Scottish Power Site Re-development 3 - supermarket + housing

[Porty]

I was against the Superstore but mindful that along in Musselburgh they have substantial Tesco roughly the same distance from their High Street and in retail terms Musselburgh High Street is still strong. Rental values are at least twice what they are in Porty.

I am surprised the BL and PM place so much value on how PCC may vote. Why is that?

[Porty]

[seanie]

[Porty]

[seanie]

[philip myerscough]

[seanie]

[Franck]

[Bob Jefferson]

[seanie]

[wangi]

admin: 6 posts regarding Portobello Community Council have been split off to the thread to try and keep this one on-topic. Thanks.

And just what are the shopping habits of people here in Portobello? Share yours on the thread.

L/

[philip myerscough]

Thanks for your welcome, Bob. Not worked out yet how to use the quotes feature but this is in response to your hypothetical question.
My difficulty is that the committee rejected the previous application principally because of height and density. Any re-application has to address the reasons for refusal and be materially different. If I only make a half hearted attempt at that I risk the committee saying "we told you it was too high and too dense and you have ignored us".
On the retail side I have to incorporate something that creates value. That means I have to meet the requirements of the operators. A convenience store has little value. I can't say to Waitrose you can have let's say 2000sf. They will say sorry we only do X size of store in this location with this demographic profile. We want to be able to do home delivery. We need 6 spaces for home delivery vans. We need Y parking spaces for customers. Give us that and we will pay premium value. Otherwise go away.
So I am stuck between a rock and a hard place!
However bear in mind there will have to be a Retail Impact Assessment and it will judge the impact on existing retailers and on traffic. You will see that. You can comment on it. If it is adverse and the planners don't like it they will recommend refusal.
I personally don't buy the impact on the High Street argument. I suspect those who use the good shops in Portobello also already use a supermarket somewhere. Putting a Waitrose down the road will not stop them shopping in the good High Street shops. And an "anchor" like Waitrose will attract other quality retailers into Portobello. They might put the poorer shops out of business. But it will raise the overall quality of what is available. Surely that sort of competition is a good thing.
I don't want to be appearing to say "take it or leave it". But the previous refusal has severely limited the options. And I think the Waitrose is actually a positive contribution to Portobello.
On another issue I met Brian Cope of Portobello Music School today. What a fantastic operation he has created! There is huge potential for the Music School, Verden Studios and Out of the Blue Artists Studios to operate together in integrated space sharing performance space and cafe and opening out onto a piazza and the Community Garden. Very exciting!
Please just give me the chance to prove to you what can be achieved.

[Bob Jefferson]

[seanie]

But because the reasons for refusal are general in nature, the only way to address them is comprehensively.

The Committee said too high. So the only absolutely safe way is to reduce heights across the board. Then the committee can't say "you've only reduced reduced half, that's not enough" . If the offical reasons for refusal are absolutely countered, then the only remaining issue is local opposition/the PCC.

[allaboardtheskylark]

Will the Waitrose damage the business for Findlays and Williamsons? That is something I am not sure about. I checked out the fresh fish and butcher meat at Waitrose and our local specilaists look pretty decent in comparison.Would it bring business into Portobello, I am sure the answer would be yes.

But, if Waitrose were to find another site, say in Musselburgh, Portobello would be left only with the negative aspects. Lets face it, without the Waitrose we have a pretty poor High Street as it is and I would rarely walk past the shops we regularly use to go to Waitrose. There would however be another 550 residencies.

What we have got to remember though is, the Superstore is dead. The first BL plan is dead unless appealed. The next plan has to be significantly different or there is no point in going along with it.

The Waitrose has had nothing like the negative response a Superstore had. That must be recognised. Phil has flung the cat among the pigeons.

[Porty]

[philip myerscough]

Hi Porty. I have no problem with Councillor Hawkins being the mouthpiece of PCC. He is elected as a Councillor to represent the views of his constituents. If, on balance, their views are that the current proposal should be supported in principle I am sure he will reflect that. He knows that his own views are secondary to the views of his constituents.
Let me look out the date of the PCC and will post later.
What I need from the PCC is a decision on behalf of the community that they represent whether or not the current proposal is acceptable, in principle and subject to detailed design, the Traffic Impact Assessment, the Air Quality Assessment and the Retail Impact Assessment. Ideally as soon as possible so that I can report that to my funders.
I and the design team met with the planners today to update them and get their feedback. Subject to the items above they are happy with what we are proposing.

[Puerto bella]

Hello Phil,

Can you advise what the results of the questionaire at the exhibition were and perhaps how many people took the trouble to look at the plans and comment?

I would be interested in how that outcome correlates with the community council views. It might also assist the CC in arriving at their decision if they knew the stats from the survey.

It would also be useful to know how your proposals were received by the ECC Design Review Panel, whether you are any further forward in negotiations with Scottish Power and how things sit at the moment with the residents on Bailliefield - all things I talked to you about at the exhibition you will perhaps recall.

One of my concerns is that the more exciting architectural elements of the scheme have been watered down to such an extent that they have now become mundane in streetscape terms.

Difficulty also is that a consent for the site establishes numbers and floorspace and gives no certainty as to who will develop or occupy the site - Phil and his team's best intentions may be long forgotten when A N Other and co purchase the site who knows when...

[philip myerscough]

[Puerto bella]

[Porty]

[Porty]

[philip myerscough]

[allaboardtheskylark]

[allaboardtheskylark]

[philip myerscough]

[Bob Jefferson]

[wangi]

Bob, and what for the many people who live in Portobello and already (the dirty buggers) jump in the car to shop elsewhere? You might find Scotmid acceptable, but for many it's a last resort. In some of those cases a small supermarket they'd use in Portobello would lead to them probably shopping in Portobello more.

And wasn't it the local traders in Haddington that didn't want the town centre Tesco to close/move due to the knock-on trading it brought them?

[Poppy]

[Bob Jefferson]

[seanie]

[Puerto bella]

Re: Wangi's valid point - it was a nail in the coffin of Dalkeith's town centre when the small size Tesco moved to Hardengreen in the late 90's. The site lay vacant for a time and then Lidl and Peacocks moved in and things picked up a wee bit. It was by no means as straightforward as that though.

Driving, yes the sin of it, along the High Street tonight I was struck at the number of empty, to let shops on the section from Mike's Tackle along to the police station; is there really any hope for the High St? Are there not just far too many small floorplate shop units with limited viable alternative uses?

Re: Impact Studies an old saying comes to mind - he who pays the piper.....

[seanie]

[allaboardtheskylark]

[Bob Jefferson]