Skip to content

Giant Sainsburys -yes or no

March 2, 2011

At some point tonight the much maligned and occasionally praised elected representatives have to come up with the goods.

Tough job.

Say No and its the massive campaign of vilification from BCFC fans and the Evening Lost.

Say Yes and its a happy SL flying back to guernsey, happy fans who’ve now lost their ground to a giant hypermarket like the gas did, and many groans from the residents who care about the community they live in and are rightly fearful of the future under the shadow of the Giant Sainsbury.

Trouble is this. The hypermarket plans are a gamble that has created years of uncertainty for the residents of the area.

And a yes vote will ensure this uncertainty and risk to the health and vitality of the area continues. The arguments for jobs and investment are countered by the risks to historic retail streets and traffic and pollution.

So do you go down the road of risk and gamble which has proved very successful for Steve Lansdown in the world of stocks, hedgefunds and pensions where fortunes are made and lost at the press of a button?

Or do you say no and stay on the road of sustainable development, where communities and people can build the things that matter, such as safe roads, thriving shopping streets, schools, pubs,  jobs with sustainable and successful local businesses?

The gamble is good for those who don’t have to live with the consequences. If and when it all goes wrong, its the community and residents who have to pick up the pieces.


Ashton Gate Sainsbury Saga: the truth behind the spin Bristol24/7

  1. March 2, 2011 8:00 pm

    Watching the webcast, seems the officers aren’t happy

  2. ali permalink
    March 2, 2011 8:58 pm

    Well there we go then. I’ve always been against the development, but agnostic about the stadium, but I’ve got to say that some of my fears were allayed tonight – I do think that the pro side convinced me more than I thought they would. Still disappointed. The city has made the wrong decision, but it’s not as bad a decision as I thought.

  3. Richard Lane permalink
    March 2, 2011 10:43 pm

    Having attended tonight, I thought there were very good representations on both sides.
    I have to say I did not know or have a feeling of which way it was going to go, until quite late into the debate by councillors.I thought at any time there could have been a spanner thrown into the works, from the pro point of view.

    I spoke briefly with Tony but I was in desperate need of the loo. I hope you don’t think I was rude Tony.
    Had a little chat with Charlie, wasn’t he passionate? But silly to mention Chelsea.

    I don’t like the booing and heckling and didn’t partake in that. But the opponents did use that tactic in previous meetings, so I suppose fairs fair.

    Anyway, I will keep using the local shops and other establishments of North St. Let’s hope you all do, including George, who seems to like Aldi (so I’m told).

  4. lover not a hater permalink
    March 2, 2011 11:14 pm

    Seems the boys in red want to boycott all the shops that didn’t want the supermarket…


    But i doubt they will, every time there has been a match at AG in the last few months, they can be seen in George’s funny that I am sure i saw them publically slate him and claim to boycott him too… and that is ‘Fact’

    Shame the whole ‘document’ didn’t get read out.. i think it would of been a different ending if it had.

    Would also like to see the bond on sainsbury’s to be sufficiently high to compensate as well as for future roadworks, it’s the locals who will suffer the noise, destruction 24/7, been there and lived through it for scabby circus.. maybe it will be set too high and not viable to build after all?

    Get to know the noise abaitment phone number, i can see this become a busy line.

  5. Richard Lane permalink
    March 3, 2011 1:39 am

    Lover not a Hater
    Seems a strange name to choose for one so full of the latter.
    Do you really think that the site you refer to is representative of city supporters? Let me tell you, it is not. Most city supporters no nothing of the goings on between the people on either side of the argument. That’s why you will see some of them in the TF before and after a game. Most are oblivious to what’s happened and blame the delays on the council.

    The site by it’s virtue, attracts some of the more radical enthusiastic supporters. So you will see more radical views expressed. Somewhat like this site, which is not representative of all the people opposed to the store, or stadium. Although it must be said that the exagerations are broadly used, tonight the new store was described by one opposition spokesman as the biggest Sainsbury in the World.

