Marple Community Forum & Noticeboard

Local Community => Local Issues => Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development => Topic started by: admin on September 26, 2012, 09:10:33 PM

Title: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: admin on September 26, 2012, 09:10:33 PM
The following press release has been made by Kirkland Developments today:

Plans in store for town centre site

Kirkland Developments, a local development company based in Stockport, has today announced that it is bringing forward proposals for a new foodstore in Marple town centre. The store, to be located off Trinity Street where the Royal Mail depot currently stands, will ensure residents can undertake their weekly shop in Marple town centre instead of having to travel out of town, reducing residents’ fuel costs and making food shopping more convenient.
 
Kirkland’s proposals will also help existing Marple traders by providing an ‘anchor’ in-centre foodstore with free car parking which will increase footfall in the Town Centre, leading to spin-off trade for independent businesses.  The proposed foodstore will also provide a welcome boost to the local economy by retaining spending within Marple and by creating a considerable number of new flexible local jobs.

Kirkland recognises the local concern over the location of a foodstore to serve Marple and has carefully planned the proposals to encourage linked trips between the town centre site and local shops, particularly along Market Street and Trinity Street. The plans include an enhanced pedestrian route from Market Street, between the Bull’s Head Pub and Royal Bank of Scotland, over Trinity Street to the proposed store entrance.

Kirkland Developments want to ensure that local residents are able to view the plans, ask questions of the development team and feed back their views. As such, a public exhibition of the proposals will be held in October and more details of this will be released soon. The launch of Kirkland’s proposals comes as ASDA holds its public exhibition for an out-of-town store on Hibbert Lane.

Rod Hogarth, Managing Director, Kirkland Developments, commented:

“As a local company and the Council’s preferred development partner, we’re pleased to be in a position to bring forward proposals for a foodstore right in the heart of Marple Town Centre.

“This store is in a great location. It will help to increase footfall to the town centre and enable local residents to do their weekly shop at a store in Marple, meaning that they don’t have to travel elsewhere – saving time and money, and helping the local economy.

“We are in discussions with a number of high quality food retailers who have expressed an interest in locating here, particularly if the Council were to refuse permission for ASDA’s current plans for an out-of-centre foodstore on Hibbert Lane.

“It’s important to hear the views of the local community before we submit our planning application and I would encourage those who can attend to come along to our consultation events.”


The proposals represent substantial private investment and will create hundreds of jobs.

A website for the proposals will be established shortly as well as a community information line ready to answer residents’ queries.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on September 27, 2012, 11:54:07 AM
That's an interesting and useful update.  Perhaps the most interesting paragraph is this one:

“We are in discussions with a number of high quality food retailers who have expressed an interest in locating here, particularly if the Council were to refuse permission for ASDA’s current plans for an out-of-centre foodstore on Hibbert Lane.

I wonder if the phrase 'high quality food retailers' is just a bit of PR-speak - or does it really mean something, such as that they are looking for interest from a Waitrose or Sainsbury's, or even an M&S, rather than an Aldi?

It's also amusing to see the Hibbert Lane site described as as 'out-of-centre', rather than 'edge-of-centre', which it actually is, arguably.   Well they would say that, wouldn't they!   ;)
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Henry on September 27, 2012, 02:14:11 PM
I think the clue lies in the organisation  that sent out the press release , Lexington Communications. They carry out lobbying/PR services for Tesco. So presumably then, a Tesco Express for Chadwick Street it is?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on September 27, 2012, 02:35:42 PM
I think the clue lies in the organisation  that sent out the press release , Lexington Communications. They carry out lobbying/PR services for Tesco. So presumably then, a Tesco Express for Chadwick Street it is?

They are dearer than the coop .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on September 27, 2012, 03:39:29 PM
They are indeed. Good news for the Co-op then.   ;D
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on September 27, 2012, 03:43:31 PM
They are indeed. Good news for the Co-op then.   ;D
So no change back to being ripped of again .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: admin on September 29, 2012, 03:53:51 PM
Here's an artist's impression of the proposed Chadwick car park store published in the Stockport Express:

(http://www.marple-uk.com/marple-in-action/chadwick-st-proposal-larger.jpg)
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Franz on September 30, 2012, 06:47:09 AM
An interesting and much anticipated development. I now look forward to seeing Kirkland’s proposals for the future of further education in Marple, the provision, and possible gifting to the council, of public open space, the provision of good facilities for sports clubs and the community at large, and competitively priced petrol and diesel.

I was also amused by the reference to the Asda project as “out of centre/town” by both Kirkland and MIA, particularly since MIA have previously referred to it as “edge of town” which it appears to be.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on September 30, 2012, 03:16:31 PM

I wonder if the phrase 'high quality food retailers' is just a bit of PR-speak - or does it really mean something, such as that they are looking for interest from a Waitrose or Sainsbury's, or even an M&S, rather than an Aldi?

It's also amusing to see the Hibbert Lane site described as as 'out-of-centre', rather than 'edge-of-centre', which it actually is, arguably.   Well they would say that, wouldn't they!   ;)

I agree.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on September 30, 2012, 03:18:03 PM
An interesting and much anticipated development. I now look forward to seeing Kirkland’s proposals for the future of further education in Marple, the provision, and possible gifting to the council, of public open space, the provision of good facilities for sports clubs and the community at large, and competitively priced petrol and diesel.

I was also amused by the reference to the Asda project as “out of centre/town” by both Kirkland and MIA, particularly since MIA have previously referred to it as “edge of town” which it appears to be.


Good points, I agree with you also.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Duke Fame on September 30, 2012, 03:21:53 PM
That's an interesting and useful update.  Perhaps the most interesting paragraph is this one:

“We are in discussions with a number of high quality food retailers who have expressed an interest in locating here, particularly if the Council were to refuse permission for ASDA’s current plans for an out-of-centre foodstore on Hibbert Lane.

I wonder if the phrase 'high quality food retailers' is just a bit of PR-speak - or does it really mean something, such as that they are looking for interest from a Waitrose or Sainsbury's, or even an M&S, rather than an Aldi?

It's also amusing to see the Hibbert Lane site described as as 'out-of-centre', rather than 'edge-of-centre', which it actually is, arguably.   Well they would say that, wouldn't they!   ;)

Dave, I'd not play with you at archery if you reckon the college is 'edge-of-centre'.

