefully money speaks and the private owners think they can make some...... it would be nice to see some real change and progress in the city.
By Gloucester I meant Worcester of course..... typo
[quote][p][bold]A Different View[/bold] wrote: Well to try and play devil's advocate, the property is in the hands of a private company who have only owned it since 2013. They have already got to the point that they have interested parties and firm plans so they must have been working on it pretty much since they owned it... so they are showing some pace. They were quite clear that it wont be built unless a large percentage of the units are pre-let. However considering that they seemed to be very confident that the 7 restaurants are not already in Gloucester, and they type they were, I would suggest it is a tied up as is possible before planning is granted. The traffic type people there seemed to indicate that based on calculations the changes would neither improve the traffic flow nor make it worse. I have some concerns but time will tell. Hopefully money speaks and the private owners think they can make some...... it would be nice to see some real change and progress in the city.[/p][/quote]By Gloucester I meant Worcester of course..... typo A Different View
  • Score: 5

10:16am Sat 3 May 14

liketoknow says...

it's hard not to be cynical when you read these stories. after all we've had two of these 'developments' since the sixties. we had the old Blackfriars , which made way for the Crowngate. I think they just succeed in taking away any character from the city.
it's hard not to be cynical when you read these stories. after all we've had two of these 'developments' since the sixties. we had the old Blackfriars , which made way for the Crowngate. I think they just succeed in taking away any character from the city. liketoknow
  • Score: 4

11:02am Sat 3 May 14

Jay1981 says...

More plans. How many go through ! We where told about a swimming pool plans. Nothing never happened. All the plans for railway station never went through.

more dreams and no progress.
More plans. How many go through ! We where told about a swimming pool plans. Nothing never happened. All the plans for railway station never went through. more dreams and no progress. Jay1981
  • Score: 4

4:33pm Sat 3 May 14

Chronos says...

Whatever they do in that part of Worcester, the end result is going to be blighted by still having the A44 scything through it.

Why don't our planners, just for once, take a long-term view and maybe do something a little more sophisticated than mere cosmetic dressing in their attempts to spruce up an area much in need of it.

Drastic it may sound, and certainly not the cheapest option, but why not at least consider the possibility of tunnelling beneath the area and diverting the traffic through harmlessly and unnoticeably underground?

They faced the same dilemmas with the City Walls Road separating the new St Martins Quarter development from the rest of town and chose to do little or nothing except slightly repositioning the pedestrian crossing and removing one of the northbound traffic lanes.

Far better to have sent the road underground, or maybe to have built a decent bridge from The Cornmarket across to the other side.

As always with our Council, they do occasionally come up with some pretty imaginative and insightful plans, but without exception, their subsequent implementation is at best, half-arsed. Think no further than the fact that we must be the only town or city anywhere with an orbital "bypass" that only actually runs around three-quarters of the area's circumference.
Whatever they do in that part of Worcester, the end result is going to be blighted by still having the A44 scything through it. Why don't our planners, just for once, take a long-term view and maybe do something a little more sophisticated than mere cosmetic dressing in their attempts to spruce up an area much in need of it. Drastic it may sound, and certainly not the cheapest option, but why not at least consider the possibility of tunnelling beneath the area and diverting the traffic through harmlessly and unnoticeably underground? They faced the same dilemmas with the City Walls Road separating the new St Martins Quarter development from the rest of town and chose to do little or nothing except slightly repositioning the pedestrian crossing and removing one of the northbound traffic lanes. Far better to have sent the road underground, or maybe to have built a decent bridge from The Cornmarket across to the other side. As always with our Council, they do occasionally come up with some pretty imaginative and insightful plans, but without exception, their subsequent implementation is at best, half-arsed. Think no further than the fact that we must be the only town or city anywhere with an orbital "bypass" that only actually runs around three-quarters of the area's circumference. Chronos
  • Score: 1

4:40pm Sat 3 May 14

CJH says...