  6. Tony Dyer permalink
    March 3, 2011 9:42 am

    Hi Rich,

    No, I didn’t think you were being rude at all. TBH, I appear to have picked up some sort of viral infection so it was probably a good thing for you that we only had the very briefest of chats. That was also why I sat at the end of the benches on my own and ended up leaving early.

    I didn’t think the booing was that bad, the only people that really got booed was George Ferguson and Charlie and I suspect they are both thick-skinned enough to cope with it (I know Charlie see it as going with the territory) – and tbh, as they were the two that barracked officers as the previous meeting I think they will accept that what goes around, comes around. People feel very passionate about the issues raised by this application, but nevertheless I thought both sides were better behaved than most MPs during an average session of Prime Minister’s Questions!

    Not too sure about what happens next – that is down to others. The objectors concerns were, and remain, about the negative impact of such a large store whereas the councillors last night seemed more concerned about the potential loss of the new stadium and its associated benefits – as officer’s said it is a question of balancing judgements and, perhaps, priorities. Sainsburys did not accept the previous planning decision and tried again to build the store. It remains to be seen if the objectors accept this planning decision or if they too will seek further redress but I get the impression that most people just want to get back to some sort of normality tempered with concern about what the future holds.

  7. Richard Lane permalink
    March 3, 2011 8:33 pm


    Keep your bugs in Chipping Sodbury, we don’t want them.

    I echo the sentiments of those people wanting to get back to normality.
    The negative vibes from constant disagreements is very tiring, though you do get used to it.

    If I can help in any fights for improving Bristol, give me a shout.
    Cheers Rich

  8. harryT permalink
    March 3, 2011 9:01 pm


    If you want to help, then start getting city fans to stop putting bricks through windows in Ashton Vale. Another day of broken glass today. You compadres are not exactly portraying themselves as ideal future neighbours.

  9. March 3, 2011 9:21 pm

    This aggravated attitude comes from the top down and the club really needs to take a lead on this and put a stop to the disgraceful behaviour of some people -almost certainly so-called fans.
    The voice of Lansdown himself would be beneficial in condemning such cowardly acts.

  10. March 3, 2011 9:54 pm

    Please excuse me using your blog to pass on a message but the comments were closed on the last article and I hope I’m updating the same people. I’m not here to comment on the last 24 hours because quite frankly in spite of any prior efforts I’ve in the end found myself numbed by the whole experience having appreciated first hand this week how much of a wedge a dispute like this can drive between people from the same neighbourhood.

    All I wanted to clarify was that I sent a letter to Paul at Southville Deli with the intention of trying to prove I had nothing to do with ‘Mike Ford’ and hoping to end any bad blood (this all sent before the council decision also, so irrespective of the outcome). On getting back to Bristol tonight I see that he has very graciously and kindly left a reply in kind and accepts that I am not ‘Mike Ford’. I’m only sorry it had to get this far to get people talking.

    For what it’s worth I’d also written to the Evening Post editor asking him politely to confirm in writing to Paul as I don’t want the idea anyone round here would think I’d write the kind of vicious and provocative things Mike Ford did – the example Paul pasted on here was one of many where Mike Ford seems to use “scum” almost as if it’s a punctuation mark, it could not be further from how I write or debate and I certainly wouldn’t abuse my neighbours.

    I know some people will still feel it’s fair game to tar me with the same brush as Mike Ford anyway due to what went before and I am genuinely sorry if anyone feels I’ve done anything wrong, but I maintain that one thread on OTIB with a series of factual largely political pieces about the background to the last decision and its protagonists, and then 8 posters this week, is hardly any different to efforts of people involved in campaigning against the plans.