I suspect High quality food retailers is a misnomer, Aldi & Lidl are undoubtedly high quality retailers in that they are good at what they do.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Duke Fame on September 30, 2012, 03:25:44 PM
An interesting and much anticipated development. I now look forward to seeing Kirkland’s proposals for the future of further education in Marple, the provision, and possible gifting to the council, of public open space, the provision of good facilities for sports clubs and the community at large, and competitively priced petrol and diesel.

I was also amused by the reference to the Asda project as “out of centre/town” by both Kirkland and MIA, particularly since MIA have previously referred to it as “edge of town” which it appears to be.


They shouldn't have to include educational facilities and sports fields as these will be left intact at the Hibbert Lane Campus.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on September 30, 2012, 06:31:45 PM
Dave, I'd not play with you at archery if you reckon the college is 'edge-of-centre'.

Definition of Edge of Centre: 'For retail purposes, a location that is well connected and up to 300 metres from the primary shopping area.'   Source:  http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/general/glossaryandlinks/glossary/e
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on September 30, 2012, 08:24:08 PM
An interesting and much anticipated development. I now look forward to seeing Kirkland’s proposals for the future of further education in Marple, the provision, and possible gifting to the council, of public open space, the provision of good facilities for sports clubs and the community at large, and competitively priced petrol and diesel.

I was also amused by the reference to the Asda project as “out of centre/town” by both Kirkland and MIA, particularly since MIA have previously referred to it as “edge of town” which it appears to be.


They shouldn't have to include educational facilities and sports fields as these will be left intact at the Hibbert Lane Campus.

And improved .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Victor M on September 30, 2012, 08:45:51 PM
Quote
Definition of Edge of Centre: 'For retail purposes, a location that is well connected and up to 300 metres from the primary shopping area.'   Source:  http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/general/glossaryandlinks/glossary/e

It all depends on what is the primary shopping area, is it at Littlewoods Butchers or half way down Market Street?

Quote
and possible gifting to the council, of public open space,
I have often wondered how you can gift something to someone or some organisation something that they originally owned and was taken off them!
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Duke Fame on September 30, 2012, 09:37:34 PM
Dave, I'd not play with you at archery if you reckon the college is 'edge-of-centre'.

Definition of Edge of Centre: 'For retail purposes, a location that is well connected and up to 300 metres from the primary shopping area.'   Source:  http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/general/glossaryandlinks/glossary/e

Pushing it there Dave, the primary shopping area isn't 300mtrs in linear distance in any direction so surely it's relative to the size. The fact you have around 200 private dwellings between the two sites would suggest your 'edge of centre' definition is what most would call , 'a lie' 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Belly on October 01, 2012, 09:26:39 AM
Dave, I'd not play with you at archery if you reckon the college is 'edge-of-centre'.

Definition of Edge of Centre: 'For retail purposes, a location that is well connected and up to 300 metres from the primary shopping area.'   Source:  http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/general/glossaryandlinks/glossary/e

Pushing it there Dave, the primary shopping area isn't 300mtrs in linear distance in any direction so surely it's relative to the size. The fact you have around 200 private dwellings between the two sites would suggest your 'edge of centre' definition is what most would call , 'a lie' 

Or in fact 33 dwellings on Hibbert Lane (taking into account both sides of the road) from the juncton of Edwards  Way (i.e. past the front door of Asda) to Littlewoods the butchers (well within what is designated in planning terms as the town centre). Hibbert Lane being the main (indeed only) pedestrian desire line between the ASDA site and town centre.

I don't believe its Dave's definition anyway.

Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on October 01, 2012, 01:40:38 PM
your 'edge of centre' definition is what most would call , 'a lie' 

It's not my definition, it's the government's definition, as set out in the Planning Portal (click the link which I provided for you.).  The measurement is from the boundary of the district centre, as shown in red on this map.  http://www.marplepartnership.org.uk/map.htm  The supermarket site is well within the 300 metres which define it as 'edge of centre'.

I object to being called a liar, but I guess an apology is too much to expect.   ::)
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Duke Fame on October 02, 2012, 11:01:56 AM
your 'edge of centre' definition is what most would call , 'a lie' 

It's not my definition, it's the government's definition, as set out in the Planning Portal (click the link which I provided for you.).  The measurement is from the boundary of the district centre, as shown in red on this map.  http://www.marplepartnership.org.uk/map.htm  The supermarket site is well within the 300 metres which define it as 'edge of centre'.

I object to being called a liar, but I guess an apology is too much to expect.   ::)

i appologise for calling you a liar. I'd have thought that definition must take into consideration the size of the town.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: rsh on October 02, 2012, 11:45:57 AM
Here's an artist's impression of the proposed Chadwick car park store published in the Stockport Express:

(http://www.marple-uk.com/marple-in-action/chadwick-st-proposal-larger.jpg)

Impressive. Much bigger than I expected and even though I had questioned digging out the land to put the entire car park on top level with Chadwick St, I never thought a developer would go to that length in Marple. That investment and the general design of the building says Waitrose to me. Aldi doesn't spend money like that on bespoke-designed stores, it has a standard box and surface parking.

This could be a great boon for Marple, at least if it can weather itself through the temporary loss of the whole car park during construction...
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: admin on October 02, 2012, 12:32:04 PM
I've received some hi-res copies of the artistic impressions from the developer today - I'll put them on-line this evening.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: red666bear on October 02, 2012, 01:11:31 PM
I've received some hi-res copies of the artistic impressions from the developer today - I'll put them on-line this evening.

hazel grove sorting office closed and now residents of hazel grove have to go to green lane not far from the pyramid. it is not only the sorting office that would go but also the 4 houses next to it on chapelfields. why is no one asking where the sorting office would be relocated? goyt mill? chadwick industrial estate? stockport?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Harry on October 02, 2012, 02:08:14 PM
it is not only the sorting office that would go but also the 4 houses next to it on chapelfields.

The four houses on Chapelfields are clearly shown on the artist's impression as still being there. But why they have trees planted outside their front doors is anybody's guess. Perhaps the artist just went overboard with the trees. I see the fish van (or whatever its called now its not a van) has become a tree.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: admin on October 02, 2012, 08:04:41 PM
As promised, here are some larger images - these are ‘for illustrative purposes’ only. I've reduced them down from the full size images sent to preserve my bandwidth.