Chronos wrote:
Whatever they do in that part of Worcester, the end result is going to be blighted by still having the A44 scything through it.

Why don't our planners, just for once, take a long-term view and maybe do something a little more sophisticated than mere cosmetic dressing in their attempts to spruce up an area much in need of it.

Drastic it may sound, and certainly not the cheapest option, but why not at least consider the possibility of tunnelling beneath the area and diverting the traffic through harmlessly and unnoticeably underground?

They faced the same dilemmas with the City Walls Road separating the new St Martins Quarter development from the rest of town and chose to do little or nothing except slightly repositioning the pedestrian crossing and removing one of the northbound traffic lanes.

Far better to have sent the road underground, or maybe to have built a decent bridge from The Cornmarket across to the other side.

As always with our Council, they do occasionally come up with some pretty imaginative and insightful plans, but without exception, their subsequent implementation is at best, half-arsed. Think no further than the fact that we must be the only town or city anywhere with an orbital "bypass" that only actually runs around three-quarters of the area's circumference.
A tunnel? That close to the river? That couldn't possibly go wrong could it?
[quote][p][bold]Chronos[/bold] wrote: Whatever they do in that part of Worcester, the end result is going to be blighted by still having the A44 scything through it. Why don't our planners, just for once, take a long-term view and maybe do something a little more sophisticated than mere cosmetic dressing in their attempts to spruce up an area much in need of it. Drastic it may sound, and certainly not the cheapest option, but why not at least consider the possibility of tunnelling beneath the area and diverting the traffic through harmlessly and unnoticeably underground? They faced the same dilemmas with the City Walls Road separating the new St Martins Quarter development from the rest of town and chose to do little or nothing except slightly repositioning the pedestrian crossing and removing one of the northbound traffic lanes. Far better to have sent the road underground, or maybe to have built a decent bridge from The Cornmarket across to the other side. As always with our Council, they do occasionally come up with some pretty imaginative and insightful plans, but without exception, their subsequent implementation is at best, half-arsed. Think no further than the fact that we must be the only town or city anywhere with an orbital "bypass" that only actually runs around three-quarters of the area's circumference.[/p][/quote]A tunnel? That close to the river? That couldn't possibly go wrong could it? CJH
  • Score: 5

9:09pm Sat 3 May 14

Chronos says...

Yeah good point CJH... I guess we'll need a flyover instead.
Yeah good point CJH... I guess we'll need a flyover instead. Chronos
  • Score: -2

10:40pm Sat 3 May 14

CJH says...

Chronos wrote:
Yeah good point CJH... I guess we'll need a flyover instead.
Twice round the cathedral tower and on to St Johns?
[quote][p][bold]Chronos[/bold] wrote: Yeah good point CJH... I guess we'll need a flyover instead.[/p][/quote]Twice round the cathedral tower and on to St Johns? CJH
  • Score: 2

8:49am Tue 6 May 14

Roger5 says...

How this is considered ambitious I do not know. The main ambition seems to result in widening the pavement, narrow the road for buses, lorries and cars, and create a great space for skateboarding.

The developer is keen on restaurants to be situated opposite our world heritage cathedral, and this could be anything including Burger King, KFC or other fast food outlets. Is that what we want for the town?

The current roundabout is an effective frontage for the cathedral, so why not leave it? Green space is at a premium in Worcester centre.

Money interests should not trump the appearance of our ancient town. I think there was also quite a bit of development in between the Romans and the 1960s. Since then I'd have to say it has been downhill all the way!
How this is considered ambitious I do not know. The main ambition seems to result in widening the pavement, narrow the road for buses, lorries and cars, and create a great space for skateboarding. The developer is keen on restaurants to be situated opposite our world heritage cathedral, and this could be anything including Burger King, KFC or other fast food outlets. Is that what we want for the town? The current roundabout is an effective frontage for the cathedral, so why not leave it? Green space is at a premium in Worcester centre. Money interests should not trump the appearance of our ancient town. I think there was also quite a bit of development in between the Romans and the 1960s. Since then I'd have to say it has been downhill all the way! Roger5
  • Score: -4

3:13pm Tue 6 May 14

Ted Elgar says...

