Page 2 of 4

Re: Sainsbury's Local

PostPosted: Fri 23 Jan 2015 8:49 pm
by Ian
Steve wrote:The only valid grounds for objection is if it contravenes local planning policy. It doesn't matter how many people object.


Not so. The Co-Op sign is listed and is covered by *national* legislation. The argument (rejected by EHDC) is that by covering the feature that is protected, no regular checks can be made for the condition of the listing which will result in deterioration of the mosaic and subsequent loss of this feature. This contravenes the legislation.

Re: Sainsbury's Local

PostPosted: Fri 23 Jan 2015 11:57 pm
by Steve
I was making a general observation, not commenting on this specific case. Obviously local planning policy has to respect national legislation and the NPPF.

FWIW the decision regarding the sign is not without precedent. I know of at least one "historic" sign on a listed building in Hertford that has had the same treatment, so it's questionable as to whether it's "another example of Ware being let down by EHDC".

Ian wrote:
Steve wrote:The only valid grounds for objection is if it contravenes local planning policy. It doesn't matter how many people object.


Not so. The Co-Op sign is listed and is covered by *national* legislation. The argument (rejected by EHDC) is that by covering the feature that is protected, no regular checks can be made for the condition of the listing which will result in deterioration of the mosaic and subsequent loss of this feature. This contravenes the legislation.

Re: Sainsbury's Local

PostPosted: Sat 24 Jan 2015 11:33 pm
by The Masked Woler
That they may have done the same in Hertford has no effect on whether they have let down Ware by this decision.

They have done so before so it is another example.

Re: Sainsbury's Local

PostPosted: Mon 26 Jan 2015 3:55 pm
by Ian
Steve wrote:I was making a general observation, not commenting on this specific case. Obviously local planning policy has to respect national legislation and the NPPF.

FWIW the decision regarding the sign is not without precedent. I know of at least one "historic" sign on a listed building in Hertford that has had the same treatment, so it's questionable as to whether it's "another example of Ware being let down by EHDC".


Well, it's my view that the planning system nationally and in East Herts is pretty well broken by local decisions failing to reflect NPPF on many different levels, but as this is Ware forum I don't think we need to go down that road, it will take a great deal of discussion!

Just because similar decisions are made elsewhere doesn't change the fact that it's letting Ware down. FWIW I don't have any doubt that the planning department allow this to happen everywhere and your example backs that up, but that doesn't change the effect it has on Ware.

Re: Sainsbury's Local

PostPosted: Mon 30 Mar 2015 10:56 am
by Aardvaark
There seems to be a strong rumour in town this morning that Sainsbury's have pulled out of going into the old Co-op site,now being developed, and that we may be left with another empty retail unit in town.

Re: Sainsbury's Local

PostPosted: Mon 30 Mar 2015 12:14 pm
by Mancunian
so what affect does it have on Ware if the old sign is covered up? i don't understand that! yes it's grade listed or whatever but over the god knows how many years it's just been sat there and probably most people don't even look at it, what shop is going to look at going in there with all this etc, tbh i'm not surprised if they pull out as given the reaction on here to it they probably thought sod this too much hassle.... just my opinion...

Re: Sainsbury's Local

PostPosted: Mon 30 Mar 2015 12:22 pm
by The Masked Woler
Mancunian wrote:so what affect does it have on Ware if the old sign is covered up? i don't understand that! yes it's grade listed or whatever but over the god knows how many years it's just been sat there and probably most people don't even look at it, what shop is going to look at going in there with all this etc, tbh i'm not surprised if they pull out as given the reaction on here to it they probably thought sod this too much hassle.... just my opinion...


Where is the hassle? They applied for permission for a store (including a sign which covers the old one) which was granted with no difficulty, the store is nearly built.

Are you seriously suggesting Sainsbury base marketing decisions on what a few say on a forum most don't even know exists?

(ps just being sat there is what signs do - what else were you expecting)

Re: Sainsbury's Local

PostPosted: Mon 30 Mar 2015 12:30 pm
by The Masked Woler
Aardvaark wrote:There seems to be a strong rumour in town this morning that Sainsbury's have pulled out of going into the old Co-op site,now being developed, and that we may be left with another empty retail unit in town.


I wonder if this is because the property freehold is up for sale, however the sale details do say it is subject to a 15 year lease to Sainsbury.

Re: Sainsbury's Local

PostPosted: Mon 30 Mar 2015 12:32 pm
by Steve
Aardvaark wrote:There seems to be a strong rumour in town this morning that Sainsbury's have pulled out of going into the old Co-op site,now being developed, and that we may be left with another empty retail unit in town.

I wonder if this is a consequence of the Waitrose decision.

Re: Sainsbury's Local

PostPosted: Mon 30 Mar 2015 12:45 pm
by craig
Aardvaark wrote:There seems to be a strong rumour...


Let's end the rumour right now.
I've just contacted the regional property acquisitions team at J Sainsbury Plc.

"I really do wonder where or who starts these things.
Sainsbury is legally committed to this project and we are just waiting for the developer to hand the site over to us which should be around early July which is turn will see us open mid August.
Until we are handed the site we cannot commence our own fit out works."


Now, stop it. It'll be in the Mercury as fact if you carry this on.