They are shown at 600 pixels wide below but if you click the links underneath you will see 1000 pixel wide versions.

(http://www.marple-uk.com/chadwick-st-01.jpg)
www.marple-uk.com/chadwick-st-01.jpg

(http://www.marple-uk.com/chadwick-st-02.jpg)
www.marple-uk.com/chadwick-st-02.jpg

Like it or not, it's a clever bit of design and I'm impressed at how quickly they've moved Harry's trees on Chapel Fields!
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Victor M on October 02, 2012, 09:28:08 PM
I like the idea of the patio area behind The Bulls Head!!!
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on October 02, 2012, 09:53:58 PM
As promised, here are some larger images - these are ‘for illustrative purposes’ only. I've reduced them down from the full size images sent to preserve my bandwidth.

They are shown at 600 pixels wide below but if you click the links underneath you will see 1000 pixel wide versions.

(http://www.marple-uk.com/chadwick-st-01.jpg)
www.marple-uk.com/chadwick-st-01.jpg

(http://www.marple-uk.com/chadwick-st-02.jpg)
www.marple-uk.com/chadwick-st-02.jpg

Like it or not, it's a clever bit of design and I'm impressed at how quickly they've moved Harry's trees on Chapel Fields!
Let's not forget these are not plans just's artist's impressions to enable Kirkland to attract a developer and more than likely will have no relationship to the plans that that developer eventually puts in.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Harry on October 03, 2012, 10:32:46 AM
Let's not forget these are not plans just's artist's impressions to enable Kirkland to attract a developer and more than likely will have no relationship to the plans that that developer eventually puts in.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Kirkland Developments were the developer. I'm thinking that the plan is for Kirkland to obtain planning permission and build a supermarket, and then sell or let to a retailer. In which case these artists impressions will form part of the planning proposal.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: rsh on October 03, 2012, 11:32:43 AM
Thanks for the larger images Admin. It's a clever design indeed and would definitely smarten up Trinity St, perhaps creating more of a shopping circuit as people walk up Market St and then back via Trinity St. There looks to be about 40 extra parking spaces (138-ish) than present (98), so new supermarket customers using up spaces shouldn't cause too much trouble.

Sorry if I've missed it, but is there any clue as to the actual square footage of this proposal? Especially compared to the Co-op or ASDA. It looks almost Co-op sized to me which is a surprise, but I should have known they'd absolutely maximise retail space.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Kirkland Developments were the developer. I'm thinking that the plan is for Kirkland to obtain planning permission and build a supermarket, and then sell or let to a retailer. In which case these artists impressions will form part of the planning proposal.

I think you're right, though the supermarket being the sole tenant here would probably have to be signed before they broke ground. The plans have probably been drawn up with a particular retailer in mind (it seems to have all the regular design features of a new Waitrose to me), either with them already interested or with the hope of wooing them?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: hollins on October 03, 2012, 02:47:37 PM
Some questions:
(1) How much is Stockport MBC selling this site for?

(2) Is Stockport MBC going to be assessing the planning application as well as getting money for the site?

(3) Which supermarket retailer is Kirkland Developments proposing to install there? (I don't believe it will be a speculative purchase in the expectation of subsequently attracting a tenant).

(4) What are the access routes for (i) construction; (ii) supermarket deliveries?

(5) Where is the Sorting Office going?

(6) What is the timescale for this development?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on October 03, 2012, 04:09:39 PM
Some questions:
(1) How much is Stockport MBC selling this site for?

(2) Is Stockport MBC going to be assessing the planning application as well as getting money for the site?

(3) Which supermarket retailer is Kirkland Developments proposing to install there? (I don't believe it will be a speculative purchase in the expectation of subsequently attracting a tenant).

(4) What are the access routes for (i) construction; (ii) supermarket deliveries?

(5) Where is the Sorting Office going?

(6) What is the timescale for this development?

How much the site is going for is clearly commercially sensitive information and neither you nor I have any right to know it,why ask the question at all.

Of course Stockport will be the planning authority if an application comes forward that is always the case why ask the question implying there is something sinister about it.

I would be amazed if Kirkland as yet had a developer in mind that's not how the industry works.

I am not sure I care where the sorting office goes if we see the sort of town centre improvement which the sale to Kirkland might bring.

But please don't couch your questions in such a way as to imply that our local authority has in some way acted improperly.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Victor M on October 03, 2012, 04:22:02 PM
With regard to where the sorting office will be locating to, that is up to Royal Mail but I have heard that they are looking for some where local and have looked at using some redundant warehouse space at the co-op.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Duke Fame on October 04, 2012, 11:11:41 AM
With regard to where the sorting office will be locating to, that is up to Royal Mail but I have heard that they are looking for some where local and have looked at using some redundant warehouse space at the co-op.

I'm aware that the college have some space they would like to utilise. ;-)

In reality, the artists impression looks a great way to incorporate a larger supermarket alternative whilst complimenting the existing shopping area.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on October 04, 2012, 11:33:59 AM
a great way to incorporate a larger supermarket alternative whilst complimenting the existing shopping area.

Ooh, you are a lovely shopping area.....  ;)
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on October 04, 2012, 11:55:14 AM
With regard to where the sorting office will be locating to, that is up to Royal Mail but I have heard that they are looking for some where local and have looked at using some redundant warehouse space at the co-op.
Then that would cause problems with houses near by early mornings noise they already complain about the coop that's why there's no early morning deliveries .before seven .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on October 04, 2012, 01:20:47 PM
Let's not forget these are not plans just's artist's impressions to enable Kirkland to attract a developer and more than likely will have no relationship to the plans that that developer eventually puts in.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Kirkland Developments were the developer. I'm thinking that the plan is for Kirkland to obtain planning permission and build a supermarket, and then sell or let to a retailer. In which case these artists impressions will form part of the planning proposal.

No that is not the case Harry, Kirkland are first of all looking for a store to work with before a if they can not attract one the site remains as it is.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Duke Fame on October 04, 2012, 02:40:55 PM
a great way to incorporate a larger supermarket alternative whilst complimenting the existing shopping area.

