Topic ID 4306
http://www.hertfordshiremercury.co.uk/hertfordshiremercury-news/displayarticle.asp?id=405987 Apparently the National Government has now decided to get involved with this. So our local councillors who we voted for have their decision overturned so that the government which we did not vote for (well our MP is a Tory and the Government is Labour) gets to decide. [}:)]
Reply ID 62404
Don't be daft. It's got nothing to do with that. It sounds more like Tesco threw its toys out of the pram over why it got refused and Sainsbury's didn't.
Reply ID 62406
I think a new supermarket on the former brewery is actually worse then simply expanding the existing Tesco (specifically with regards to traffic). Having said that, I think most people would prefer that the existing Tesco supermarket be knocked down to make way for a giant Sainsbury's in its palce. :)
Reply ID 62407
Worst possible outcome would be a hideous new Tesco and no Sainsburys
Reply ID 62408
I still say they will submitt new plans for housing, the local council grant them as the whole area will have become such an dangerous isore.
Reply ID 62409
It is good that somebody has seen sense over this - I opposed this ridiculous proposal from day one. Even if it does happen - we are talking years rather than months!
Reply ID 62411
Perhaps they should close Tescos, refuse planning for Sainsburys and open some grocery and greengrocers shops in the town centre. Without competition from Tesco and Sainsbury's they could charge a premium for their products and the footfall in the town centre would increase. Wouldn't that be great [}:)]
Reply ID 62413
quote:Actually great for who? Shoppers have to be even more careful these days about how they spend their money. How would charging a premium help them? I'm sorry but at the moment supermarkets are the best option for the average shopper. Yes we would all like to see local shops prosper, but let's face it.......it a'int gonna happen
Originally posted by jez_p
Perhaps they should close Tescos, refuse planning for Sainsburys and open some grocery and greengrocers shops in the town centre. Without competition from Tesco and Sainsbury's they could charge a premium for their products and the footfall in the town centre would increase. Wouldn't that be great [}:)]
Reply ID 62414
Surely Tesco wont care now, and wont progress with expension if Sainsburys dont come to town - They only proposed extension after sainsburys requested planning permission... So for those against either/both sites, this is surely good news, as neither development will go ahead for some time. I still prefer my idea for the brewery site... A brewery!!!!!!!
Reply ID 62415
The actual wording of the letter to me from the Planning Inspectorate (2/4/09) is as follows: The Inspectorate has decided that this application (Sainsburys) should be linked to a planing appeal by Tesco Stores. Both cases will then be heard at a joint enquiry. Whether they will be heard separately, together, independently but linked I do not know. Waiting for an answer. If and when received will let you know.
Reply ID 62416
quote:Hence my suspicion that this is the result of Tesco throwing their toys out the pram. Sounds like Tesco down to a 'T'. If we can't be in a town, then no one else can.
Originally posted by sloopjohnb
The actual wording of the letter to me from the Planning Inspectorate (2/4/09) is as follows: The Inspectorate has decided that this application (Sainsburys) should be linked to a planing appeal by Tesco Stores. Both cases will then be heard at a joint enquiry. Whether they will be heard separately, together, independently but linked I do not know. Waiting for an answer. If and when received will let you know.
Reply ID 62418
quote:Interesting that they haven't included the proposed Asda in Ware as well.
Originally posted by sloopjohnb
The actual wording of the letter to me from the Planning Inspectorate (2/4/09) is as follows: The Inspectorate has decided that this application (Sainsburys) should be linked to a planing appeal by Tesco Stores. Both cases will then be heard at a joint enquiry. Whether they will be heard separately, together, independently but linked I do not know. Waiting for an answer. If and when received will let you know.
Reply ID 62424
If they hear Sainsbury & Tesco together then my money is on our receiving an enlarged Tesco and a new Sainsbury.
Reply ID 62425
Almost no changed outcome would be above suspicion. No Sainbury because main competitor objects? No Sainsbury, but huge Tesco allowed? Current already reduced sized Sainsbury plan and much bigger Tesco allowed? Even, no Sainsbury and no increase to Tesco could look a bit dodgy, knowing that without their intervention Sainbury had already been given the go ahead. Preservation of responsible civic governance versus huge wads of cash to be spent on 'lobbying'. Any bets?
Reply ID 62426
I love Tesco, (keeps all the riff-raff out of Waitrose)[8D]
Reply ID 62427
So sorry, who gets to decide what happens next? Are we saying after all this planning fiasco it's down to the government?
