Scottish Power Site Re-development 3 - supermarket + housing

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 03 Jul 2010, 20:31

Admin: this thread has been split from earlier ones dealing with previous planning applications on this site:

Superstore - New Petrol Station - Parking - New Access
NW Portobello Masterplan
Scottish Power Site Re-development (round 2) - high density housing

See also the poll on the this proposal and discussion on shopping habits.

New plans for the site will be revealed at a Public Meeting on 16 July at 7.30* in Portobello Town Hall. The meeting has been arranged by BL Developments, the site owners.

*edit: this is now a drop-in session running from 2pm - 8pm

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 03 Jul 2010, 23:18

I'm fed up with the shit on that site. most people are, how many objections did they get for the previous application? Whatever plans BL come up with this time i have a feeling I'll be for it.

Even a 16 storey hypermarket bordered by a prostitute safe zone with a 24/7 fun fair and a jet Ski pond is beginning to sound appealing.

the good guy · Post by **the good guy** » 06 Jul 2010, 16:39

B L Developments with be exhibiting amended proposals for the Scottish Power Site at an open day at the Town Hall on Friday 16th July. Please go along and see what is proposed and make YOUR views known. There will be the chance to speak to the architects and developer direct. You can fill in a questionnaire about just what YOU want to see incorporated - houses, workshops, restaurant, bar, your M&S foodstore, starter homes, offices, nursery, GP surgery, Lidl/Aldi, social housing, nursery/creche, pharmacy, etc. Let them know what YOU want. You can drop in at any time between 2pm and 8pm.

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 06 Jul 2010, 19:08

the good guy wrote:B L Developments with be exhibiting amended proposals for the Scottish Power Site at an open day at the Town Hall on Friday 16th July. Please go along and see what is proposed and make YOUR views known. There will be the chance to speak to the architects and developer direct. You can fill in a questionnaire about just what YOU want to see incorporated - houses, workshops, restaurant, bar, your M&S foodstore, starter homes, offices, nursery, GP surgery, Lidl/Aldi, social housing, nursery/creche, pharmacy, etc. Let them know what YOU want. You can drop in at any time between 2pm and 8pm.

Sounds very interesting, but, unfortunately, I'll miss it as I'm on holiday then. Perhaps the Edinburgh trades fortnight isn't the best time to choose to hold a public consultation?

the good guy · Post by **the good guy** » 07 Jul 2010, 11:33

There will be another opportunity to view the proposals and to comment at the August meeting of the Community Council - last Monday in August

seanie · Post by **seanie** » 09 Jul 2010, 13:57

Big stores eyeing up Portobello gap site

rmolehusband · Post by **rmolehusband** » 09 Jul 2010, 14:17

I suspect this 'story' is a bit of a BL plant*, people may look on their plans a lot more favourably if they see the alternative is some sort of Tescoid Megaplex.

That's not so say that big supermarkets as described are not interested in the site, but that's not exactly news, is it?

* the EEN ran an advert for Tennents yesterday, very thinly disguised as a story about a moustache on a billboard. I suspect if a press agency simply sends them a story, with a blank line for the EEN to fill in the byline, they'll print it verbatim.

allaboardtheskylark · Post by **allaboardtheskylark** » 09 Jul 2010, 14:55

Lies, damn lies and blackmail.

It's a softener upper to get a lessed sized retail outlet to boost the coffers. Whose building houses anyway. Suspect they did not get the housing density they wanted so are going along a different route to get a combination of uses to raise the revenues.

Thats the problem with continually saying no. BL get trapped and have to come up with anotehr solution. Don't think they would go for a Supermarket though, it's just a bluff. That option has already been K B'd so why try again.

Are you reading this Phil ???

the good guy · Post by **the good guy** » 09 Jul 2010, 15:13

That is indeed the problem of continually saying no to any form of development. You end up with a derelict site for years. Eventually something is consented but it may end up being worse than what was rejected in the first place. Development has to be profitable otherwise no bank will lend to fund it. That means there has to be enough value in what is built whatever that may be. If we are asking the developers to reduce the amount of residential development they have to compensate for that with more of something else. It's as simple as that.