Ooh, you are a lovely shopping area.....  ;)

What's a vowel between foes
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: gazwhite on October 04, 2012, 03:21:32 PM
With regard to where the sorting office will be locating to, that is up to Royal Mail but I have heard that they are looking for some where local and have looked at using some redundant warehouse space at the co-op.

use the firestation.... move that somewhere better....
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: the rover on October 04, 2012, 04:15:46 PM
Move it to Hibbert Lane, I hear there will be some empty land soon!
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Franz on October 04, 2012, 08:00:45 PM
I am puzzled by the position of MIA in relation to this proposal. They say “Marple in Action was formed to fight the proposal for a supermarket on Hibbert Lane and as such, does not position for or against a development on Chadwick Street”.

It has previously been stated that “MIA would welcome a new supermarket within the district centre of Marple to provide competition for the Co-op and choice for local residents. This would bring more people into Marple which can only be seen as a good thing for the community and local businesses. The issue with Hibbert Lane is that it is not within the retail zone, as laid down by the council and is just far enough away from the centre to draw shoppers away from other shops"

They would welcome a supermarket within the district centre but, for some reason, cannot bring themselves to welcome a supermarket in Chadwick Street? It can’t be for fear of losing some support from the residents of Chadwick Street, Church Street, etc, etc,, can it?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: admin on October 05, 2012, 10:19:05 AM
Latest news on the new plans for Chadwick Street is that there will be a public consultation in Marple Library on Friday 19th October- 2pm to 7pm and Saturday 20th October 11am to 3pm.

Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: admin on October 07, 2012, 11:10:42 AM
Here's a copy of a booklet being distributed by Kirkland Developments about the proposals for Chadwick Street.

They are shown at 600 pixels wide below but if you click the links underneath you will see 1000 pixel wide versions.

(http://www.marple-uk.com/kirkland-booklet-1.jpg)
www.marple-uk.com/kirkland-booklet-1.jpg

(http://www.marple-uk.com/kirkland-booklet-2.jpg)
www.marple-uk.com/kirkland-booklet-2.jpg
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: sgk on October 07, 2012, 12:48:03 PM
The referenced http://www.marpletowncentrestore.co.uk/ (http://www.marpletowncentrestore.co.uk/) isn't live yet, says "under construction", as I'd hoped to find out from there where the new sorting office will be.  Marple Area Committee minutes earlier this year noted http://democracy.stockport.gov.uk/mgCommitteeDetails.aspx?ID=138 (http://democracy.stockport.gov.uk/mgCommitteeDetails.aspx?ID=138) "A requirement of any development proposal will be to retain parking provision to serve the district centre, public realm improvements and the relocation of the Royal Mail sorting office."

I guess the reference to "high quality food retailer" in the booklet doesn't necessarily rule out LIDL / ALDI.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on October 07, 2012, 01:11:42 PM
The referenced http://www.marpletowncentrestore.co.uk/ (http://www.marpletowncentrestore.co.uk/) isn't live yet, says "under construction", as I'd hoped to find out from there where the new sorting office will be.  Marple Area Committee minutes earlier this year noted http://democracy.stockport.gov.uk/mgCommitteeDetails.aspx?ID=138 (http://democracy.stockport.gov.uk/mgCommitteeDetails.aspx?ID=138) "A requirement of any development proposal will be to retain parking provision to serve the district centre, public realm improvements and the relocation of the Royal Mail sorting office."

I guess the reference to "high quality food retailer" in the booklet doesn't necessarily rule out LIDL / ALDI.

Well certainly in Germany Aldi would be regarded as a quality retailer and they regularly beat larger retailer including Waitrose in terms of their fruit and veg quality.

Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: admin on October 08, 2012, 07:53:08 PM
A new press release from Kirkland Developments:

Kirkland Developments announces public exhibitions for Marple town centre store

Stockport-based local development company Kirkland Developments has today announced two public exhibitions of its proposals for a foodstore at Chadwick Street car park in Marple town centre.

The events, to take place from 2pm until 7pm on Friday 19 and 11am until 3pm on Saturday 20 October at Marple Library, Memorial Park, Marple, SK6 6BA, will have information on Kirkland’s plans on display and members of the development team on-hand to answer residents’ questions.

Prior to the exhibitions, over 6,000 leaflets will be delivered to houses and businesses in and around Marple to invite people to the events and seek their initial feedback on the proposals.

Rod Hogarth, Kirkland Developments’ Managing Director, said:

“I am pleased to announce our public exhibitions for a town centre store. Kirkland’s plans will increase footfall in Marple town centre, reduce the need to travel out of town to do a weekly shop and create hundreds of jobs. We know that a foodstore in this location can provide a real boost to Marple.

“I encourage people to come along to the exhibitions and talk to the team. We want to hear what the community has to say so that we can take this on board before we submit a planning application. I look forward to meeting members of the community soon.

“There is no agreed operator but we have been in discussions with all the major high quality retailers, who are interested in opening a store in Marple if the Asda proposals do not go ahead.”


If residents are unable to attend the exhibition, a website will soon be launched, www.marpletowncentrestore.co.uk and they can contact the dedicated community information line on 0161 247 8417 to find out more.

Plus a new image:

It is shown at 600 pixels wide below but if you click the link underneath you will see a 1000 pixel wide version.

(http://www.marple-uk.com/bulls-head-crossing-view.jpg)
www.marple-uk.com/bulls-head-crossing-view.jpg
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: admin on October 19, 2012, 11:48:42 AM
The Kirkland Development web site is now working:

http://www.marpletowncentrestore.co.uk
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on October 19, 2012, 02:05:18 PM
That's very interesting indeed - especially the information, which I hadn't picked up on until now, that the Chadwick Street scheme proposes a supermarket with a sales area of 25,000 sq.ft - exactly the same as Hibbert Lane.  What a coincidence........   ;)
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Lily on October 21, 2012, 09:11:36 PM
Very interesting presentation by Kirkland and, in my opinion as a Marple resident, far better than the Asda proposal.

From what I understand the Kirkland build would only go ahead if Asda lost or gave up on their plans.

They informed people at the presentation that delivery lorries would access the supermarket (not named as yet) via Trinity Street. They would go inside the store to drop off their goods and turn round inside before leaving - so no reversing on a narrow street.

