Alternative site

[ringi]

Why not build a supermarket in the middle of Marple and re develop the town centre.

Because a lot of the locals (and the MP) have made it clear that they don't wish Marple to move into the 21st century.  Therefore any development money is more likely to be spent elsewhere.

There is also a lack of space, so a multi story car park may be needed, these are not cheap.

[bat man]

Why not build a supermarket in the middle of Marple and re develop the town centre.

[Miss Marple]

Belly deals well with Miss M's list of questions. Re her suggestion that 'we still need the additional education facilities Marple already has.  Only a fool would sell an asset of this size and location', it's important to understand that a modern purpose-built building at Buxton Lane will be much more space-efficient and economical to run than the 80-year-old former school at Hibbert Lane. There's nothing at all 'foolish' about that.

Oh hello ! Have you got a warning buzzer to alert you when I post !  Lol 

[Lisa Oldham]

I agree with you miss Marple..and am well aware that you write as yourself.. however.. i dont know anyone else who is part of MIA who is 1 obviously on here 2 so outspoken.

Its unfortunate in some ways, but shows the power of this fantastic forum, that you have via your comments on here  become the "face"/"voice" /"persona" of MIA and whether you post as yourself or as MIA sadly wont make a blind bit of difference to many... maybe another person on MIA should get on here and post AS MIA?

Belly.. I agree.. that was my point   Must say.. i  didnt realise that Hazel Grove and back was 7 miles! Any one fighting this.. in particular the legal eagles MIA say they have.. should be concentrating on fighting that issue!

[Dave]

Belly deals well with Miss M's list of questions. Re her suggestion that 'we still need the additional education facilities Marple already has.  Only a fool would sell an asset of this size and location', it's important to understand that a modern purpose-built building at Buxton Lane will be much more space-efficient and economical to run than the 80-year-old former school at Hibbert Lane. There's nothing at all 'foolish' about that.

[Belly]

Sadly I agree with Belly s points.. in particular i think MIA should read point one over and over again! This constant slagging off of the college and going on and on about the fact they dont care is  a waste of effort now... it was expected as I'm sure the supermarkets advised them long and hard that that would be MIA or any groups tack, and theyve weathered the storm.

To Howard and Belly I'd say.. its interesting the use of the words "need"and "demand" and when the realisation of such came into play.. we didnt know what we needed/demanded until we were told?  

MIA.. presume you have to prove to an inspector that marple and its few thousand inhabitants dont NEED/DEMAND a store... regardless of the pressure to provide an alternative.. and i reckon you have a chance!
However if you go down the line of finding an alternative site that is not 100% suitable, you'll fail simply because there is no where in the retail development zone that will fit the bill then.... concentrate on the arguments you can win...

Lisa - I think your point re: demand / need is well made. I'm sure many would like the convenience / competition of a new store in Marple, but do we need it?

I suspect the answer depends on whether a 7 mile round car trip to the nearest large supermarket that isn't the Co-op is 'acceptable'. Not something that I have a strong view on either way as I have a car and can make the journey, but again this is an issue that is likley to be a key debating point at any inquiry and at the crux of an Inspector's final decision.

[Miss Marple]

These points are my points even though I am a member of MIA I do have my own views, I am just entering into a debate.   I hope people do not think that it's me and a mate who are MIA lol !   MIA is an very organised group of people with experence in all areas, so take what I say on here  as my views which I hope I am entitled to ?   As Admin says if you are interested in facts refer to the MIA facts page.  In future I will make a point of mentioning that I am posting as MM
Miss MARPLE 

[Lisa Oldham]

Sadly I agree with Belly s points.. in particular i think MIA should read point one over and over again! This constant slagging off of the college and going on and on about the fact they dont care is  a waste of effort now... it was expected as I'm sure the supermarkets advised them long and hard that that would be MIA or any groups tack, and theyve weathered the storm.

To Howard and Belly I'd say.. its interesting the use of the words "need"and "demand" and when the realisation of such came into play.. we didnt know what we needed/demanded until we were told? 

MIA.. presume you have to prove to an inspector that marple and its few thousand inhabitants dont NEED/DEMAND a store... regardless of the pressure to provide an alternative.. and i reckon you have a chance!
However if you go down the line of finding an alternative site that is not 100% suitable, you'll fail simply because there is no where in the retail development zone that will fit the bill then.... concentrate on the arguments you can win...

[Belly]

What we need to be thinking is ,

1.   Where  would a supermarket be built if Hibbert Lane was not for sale

2.   Why was there not a need for another supermarket before June 2011

3.    We would still be non the wiser to the proposed sale of the land if the proposals had not leaked out 4 months ago

4. Why has there suddenly become such a need

5. Why are some people in favour of selling educational land to ANYONE. statistics are there to show that there will be a need for additional college / school places in a few years

6. People are saying that Marple needs another supermarket because we are a growing town, so doesn't that mean we still need the additional education facilities Marple already has.  Only a fool would sell an asset of this size and location, One  can only assume that CAMSFC do not have our children's best future educational needs in mind.

My answers to your questions Miss M are:

1. Don't know. Probably nowhere, as I'm yet to be convinced another site is available. This is potentially a key point which the superstore developer will seek to exploit. Is there an alternative? If there is, why has it never come forward before? Does this lack of previous supermarket proposals at other sites demonstrate that no other sites are actually available / practical?