Post by **wangi** » 10 Jul 2010, 13:29

the good guy wrote:There will be another opportunity to view the proposals ...

Phil, would it be possible for you to make the plans available electronically so we can view them here? (email them to

and I can take care of the rest)

EDIT: when I posted this message I assumed "the good guy" was Phil Myerscough due to previous posts - this was not based on any private user data.

L/

Puerto bella · Post by **Puerto bella** » 12 Jul 2010, 13:05

Holding a gun to anyone's head is not a great start in terms of 'engaging' Phil so hopefully participation in this forum will better 'inform' you.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 13 Jul 2010, 12:37

Given that in this case "the gun" is about as potent as a 99p water pistol, i don't believe there's much of a threat.

Post by **wangi** » 03 Aug 2010, 14:47

"Portobello supermarket bid back on"
http://news.scotsman.com/edinburgh/Port ... 6453421.jp

NEW plans for a "Waitrose-style" supermarket have been unveiled as part of a revised scheme for one of Edinburgh's biggest gap sites ...

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 03 Aug 2010, 15:32

wangi wrote:"Portobello supermarket bid back on"
http://news.scotsman.com/edinburgh/Port ... 6453421.jp
NEW plans for a "Waitrose-style" supermarket have been unveiled as part of a revised scheme for one of Edinburgh's biggest gap sites ...

Wonder if the proposal for a Waitrose or M&S food outlet is meant to reduce opposition from the chattering classes? I was told that not so long ago Lidl were interested in a Portobello site.

Must admit I don't feel the same level of opposition to a small food outlet as I did for a huge supermarket, but would like to know more about what is proposed.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 03 Aug 2010, 17:02

Agreed. The phrase 'Waitrose-style' is designed to impress and is no guarantee of what we might end up with. It could just as easily be a Tesco Metro or indeed a Lidl. We might prefer one over another or think that one might complement the retail offer we already have but it won't be our choice.

I would expect an entrenched, 'no surrender' response from the PCATS diehards but I think many others might see this as the best compromise we are likely to achieve.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 03 Aug 2010, 17:06

How about this from 'Save Portobello Park' of Duddingston in the Comments section of the EN:

With the exception of a few, noone wants the new school in portobello park. on the other hand waitrose would provide the sort of upmarket product offer which would suit neighbouring residences. As things stand at the moment the council is going to give the land away for free to allow the school to be built. In these tough times surely it would be preferable to get a big capital receipt from a land hungry supermarket chain? There used to be a huge supermarket (Asda) just a couple of hundred yards away on Milton Road and that never bothered anyone.

allaboardtheskylark · Post by **allaboardtheskylark** » 05 Aug 2010, 00:21

So, Save Portobello Park from a school, nasty oiks. But lets have a jolly old feast at Waitrose. Save getting ones 4 x 4 out of the drive what.

One could just nick ones own trolley out of the store and wheel ones own supplies home. Convenience and class, what.

More chance of getting a couple of Bernard Matthews turkey steaks from LIDL washed down by some TESCO own brand bucky.

allaboardtheskylark · Post by **allaboardtheskylark** » 08 Aug 2010, 21:33

Porty wrote:Given that in this case "the gun" is about as potent as a 99p water pistol, i don't believe there's much of a threat.

Seems like the gun has now got a bullet in it. Story goes the land will be sold at cost to a buyer, most likely a Supermarket. They have the cash. Then it lies as an asset for as long as it takes, be it 20 or 30 years.