What's more, Kirkland seem to be more open with their proposals. We have had a very informative leaflet through the door and now have access to their website.  And, as you see in the press release, they even give a telephone number if you have any questions.

I'm still waiting for any information from Asda  (so it's a good job I went to their public presentation).
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on October 21, 2012, 10:51:33 PM
From what I understand the Kirkland build would only go ahead if Asda lost or gave up on their plans.

What is your source for that, Lily?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Lily on October 21, 2012, 11:21:15 PM
Hi Dave,

While at the presentation I heard one of the representatives from Kirkland say it and can only assume he was telling the truth (and I only said "from what I understand").

As mentioned in my posting there is a a telephone number mentioned in their press release which states "there is a dedicated community information line on 0161 247 8417 to find out more".

If you go to their website it is also intimated in both 'The Proposals' and 'The Process' sections.

People will have their own opinions so the best way to find out is contact Kirkland yourselves.

Lily
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on October 21, 2012, 11:38:29 PM
Very interesting presentation by Kirkland and, in my opinion as a Marple resident, far better than the Asda proposal.

From what I understand the Kirkland build would only go ahead if Asda lost or gave up on their plans.

They informed people at the presentation that delivery lorries would access the supermarket (not named as yet) via Trinity Street. They would go inside the store to drop off their goods and turn round inside before leaving - so no reversing on a narrow street.

What's more, Kirkland seem to be more open with their proposals. We have had a very informative leaflet through the door and now have access to their website.  And, as you see in the press release, they even give a telephone number if you have any questions.

I'm still waiting for any information from Asda  (so it's a good job I went to their public presentation).





I really have to challenge that Lily I have no truck with ASDA its not a store I use or am likely to use but to imply that they have been less than fullsome with there information and material in my view flies in the face of the facts. They have produced just as good a range of material as Kirkland and widely distributed it, held a range of consultations, generated press coverage and are easily accessable via email and phone. What more would you have been looking for them to do?????
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Lily on October 22, 2012, 12:17:22 AM
I'm only stating my personal opinions about the consultations. 

I have never received anything through my door from Asda or the college whereas I have received an informative leaflet from Kirkland which also includes contact details.

Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on October 22, 2012, 08:16:25 AM
I can't say that I have noticed much difference in the PR between Asda and Kirkland.

They've both done some things a little different than the other but in the main the information has been there if you felt the need to find it. 

I suppose at the time of writing and providing local councillors favour Kirkland, (and my understanding is that they do) then it should follow that Kirkland is the favourite. There is though still the issue of the sorting office relocation. I also understand that SMBC have sent back ASDA'S traffic management scheme and told them to rethink it. Though whichever scheme outs, there is going to be more traffic in Marple. There is an argument that says because Kirkland are in the town centre then more traffic will converge on the centre whereas with Asda the traffic coming from the High Lane end will stop at Hibbert Lane. On the other hand Kirkland will bring custom in to the centre to support the local traders.

The other aspect of the Kirkland development is that it doesn't do anything for the College. It now looks to me as if their refurbishment plans as far as ASDA is concerned are well and truly on hold if not dead and buried.         
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on October 22, 2012, 09:43:26 AM
The other aspect of the Kirkland development is that it doesn't do anything for the College. It now looks to me as if their refurbishment plans as far as ASDA is concerned are well and truly on hold if not dead and buried. 

For those of us who care about education in Marple, that, of course, is the real worry.  When the Chadwick Street development plans first emerged, many of us (including me) assumed that because the overall area of the Chadwick Street site is much smaller than the Hibbert lane site, the retail area of any supermarket built on it would be correspondingly smaller.  So there was much discussion here of whether it might be an Aldi, or an M&S Simply Food, or maybe a Tesco Express or Sainsbury's Local.   

But we were wrong - both schemes propose a gross retail area of about 25,000 sq.ft, which is at the upper end of the range of normal supermarket size (3,000 - 25,000 sq.ft.), a would therefore suit any major supermarket chain.

I'm not normally a conspiracy theorist - in my experience, many alleged conspiracies turn out in the end to have been cock-ups.  But on this occasion, I have to admit that this is beginning to look like a calculated attempt by our beloved councillors to sabotage plans for the improvement of the educational facilities available to the people who voted for them.  I hope I'm wrong, but if that is true, it's an absolute disgrace.   :(
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on October 22, 2012, 10:38:38 AM
Dave of course your wrong, with respect thats just silly.

I believe our authority is in good hands under the leadership of Cllr Derbyshire no one here or anywhere has ever stated anything different althought I do accept therr are some extremly weak and illliberal  members in Marple.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on October 22, 2012, 11:02:57 AM
I hope you are right and I'm wrong, wheels.  However, as far as I can recall, the Chadwick Street proposals emerged a year ago, in October 2011.  This was about four months after the plans for Hibbert Lane were first leaked on to this forum by the redoubtable Miss Marple, and three months after the infamous 'party-in-the-park' in July last year, when councillors were publicly lobbied (some would say bullied) into coming out against the college's scheme.

Now that could just be a coincidence.......
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on October 22, 2012, 11:32:09 AM
I think the Marple ward councillors in this whole situation are largely irrelevant they are not part of the decision making process or of any wider strategic thinking. Thus I have much more confidencethan you Dave. I would have concerns if the Marple six mattered at all.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: admin on October 22, 2012, 12:18:17 PM
This statement is taken from the Kirkland web site: www.marpletowncentrestore.co.uk/theproposals.html

What about the College?
Kirkland Developments recognise the importance of the redevelopment of the College to residents in Marple. As a local company, Kirkland was involved in the initial stages of bidding for the College redevelopment, prior to the Chadwick Site becoming available for a foodstore proposal. Kirkland's initial bid for the redevelopment of Marple College included a residential and leisure scheme for the Hibbert Lane site. During this bidding process, Kirkland was in a position to understand the requirements of bringing forward a redevelopment of the College. As such, the company believes that if a town centre store was approved, the Marple College redevelopment is still possible without Asda. Proposing new homes at Hibbert Lane, as opposed to a foodstore, combined with the return generated by a store at Chadwick Street, will provide a sum that could be used to redevelop Marple College.

Kirkland has not brought forward proposals for Hibbert Lane but has looked carefully into the potential for new College facilities without approval for the Asda proposals, in recognition of Marple College's ambitions and to reassure residents that approval for Kirkland's town centre store proposals will not mean the College is sidelined.

