Superstore - New Petrol Station - Parking - New Access

[dccairns]

The Council Planning department informed me today that the developers have appealed to the Scottish Executive because the planning application did not go to committee within the two-month statutory timeframe. No-one warned us of this possible scenario at any point up to now. Even though the developers have held the application up with their tardy delivery of reports they can now bypass the Planning Committee and go straight for a public enquiry which is what is going to happen. Apparently the letter signalling their intentions from the developers has just come in to the Council in the last couple of days so nothing much will happen for a while. It is unlikely that the public enquiry will take place until September/October time.

Will update the website as new information comes in.

[Cynthia]

So they don't even bother to wait for local democracy to take place - but this seems a tactic that developers seem to be using more now. Lets face it, they are just speculators on land values, they don't even own the land. There was a piece in the Evg News tonite re Tollcross and the developers there have done the very same thing, much to the annoyance of the local campaign. We have to remember Bath Street flats here again - if the Superstore got turned down by the local Council, as that did twice I believe, the developers would still go to the S Exec and maybe they didn't want the added evidence of it being turned down by the local Council. Who knows.

Hopefully our MSPs who have supported our campaign will now be able to argue our case in the Scottish Parliament, although it is I believe a nominated minister/civil servant who is responsible for the P Inquiry. If this goes through our MSPs will have a very annoyed community to cope with here I think!

Anyone with any expertise or experience re dealing with a Public Inquiry, please contact PCATS asap! We are in touch with another Campaign who have done this, but the more experience the better. email info@pcats.org.uk or post a private message to one of us through the forum, Carla

[Guest]

Here's a link to today's coverage in the Evening News for anyone who missed it:

http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/edinb ... 0521171605

and below is CATS chair, Dickie Alexander's submission to the EN letters page in response to the article:

Dear Sir,

The Portobello Campaign Against the Superstore would like to take issue with a couple of points in your article about the referral of the application to build a superstore in Portobello to a public inquiry ("Porty traders to take on builders at inquiry", today's issue).

First, it is implied that the delays in bringing the application before the Planning Committee have all been on the Council's side. However, the developers took three months to produce their traffic and retail impact studies last autumn. The traffic study was incomplete and inaccurate, even containing references to cycleways through Glasgow! They commissioned their traffic consultants to carry out further studies, which were completed in January, but they did not submit their amended traffic report to the Council officers until March, so they are also guilty of delaying the progress of the application. Now they have the audacity to bypass our local community and flout local democracy. A cynic might say that the delay has suited them very well.

Secondly, the Duddingston House spokesman claims that they have "an optimum town centre site". In fact the site is an "edge-of -centre" site, which means that, should this development go ahead, it would suck the life out of the existing retail centre of Portobello, some 200 yards away. With eight large superstores within a two-mile radius of the town (including one in the centre), we need another one like a hole in the head. Moreover, the site is an important gateway to this historic town, which is worthy of something far better than a massive ugly shed and car park.

Yours faithfully

Dickie Alexander
Chairperson
Campaign Against the Superstore
32 Marlborough Street
EH15 2BG

[dccairns]

The food writer, Joanna Blythman, author of the new book "Shopped: the Shocking Power of British Supermarkets", visted Portobello last Friday to find out more about the Campaign Against the Superstore. She was very impressed with our independent shops and even made a purchase or two! She was also horrified that there is this planning application to build a superstore which is four-fifths the size of the Asda store at the Jewel. Joanna believes that our concerns about the impact of the development on the local shops and the community are fully justified, having seen similar situations all over the country when she was researching her book.

Joanna has offered to help us with the campaign and has already done so by writing an article for the Sunday Herald which was published yesterday. Here is the link to the article, which was accompanied by a piece on a campaign to stop and edge-of-centre Tesco being built in Castle Douglas (it's happening all over):

www.sundayherald.com/42166

[dccairns]

There will be a public meeting to discuss the forthcoming Public Inquiry and put forward your views about what you would like to see on the former Scottish Power site. There will be a speaker from Friends of the Earth, Scotland. Please put it in your diary. More details to follow.

Date: Monday 28 June
Time: 7.30 pm
Venue: Portobello Town Hall

[dccairns]

For those who would like to find out more about the debate on supermarkets, this evening's edition of "Tonight with Trevor MacDonald" focuses on the power of British supermarkets. It will be screened at 8.00 pm on ITV1.