This is crying out for a right of way from the highstreet through to Friar Street.
This is crying out for a right of way from the highstreet through to Friar Street. Ted Elgar
  • Score: -1

9:54pm Thu 8 May 14

Perfman says...

CJH wrote:
Chronos wrote:
Whatever they do in that part of Worcester, the end result is going to be blighted by still having the A44 scything through it.

Why don't our planners, just for once, take a long-term view and maybe do something a little more sophisticated than mere cosmetic dressing in their attempts to spruce up an area much in need of it.

Drastic it may sound, and certainly not the cheapest option, but why not at least consider the possibility of tunnelling beneath the area and diverting the traffic through harmlessly and unnoticeably underground?

They faced the same dilemmas with the City Walls Road separating the new St Martins Quarter development from the rest of town and chose to do little or nothing except slightly repositioning the pedestrian crossing and removing one of the northbound traffic lanes.

Far better to have sent the road underground, or maybe to have built a decent bridge from The Cornmarket across to the other side.

As always with our Council, they do occasionally come up with some pretty imaginative and insightful plans, but without exception, their subsequent implementation is at best, half-arsed. Think no further than the fact that we must be the only town or city anywhere with an orbital "bypass" that only actually runs around three-quarters of the area's circumference.
A tunnel? That close to the river? That couldn't possibly go wrong could it?
You'll find plenty of tunnels under Rivers, Seas, Lakes, near Lakes, near Rivers, in mountains, under cities etc etc. There is a really good and proven record for tunnel building going back 100's of years!!!!
[quote][p][bold]CJH[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chronos[/bold] wrote: Whatever they do in that part of Worcester, the end result is going to be blighted by still having the A44 scything through it. Why don't our planners, just for once, take a long-term view and maybe do something a little more sophisticated than mere cosmetic dressing in their attempts to spruce up an area much in need of it. Drastic it may sound, and certainly not the cheapest option, but why not at least consider the possibility of tunnelling beneath the area and diverting the traffic through harmlessly and unnoticeably underground? They faced the same dilemmas with the City Walls Road separating the new St Martins Quarter development from the rest of town and chose to do little or nothing except slightly repositioning the pedestrian crossing and removing one of the northbound traffic lanes. Far better to have sent the road underground, or maybe to have built a decent bridge from The Cornmarket across to the other side. As always with our Council, they do occasionally come up with some pretty imaginative and insightful plans, but without exception, their subsequent implementation is at best, half-arsed. Think no further than the fact that we must be the only town or city anywhere with an orbital "bypass" that only actually runs around three-quarters of the area's circumference.[/p][/quote]A tunnel? That close to the river? That couldn't possibly go wrong could it?[/p][/quote]You'll find plenty of tunnels under Rivers, Seas, Lakes, near Lakes, near Rivers, in mountains, under cities etc etc. There is a really good and proven record for tunnel building going back 100's of years!!!! Perfman
  • Score: 2

12:45am Fri 9 May 14

CJH says...

Perfman wrote:
CJH wrote:
Chronos wrote:
Whatever they do in that part of Worcester, the end result is going to be blighted by still having the A44 scything through it.

Why don't our planners, just for once, take a long-term view and maybe do something a little more sophisticated than mere cosmetic dressing in their attempts to spruce up an area much in need of it.

Drastic it may sound, and certainly not the cheapest option, but why not at least consider the possibility of tunnelling beneath the area and diverting the traffic through harmlessly and unnoticeably underground?

They faced the same dilemmas with the City Walls Road separating the new St Martins Quarter development from the rest of town and chose to do little or nothing except slightly repositioning the pedestrian crossing and removing one of the northbound traffic lanes.

Far better to have sent the road underground, or maybe to have built a decent bridge from The Cornmarket across to the other side.

