Comment posted Waitrose has £325k on table for Tuesday planning hearing – and opposition rolls in by newsroom.
Lowry – as you must know, we are a very small team with a huge amount of work to do and we cannot keep absolutely on top of everything.
We haven’t forgotten about this matter and we will be pursuing it.
You gave us a smile at the suggestion that this – or anything – might be ‘too political’ for us. Hardly our MO.
newsroom also commented
- This could be said to be an almost perfect line up of the numpties. Authoritative? Hardly. But no doubt it will be sufficient, along with a side dish of pak choi.
- We understand that it is practically unheard of for Councillor Danny Kelly, who is chairing the hearing, to overturn the planners’ recommendation. If he were to do so on this occasion, it would be strange.
- So where did the recent survey majorities FOR a retail development on the pier head come from – as quoted by Sainsburys in the letter we have published?
Recent comments by newsroom
- Argyll and Bute Council: Councillor McCuish leads again
We appreciate that it is inconvenient for a light to be shone on doings your party would prefer to keep hidden in shady places from those it asks to vote for it.
That is a dishonourable contract.
As the former Alliance of Independent Councillors [which had nothing at all do with Michael Russell ] knows very well, when it was damaging Argyll and Bute by its conduct during the 2010-11 schools closure wars, we were even more vigilant in keeping them under scrutiny and publishing on their manoeuvres.
We had to be even more vigilant because they were skilled at keeping things under wraps – where the SNP has conducted its acts of political genocide en plein air. All anyone has had to do is draw up a chair.
It should be obvious from our stance in recent weeks that we have no ‘vendetta’ against Councillor Dick Walsh, whom we dealt with arguably more harshly than we have done with Mr Russell.
A central function of our role is to contribute to the holding to account of those elected to serve the people. We do our best to fulfil this fairly – and hard. But we have no vendetta against anyone.
In Mr Russell’s case we simply feel he is a hot air balloon who has imploded over Argyll and done a great deal of harm – profoundly so to his own party, which we used to support. The evidence for our view is in the public domain. - Radically new council group changes all the dynamics: party politics dead in Argyll
The fact is that the SNP councillors in the Argyll and Bute for Change group are not ‘SNP councilors’ in council group terms – as rules forbid membership of more than one group.
So the ‘Russell camp’ is definitely no longer in the council’s SNP group, although presumably they will personally vote in elections according to their preferences.
And IF the other 8 SNP members have actually joined [as opposed to supporting [the Argyll, Lomond and the Isles group, there is no formal SNP group at all in Argyll and Bute Council.
If this has become the situation, it means that the SNP as a party has no right of purview over the behaviour of ANY of its originally elected councillors, none of whom would now be SNP councillors.
You have to say this is fun. It's not politics but it is a laugh. - Argyll and Bute Council: Councillor McCuish leads again
As given in one of the recent updates above - the missing person is Councillor Strong - from the, as of this morning, Argyll and Bute for Change Group. This would leave that group with 18 members but only 17 present to vote - which would not be enough to carry them to administration IF all other 18 councillors voted together.
This has to be likely but in the current situation the finessing is so arcane that one cannot be certain of anything until it's done. - Argyll and Bute Council: Councillor McCuish leads again
The fact is that they were quite prepared to work with the Liberal Democrat and Conservative groups - but were ordered by the the SNP to face expulsion from the party or to leave the administration that was planning just such a coalition.
We do not yet know what the SNP party position is today - although in our 14.15 update above, we have laid out the range of possibilities - but we do know that the 8 SNP Councillors have not resigned from the party. - Argyll and Bute Council: Councillor McCuish leads again
Sincere apologies for the temporary error - now corrected - and thank you for the prompt.
We are doing our level best - live - to get changing situations out to people as fast and as best as we can.
When we inevitably have the odd muddle [like cloning Mary Jean Devon], it is corrected very quickly.
powered by SEO Super Comments
Helensburgh has rejected a supermarket on the pier three times in the past decade. How many more times do you need to hear it?
That being the case, the rest of your argument falls. I am beginning to think we need a For Helensburgh website, leaving you to concentrate on the old Argyll area where you are clearly better informed.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
So where did the recent survey majorities FOR a retail development on the pier head come from – as quoted by Sainsburys in the letter we have published?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Don’t know – it was not mentioned today. Don’t suppose Sainsburys could have an interest?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
PBP – ‘old Argyll area’, care to define what you mean by ‘old’
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The former Argyll before it was lucky enough to land the cash cow of Helensburgh and District.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’d like to know PBP if this is your attitude towards For Argyll? or to Argyll itself?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It is about For Argyll itself, which in many respects I admire but which does not seem to have much of a clue about Helensburgh.
This morning at the hearing it was made clear, through various surveys, that thousands were in favour of Waitrose at Colgrain, and that there was a roughly 55-45 split against a pier supermarket.
Yet For Argyll has consistently claimed the opposite in both cases.
Today there is a huge attendance of Waitrose supporters and, so far, six objectors have put their heads above the parapet.
Interestingly, the only person booed this morning was the representative of Helensburgh Retailers Association.
If I was the editor of For Argyll, at this point I would be questioning the quality of the reporting.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Apparently, Victoria Halls is currently packed to capacity with many people waiting outside as well to hear the verdict.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For Argyll don’t seem to understand my area either. Folk here are still waiting to learn the membership make up of the Easdale Island charity, Eilean Eisdeal, and how the money was spent from the Scottish Gas Green Streets award. For Argyll claimed that this information should be in the public domain – so where is it? We seem to have been forgotten or FA aren’t interested in persuing this further. Perhaps they’re not bothered about the rights of folk here, or is it too political?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Lowry – as you must know, we are a very small team with a huge amount of work to do and we cannot keep absolutely on top of everything.
