ricardo
Steve Elliot
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 138 
|
Post by ricardo on Aug 8, 2014 13:08:53 GMT
just had an email confiming sainsburys have made an appeal to the secretary of state regarding the council's decision not to grant permission to ammend delivery hours to between 0500 and 00:00.
I guess this can be looked at in one of 2 ways:
Good as it indicates they still intend to build it.
Bad as it could be seen as a delaying tactic if they are just trying to get out of it!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2014 13:16:08 GMT
Very interesting and that would account for the daily lawyers meetings.
|
|
|
|
Post by Feeling The Blues on Aug 8, 2014 13:17:11 GMT
They probably calculate that they are in a strong position right now to call the shots, certainly a lot stronger than they will be once they hand over the money. More delays though!
|
|
rovers2
Bruce Bannister
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 326
|
Post by rovers2 on Aug 8, 2014 13:18:33 GMT
I raised this as an issue a couple of months ago as being a major reason Sainsburys would not proceed.
|
|
|
|
Post by lulworthgas on Aug 8, 2014 13:24:47 GMT
just had an email confiming sainsburys have made an appeal to the secretary of state regarding the council's decision not to grant permission to ammend delivery hours to between 0500 and 00:00. I guess this can be looked at in one of 2 ways: Good as it indicates they still intend to build it. Bad as it could be seen as a delaying tactic if they are just trying to get out of it! Central government would surely allow this, having publicly backed the enabling project during PMs questions. Hopefully this will be decided on quite quickly. |
|
|
|
Post by droitwichgas on Aug 8, 2014 13:26:19 GMT
Surely this is totally irrelevent to Sainsbury's buying the Mem, it's a bit like exchanging contracts to buy a house then the purchaser seeking permission to build a conservatory, it's not the sellers fault if pp gets turned down & the purchaser has to appeal.
Why are they in a "stronger position" as they are not handing any money over to BCC and BRFC will have no say in the decision?
At least it shows Sainsbury's haven't given up on buying the Mem/building a store, it's time they paid up for it!
|
|
|
|
Post by upminstergas on Aug 8, 2014 13:27:44 GMT
Got to be a positive, posters on here were suggesting that the deal was dead in the water after that paper article, this shows that Sainsburys haven't totally give up on the idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by frenchgashead on Aug 8, 2014 13:32:18 GMT
What happens if it is turned down? Would it be an excuse to pull out? Will TRASH use this as an opportunity to submit evidence opposing the longer hours?
|
|
|
|
Post by lulworthgas on Aug 8, 2014 13:32:36 GMT
This is fantastic news and a clear indication that sainsburys will be cracking on. They knew about this caveat when they put in for planning and are probably aware that with the investment that will happen due to the mem sale around north bristol, that changing this detail at a latter stage would be straight forward.
|
|
|
|
Post by lulworthgas on Aug 8, 2014 13:34:14 GMT
What happens if it is turned down? Would it be an excuse to pull out? Will TRASH use this as an opportunity to submit evidence opposing the longer hours? I can't see how it can be used as an excuse as the delivery time restrictions were not a surprise and certainly nothing to do with bristol rovers. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2014 13:37:02 GMT
That's pleasing, clear indication that Sainsburys are still horny for the project.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2014 13:45:01 GMT
That's pleasing, clear indication that Sainsburys are still horny for the project. Orally, yes I suppose! |
|
|
|
Post by CabbagePatchBlues on Aug 8, 2014 13:47:25 GMT
So the original delivery hours was just Sainsbury's hanging out green washing as bait then?
|
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Aug 8, 2014 13:49:05 GMT
Come on someone has just made this up surely? We've got 13 pages of b*llocks from all the bar room lawyers telling us Sainsburys definitely have no interest in the site. Oh god some of those bar room lawyers couldn't be wrong could they?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2014 13:50:23 GMT
Normal procedure. Doesn't mean a great deal.
And even if the decision were to be overturned, plenty of background work has been done suggesting that the original decision was supported by flawed noise impact data provided by Sainsbury's, so there will be further delays and appeals as the argument is batted back and forth.
For those who think it unreasonable to have the restrictions, just ask yourself how you would feel if you were being subjected to massive articulated delivery lorries 19 hours a day driving past your garden window with the only respite being midnight ~ 5am.
Still, as long as 2p can be saved on a loaf of bread who cares how much inconvenience is caused to other people.
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Aug 8, 2014 13:56:25 GMT
What are the original/current delivery hours?
Surely between 6am and 10pm is adequate/not unreasonable in a residential area. I don’t think I would he happy having large Lorries delivering at Midnight if I lived by the store
What are Sainsbury’s going to do if this is chucked out
|
|
|
|
Post by lulworthgas on Aug 8, 2014 13:56:34 GMT
]Still, as long as 2p can be saved on a loaf of bread who cares how much inconvenience is caused to other people.[/quote]
Exactly!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2014 14:07:09 GMT
What are the original/current delivery hours? Surely between 6am and 10pm is adequate/not unreasonable in a residential area. I don’t think I would he happy having large Lorries delivering at Midnight if I lived by the store What are Sainsbury’s going to do if this is chucked out Here you go matey. trashorfield.wordpress.com/application-for-extension-of-delivery-hours/That actually makes quite interesting reading, especially the bit about what was used as a base line for background noise levels. They have 17 hours a day, 5 days a week, but obviously that isn't good enough, they want 19 hours 7 days a week. Obviously they fully intend to use those extra 2 hours weekdays and 19 hours Saturdays and Sundays, or they wouldn't bother appealing. |
|
toteend
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 305
|
Post by toteend on Aug 8, 2014 14:15:24 GMT
God save us from the bloody experts on here. Just because Sainsburys are looking to vary the delivery times doesn't mean that you will have articulated lorries all hours of the day and night.
If that was the case it would be cheaper to bring it in by train. It just means the same number of deliveries, but they can come in either later at night or earlier in the morning.
I wouldn't fancy living that close to where lorries are plying their trade, but what happens now? I would imagine you get a fair old number of lorries now up and down Gloucs Rd and Muller Rd all hours, and when the new housing is built, it will be no louder for the existing houses than it is now.
As for the new houses, they will know what they are buying into.
|
|
|
|
Post by bristolian on Aug 8, 2014 14:16:32 GMT
What are the original/current delivery hours? Surely between 6am and 10pm is adequate/not unreasonable in a residential area. I don’t think I would he happy having large Lorries delivering at Midnight if I lived by the store What are Sainsbury’s going to do if this is chucked out I worked nights at Sainsburys at Emerson Green a couple of years ago, unlike Tesco they aren't 24/7, that means the shelves are stacked at night and very little is done during the day. That also means there is virtually not warehouse storage at the back of the store, the lorries come over from their depot, the cages of goods are delivered and straight out onto the shop floor. So if they can't delivery at night they can't re-stock the shelves, pretty simple. So not a petty issue for Sainsburys, strange to think they applied for planning without this already in place. |
|
