Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced

[simonesaffron]

Heard a story last night, can't swear to it being absolutely true as it is second- hand information but allegedly from one of our local Councillors, I won't say which one.

Apparently ASDA have now submitted their Planning Application but currently it lies "invalid" on the SMBC planners desk. The reason being that they have submitted the "wrong" fee. I suppose any body can make a mistake writing out a cheque and perhaps force of habit meant that they thought that they could get it at ...ASDA price. Nevertheless this does little to support the accuracy of their estimates for the CAMSFC refurbishment.

[Belly]

Kirkland's site is not really an alternative, it is too small for a major supermarket with adequate parking spaces and takes all the other spaces

The proposed development by Kirkland is exactly the same size (sales area) as ASDA's proposed development, the current car park is under utilised so even with the Supermarket there will be adequate parking.

Victor I'm afraid I can't agree with that. Stockport Councils own car parking standards for new town centre food retail sites in the borough identifies a parking requirement of 1 space per 16sqm Gross Floor Area (see http://www.stockport.gov.uk/2013/2994/developmentcontrol/planningpolicy/UDP/udpreview_m_appendix9). Now yes this is a maximum, but I would be stunned if that's not what the Council require - they always do for pretty much every other scheme going. If we assume that the Chadwick St store will have 15% additional 'back of house' space on top of the retail floor space (which I think is quite conservative, I'm sorry i don't have the plans with me to check) that would mean a store GFA of 2671sqm (based on the retail floor plate of 25,000sqft (2322sqm) and thus a parking requirement of 166 spaces.

Now I don't know if the above floorspace estimates also includes for the small additonal retail unit proposed as part of the CS scheme, but even if it does, thats a need for more spaces than are proposed BEFORE you take into account of what is already parking on the Chadwick Street site.

To me that doesn't add up, or at least it does add up - to a potential parking mess around Marple, unless its properly thought through. I'm not against the CS site - i quite like the design and the principle, but its got to be the right solution or else there will be trouble ahead.

[Dave]

I go along with Simone's assessment of the current state of play.

She raises a query about how much the college needs to develop its Buxton Lane site to replace Hibbert Lane. The ball-park figure for the construction cost of educational premises is around 1,500 pounds per sq.m. I don't know how much space the college needs to build - it may not be a like-for-like replacement of the entire Hibbert Lane space because the new scheme will be purpose-built (unlike Hibbert Lane) and therefore more efficient. But at that cost per sq.m., 7,000 sq.m would cost 10,500 million, 8,000 sq. M would cost 12 million. Which why selling Hibbert Lane for housing at 4 million won't work.

[JMC]

Kirkland's site is not really an alternative, it is too small for a major supermarket with adequate parking spaces and takes all the other spaces

The proposed development by Kirkland is exactly the same size (sales area) as ASDA's proposed development, the current car park is under utilised so even with the Supermarket there will be adequate parking.

'Whilst the 154 spaces is 47 more than the 107 spaces of the public car park, the redevelopment will obviously result in the site having a supermarket (2,323 sqm sales area) on it which of course requires significant additional car parking in addition to spaces for town centre shoppers. It is clear that the supermarket would need at least 250 spaces, plus spaces for other town centre uses. The 154 spaces is far too few and will mean that the supermarket scheme would not be attractive to a retail operator and would not be viable. This very small number of spaces (compared to the need that would be created) would simply not work on site.'

That is from Asda's website. I tend to agree with them, it doesn't seem enough spaces for a store that size. The site isn't deemed big enough. Also we could potentially end up with two small stores there or even another Co-op. This isn't helping low income residents so will increase Asda's chances.

[Victor M]

Kirkland's site is not really an alternative, it is too small for a major supermarket with adequate parking spaces and takes all the other spaces

The proposed development by Kirkland is exactly the same size (sales area) as ASDA's proposed development, the current car park is under utilised so even with the Supermarket there will be adequate parking.