Does that sound feasible? Looks like decsion time. New houses and a nice wee Waitrose. Or a grubby site occupied by a fun fair every Summer.

rmolehusband · Post by **rmolehusband** » 09 Aug 2010, 15:47

allaboardtheskylark wrote:
Porty wrote:Story goes the land will be sold at cost to a buyer, most likely a Supermarket. They have the cash. Then it lies as an asset for as long as it takes, be it 20 or 30 years.
Given the precedent set when the last supermarket bid was fought off I have my doubts that any supermarket chain would take on this site. That said, it is quite a desirable location so you may well be right and maybe it would be worth another punt. The other point you make is a good one, big sites like that are reasonable rare in Edinburgh so buying it just to sit on it for a while, if they have the cash anyway, might be option. On the whole I still suspect this is FUD from BL though.

Does that sound feasible? Looks like decsion time. New houses and a nice wee Waitrose. Or a grubby site occupied by a fun fair every Summer.

It's far from wee, 15,000 square feet is a big store, the average Tesco Metro is around 10,000 I think. A one of these small scale supermarkets, I'm not sure how it would work,it probably wouldn't have the the passing trade/footfall to work in the Tesco Metro model and, for people using their cars, the larger ASDA or Morrisons would seem a better bet to me. In short, too big for a small supermarket and too small for a big one. I'll wait to see the plans - the number of parking spaces will be the give-away.

On the positive side, the toned down residential development can't be that bad a thing for Porty, can it. All this debate about getting more people on the High Street - having more people live at the end of it is a simple solution.

allaboardtheskylark · Post by **allaboardtheskylark** » 09 Aug 2010, 20:19

What size is a LIDL?

We now have a problem in Portobello with this site. We either get the type of houses the market conditions and current building methods dictate, or, keep opposing what the developers want to provide and end up with an empty site for years to come.

It would be a tremendous long term investment but also an eyesore. There is one thing no one can disagree on, the current owners are not the type of company to sit on an undeveloped site. They will sell, but when and who to.

Puerto bella · Post by **Puerto bella** » 09 Aug 2010, 21:43

The most obvious 'eyesore' part of the site to my mind is that which is most visually prominent ie the corner facing onto the 5 exit junction and that doesn't form part of the application at the moment due to the lack of ability to reach a deal with Scottish Power.

seanie · Post by **seanie** » 10 Aug 2010, 17:19

Given the nature of the junction it's not likely to be the most pre-pssessing of places regardless of what's on the corner. I've not seen anything of the new proposals but I thought the previous ones were OK and broadly compliant with Planning requirements. Large scale residential development could really strengthen the High Street.

the good guy · Post by **the good guy** » 10 Aug 2010, 21:40

It might be a good idea if those of us who quite like the idea of more houses supporting the High Street plus a Waitrose wrote in support of the planning application if and when it is submitted. It was, after all, the vehement criticisms of those purporting to represent us which brought down the previous application.

allaboardtheskylark · Post by **allaboardtheskylark** » 10 Aug 2010, 21:48

You do have a point good guy. Perhaps people should learn to write in support or against applications more often.

I do find the idea of an empty site quite worrying. Perhaps it is time West Portobello was re-populated.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 10 Aug 2010, 21:51

Good Guy, there seems to be some suggestion that you are in fact Phil Myerscough. Can you clarify whether this is indeed the case so that we can judge your posts, and your intentions, accordingly?

the good guy · Post by **the good guy** » 10 Aug 2010, 22:31

Hello!! Is this the porty.org police?! Who is the "we" who would like to judge my intentions? What are your intentions? Maybe you would like to ask puerto bella, or marya, or wangi, or allaboard the skylark who they are. It doesn't matter. This is supposed to be an open forum where people can make their opinions known and they are judged by their opinions not by who they are! No, I am not Phil Myerscough. And who are you? Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin?

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 10 Aug 2010, 22:38

A simple 'yes' or 'no' would have sufficed. The difference is that I know who all the other people you mention are. And I am exactly who I claim to be.

the good guy · Post by **the good guy** » 10 Aug 2010, 22:51

And so am I. And my apologies for the length of my response. Unlike you I do not know who anyone is on the site. Clearly I am not part of the inner circle. But surely that does not invalidate my opinions?

rmolehusband · Post by **rmolehusband** » 11 Aug 2010, 14:32

the good guy wrote:But surely that does not invalidate my opinions?