As always with our Council, they do occasionally come up with some pretty imaginative and insightful plans, but without exception, their subsequent implementation is at best, half-arsed. Think no further than the fact that we must be the only town or city anywhere with an orbital "bypass" that only actually runs around three-quarters of the area's circumference.
A tunnel? That close to the river? That couldn't possibly go wrong could it?
You'll find plenty of tunnels under Rivers, Seas, Lakes, near Lakes, near Rivers, in mountains, under cities etc etc. There is a really good and proven record for tunnel building going back 100's of years!!!!
And the cost involved, just to provide this developer with some shops? Do you think they would pay for it? And have you taken into account our Highways Dept? Again, what could possibly go wrong...
[quote][p][bold]Perfman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CJH[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chronos[/bold] wrote: Whatever they do in that part of Worcester, the end result is going to be blighted by still having the A44 scything through it. Why don't our planners, just for once, take a long-term view and maybe do something a little more sophisticated than mere cosmetic dressing in their attempts to spruce up an area much in need of it. Drastic it may sound, and certainly not the cheapest option, but why not at least consider the possibility of tunnelling beneath the area and diverting the traffic through harmlessly and unnoticeably underground? They faced the same dilemmas with the City Walls Road separating the new St Martins Quarter development from the rest of town and chose to do little or nothing except slightly repositioning the pedestrian crossing and removing one of the northbound traffic lanes. Far better to have sent the road underground, or maybe to have built a decent bridge from The Cornmarket across to the other side. As always with our Council, they do occasionally come up with some pretty imaginative and insightful plans, but without exception, their subsequent implementation is at best, half-arsed. Think no further than the fact that we must be the only town or city anywhere with an orbital "bypass" that only actually runs around three-quarters of the area's circumference.[/p][/quote]A tunnel? That close to the river? That couldn't possibly go wrong could it?[/p][/quote]You'll find plenty of tunnels under Rivers, Seas, Lakes, near Lakes, near Rivers, in mountains, under cities etc etc. There is a really good and proven record for tunnel building going back 100's of years!!!![/p][/quote]And the cost involved, just to provide this developer with some shops? Do you think they would pay for it? And have you taken into account our Highways Dept? Again, what could possibly go wrong... CJH
  • Score: 2

8:47am Fri 9 May 14

reflector says...

Let's not be too negative about everything. At last, I think this actually looks as though it will make a decent job of what was one of the worst planning decisions in Worcester's history. Short of demolishing it all and moving the road elsewhere which, financially I am sure would be non starter, it does create a nice open square in front of the cathedral.

I would certainly do away with the roundabout altogether. Such features are usually only provided at road junctions, of which, since the High Street was closed to traffic, this is not one. It just enables vehicles to turn round or gain access to the multi storey car park which could both be done elsewhere.
Let's not be too negative about everything. At last, I think this actually looks as though it will make a decent job of what was one of the worst planning decisions in Worcester's history. Short of demolishing it all and moving the road elsewhere which, financially I am sure would be non starter, it does create a nice open square in front of the cathedral. I would certainly do away with the roundabout altogether. Such features are usually only provided at road junctions, of which, since the High Street was closed to traffic, this is not one. It just enables vehicles to turn round or gain access to the multi storey car park which could both be done elsewhere. reflector
  • Score: 2

4:23pm Fri 9 May 14

themooman says...

bulldoze the city centre and start again thats what i say - leave only marks spencers because they offer great products at affordable prices but get rid of the rest. maybe even look to expand a MEGA shopping centre over the bridge and where the cricket ground is, move worcester cricket club to Badsey cricket club and everyone is happy, just a thought but feel free to discuss
bulldoze the city centre and start again thats what i say - leave only marks spencers because they offer great products at affordable prices but get rid of the rest. maybe even look to expand a MEGA shopping centre over the bridge and where the cricket ground is, move worcester cricket club to Badsey cricket club and everyone is happy, just a thought but feel free to discuss themooman
  • Score: -1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

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