[JMC]

http://hayes.uxbridgegazette.co.uk/2012/11/asda-appeal-win-a-victory-for.html

The above is an interesting case. Although I can't tell what other provision is in the town. It is interesting that local opinion was said to be on Asda's side. If I were Asda now I would be working on that in Marple in a big way. It would be interesting if there were a petition of Yes to Asda people to see how many they would get now. I don't believe 8,000 people are against Asda. My own family signed the petition when they were told it would be four times the size of the Co-op. Now they want Asda. Kirkland's site is not really an alternative, it is too small for a major supermarket with adequate parking spaces and takes all the other spaces. There is also a high chance it won't be a cheaper store than the Co-op. It could even be a Co-op, wouldn't surprise me at all.

[simonesaffron]

This issue shifts as each day goes by.

When we are talking about estimate figures to re-furbish the College, then perhaps we should ask ourselves where these figures are sourced and as far as I am aware they have come from CAMSFC & ASDA. They have not been endorsed by anyone else. Perhaps the College can have a £10m refurbishment or an £8m one, perhaps they can cut their suit... What is important to retain, in my view, is that ASDA has brought the College into their enabling application in order to gain planning permission for their supermarket and for no other reason. So these figures are ASDA'S creation and no-one else's 

Before Kirkland came on the scene Asda were confident of winning planning permission on appeal and this confidence was not misplaced. They would have hired the best legal team money could buy and the Council would have hired the best that it could afford. ASDA would have presented their "enabling petition" and it would have won the day.  This is nothing new, these appeals win through over the length and breadth of the country, time and again when a planning application is deemed to be against the Council's policy.

So that was the core problem for ASDA to overcome SMBC planning policy which does not allow for a supermarket on Hibbert Lane.     

It has been said before on this site. The supermarket development of Trinity Street was a scheme thought up by our local Councillors to prevent ASDA developing Hibbert Lane, as H/L it was considered (rightly or wrongly) is an "out of town" supermarket and it would kill off the town centre. The rest of their conduct; Their stance, their comments, their tactics has all been part of this strategy.     

There will be traffic problems with both schemes,how can there not be? Traffic that is normally dispersed throughout Marple and its environs wherupon shoppers from Marple who currently shop at Bredbury, Hazel Grove et al and cause traffic to disperse from Marple, will then converge upon Marple.

The major obstacle IMHO now faced by ASDA and Kirkland is not the same one.

ASDA have to overcome the Council or more directly - local Councillors. Local Councillors in this instance have the power to authorise the Trinity Street Development at Area Committee. If they do this it is hard to see what ASDA'S case can be.

Kirkland have to find a client and it is difficult to envisage somebody stepping forward whilst ASDA are hovering around.

MIA are and always have been an irrelevance as far as both sites are concerned. They have faded away now so lets allow them to die in peace.   
 

[Tricky]

It will be more traffic in a more concentrated area. Right in the middle of Marple.



It makes me wonder if they would be planning to re-open Queen Street to traffic..

[JMC]

All very interesting. The above point re: parking supply has always been my biggest concern re: the Chadwick Street scheme based on the plans I've seen to date. Albeit not from a viability point of view, more on parking capacity grounds when looking at the town centre as a whole. It's a big store for such limited parking (once you take the residual town centre parking already taking place on the existing car park into account).
I understand that Kirklands have a plan for this (or at least thats what their last press statement suggested), I'll be interested to see what it is.

Me too. Cars could easily end up parking down Lyme Grove etc. I don't see how the traffic would be any better than at Hibbert Lane either if the store is almost as big.

[Belly]

Whilst the 154 spaces is 47 more than the 107 spaces of the public car park, the redevelopment will obviously result in the site having a supermarket (2,323 sqm sales area) on it which of course requires significant additional car parking in addition to spaces for town centre shoppers. It is clear that the supermarket would need at least 250 spaces, plus spaces for other town centre uses. The 154 spaces is far too few and will mean that the supermarket scheme would not be attractive to a retail operator and would not be viable. This very small number of spaces (compared to the need that would be created) would simply not work on site.