[Guest]

The following message, which will be of great interest to everyone opposed to the Superstore development, is posted on behalf of James, a local resident.

Friends of the Earth Press Release


MPs TOLD TESCO NEEDS TO BE TAMED


Britain's biggest supermarket, which holds its annual general meeting tomorrow (Friday 18th June), is damaging communities, putting local shops out of business, and threatening the livelihoods of many UK farmers, a new briefing presented to MPs today reveals [1]. They will also discover how Tesco is failing to live up to its promises on ethical trading with overseas suppliers and the serious impacts this has on workers in South Africa and Latin America.

As UK grocery market leader, with over 27% of the UK market, Tesco is extremely powerful. But speakers from Friends of the Earth, Oxfam, the Association of Convenience Stores and the NFU council will reveal how Tesco is able to abuse its position because of weak controls and the lax government attitude to controlling supermarket power. The new briefing contains stories from local traders, overseas suppliers, pensioners and farmers which illustrate how Tesco's abuse of power impacts on people and communities.

These include:

• Shopkeepers in the Norfolk town of Stalham have told Friends of the Earth how Tesco has damaged their business and backtracked on promises made when it moved to the town.
  
  In the nearby market town of Sheringham, traders said a new Tesco store, recently granted planning permission despite strong local opposition, will destroy the town's special appeal to tourists and ruin their livelihoods.
  
  Pensioners in Witney, Oxfordshire are angry about the way Tesco took over stores in the town and threatened to close the post office in the stores, a vital local service. To date, Tesco has been allowed to take over convenience store chains with no investigation or intervention from the competition authorities.
  
  South African suppliers have described the way in which Tesco pushes prices down and makes unreasonable demands for expensive packaging that must be paid for by the supplier. Workers describe how this impacts on them in lack of employment rights and poor conditions including lack of protective clothing.
  
  Farmers describe how Tesco has ignored their pleas for fairer prices and the impacts this has on the environment and rural communities. They say a stricter code of practice is essential.

Friends of the Earth is warning that Tesco's practices are also damaging the environment. Its search for cheap food across the globe clocks up polluting food miles, while requirements for pristine and uniform fruit and vegetables results in the some food going to waste. And Tesco's demand for the cheap palm oil for processed foods is leading to rainforest destruction in south east Asia.

Friends of the Earth Food and Farming Campaigner Sandra Bell said:

"Tesco's success has made it immensely powerful - a position that it is clearly abusing by putting small traders out of business and killing off local high streets, bullying suppliers, and damaging the environment through its never ending demand for cheap food. The evidence against Tesco can no longer be ignored. It is time for the Government to regulate and tame this corporate beast."

Friends of the Earth is calling on Government to tame Tesco by:

• More robust planning policies to protect town centres and high street shops including a cap on retail floorspace.
  
  A much stricter and statutory code of practice to ensure that suppliers are treated fairly
  
  A supermarket watchdog to ensure that the grocery market is operating in the interests of consumers, farmers and small retailers.
  
  A moratorium on Tesco taking over any more shops and chains including convenience stores.
  
  Corporate accountability legislation which makes companies accountable for their effects on communities and the environment.

Friends of the Earth will be attending Tesco's AGM on Friday together with farmers and communities affected by Tesco.

Notes

[1] Copies of the briefing for MPs is available at:

www.foe.co.uk/resource/briefings/every_little_hurts.pdf

[bellybabe]

I found that last post fascinating - thanks for the info, James.

This morning I got the leaflet from PCATS about the Public Inquiry, hand delivered (the first one that's made it to our house, I might add), and it was only as the nice lady left that i realised she might be one of our wonderful industrious forum members, and I thought it would have been polite to introduce myself - so, anyone here hand me the leaflet? I was at the door, with toddler clinging to my leg (who very politely said thank you to the lady), speaking to a very handsome chap about to drive away in a red porsche, which was actually blocking the pavement, who held the gate open for her...

Was it anyone here?

[dccairns]

I'm glad you have finally had a leaflet delivered, Bellybabe. It made me wonder if there are other suppporters out there who have not received the latest information, so I am posting the main gist of the latest leaflet in case there are.