We haven’t forgotten about this matter and we will be pursuing it.
You gave us a smile at the suggestion that this – or anything – might be ‘too political’ for us. Hardly our MO.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Copied from URTV’s Facebook page:
Final count is 693 letters of support to the council for Waitrose and 137 letters against, including a petition. There were also 7 miscellaneous letters.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Same source again – URTV:
The Council Planning Department and Waitrose have both spoken. The Planning Department say that the effects on the town centre could have been grossly underestimated by Waitrose’s retail impact survey and that they are maintaining that they recommend refusal of the application.
Waitrose still believe that the effects on the town centre will be negligible and they can mitigate them. Waitrose spokesperson, Martin Gorman, received a big round of applause for saying Helensburgh is crying out for a good quality food store.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Be interesting to see whether members choose to reject the advice given to them by the planning department and the justification for that rejection (should it happen)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
We understand that it is practically unheard of for Councillor Danny Kelly, who is chairing the hearing, to overturn the planners’ recommendation. If he were to do so on this occasion, it would be strange.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
But he did.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Thanks for update CSB. No room at the inn for me at 10.25. Hey ho, should have got there a bit earlier!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Now lunch time in the Victoria Halls. It is a full house. Looks like it could run into this evening as the previous supermarket application did about 10 years ago.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I could be wrong. But I think they made an exception for Henry Bros at Colgrain, which was greenbelt outwith the local development plan. That seemed strange at the time. Probably a large brown envelope involved there.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
From URTV again:
30 pro Waitrose representatives have spoken, including Councillor Vivien Dance and Community Councilman Nigel Harman. Now it’s over to the objectors.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I turned up in time to hear a lady in support of Waitrose say she wanted Waitrose so she could buy pak chow in Helensburgh. That seems to be the level of the debate.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It is 4.30 and we are now into PPSLC members asking questions before everyone sums up. It could be another hour or so before we have a decision depending on how many questions are asked.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
We cope with bin collections once a week (or even fortnightly) so how about fancy supermarket visits once a week? – a Waitrose on a seagoing barge, serving the west coast – say from Helensburgh to Fort William, stopping off at Dunoon, Rothesay, Campbeltown, Oban, Fort William – and maybe Tobermory and Port Ellen alternate weeks. Just dreaming. At Helensburgh it would tie up at the pier, of course. The supermarket aisles would be cushioned with giant airbags to keep everything shipshape on passage, and maybe even giant gimbals would be effective.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Great idea – a 21st century Vital Spark!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Summing up now underway.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Summing up now complete. Now moving on to the PPSLC members debating the issue before the decision is taken. It looks like it will be an approval but watch this space.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Bruce Marshall has stated that he will support the application if a competent amendment can be brought forward. David Kinniburgh has stated that he will be doing the same. Robin Currie has stated that he hopes the application will be approved but the mitigation is insufficient. He is looking for an additional £420k in mitigation for various items. Neil McKay also looking to support it if an amendment can be put together but needs more mitigation.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
This could be said to be an almost perfect line up of the numpties. Authoritative? Hardly. But no doubt it will be sufficient, along with a side dish of pak choi.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’d like to know what Councillor Currie wanted to do with the extra £420,000.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Alex McNaughton has also confirmed his support along with Gordon Chalmers. It is now clear that it will be approved if a competent motion / amendment can be put together.
Cllr McAlister has also indicated support along with Cllr Devon, Cllr McMillan and Cllr McQueen.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
In the final straight now. Cllr McCuish has confirmed his support as has Cllr Reay. We only await the views of the Chair.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Cllr Reay now moving a motion to approve the application. Now reading it out to obtain confirmation if it is competent or not. Now seconded by the Chair – Cllr Kelly.
Application has been approved.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Pingback: Argyll News: RIP Helensburgh town centre: Waitrose out of town location approved | For Argyll
A long hot day, but full marks to the Helensburgh area public for their active participation.
The right result too, so long as Waitrose are not put off by the vastly increased ‘mitigation payment’.
On a wider stage, Government should be looking at how such payments, which are pure and simple bribery, could be regulated.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I thought ‘mitigation’ in the context of a supermarket proposal meant meeting the cost of any extra roadworks, pedestrian crossings etc made necessary by the extra traffic generated by the development. I’d like to know if some councillors took a more elastic view of the meaning of the word.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’m sure they won’t be put off by the mitigation payment. In all probability there will be negotiations over the purchase price between drum & waitrose. The application was made under two names – Waitrose & Wandering Wild (aka drum). It is highly likely that there is an agreement between drum and waitrose, where waitrose purchase the land subject to planning approval. This allows them to attach caveats re planning gain / mitigation payments. It will probably be drum who take a hit on the price. They’ll be aware that without planning approval their land is worthless. I actually think planning gain is a good thing. Just as long as it reaches the intended parties and not the council coffers, which sadly often happens.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
We need a clear statement from the coumcil of how this mitigation sum was calculated, and how it will be committed.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’d like to see the money used to directly improve the retailers units / frontages. I’ve attached a link to the merchant city initiative below, which completely transformed that area.
http://glasgowmerchantcity.net/regeneration.html
I’m pleased Waitrose got their approval. Had Waitrose been rejected, then all that would have happened is a continuation of the current decline of the town centre. That decline is due to the apathy of a lot of shop keepers. Either the shopkeepers take this opportunity to get their fair share of mitigation money to improve the service that they provide. Or they sell up and allow the next generation of shopkeepers to take over. I’m sure like me, the majority of Helensburgh shoppers do not want to soley shop in Waitrose. To me the Waitrose development has always been about a high end outlet recognising the potential and wanting to invest in our town, which will hopefully be a catalyst for further investment in the town centre.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0