All very interesting. The above point re: parking supply has always been my biggest concern re: the Chadwick Street scheme based on the plans I've seen to date. Albeit not from a viability point of view, more on parking capacity grounds when looking at the town centre as a whole. It's a big store for such limited parking (once you take the residual town centre parking already taking place on the existing car park into account).

I understand that Kirklands have a plan for this (or at least thats what their last press statement suggested), I'll be interested to see what it is.

[JMC]

There is updated info on the Asda/camsfc website and responses to kirkland.

Taken from http://www.marplecollegeandasda.co.uk/#/

'The Kirkland proposals (with their 154 car parking spaces) will deliver an additional 47 spaces when compared to the current provision

Whilst the 154 spaces is 47 more than the 107 spaces of the public car park, the redevelopment will obviously result in the site having a supermarket (2,323 sqm sales area) on it which of course requires significant additional car parking in addition to spaces for town centre shoppers. It is clear that the supermarket would need at least 250 spaces, plus spaces for other town centre uses. The 154 spaces is far too few and will mean that the supermarket scheme would not be attractive to a retail operator and would not be viable. This very small number of spaces (compared to the need that would be created) would simply not work on site.

If Kirkland Development’s store is approved, Marple will have sufficient retail provision for the Council to justifiably reject applications for foodstores outside the town centre.
This claim from Kirkland assumes that the scheme on the Chadwick Street site is viable. There is no evidence that is the case. No operator is associated with the Kirkland scheme. The Kirkland claim requires that a retail operator would be prepared to occupy the store. There is no evidence that an operator would take the store, especially given the abnormal costs of development. In any event, Planning does not work on the basis that Councils ‘choose’ between sites – each proposal is considered on its own merits.
Kirkland Developments is confident that the College site at Hibbert Lane can be redeveloped for residential use, which will enable the development of new facilities at the Buxton Lane campus.

The total project cost to redevelop the College on the Buxton Lane site has been estimated at approximately £12.075M. The sale of the Hibbert Lane site for housing however would only achieve a land value of approximately £4.5M (based upon professional valuations), which is clearly insufficient to enable the amalgamation to proceed. Therefore, the Kirkland residential proposal for the Hibbert Land site would, on any reasonable valuation, generate less than half the amount of money that the College needs for its scheme to provide all its facilities on the one site at Buxton Lane.'

Obviously it is from Asda/camsfc so i am sure some people will disagree but there are some updated points worth reading on their website.

[Maria]

I don't think you can say that in all honesty Amazon! Just because matters have been quiet waiting for the PA to go in doesn't mean their work has been for nothing.  I actually admire them to be honest for having the nerve to try to do something about it.  Fair play to them in my opinion but hey each to their own opinion.

[amazon]

Who said MIA want a waitrose?

From what I can gather they objected as the Hibbert lane site is outside the retail zone in the middle of houses.  Chadwick street, whilst fronting/backing on to houses is classed as within the retail zone so slightly different.  Also the plans drawn allow for the development below street level so only the car park will be at the same level as the houses-or so I recall-apologies if I am wrong!

2 completely separate issues to be honest and the college have already confirmed they have other options if ASDA is refused. 

We will get another supermarket and it seems to me that within the retail zone is the most appropriate.

A lot of people on here seem to take great delight in slagging off MIA and yet do very little themselves-a lot of keyboard warriors I imagine but again, if I am wrong, I sincerely apologise!

a lot of keyboard warriors get more response than standing under a bit of cloth on a saturday morning on the precinct .

[JMC]

I asked the ASDA traffic planning guy if there would be access via Lyme Grove / Willow Grove the last presentation. The answer was DEFINITELY NOT - the only access to the site will be on Hibbert Lane. Whether you can trust him / ADSA is another matter.

What about pedestrian access?

[Maria]

I suspect it isn't worth £4million for houses and I am sure if necessary, Kirkland will open discussions with the college again.

£12million is what the college, I believe, wanted initially and ASDA agreed to pay that.