Marple in Action - The Future

[amazon]

Simone that sounds like whatever the outcome if you don't like it we can blame the authority.

Your well aware saving have to come from none statuary expenditure, sadly some might say but that's where we are currently. Better a park closed than savings on cycle infrastructure provision some might say if one wanted to be provocative.

Just trust the people if Parks don't figure highly on peoples agenda even after all the scaremongering then let them go.

Sooner have a nice park than a bike

[wheels]

Simone that sounds like whatever the outcome if you don't like it we can blame the authority.

Your well aware saving have to come from none statuary expenditure, sadly some might say but that's where we are currently. Better a park closed than savings on cycle infrastructure provision some might say if one wanted to be provocative.

Just trust the people if Parks don't figure highly on peoples agenda even after all the scaremongering then let them go.

[simonesaffron]

Simone, I think there are those who are deliberately misleading others re any proposals for the the parks. Because that's exactly what they are proposals no more. It seems to me entirely responsible of an authority face with massive cuts left by the last Labour Govt to seek to get peoples views as to where those cuts should be.

Such consultation of the public is something Stockport is well known for in comparison with other surrounding authorities.

And if the public say they would prefer to see cuts to the parks budget instead of says Library's or adult social care are you saying that's a bad thing?

Wheels,

I don't think this is a party political issue. The last Labour government has been out of office for over three years. There does come a time when incumbent governments have to stop blaming past governments. This current government hasn't stopped doing that yet.

Parks are a local issue not a National one - not yet anyway. All I'm saying is where are our local politicians now. They've been vociferous about the ASDA; Marches, leaflets, speeches. Where's the Marches, leaflets and speeches for the parks ? If it is a party political issue, its a LibDem one cos' their all LibDems. 

As you've mentioned consultation, I'll say this, in theory it  is a good thing and top marks to SMBC for even attempting it and also you're quite right there is many a local authority, some not to far from here who would not have even gone out to consultation. However it has to be done properly otherwise people don't respond and lets not forget consultation processes are not free, they cost money so if its not done properly it is worse than useless. You might just as well as implement the plan in the first place and save yourself the consultation fee. That's exactly what has happened in Stockport. It hasn't been done properly so people have not responded. Last year 28,783 responses were received over ten borough wide consultations. With a population of 248,600 that's an average response of just 1% - are you happy with that ?   

       

[simonesaffron]

Why is it a gamble?  (Gamble, n. To take a risk in the hope of gaining an advantage or a benefit)

What risk did the council take?

Dave,

Thank you kindly for the dictionary definition but we think we know what "gamble" means or at least we have an accepted definition in our eyes.

They took the risk of authorising a development on Trinity Street in the hope that the authorisation alone would defeat the supermarket proposals on Hibbert Lane. Which is exactly what it has done. The danger is now (albeit remote) that somebody somewhere could actually find the money and the will and try and develop Trinity Street in accordance with the actual planning permission. 

[wheels]

Simone, I think there are those who are deliberately misleading others re any proposals for the the parks. Because that's exactly what they are proposals no more. It seems to me entirely responsible of an authority face with massive cuts left by the last Labour Govt to seek to get peoples views as to where those cuts should be.

Such consultation of the public is something Stockport is well known for in comparison with other surrounding authorities.

And if the public say they would prefer to see cuts to the parks budget instead of says Library's or adult social care are you saying that's a bad thing?

[Dave]

thats one hell of a gamble thats just been played by our Council.

Why is it a gamble?  (Gamble, n. To take a risk in the hope of gaining an advantage or a benefit)

What risk did the council take?

[simonesaffron]

Simone, I understand what you say and I suspect on cost grounds that you might well be right.... but if you are not, thats one hell of a gamble thats just been played by our Council.

Its also not true to say that TS is much further from realisation from ASDA - as TS has planning consent. Ultimately its now down to money as to whether anyone can actually deliver the scheme or indeed, something similar. The principle has now been set for the land or at least it has for the next few years.

Belly,

I really do see the points that you make and I'm no defender of the Council. As a body they let us down as much as they support/stand up for us. We've got six Councillors in Marple all of the same party plus the fact that the leader of the Council lives in Marple, I appreciate that she has to take the wider view but she is also a LibDem  and this should give us some unified strength, but where is it ? Where is it say on the issue of the proposed  park cutbacks which to me is just as important as where they build the supermarket.

However the only way to stop an out of town centre, 25,000 sq ft Supermarket in Marple was to have a definite plan to build a 25,000 sq ft Supermarket in town and that's exactly what they came up with. So in that instance they did stand up and be counted. You're right it probably is a gamble but in some situations there is an inevitable element of that. IMHO, I don't think that Trinity Street will ever see a Supermarket that size but it might see a smaller one which could be a benefit to Marple.

Back to the Parks and as this topic started about MIA's future, where are they on raising awareness about this issue ? 



   

[Belly]

Belly, why do you say that it is "the greatest shame of the past two years". I don't actually think that anything has been ignored at least not by the people with the influence. IMHO it has all been calculated down to the last detail. The Trinity Street scheme is further away from realisation than the ASDA is. The ship hasn't sailed at all. Its not even drawn anchor.  There are thousands of planning permissions the length and breadth of the country that never become anything more than that - just planning permissions. Instead of seeing Trinity Street as a Supermarket to stop a Supermarket try viewing it as a planning permission to stop a planning permission.

Simone, I understand what you say and I suspect on cost grounds that you might well be right.... but if you are not, thats one hell of a gamble thats just been played by our Council.