Of course not. However in expressing an opinion it would is only fair that one discloses any particular self-interest one may have in the subject.

I point this out because I too wondered if you had a connection with the developers, given that your only postings have been to announce/promote the consultation and to encourage support for the new proposal. So please forgive me if I was wrong, but I hope you can understand how my suspicion arose.

So, given the nature of your posts, a fairer question would be ask if you have any connection with the developers, neighbouring landowners, council, supermarket or the like?

Reg - common or garden Porty resident.

the good guy · Post by **the good guy** » 11 Aug 2010, 15:33

I have no vested interest in this. I was born and raised in Portobello. I want to see the town move forward into the 21st century. I think progress and change are generally good and I would like to see the development of the Scottish Power site go ahead. From the point of view of democracy I find it annoying when a small number of self interested groups or individuals grab the agenda and the silent majority's views are overlooked. I see it happening all around me in all fields if life. So I thought I would put my money where my mouth is and get involved!

allaboardtheskylark · Post by **allaboardtheskylark** » 11 Aug 2010, 20:18

Good for you good guy. You are entitled to disagree. That's the whole point of a forum, init.

I hope there is some kind of a positive outcome though not sure as I have not seen all the plans. If not I hope the site can be put to some positive use.

It looks like good level land suitable for temporary structures until a developer decides to build some 2 storey Georgian structures, to be called New Brighton perhaps?

I think it would be ideal as a caravan park in the meantime. There always seems to be groups of travelling people eager to find a stop of point, I am sure they would be welcomed.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 12 Aug 2010, 13:36

Bob Jefferson wrote:
I would expect an entrenched, 'no surrender' response from the PCATS diehards

Guaranteed.

Pity that PCATS queered their pitch. First, they tried to use the thousands of pounds of leftover funds to campaign for housing. And only backed down after being called to question on POL and at the PCC.

There was widespread suspicion that they were contributing to the PPAG coffers. (PPAG have published no detail whatsoever of their fund raising from their two years of calendar sales, coffee mornings or donations from other sympathetic local groups) PCATS stopped publishing accounts on their website more than 3 years ago.

Then PCAT's actually did give away a substantial sum of money to a totally unrelated campaign.

I certainly won't be contributing to any campaign hosted by Cairns/Hawkins/Ward or Hosking. Clearly they believe that once funds are donated they can be switched to whatever cause takes their fancy. Only after they conduct a phoney consultation, which usually takes the form of a few leaflets left in the deli. And the onus pushed onto the donaters to raise their voices against.

allaboardtheskylark · Post by **allaboardtheskylark** » 12 Aug 2010, 21:55

If they cannot publish accounts then I will give them nowt.

the good guy · Post by **the good guy** » 12 Aug 2010, 22:51

It's not just the money. They seem to think that they can impose their views on the whole of Portobello. You only need to go to PCC to see that. And if nobody stands up and disagrees with them then their views ARE taken as representing the whole of Portobello. They may have been right about the superstore proposal and the waste reprocessing thingie but that doesn't mean they are right about everything. Stand up and be counted I say. ooops, that's going to get me in trouble with the Talkporty police again!

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 13 Aug 2010, 18:17

the good guy wrote:No, I am not Phil Myerscough.

the good guy wrote:I have no vested interest in this.

Because you can see how bad this would look if, for argument's sake, you were in fact Phil Myerscough or someone else employed by BL Developments. You could be acting as an agent provocateur, stirring things up, while pretending to be an ordinary punter. The press would have a field day and your credibility would be shattered.

But I can't believe that the real Phil Myerscough would stoop to such dirty tactics, even with a multi-million pound deal at stake so I unreservedly retract any such suggestion.

Talk Porty ~ Portobello

Scottish Power Site Re-development 3 - supermarket + housing

Scottish Power Site Re-development 3 - supermarket + housing

Scottish Power Site Community Consultation Open Day 16 July

Re: Scottish Power Site Community Consultation Open Day 16 J