As an example, Kirkland has worked on the indicative proposal below, showing new homes at Hibbert Lane alongside new facilities for Marple College.


It refers to an indicative proposal "below" but it isn't on the site (as far as I can see). However, it was on display at the consultation and I asked them for a copy to put on here. If / when it arrives I will add it.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Maria on October 22, 2012, 12:21:00 PM
Dave have a look at the Kirkland devlopment website.  There is nothing to say students who attend CAMSFC will lose out.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on October 22, 2012, 02:20:57 PM
Thanks admin - that is useful.

Obviously Kirkland are going out of their way to be reassuring about the college, and to acknowledge the importance of the college's development plans.  This seems to be a key sentence:
the company believes that if a town centre store was approved, the Marple College redevelopment is still possible without Asda. Proposing new homes at Hibbert Lane, as opposed to a foodstore, combined with the return generated by a store at Chadwick Street, will provide a sum that could be used to redevelop Marple College.

Can anyone work out what that means, exactly?   We know from many previous posts on this forum that the valuation of the Hibbert Lane site for housing is about £4 million, which leaves an £8 million shortfall, which Kirkland seem to suggest could be made up by 'the return generated by a store at Chadwick Street'.   I don't understand that - does anyone else? 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on October 22, 2012, 02:35:33 PM
Yes I understand it and it has been suggested as a way forward elsewhere.

I urge you to have confidence in the Coucnil leadership Dave.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on October 22, 2012, 02:49:15 PM
I'm glad you understand it, wheels.  Are you going to enlighten the rest of us??
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Belly on October 22, 2012, 03:58:30 PM
For me Chadwick Street is all about car parking - specifically is there enough proposed to accommodate the store and residual town centre parking. Gut feeling is that there isn't enough. I predict problems if it isn't addressed and I'm not sure how it can be.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: tricky on October 22, 2012, 04:30:30 PM
I agree.. Car parking will be a major factor but I think it's about logistics too.. there'd be massively more moving traffic issues with a 20,000+ sqft store on Chadwick Street.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Mrs O on October 22, 2012, 05:08:35 PM
This statement is taken from the Kirkland web site: www.marpletowncentrestore.co.uk/theproposals.html

What about the College?
Kirkland Developments recognise the importance of the redevelopment of the College to residents in Marple. As a local company, Kirkland was involved in the initial stages of bidding for the College redevelopment, prior to the Chadwick Site becoming available for a foodstore proposal. Kirkland's initial bid for the redevelopment of Marple College included a residential and leisure scheme for the Hibbert Lane site. During this bidding process, Kirkland was in a position to understand the requirements of bringing forward a redevelopment of the College. As such, the company believes that if a town centre store was approved, the Marple College redevelopment is still possible without Asda. Proposing new homes at Hibbert Lane, as opposed to a foodstore, combined with the return generated by a store at Chadwick Street, will provide a sum that could be used to redevelop Marple College.

Kirkland has not brought forward proposals for Hibbert Lane but has looked carefully into the potential for new College facilities without approval for the Asda proposals, in recognition of Marple College's ambitions and to reassure residents that approval for Kirkland's town centre store proposals will not mean the College is sidelined.

As an example, Kirkland has worked on the indicative proposal below, showing new homes at Hibbert Lane alongside new facilities for Marple College.


It refers to an indicative proposal "below" but it isn't on the site (as far as I can see). However, it was on display at the consultation and I asked them for a copy to put on here. If / when it arrives I will add it.
Below is a post by Miss M back in July last year!

Ms Cassidy stated that plan B was housing, she stated that she did not ever think that SMBC would have refused planning permission  .    Sorry for having to continually repeat myself but some posters on this site never want to know the events as to how we have got to this stage.   MIA were contacted by a developer who stated that they had offered nearly 9million for housing and a very small Waitrose, but their bid had never been even considered by CAMSFC.   
MIA had to inform the developer that we could not assist in anyway as that part of things  were nothing to do with MIA as we had only formed to prevent a supermarket on Hibbert Lane.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on October 22, 2012, 05:19:54 PM
Not sure what your point is O it was nonesense and is nonesense now
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Mrs O on October 22, 2012, 05:43:54 PM
Not sure what your point is O it was nonesense and is nonesense now
Whats your point W? You was not present at the telephone conversation. I was.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on October 22, 2012, 06:41:17 PM
Wheels, with respect, it is leaders of Councils who are irrelevant not local Councillors. Leaders of Councils are not like Chairs of PLC'S or Captain's of Industry, they have no authority whatsoever over their Councillors. Leaders are elected by their own internal political group. They are often chosen because no other fool wants to do it and this is the case with Stockport. The Council sticks them up at Council question time to answer awkward questions.The real power in any Council is the Executive and the Alliances on that board. The leader has no more say in who makes up the Executive than the most junior backbench Councillor, they are elected internally. So there is really no leadership as such to have "confidence" in. A

The whole executive in 2012 (all 8 of them) was elected completely unopposed, what does that tell you? It tells me that it was decided before the election was. Let's remember the  Council Leader that came out of that election was not the leader that went into it. So it didn't matter who the Leader was but it mattered who the Executive was.     
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on October 22, 2012, 08:53:28 PM
Wheels, with respect, it is leaders of Councils who are irrelevant not local Councillors. Leaders of Councils are not like Chairs of PLC'S or Captain's of Industry, they have no authority whatsoever over their Councillors. Leaders are elected by their own internal political group. They are often chosen because no other fool wants to do it and this is the case with Stockport. The Council sticks them up at Council question time to answer awkward questions.The real power in any Council is the Executive and the Alliances on that board. The leader has no more say in who makes up the Executive than the most junior backbench Councillor, they are elected internally. So there is really no leadership as such to have "confidence" in. A

The whole executive in 2012 (all 8 of them) was elected completely unopposed, what does that tell you? It tells me that it was decided before the election was. Let's remember the  Council Leader that came out of that election was not the leader that went into it. So it didn't matter who the Leader was but it mattered who the Executive was.    

There is a good deal of misunderstanding and misinformation there Simone. Under Stockports Constitution the Executive is appointed by the Leader and Confirmed by full council so clearly there is not going be be any election there is not meant to be any. The Leader puts her slate forward and council confirms end off. Of course other minor party Lab and Tory's could put a slate forward but what would be the point they would lose.