The planning application (ref no 03/03021/OUT) will go to a Public Inquiry in September or October this year. The planning department are of the opinion that the arguments for and against the application are “finely balancedâ€Â

[wangi]

Strikes me that this lacks proper setup - are folk expected to put their concerns to each and every one of these cllrs? Would come across as a manic nutter spamming tens of folk - would supprise me if the email was flagged as spam due the the number of recipients on the to list...

Who are the relevant cllrs to contact?

[dccairns]

In answer to Wangi's question about who the relevant councillors are to contact, the answer is all of them. All 15 mentioned in my earlier post are members of the Planning Committee and have a right to vote (or in this case express a view) on planning applications. You could always send individual letters or send messages to five at a time. It is important that people contact each member though.

[wangi]

Is this how the planning committee really works? If I have a concern I'd have to contact hem all, rather than just one (who then brings my concerns forward to the committee)?

Urgh.

[dccairns]

If you prefer, you could just contact your local councillor (presumably Lawrence or Maureen) but if you contact the whole committee then they are all getting the message.

[dccairns]

This is to remind you about the Portobello Campaign Against the Superstore Public Meeting.

Date and time: 28 June at 7.30 pm

Venue: Portobello Town Hall

Come along to air your views and find out how you can help with the Public Inquiry.

A speaker from Friends of the Earth Scotland will be at the meeting to answer your questions about the Public Inquiry.

[dccairns]

It was fantastic to see so many people at the Town Hall tonight (275 to be exact) for the public meeting against the superstore. Siobhan Samson, the speaker from Friends of the Earth Scotland, guided us through the Public Inquiry process and answered questions. There were many valuable contributions from the floor. Speakers included our local councillor, Lawrence Marshall, MSPs Susan Deacon and Mark Ballard and David McDonald, the Director of the Cockburn Association. Clive Andrew of Shapes Hair spoke on behalf of the Portobello traders. Gavin Strang MP and MSPs Robin Harper and Margo MacDonald all sent messages of support. The overwhelming feeling at the meeting was that we want something far better for this vital gateway site to Portobello than yet another superstore.

So thanks once again for all your support, as without you this campaign would have gone nowhere and thanks for your great generosity in contributing to the campaign funds. This is community spirit at its best.

[Guest]

Link to Evening News coverage of the Town Hall meeting:

http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/index ... 0629232406

[Guest]

For the benefit of those who are not on LM's email distribution list:

I thought you might all like to know that I've just found out that the date when the Portobello superstore application is to be considered by the Development Quality Sub-Committee of the Planning Committee is Wednesday 28 July.

Since the recommendation is for REFUSAL, this means that there will not be a Hearing (which enables both sides to put their case verbally to the committee) as would have been the case had the recommendation been for grant.

The meeting normally starts at 10.00 a.m. in the Dean of Guild Court Room in the City Chambers - I guess that this item will be quite high up on the agenda that day and so be likely to be heard fairly early on in the meeting.

The committee papers relating to this will become public a week before on www.edinburgh.gov.uk/cpol - just search for the Development Quality Sub-Committee for 28 July 2004. I'll also try to get a Word copy to e-mail out to folk.

As always, this meeting will be open to the public - we might need to use the main Council Chamber if lots of folk want to come along to watch.

Lawrence Marshall

[Mimpty]

I hope I am right in saying that at the public meeting Susan Deacon said that the Scottish Exec Reprters Unit were happy to receive letters from the public.

That being the case I contacted Susan's office and was given the Reporters Unit's address in order to write to them. For anyone who is interested, here it is:

Scottish Executive Enquiry Reporters Unit
4 The Courtyard
Callendar Business Park
Falkirk
FK1 1XR

tel.no: 01324 696 400

[Hell's Cat]

Spotted this in the Figgate Park on Sat. I wonder if they will start breeding if the new superstore opens?

[Hell's Cat]

Sorry, I think the image is too big to post on the forum. So have a look at-

http://www.visionsofscotland.co.uk/UrbanDecay.htm

[Guest]

I imagine that most of you are on the email distribution lists of either Lawrence or Maureen and are consequently aware of the latest developments in the superstore application.

