Tesco / ASDA !!!

[Dave]

Finetime writes that an Asda planning application 'won't be under the jurisdiction of SMBC', but I can't see how that can happen. Surely local authorities are obliged to deal with planning applications, initially at least. Obviously if it then goes to appeal then it's dealt with by the Planning Inspectorate.

[finetimefontaine]

It's all right for you Heritage, you've only been debating this a couple of weeks. Most of the posters on here have been at it months -years even. Dave and Miss M have been writing to each other about the Hibbert Lane ASDA virtually all their adult lives. No offence but most of the things that your are saying have been said ten times over previously.

What did you say..."expending emotional energy"...well I told you about the APP from MOP...but you laughed...well that's exactly the process that's going on now -exactly as you describe. You're not the APP are you ? You wouldn't tell me anyway would you?      

What did you say..."consultation process"! Heritage this is Stockport MBC we're dealing with here - I think that you'll find that their definition of "consultation" and yours are a little at variance. Yours is probably; Provide the information, ask for views, take them into account then act accordingly. Theirs is similar -well three out of four isn't bad.

Coincidentally though, there is a late development here, which if my information is correct would probably explain why ASDA have not yet put in a planning application.  It may well be that when it comes to the planning app it won't be under the jurisdiction of SMBC...INTERESTING EH! Although I think that the real reason for that is tied up with the obvious implications of the Chadwick St site....but I've been wrong before...  

You like conspiracy theories Miss M -YOU'LL LOVE THIS ONE.

[Dave]

why has Ms Cassidy and her corporation refused to speak to residents around the site who are worried about increased noise, light and traffic pollution.

Because they have been forced by the aggressive opposition into a sort of 'bunker mentality'.  I agree that they should have consulted with neighbouring residents at a much earlier stage, and they will no doubt now be regretting that they didn't have the political sense to do that when the idea was first mooted.  At that stage it would not have compromised any negotiations, as long as no specific purchaser was mentioned.  However, they are now in a totally defensive posture, and all they can do for the moment is tough it out.  However, once the planning process becomes public, they will have to come out of the bunker and deal with it.  But that will be a bit easier when there are detailed plans available, and when they can show people what the college's new facilities might look like. 

 

 Why did 3 LOCAL governors  stand down in protest of the plans, that they HAD sight of. It all seems a little strange to me !  

Presumably because they regard the impact on neighbouring properties, and maybe on traffic flow too, as too serious to justify the benefits to the college.  That's a perfectly reasonable point of view.  I don't agree with it, but I should have though you would, Miss M, so what's 'strange' about it?

[Heritage]

Expending all this emotional energy on a debate ahead of any proper public consultation will - my opinion only of course! - merely lead to a less effective consultative process come the day. People will have become so entrenched, opinionated or exhausted by months and months of 'debate' that it will be difficult to grant a fair assessment of the situation. Whatever people may have discovered - whether or not they are annoyed by any supposed lack of 'transparency' - about an alleged supermarket, the consultation process will happen if it is going to happen. And that may be years....YEARS...away. So - to those who are energised now by this fairly spurious debate I would say - arm yourselves with Pro-Plus...you have month after month after month of forum posts to write....and then it'll all have to start from scratch in an objective consultation. 

[Miss Marple]

..... I hope you don't think it will be an ASDA express ! Oh silly me they don't do small do they  

What an odd thing to say!

ASDA are into small in a big way. And their smaller supermarkets charge exactly the same prices as their big superstores, unlike some other retailers.

The nearest small ASDA is in Poynton. See http://storelocator.asda.com/store/poynton

My god it will look lost on 8.5 acres.     I doubt they will  be paying  13 million to build a store of that size!   Do you ?

[Harry]

..... I hope you don't think it will be an ASDA express ! Oh silly me they don't do small do they  

What an odd thing to say!

ASDA are into small in a big way. And their smaller supermarkets charge exactly the same prices as their big superstores, unlike some other retailers.

The nearest small ASDA is in Poynton. See http://storelocator.asda.com/store/poynton

[Miss Marple]

You like myself are entitled to your own opinion   But all I will say is , if it is such a flippin good idea why has
Ms Cassidy and her corporation refused to speak to residents around the site who are worried about increased noise, light and traffic pollution.  Why did 3 LOCAL governors  stand down in protest of the plans, that they HAD sight of. It all seems a little strange to me !  

[Dave]

Ultimately if the college were considering selling (or perhaps more accurately 'optioning') their land to whoever and for whatever purpose, there is an argument that it was their business. Why must we know anything before a planning application was submitted? The whole point of the planning application process is that it is on submission of the application that full public consultation takes place, i.e. once there are facts on the table to consider and debate.

This is a key point.  And there is also the issue of commercial sensitivity.  The college needed to conduct sensitive negotiations with various potential purchasers in a way that did not breach the necessary confidentiality of the process.  We cannot know at this point whether the leaks from staff actually caused any negotiations to be compromised, but there was always that danger. 