Reply ID 62428
I reckon it is always the choice of the good old government in the end Ted Badger. You apply to build a house - the local authority say no. You appeal the result - the planning inspectorate says yes/no. Both apply to build/extend a supermarket - the local authority says yes and no. One appeals the result - the Secretary of State says yes/no. Let's see how strong the Cornish man is in this instance. It could have massive implications on local elections depending on local thoughts.
Reply ID 62431
quote:Since it's likely to come to be timed for when fewest are present and tabled by someone who's never been to Hertford or has knowledge of the town (see the original Tesco planning scam for example), the Cornish man will be most likely be fast asleep in Cornwall.
Originally posted by James007
I reckon it is always the choice of the good old government in the end Ted Badger. You apply to build a house - the local authority say no. You appeal the result - the planning inspectorate says yes/no. Both apply to build/extend a supermarket - the local authority says yes and no. One appeals the result - the Secretary of State says yes/no. Let's see how strong the Cornish man is in this instance. It could have massive implications on local elections depending on local thoughts.
Reply ID 62435
the government have better things to do like put this country in a trillion pounds of debt and claim porn films on expenses. I doubt they care whether a tin pot town has a Sainsburys or not.
Reply ID 62437
quote:Erm. The Conservatives are just as bad if not worse; in fact, they were the ones who brought in the whole idea of MPs expenses.
Originally posted by aubend
the government have better things to do like put this country in a trillion pounds of debt and claim porn films on expenses. I doubt they care whether a tin pot town has a Sainsburys or not.
Reply ID 62440
quote:That's exactly the point. What does it take to cause an unconnected MP to become so passionately interested in ensuring that a small Market town, which he has never been to, has a Tesco forced on it? One can only imagine what kind of motivation is required.[;)]
Originally posted by aubend
the government have better things to do like put this country in a trillion pounds of debt and claim porn films on expenses. I doubt they care whether a tin pot town has a Sainsburys or not.
Reply ID 62441
Forgot this letter dated 27 March from GO-East (based in Cambridge - Planning inspectorate based in Bristol). I am writing to let you know that the Secretary of State has decided that the above application (Sainsburys) is one that she should decide herself because of the potential conflict with national policy guidelines. She has therefore directed East Herts District Council to refer the application to her for decision. No mention of what the conflict is or what national guideline(s) is under consideration. And no one yet has returned my call. So we are all left to wonder.
Reply ID 62449
quote:It's probably because of competition rules. It may even be being used as a test case for the renewed plans to bring in competition testing for supermarkets. After all, I think we all know the only reason why Tesco wants to expand is because a rival that could actually do damage to its market share is wanting to move into town. If it is; expect Tesco to be put in its place and Sainsbury's granted.
Originally posted by sloopjohnb
Forgot this letter dated 27 March from GO-East (based in Cambridge - Planning inspectorate based in Bristol). I am writing to let you know that the Secretary of State has decided that the above application (Sainsburys) is one that she should decide herself because of the potential conflict with national policy guidelines. She has therefore directed East Herts District Council to refer the application to her for decision. No mention of what the conflict is or what national guideline(s) is under consideration. And no one yet has returned my call. So we are all left to wonder.
Reply ID 62450
quote:At the risk of veering seriously off-topic, famously in the 80s when the then government increased MPs' allowances to head off a conservative backbench pay revolt, Conservative minister John Moore, told them to “go out boys and spend it”!
Originally posted by Brockman Erm. The Conservatives are just as bad if not worse; in fact, they were the ones who brought in the whole idea of MPs expenses.
Reply ID 62577
Let us not forget that Lord Sainsbury is in the House of Lords and supermarkets in general have a secure hook in politics. Tesco is known for threats of pulling out of an area and causing mass unemployment if they don't get what they want (see Brookfield Farm when Asda were interested in buying the site). Personally I see Tesco as an F-you operation and Sainsbury's is not far behind. I fear for the traffic through/around town if both supermarkets go ahead. I feel that Tesco will be told to stay put or be allowed a smaller extension than requested (ie: new ugly building anyway) and Sainsbury's will get the green light. I, too, query why Asda in Ware has not been included in the planning enquiry as it will be a huge store two miles or so away. If the above paragraph comes to fruition there will be a greater push for a bypass as the town traffic combined with the government's house building number requirements will eventally strengthen the argument for a bypass to happen. Additional houses will spring up between Hertford and the bypass enlarging one side of the town; the value of and demand for Victorian/period properties will increase. Hopefully this will give a greater rise to the varieties of independent traders in town with the new blood living here but I doubt it as East Herts Council don't have a clue about or direction for this town. Well, that was depressing.