Posted below are links to the pdf versions of the two reports going before the Development Quality Sub-Committee next Wednesday (28 July 2004)

Warning - these files are large and will take a long time to download unless you have a broadband connection.

http://cpol.edinburgh.gov.uk/getdoc_ext.asp?DocId=46281

http://cpol.edinburgh.gov.uk/getdoc_ext.asp?DocId=46283

Alternatively, here is a brief synopsis taken (without permission) from Maureen's mail shot:

As you probably all know by now, the two applications for the superstore and associated car parking on the Scottish Power site, 3-15 Portobello High Street will be considered at Committee - the development quality sub-committee of Planning, to be really accurate - next Wednesday, 28 July, starting at 10am. The superstore applications are the second and third applications in line to be presented and the two reports are likely to be considered in tandem.

I now have the full papers and see that planning officers recommended that Committee take the view that they are 'minded to refuse' both applications. Because it is recommended as 'minded to refuse' and not 'minded to grant', there will not be a hearing where applicants and objectors would have been heard. Had the recommendation been the other way, there would have been a full hearing so that Committee could listen to and question both applicants and objectors' sides directly.

The grounds for the recommendation 'minded to refuse' are:

The proposed development will not make a positive contribution to the overall quality of the local environment and will not integrate with the character of Portobello town centre. It fails to:

a) provide a key street frontage
b) provide an appropriate landmark building at the entrance to Portobello
c) complement the urban structure of Portobello
d) enhance the pedestrian accessibility and provide sufficient connectivity with the town centre
e) provide a variety of use on the site

Consequently the proposed development is contrary to:

- Government policy on 'Designing Places' and 'Town Centres and Retailing
- North East Edinburgh Local Plan policies E25 (Design of New Development), E26 (Quality of New Development) and S1 (New Shopping Development)
- the Council's 'The Edinburgh Standards for Urban Design'
- the Council's approved 'Statement of Urban Design Principles for the Site.'

The second of the two applications - for car parking, bus stop and landscaping - is recommended as 'minded to refuse' on the same grounds since these things are ancillary to the superstore.

[dccairns]

This is to remind you that the superstore application no 03/03021/OUT goes to the Planning Committee meeting on Wednesday 28 July.

There is still time to write to the planning committee members before then. Encouragingly, the council report is recommending rejection but it is by no means a foregone conclusion. If you want to write, please do so before Wednesday 28 July to remind them of the reasons why this development should be turned down, i.e. it is against the local plan and national planning guidelines; it is inappropriate in scale at 80,000 sq ft (four-fifths the size of Asda); an ugly shed style building would be out of keeping with the conservation area and not worthy of the gateway site to Portobello and it would damage existing retailers’ business. It would also generate huge amounts of traffic (1100 extra movements in and out of the site at peak times) which would gridlock an already congested Portobello. We also have nine supermarkets within a two-mile radius including Scotmid

Here are the contact details for the planning committee:

Post to: City Chambers, High Street, Edinburgh, EH1 1YJ
Email – see each name.

Cllr Trevor Davies, Convener,
trevor.davies@edinburgh.gov.uk
Cllr Lawrence Marshall
lawrence.marshall@edinburgh.gov.uk
Cllr Allan Laing
allan.laing@edinburgh.gov.uk
Cllr Chris Wigglesworth
chris.wigglesworth@edinburgh.gov.uk
Cllr George A. Hunter
george.hunter@edinburgh.gov.uk
Cllr Gordon Munro
gordon.munro@edinburgh.gov.uk
Cllr Ian Murray
ian.murray@edinburgh.gov.uk
Cllr John A Longstaff
john.longstaff@edinburgh.gov.uk
Cllr Kenneth Harrold
ken.harrold@edinburgh.gov.uk
Cllr Maureen M Child
maureen.child@edinburgh.gov.uk
Cllr Sheila Gilmore
sheila.gilmore@edinburgh.gov.uk
Cllr Susan B Tritton
sue.tritton@edinburgh.gov.uk
Cllr The Hon David W G Guest
david.guest@edinburgh.gov.uk
Cllr Thomas V Ponton
tom.ponton@edinburgh.gov.uk
Cllr Jim Lowrie
jim.lowrie@edinurgh.gov.uk


And don't forget the demonstration outside the City Chambers starting at 9.30 am on 28 July. Planning committee meeting starts at 10 am. There may be free sausages on offer so please arrive early to avoid disappointment!