    Finally, it’s worth saying that in all the various arguments I never once wanted North Street to fail. People seemed to polarise that if you weren’t with North Street, you must be against it. My point of view was always from another angle which was that it was just too selfish of “our” stretch of North Street to dictate the future of the rest of South Bristol. Let me qualify that point; if you travel by train as much as I do, try walking back from Temple Meads.

    My route takes me up pass the (old) Bell, through Redcliffe’s towering council estate, down across Bedminster bridge, across Asda carpark, through the next estate across to Dean Lane and down the more dilapidated end of North Street. Getting back to the area people are so concerned for, I cannot bring myself to support a view that we should not risk the future of such a small (nice) part of South Bristol, when so many other areas could really benefit.

    I don’t believe anyone is disputing the investment both the new Sainsbury’s and particularly a Stadium will bring, particularly with jobs, and for a “half” of the City not blessed with large tangible catalysts for urban renewal, this stands to help out a lot of poorer environments in our area of the City. My point of view was always that it was selfish and illogical to protect against impact to our small area and deny so many poorer nearby areas the regeneration.

  11. bobS permalink
    March 3, 2011 10:08 pm


    You are spamming the site with your self obsession and your deluded justification for your hate campaigns

  12. March 4, 2011 6:01 am

    @bobS. The author of this blog said on the previous blog entry “Rob f- you’ve made your point and Paul be good to mend a few bridges. “. I was simply giving him and any others the courtesy of ensuring that happened and confirming that it had – the only opportunity to do so was on this entry.

    As to your other remark, I see you’re still avoiding actual debate of either the validity of anything I have written or the basis for my view of North Street as above. I am not Mike Ford and “hate” is a strong word. You show me where I hated anyone. With your “Faka” remark, you’re the bitter/nasty one.

    I’ll leave you in peace now.

  13. Country Cousin permalink
    March 4, 2011 1:43 pm

    You are now laying it on abit thickly.

    I do not really care whether you are who you say you are. If you are not, you are lying to yourself in a very convincing way and I would advise you to seek professional help. If you are who you say you are, you’ve obviously been deeply emotionally affected by the events, and the self pitying tone of your comments indicates some ongoing physcological effects inducing paranoia, insecurity and a profound persecution complex, in which case I would advise you to seek professional help.

    Voce Entende?

  14. Richard Lane permalink
    March 4, 2011 8:39 pm

    I have no compadres that throw bricks through windows., and certainly don’t agree with those actions.
    As usual you have no proof that these things happened, or if they did happen, that they were definately done by city fans. It could quite easily be an invented story, or carried out by people, or an individual opposing the stadium, portraying fans out to be thugs.
    To include me is very insulting to my character, though one I am used to, when dealing with the likes of you.
    Country cousin
    At least Rob has the guts (unlike most posters on here) not to hide behind a pseudonym whilst making comments.
    Cue the claims of fear factor. Charlie is not worried, southville Deli is open, people know where George and Alice live, likewise Tess Green and Glen Vowles. Why are you lot so scared, when there is no evidence of acts being carried out against these people? I can only assume it’s because you can act braver hiding behind the computer. Have some balls, say who you are for a change.

  15. Country Cousin permalink
    March 5, 2011 9:10 am

    Your right Rich,
    Guess I’ll just have to remain a coward whilst watching in awe those few brave souls who act as fearless cheerleaders for a multi-billionaire company and multi millionaire business men, backed with a huge PR machine, lawyers, a compliant press and misguided politicians. Takes guts I know to step out from the shadows to defeat a shadowy conspiracy of shop keepers and greens.

  16. Richard Lane permalink
    March 5, 2011 11:34 pm

    Country cousin
    I know I’m right. I am referring to the gutless people that post on sites like this, with apparently no fear because they’re behind a computer screen. They think they can say or do what they want, be as abusive as they want, because they know there is no smack in the mouth coming. And that includes the odd city fans, like the poster on beep beep look at the plans.
    If you’d like to meet and discuss the issues in a sensible way, I’m up for it, even if you choose to be sarcastic.

Comments are closed.