2. In my view there always was. There just wasn't a suitable site available before that could be developed succesfully to satisfy the demand (see point 1).

3. True, but this isn't relevant to the planning process or ultimately any planning application. The leak has at least allowed the opposition to be mobilised quicker.

4. There hasn't sudenly become a need, IMHO it's always been there - see point 2.

5. I'll take your word for that - I'm not au fait with such statistics, so have no reason not to believe you.

6. Most of this statement is opinion and not relevant to the planning application if CAMSFC can demonstrate that the re-development at Buxton Lane can cater for properly forcast future need.

I'm not seeking to be confrontational here, only seeking to add to the debate. Having attended a number of public inquiry's, planning inspectors take no truck with 'opinion' and seek only to understand the 'factual' position. They can be quite terse and dismissive of campaigining if not backed up by facts and figures relevant to planning. I think many of the points you raise go towards the eventual heart of this process and I will be interested to see how the 'for' and 'against' cases progress.

[JMC]

Lisa, there is clearly a demand for another supermarket. Even if we weren't aware of that demand prior to the exposure of the college's plans and their dealings with their consultants their actions have brought this demand to light. This issue led directly to the forming of MIA and the rather fragmented "yes" campaign.

With MIA saying "no" to Hibbert Lane then the obvious question of "where else" automatically comes up. Just saying "no" and not offering an alternative is what plays into the hands of developers. They are just seen as NIMBYs and opens them to all the criticisms we have seen.

I agree on both points.

I personally think that many NO supporters wouldn't be happy with a large supermarket anywhere because in their opinion Marple doesn't need another one (and some have said as such). But is that is because they have the means to go out of Marple themselves?

 

[Miss Marple]

What we need to be thinking is ,

1.   Where  would a supermarket be built if Hibbert Lane was not for sale

2.   Why was there not a need for another supermarket before June 2011

3.    We would still be non the wiser to the proposed sale of the land if the proposals had not leaked out 4 months ago

4. Why has there suddenly become such a need

5. Why are some people in favour of selling educational land to ANYONE. statistics are there to show that there will be a need for additional college / school places in a few years

6. People are saying that Marple needs another supermarket because we are a growing town, so doesn't that mean we still need the additional education facilities Marple already has.  Only a fool would sell an asset of this size and location, One  can only assume that CAMSFC do not have our children's best future educational needs in mind.

[Howard]

In my opinion it is not MIA s job to find a suitable site within the retail development area.. thats what the supermarket developer should have done in the first place and pays their agents top whack to do.  The fact is they've gone outside the area, knowing full well that it is against stockport council planning policy and will certainly get refused but still pushed forward with the plan.   Personally I think lots of us are playing in to the hands of the supermarket here....

Lisa, there is clearly a demand for another supermarket. Even if we weren't aware of that demand prior to the exposure of the college's plans and their dealings with their consultants their actions have brought this demand to light. This issue led directly to the forming of MIA and the rather fragmented "yes" campaign.

With MIA saying "no" to Hibbert Lane then the obvious question of "where else" automatically comes up. Just saying "no" and not offering an alternative is what plays into the hands of developers. They are just seen as NIMBYs and opens them to all the criticisms we have seen.

[Belly]

In my opinion it is not MIA s job to find a suitable site within the retail development area.. thats what the supermarket developer should have done in the first place and pays their agents top whack to do.  The fact is they've gone outside the area, knowing full well that it is against stockport council planning policy and will certainly get refused but still pushed forward with the plan.   Personally I think lots of us are playing in to the hands of the supermarket here....

Yes but the problem is Lisa, is that MIA have to some extent already 'appear' to be conceding that there is the demand / need for a new store, so the argument moves on to where? If SMBC have drawn such a tight cordon round the main retail area that there is no realistic site for a new store within it, the developers can make the case that the lines should be redrawn or that there are special circumstancs to ignore SMBC's own policy and allow an 'out of centre' store. Such an approach is very common.

My problem is that if SMBC are actively sugesting that Chadwick Street is the alternative, there is a lot about that site that struggles to stack up. Its impact's would be very, very similar to Hibbert Lane and in many cases worse.

I'm not suggesting that MIA need to actively promote an alternative site for a store, but at the very least they will need to work with SMBC be confident that there are other relaistic options, when all things are considered, that makes them more attractive than Hibbert Lane. Of course there is no need to reveal this on this message board, keeping your powder dry is all part of the planning game!  

[Lisa Oldham]

In my opinion it is not MIA s job to find a suitable site within the retail development area.. thats what the supermarket developer should have done in the first place and pays their agents top whack to do.  The fact is they've gone outside the area, knowing full well that it is against stockport council planning policy and will certainly get refused but still pushed forward with the plan.   Personally I think lots of us are playing in to the hands of the supermarket here....

[JMC]

I think it's important to note that this (decline of local shops) seems to be happening even without another supermarket. I think it's due to the wider societal changes such as more people at work in the daytime and internet shopping. Big out of town stores suit the needs to get it all quick and in one place at a time that suits. Local shops cannot really compete with that unless they are certain types of shops. The nature of our economy is that competition means some thrive where others fail and many cannot compete with the big players. You cannot really blame people for going where it is cheapest, particularly in a recession.