I submitted a Freedom of Information request a while ago concerning Council/College/Supermarket discussions. Got a copy of a redacted email from Paul Lawrence (SMBC planning officer) to Mark (Walsingham Planning, acting for ASDA+College) + Christina Cassidy (College Principal) + Steve Burns (SMBC Head of Planning), which can be viewed at
via this link.
Now that the proposal is widely known, the Council have been able to release the complete text of that email, see below. I've marked the lines which were originally censored in red.
The Council have also released a related paper from Walsingham Planning, detailing that company's disagreement on the Council's stance concerning the suitability of the site, this can be viewed
at this link.
I figured this sort of information should be shared with interested (whether for or against ASDA) parties via this forum, so that's why I've posted it here.
Neil.
--------------------
Christina – Steve Burns, our Head of Planning, and myself saw Mark from Walsingham Planning last week. Mark passed us a document and we had a useful discussion.
Since that meeting we have discussed Mark’s paper, a version of which I think will go to your Corporation meeting, and offer some comment below.
Can I just stress that these comments should not be taken as any kind of formal response from the Council as Local Planning Authority. They are initial, informal views designed to help you and your Corporation Members agree a way forward in what is a difficult situation. And I hope you’ll take these comments in the spirit of our discussions – which is that we are trying to work with you to find a way forward for the College’s much needed development ambitions.
Mark’s case rests on a number of issues and an interpretation of the Hibbert Lane site in the context of local and national planning policy. Our view is that the case rests on three key issues.
The first is whether the site is considered “out of” or “edge of” centre. We can’t share Mark’s view that the site should be defined as “edge of” centre for clear reasons and this weakens the planning case significantly.
The second is the impact such a development would have on Marple centre and again, we cannot share Mark’s implicit view that because the existing supermarket is “overtrading”, and there is leakage out of Marple, then the impact would be relatively low (my words, not Marks). In part, the out of centre location would work to increase the impact on existing traders.
Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, we cannot agree that the Chadwick St car park site is not a “sequentially preferable” site. Basically, local and national policy says that sites for development should be in the most sustainable locations and therefore there is always a sequencing to the release of sites. Whilst we acknowledge that the Chadwick St site is less commercially attractive, we remain of the view that it is deliverable and therefore sequentially available. This undermines the Hibbert Lane site very significantly indeed.
I can go into more detail on each of these points if that would help but suspect you don’t want your meeting to get bogged down in detailed planning issues. The summary is that we remain of the view that release of the Hibbert Lane site for a supermarket development would be contrary to local and national planning policy and therefore would be almost certain to be refused. Clearly, as we’ve discussed, this could be a very lengthy and controversial process and even more so if some kind of appeal is involved. Depending on timing it could also trigger local community discussions about new powers under the Localism Bill, which might prove very hard to manage.
I hope this is clear. Perhaps we can speak next week after your Corporation meeting? As I said previously I’m now going to struggle to make the 29th so maybe we can discuss the outcome of your meeting and next steps, including discussion with local councillors.
Best wishes
