Scottish Power Site Re-development 3 - supermarket + housing

[Maria]

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



- high density housing

See also on the this proposal and .

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]

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]

[Maria]

[the good guy]

[seanie]

[rmolehusband]

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]

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]

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.

[wangi]

[Puerto bella]

[Porty]

[wangi]

[Maria]

[Bob Jefferson]

[Bob Jefferson]

[allaboardtheskylark]

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]

[rmolehusband]

[allaboardtheskylark]

[Puerto bella]

[seanie]

[the good guy]

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]

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]

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]

[Bob Jefferson]

[the good guy]

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]

[the good guy]

[allaboardtheskylark]

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]

[allaboardtheskylark]

[the good guy]

[Bob Jefferson]