[Belly]

Heritage I agree with some points of what you say, but when you say them or call the process that has developed, please be mindful that if it had not been for MIA the people of MARPLE would be non the wiser.  Ms Cassidy and the corporation were outraged when staff leaked the information out to the public.  Did you have sight of the emails I posted on this site, which the college after taking legal advice asked admin to remove?  If you did then forgive me for repeating myself, but the contents of the emails were quite intimidating to staff members from Ms Cassidy. In one she wrote that she had been inundated with calls from the Town Hall, members of the public and other interested parties and as a result it had been decided that staff would not receive anymore information until the deal had been signed.
So Heritage you must forgive MIA for exposing this matter. Because we believe that staff, local shops, businesses and the residents living next to the two sites had a right to know.  I was given this information by a concerned staff member, what did you want me to do with it ? Act like Ms Cassidy and the corporation and try to deceive the people of Marple ?  Never I set higher standards for myself than that.

My only question on this is why do we 'have a right to know' what an individual or organisation is thinking / considering / planning? Is this the local thought police at work here? 

Ultimately if the college were considering selling (or perhaps more accurately 'optioning') their land to whoever and for whatever purpose, there is an argument that it was their business. Why must we know anything before a planning application was submitted? The whole point of the planning application process is that it is on submission of the application that full public consultation takes place, i.e. once there are facts on the table to consider and debate. There are no rules that say that the public must be informed as to what an individual or organisation might be thinking about doing months or years in advance of doing it.

Given that the information was leaked before CAMSFC had a plan in place to present (indeed before they even had a buyer for the land) I'm not surprised they were a little miffed that things got out and all hell broke loose. It precipitated them being asked lots of questions that they were not able to answer and had the result of winding the community up into a frenzy about a scheme that wasn't even a formal proposal.

I have no problem with MIA seeking to object to the concept of a supermarket at Hibbert Lane, but I do get tired of the constant accusations of skulduggery - when what it seems to amount to is the college being put in a very awkward position by some of its own employees when trying to 'plan' an option to secures it's future and then trying (rather awkwardly admittedly) to rescue the situation.

I have a lot of sympathy with a lot of things that Heritage has been saying over the last few days - don't waste all your ammo shooting wildly into the dark.

[Miss Marple]

Heritage I agree with some points of what you say, but when you say them or call the process that has developed, please be mindful that if it had not been for MIA the people of MARPLE would be non the wiser.  Ms Cassidy and the corporation were outraged when staff leaked the information out to the public.  Did you have sight of the emails I posted on this site, which the college after taking legal advice asked admin to remove?  If you did then forgive me for repeating myself, but the contents of the emails were quite intimidating to staff members from Ms Cassidy. In one she wrote that she had been inundated with calls from the Town Hall, members of the public and other interested parties and as a result it had been decided that staff would not receive anymore information until the deal had been signed.
So Heritage you must forgive MIA for exposing this matter. Because we believe that staff, local shops, businesses and the residents living next to the two sites had a right to know.  I was given this information by a concerned staff member, what did you want me to do with it ? Act like Ms Cassidy and the corporation and try to deceive the people of Marple ?  Never I set higher standards for myself than that.

[Heritage]

...but the fundamental point is, that no planning application has been submitted [as far as I am aware], and no structured consultation has been undertaken with anyone of real significance. Hence the supermarket is an alleged one. There is the possibility of one, but not the probability. And the fact remains that the postings on this topic portray Marple - taking the forum as a proxy for the populace - as a rather stuffy, fussy and old-fashioned place when it comes to the real challenges of change in society. When the lack of any real knowledge breaks down - as it seems to do at the end of every thread - then tired behaviours emerge again of slights, insults and prattle about fairly nondescript aspects of the 'debate'....

[Miss Marple]

Bottom line is - like practically all content about the alleged supermarket on this forum - there is a lack of any real data or objective analysis of what the impact of an alleged new business would do to the town. It all seems to descend into the same unfounded scaremongering which is actually counter-productive whatever one's supposed position! 

Hi Heritage I wish it was an alleged supermarket on Hibbert Lane but sadly it is not.    I appreciate that this thread is far too long for you to read through but the reality is that I was one of very few people that was granted an audience with  Ms Cassidy (Principal CAMSFC) who informed me back in July that she was in talks with 2 Supermarkets !    So whatever else you may deem as scaremongering sadly the prospect of a supermarket is a reality and a big one at that. 8.5 acres of land is on the table so I hope you don't think it will be an ASDA express ! Oh silly me they don't do small do they 

[Heritage]

Bottom line is - like practically all content about the alleged supermarket on this forum - there is a lack of any real data or objective analysis of what the impact of an alleged new business would do to the town. It all seems to descend into the same unfounded scaremongering which is actually counter-productive whatever one's supposed position! 

[amazon]

<Edited by Lisa.. off topic>

[finetimefontaine]

Hawk Green chippy?   

I didn't actually think of that one -but you are right. O.k then 3 businesses.