Further you are quite wrong the role of the Leader nowadays is much more like a Company Chair working with the Chief Ex. Indeed the Leader in stockport controls a budget of £250much more than none entities like Stunnel and other back bench MPs ever get near.There were in fact three other members lobbying for the Leaders Post  following the previous leaders defeat however all melted away given the strength of support for the current leader Cllr Derbyshire. The Leader themselve is appointed by the full council.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on October 22, 2012, 10:31:56 PM
Wheels, with respect, it is leaders of Councils who are irrelevant not local Councillors. Leaders of Councils are not like Chairs of PLC'S or Captain's of Industry, they have no authority whatsoever over their Councillors. Leaders are elected by their own internal political group. They are often chosen because no other fool wants to do it and this is the case with Stockport. The Council sticks them up at Council question time to answer awkward questions.The real power in any Council is the Executive and the Alliances on that board. The leader has no more say in who makes up the Executive than the most junior backbench Councillor, they are elected internally. So there is really no leadership as such to have "confidence" in. A

The whole executive in 2012 (all 8 of them) was elected completely unopposed, what does that tell you? It tells me that it was decided before the election was. Let's remember the  Council Leader that came out of that election was not the leader that went into it. So it didn't matter who the Leader was but it mattered who the Executive was.     

There is a good deal of misunderstanding and misinformation there Simone. Under Stockports Constitution the Executive is appointed by the Leader and Confirmed by full council so clearly there is not going be be any election there is not meant to be any. The Leader puts her slate forward and council confirms end off. Of course other minor party Lab and Tory's could put a slate forward but what would be the point they would lose.

Further you are quite wrong the role of the Leader nowadays is much more like a Company Chair working with the Chief Ex. Indeed the Leader in stockport controls a budget of £250much more than none entities like Stunnel and other back bench MPs ever get near.There were in fact three other members lobbying for the Leaders Post  following the previous leaders defeat however all melted away given the strength of support for the current leader Cllr Derbyshire. The Leader themselve is appointed by the full council.

Further you

There is no misinformation here Wheels, The leader does not appoint the Executive. The Executive stands for election within the group and each group member has a vote, the leader has one vote the same as everybody else.  The Executive appointments have to be ratified by the full Council but that is the power of the Council not the leader. The Leader cannot hire and fire anybody as a Chief Executive of a private company can.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on October 22, 2012, 10:38:07 PM
You are total wrong here Simone. The Council Constitution is quite clear in that the Leaders nominees are put to council for confirmation. So if considered the Transport Executive member he is appointed ot that post by the leader confirmed by council. The party groups have no voice in portfolio allocation. Thus again you mislead or just dont understand.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on October 22, 2012, 10:58:42 PM
Wheels, Portfolio Selection and Executive Election are two entirely different things. I can assure you that I understand it perfectly. The leader has no say in the identities of the Executive they are democratically elected from within their own group.

I will leave it at that now. I don't want to play Yes,No, Yes, No, Yes,No.   
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on October 22, 2012, 11:21:30 PM
We know from many previous posts on this forum that the valuation of the Hibbert Lane site for housing is about £4 million, which leaves an £8 million shortfall, which Kirkland seem to suggest could be made up by 'the return generated by a store at Chadwick Street'.   I don't understand that - does anyone else? 
Yes I understand it and it has been suggested as a way forward elsewhere
I'm glad you understand it, wheels.  Are you going to enlighten the rest of us??

Well are you??
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on October 22, 2012, 11:34:58 PM
Wheels, Portfolio Selection and Executive Election are two entirely different things. I can assure you that I understand it perfectly.
I double that really.But I am happy to leave it until you mislead again  

Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on October 23, 2012, 11:46:59 AM
We know from many previous posts on this forum that the valuation of the Hibbert Lane site for housing is about £4 million, which leaves an £8 million shortfall, which Kirkland seem to suggest could be made up by 'the return generated by a store at Chadwick Street'.   I don't understand that - does anyone else? 
Yes I understand it and it has been suggested as a way forward elsewhere
I'm glad you understand it, wheels.  Are you going to enlighten the rest of us??

Well are you??


Wheels, your silence is eloquent!   Unless I'm missing the point here, Kirkland seem to be suggesting that they plan to persuade a supermarket chain to pass over some of its profits to a college.  Can they be serious!   ;)
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Maria on October 23, 2012, 12:13:45 PM
Dave I wonder whether they mean that depending on how much they make from the development, there may be more in the kitty for the Hibbert lane site?

Just a suggestion, so no idea if this is the intented meaning!
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on October 23, 2012, 02:29:58 PM
Maria, by 'they' I assume you mean Kirkland and/or Stockport Council? Trouble is, the college is entirely unconnected with either of those organisations, so it's hard to see them giving any of their profit to the college's 'kitty'.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Maria on October 23, 2012, 02:39:22 PM
I was referring to Kirkland-they are interested in the Hibbert lane site not SMBC.

Perhaps you should telephone them to discuss your query.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on October 23, 2012, 04:09:06 PM
Re-reading between the lines of this:  http://www.marpletowncentrestore.co.uk/theproposals.html
...the light is slowly beginning to dawn. ::)

Kirkland's plan could be as follows: put in the planning application for a 25,000 sq.ft supermarket on Chadwick Street.  If it's successful, Asda may well pull out of the Hibbert Lane scheme.  Kirkland then go back to the college with their 'residential and leisure scheme'.  One snag - it is unlikely to be worth the 12 million which the college requires.    :'(
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on October 23, 2012, 10:32:56 PM
It isn't actually Kirkland's plan it is and always has been the plan of the local Councillors. Kirkland are just pawns (albeit willing one's)
in the Marple 6's game of political chess. It suits Councillors purpose to allow everybody and anybody to think that they are bullied/divided and of little consequence, when actually they are an influential, cohesive, political force.

Let me explain.

Trinity Street development was/is a scheme of the Marple 6 to prevent ASDA building a supermarket on Hibbert Lane. That was/is its sole purpose. Local Councillors contrived it, demanded and strategically managed it to fruition behind closed Town Hall Doors without any fuss but in a resolved way. Because of their number/ their united party politics and their positions within the Council they have been an impossible force to resist.