[ali]

Excellent letter in tonight's Evening News which I reproduce below.

(Surprised that Bob is so slow off the mark. He usually has the links to relevant articles or letters posted here sharpish!!! )

Similar sentiments to those I expressed in this thread a few months ago. You really shouldn't assume that your campaign against the superstore is universally accepted.




""Store is needed


I WRITE in regard to the Portobello Campaign Against the Superstore (PCATS) campaign and the flyer they recently distributed.

There may be "eight superstores within a two-mile radius" - if you have your own transport!

I suspect that the campaigners against are car owners and do not want the "additional traffic" to impede their progress to and from work.

If you are elderly, disabled and do not have your own transport then the "choice" as a Portobello resident is limited to one supermarket - the Co-op.

The new superstore will be an asset to Portobello and I cannot see that local people will abandon the local butcher, greengrocer, fishmonger etc for the quality of goods and service that they give.

I will not be demonstrating at the City Chambers on Wednesday.

Ms Anne Dignan Westbank Street, Edinburgh ""


Well said Ms Dignan!!!

[Guest]

Ali, thanks for posting this. I hadn't got round to checking EN online for Porty-related stories, and I'm just about to head out for a meeting, but my policy is to provide links to all stories that I think will be of interest, and not just the ones I agree with! The only ones I don't bother with are sports items.

I understand what Mrs Dignan is saying but I think she understimates the damage a superstore would do to the High Street. Sure, Findlay's and the fishmonger might survive (in the short term) on their reputation, but what about all the little shops around them? The whole thing would eventually collapse like a pack of cards, as has happened elsewhere.

Gotta go, but I'm sure someone else will take this up.

[ecm]

Fair enough Bob - you're obviously a busy man!!

However, nowhere in your post do you address the point about those of the Porty community who don't drive. You choose to defend the interests of the small business person in Porty (not that they aren't capable of making that case, themselves). Aren't we entitled to the choice which is so easily available to those with their own transport??

[wangi]

Disclaimer: No car in this household, and I don't even drive...

But saying that I can't really see how the new Tesco would improve things that much - it's really on the periphery of things. For most folk it'd still be a long walk?

Personally Asda would probably be a wee bit closer - and it's downhill after you've got your shopping!

And I can't see how the HLRd-PBHigh-PBRd-Seafield roundabout would cope - it's a nightmare as is and Seafield too... You'd need a grade-separated junction I think... And an extension of the dual A1 (secret M) down?

[Gemini]

I well appreciate Mrs. Dignan's and ECM's reasons for a superstore.

We (Residents of Baileyfield Road) for obvious reasons are perhaps more than others anti this proposal as it will turn our street into an Island surrounded by vehicles of every size and description imaginable, this would be 24/7 - have a look at a map and consider the implications for the residents in this area!

We have a fair amount of senior citizens in this street along with children (who don't drive) most days we cannot walk down Fishwives Causeway due to indiscriminate parking (on pavements/double yellow lines) (please don't tell me to call the Police)!! The western end of Baileyfield Road fronts HLR, you will notice that the barrier has been crashed into again! The residents in this street often fear for their lives when accessing the bus stop at this end of B.R. Would you be happy for your child/mother to walk round this corner? It may be ok for ECM and Mrs. Dignan to think about how convenient it would be to nip over to the Superstore but who will pay the price? by all accounts not Mrs. Dignan as she lives in Westbank Street, therefore it will not distrupt her life to any great extent - No idea where ECM lives - however, I am 100% behind the Campaign against the Supersore as are 92% of the porty community - perhaps you should be looking at the bigger picture?

Should this Supersore get the go ahead you can forget Portobello as we know it, have a daunder down Easter Road, once a thriving area - now almost deserted.

(note: Harry Lauder Road now carries approx 18 million vehicles of which 10% are HGV - this is a conservative estimate) day and night. a mere 8 metres from Baileyfield Road - for the hard of thinking this is approx 24 feet.