Its also not true to say that TS is much further from realisation from ASDA - as TS has planning consent. Ultimately its now down to money as to whether anyone can actually deliver the scheme or indeed, something similar. The principle has now been set for the land or at least it has for the next few years.

[simonesaffron]

The theoretical argument against Hibbert Lane has always been that as an out of town Store it will take footfall away from the town centre and thus debilitate the commercial aspect of it whereas Trinity Street is in the town centre so it will bring footfall into the centre thus supporting the local businesses. As I say this is theoretical. 

[JMC]

How does one (or even MIA for that matter) object to something that already has planning consent? That ship sailed long ago..... if someone can stump up the cash then that scheme cannot be stopped. Thats the greatest shame of the past 2 years, that this potential mess of a scheme was waved through just to fight off the evil ASDA empire. You are right that pretty much all the same arguments exist (and more imho) but alas this was ignored amongst the jubilation of scuppering Hibbert Lane.

Good point. I did read in the free 'Civic Review' very recently that they (it mentioned a person involved in MIA so I assume it was related to MIA) are objecting to the traffic proposal at Trinity. I really do think they will start to object more if a retailer comes on board-especially if it is what some would call a 'low end' or discount store. After all another MIA member said (admittedly about HL ASDA) that if cheaper groceries/items are available then it would put Marple small shops out of business. But the same argument would apply for a Tesco/ASDA right in the centre surely? Traffic would be dreadful as well as parking. Much worse than HL would have.

[simonesaffron]

How does one (or even MIA for that matter) object to something that already has planning consent? That ship sailed long ago..... if someone can stump up the cash then that scheme cannot be stopped. Thats the greatest shame of the past 2 years, that this potential mess of a scheme was waved through just to fight off the evil ASDA empire. You are right that pretty much all the same arguments exist (and more imho) but alas this was ignored amongst the jubilation of scuppering Hibbert Lane.

Belly, why do you say that it is "the greatest shame of the past two years". I don't actually think that anything has been ignored at least not by the people with the influence. IMHO it has all been calculated down to the last detail. The Trinity Street scheme is further away from realisation than the ASDA is. The ship hasn't sailed at all. Its not even drawn anchor.  There are thousands of planning permissions the length and breadth of the country that never become anything more than that - just planning permissions. Instead of seeing Trinity Street as a Supermarket to stop a Supermarket try viewing it as a planning permission to stop a planning permission.

     

[Osdog]

As I stated, it's not a burning desire..... I didn't know that MIA would not post on the forum directly.  I must have missed that bit - I suppose it's no use asking why that is.....

Anyway - like I said  - if all will be revealed later in the year.. I'll wait around for that to happen.  Like I said - idle curiosity really.

[Belly]

I personally think they would oppose any other type of large development happening in Marple. Now they think they have 'won' this I would be very surprised if they didn't later object to Trinity or a social housing estate on HL etc etc. I have my doubts that Trinity will ever happen but if it does, and especially if Asda or Tesco are involved, I am pretty sure they would object on the same grounds as HL; traffic etc.

How does one (or even MIA for that matter) object to something that already has planning consent? That ship sailed long ago..... if someone can stump up the cash then that scheme cannot be stopped. Thats the greatest shame of the past 2 years, that this potential mess of a scheme was waved through just to fight off the evil ASDA empire. You are right that pretty much all the same arguments exist (and more imho) but alas this was ignored amongst the jubilation of scuppering Hibbert Lane.

[admin]

Marple in Action’s policy is not to reply to posts in this forum. Although I’m (obviously) a Marple in Action supporter and I go to some of their meetings, I’m not an official spokesperson and cannot speak on behalf of the organisation.

I can speak for myself of course and I’m happy to tell you that I attended a meeting recently (before this thread was started) when the issues you have raised were discussed and a number of proposals and ideas put forward. These have not been fully debated or decided yet but when they are then I’m sure that they will be announced.

I don’t know how much money has been raised or spent during the course of the campaign but I believe Marple in Action will give full account of what it has been spent on and what will be done with the surplus. In the case of the latter, I expect that they will do some consultation with the community and the people who donated it as best they can to solicit views about what should be done with it.

Despite ASDA and CAMFC declaring that they will not appeal against the decision, the council’s planners say that the opportunity to do so still formally remains open until the allotted time period has elapsed. Although it is unlikely that they would appeal after making the statements that they have, Marple in Action will not disband until that possibility, however remote, can no longer occur. That means that nothing will happen until early September, when the appeal period expires.

So if you can’t wait for the fat lady to sing, probably around mid-September, and have a burning desire to ask Marple in Action what they are going to do before they feel ready to make a public announcement, then do as Simone suggests and write to the Chairman. If you can be patient then all should become clear in a reasonable time frame.

[amazon]

AFAIK donations to MIA were collected by the Marple Civic Society, presumably because it is a properly constituted charitable body, which is therefore allowed to collect public subscriptions.  However, this also mean that the Civic Society should be able to account for the funds which it has collected. 

You can see the Society's annual accounts for 2011 and 2012 here:
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=5AE1C34D7E844FFF&id=5AE1C34D7E844FFF%21544#

The report refers to the MIA campaign, but the accounts don't identify the MIA funds. It's possible, of course, that these are the income labelled as 'Reserved Donations': £1895 in 2011 and £1035 in 2012.  But the only listed expenditure that could be for MIA purposes would be Post and Print (£1105 in 2011 and £711 in 2012).  So if that's the case, MIA would seem to have made a surplus in both years, so there are  presumably some funds left over? 

If there is they could donate to the skatepark ?or do you think they might need it for there next protest .