Baileyfield Residents Group

[dccairns]

I am not a car owner, I do all my shopping on foot in Portobello and I am against the superstore. Do not assume that everyone without a car is in favour. The many supermarkets within close reach of Portobello can easily be accessed by public transport. ECM gets the bus to Tesco to shop (ref one of your earlier posts) so would still have to get the bus to the new superstore (which would not be that much closer) if he/she were carrying any amount of shopping. What's the difference? We don't need another one here.

[xxxx]

I don't drive and I don't see the need for this superstore.

The only pedestrians in portobello that will benefit will be those less than halfway between the new superstore and the existing scotmid. No others will benefit, however all will experience the disadvantage of the increased traffic .

The pedestrian argument is pretty much a diversion anyway, superstore development is based around car access (as the additional planning application illustrates). Car access means that people buy more and are less inclined to buy elsewhere, pedestrian considerations are purely cosmetic.

As to ECM and Mrs Dignan, you have had a lot of time to organise the pro superstore local group.

[ceejam]

As a similar local example, look at Musselburgh and it's Tesco. It is right on the end of the high street, kind of hidden away from the other shops. The traffic lights put up, hold up traffic on Station Road all the time.
The high street doesn't seem to have suffered, maybe even recovered after years of people going to Asda, they now go to Tesco and then wander along the High Street?

I've not really got a strong view on whether the supermarket should or shouldn't go ahead. I use the small shops in Porto, but I do the majority of my shopping at Asda. Doubt I'd use a new Supermarket at Fishwives Causeway as it'll be further away from my house, although right next to my work. Does Porto need another Supermarket (as opposed to Scotmid, the only one in Porto)? Some say aye, the vocal ones say nay!

[bellybabe]

But saying that I can't really see how the new Tesco would improve things that much - it's really on the periphery of things. For most folk it'd still be a long walk?

Personally Asda would probably be a wee bit closer - and it's downhill after you've got your shopping!

Have to agree. We are a carless household with small children. Walking home from Scotmid (2 minutes with light shopping, five with heavey shopping!) is nightmare enough. I would definitely not walk to a superstore at the other end of the High Street, especially when if I do feel I have to walk somewhere to get my shopping, i could take a more pleasant walk to Asda. Asda is within walking distance - the pedestrian argument is, i agree, somewhat moot.

And at the end of the day, if I need a lot of shopping, for less than the cost of of buses and taxis, Tesco will deliver my shopping for me and carry it into the kitchen.

[Gemini]

THOUGHT YOU WOULD ALL LIKE TO PUT THIS ON YOUR 'MUST WATCH' LIST FOR THIS EVENING!

PORTOBELLO CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE SUPERSTORE WILL BE FEATURED ON NEWSNIGHT TONIGHT (27/7). INTERVIEWS WITH DICKIE ALEXANDER - CHAIR - AND DIANA CAIRNS - SECRETARY.

[Guest]

Past my bedtime, but I'll definitely be setting the video recorder for this one. Just been speaking to Sheila at Findlay's, who is so excited I fear she may explode.

And here's the link to today's EN story on the campaign:

http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/index ... 0727171101

[cornerboy]

I'm with dccairns and the other non-car households. One of the pleasures of living in Portobello is not having to go and do the weekly shop by car in some vast hangar filled with stuff. If the High St were to suffer because of a nearby superstore then our ability to wander out of the house every day and do the small amount of shopping required for that night's meal would be seriously undermined. We also have two small children and rely on buses, bikes and the occasional Car Club or hire to get around. All of these means of transport would be compromised by the increased traffic a supermarket would generate. What is precious (and precarious) about Porty is its human scale. People who plan, build and profit by superstores and projects of that ilk are working on a different scale - their actions and underlying philosophy are directly opposed to any kind of community. They want us to get into our cars, load up our monster fridges and fill our cupboards to overflowing because it suits them and their shareholders. We might think they are doing us all a favour, but ultimately they are harming us from the air we breathe to the food we eat.

[Mimpty]

I don't have a car either and tend to shop at Asda as I think Scotmid is quite expensive and it's frustrating when they don't have what you want, so I should probably support a new supermarket, but I don't.

I am against it as I think it is a stupid place to put something that will attract so much traffic. The congestion will be terrible and as a bus user my bus would be caught up in the tail-backs too, not just the cars. The high street isn't wide enough for bus lanes.