Does anybody actually believe that it is a coincidence that a piece of land should come up for sale in the town centre for retail development for a store exactly the same size as the proposed Hibbert Lane ASDA?

That land sale had to be endorsed by both the Area Committee and the Council's Executive and who do we find dominating both ? Marple Councillors.,

They have managed both planning applications so that they both receive their first public hearing at AC at about the same time. Whereupon Kirkland will be slightly first and local Councillors will vote unanimously against ASDA and unanimously for Kirkland.

In addition to this because ASDA is non compliant with smbc planning policy, Councillors will refer the application to H & P whereas because Kirkland is compliant local Councillors will authorise planning consent at the AC. ASDA conceding inevitable defeat will either leave town or jump in with Kirkland either way the enabling application with CAMSFC/ASDA will be annahilated.

Then local Councillors will turn their machinations to Hibbert Lane and another development that is not a supermarket.

There aren't many around that can defeat ASDA.

Who says local Councillors are irrelevant with no influence ?   
   
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Victor M on October 24, 2012, 08:10:47 AM
Quote
It isn't actually Kirkland's plan it is and always has been the plan of the local Councillors.

Simonesaffron, I think you will find that the development of Chadwick St. has been muted for a number of years. When CAMSFC consultant's first contacted the Council's planning dept. they were told about land being available @ Chadwick St.

What the choice is now for the local community is do they want a new supermarket on Hibbert lane or one on Chadwick St.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Maria on October 24, 2012, 09:21:47 AM
Indeed Victor it has. 

Asda representatives confirmed to me they were offered the Chadwick street site but refused as it was too small for their planned store.  Another element of corporate greed-they admitted this to me also-the bigger the store the more money they could make (potentially).

Also the college do not "need" 12 million-Ms Cassidy confirmed to me personally, with her planning friend in tow, that they could quite easily redevelop Buxton lane with less funds but as they were offered 12 million they had that much to spend.  I suppose it is like buying a car-you buy what you can afford even if you want a Bentley.

Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on October 24, 2012, 09:48:30 AM
What the choice is now for the local community is do they want a new supermarket on Hibbert lane or one on Chadwick St.

Or to put it another way, do we want modern, efficient, purpose-built 21st century educational facilities for our community, or are we content for our kids and grandkids to carry on putting up with crumbling, inefficient and third-rate old school buildings.  

Asda representatives confirmed to me they were offered the Chadwick street site but refused as it was too small for their planned store.

As both stores are the same area (25,000 sq feet) that makes no sense.  I can think of other reasons they may prefer Hibbert Lane, however, such as the cost of building on the Chadwick Street site, the lack of a fuel forecourt, or less car park space.  

Also the college do not "need" 12 million-Ms Cassidy confirmed to me personally, with her planning friend in tow, that they could quite easily redevelop Buxton lane with less funds but as they were offered 12 million they had that much to spend.  I suppose it is like buying a car-you buy what you can afford even if you want a Bentley.

Indeed.  So is the best too good for our kids then?  
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on October 24, 2012, 11:08:08 AM
Quote
It isn't actually Kirkland's plan it is and always has been the plan of the local Councillors.

Simonesaffron, I think you will find that the development of Chadwick St. has been muted for a number of years. When CAMSFC consultant's first contacted the Council's planning dept. they were told about land being available @ Chadwick St.

What the choice is now for the local community is do they want a new supermarket on Hibbert lane or one on Chadwick St.
Why not two .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Maria on October 24, 2012, 11:58:30 AM
Dave you can say it makes no sense but that is what they said to me!  I agree it is likely to be due to the fact they want additional space for deliveries, petrol station etc but I and indeed you may be wrong.  The cynic in me also thinks it may be due to the possibility of expansion in years to come.  Who knows.

My future children want a Bentley but if I do not have the means then tough.  As in the case of the college. Land/property is only worth what someone will pay and if pp is refused then the college have to rethink.  I hardly think our future students will end up writing with quills by candlelight Dave.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Victor M on October 24, 2012, 12:39:11 PM
Quote
Why not two

Because Marple & surrounding area can only support one additional supermarket. Kirkland at their consultation event when asked did state that a Supermarket would only be interested in the Chadwick St. site if ASDA were refused planning permission.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: admin on October 24, 2012, 12:41:04 PM
I was told at the Kirkland consultation that Asda produced a multi-storey design for Chadwick Street that "proved" it wasn't viable to build a store there. Kirkland seem to have managed it though.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on October 24, 2012, 01:01:51 PM
Quote
It isn't actually Kirkland's plan it is and always has been the plan of the local Councillors.

Simonesaffron, I think you will find that the development of Chadwick St. has been muted for a number of years. When CAMSFC consultant's first contacted the Council's planning dept. they were told about land being available @ Chadwick St.

What the choice is now for the local community is do they want a new supermarket on Hibbert lane or one on Chadwick St.
Why not two .


Victor, at least 4 years to my knowledge. However being "muted" and being brought to fruition as I am sure you will agree are two entirely different things.

Amazon, there is not enough money in customer base in Marple for the Co-op, ASDA and another. 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on October 24, 2012, 01:07:46 PM
Victor, how is it a choice for the local community?

The local community aren't making the choice, there is not going to be a referendum of the good people of Marple, all 25,000 of them or even a section of them. Six Councillors will be the decision.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Victor M on October 24, 2012, 01:38:33 PM
Quote
Victor, how is it a choice for the local community?

By contacting your local Councillor and making your views known
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on October 24, 2012, 01:40:58 PM
Maria makes a good point when she writes..
My future children want a Bentley but if I do not have the means then tough.

...meaning that if the Hibbert Lane scheme is refused and the college has to sell the site for less, then they will have to go back to the drawing board (literally) with their scheme for Buxton Lane, and make do with something cheaper.  

But it's important to understand that if this happens, it is in all likelihood the direct result of actions by our councillors, as Simone has pointed out.  Our children and grandchildren currently put up with third-rate facilities at camsfc.  They could have looked forward to them becoming first rate, but thanks to our elected representatives, they will have to make do with second rate.   ::) With friends like that, who needs enemies......
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Franz on October 24, 2012, 01:48:02 PM
Thank you for the post (78) Simone. If you are right this will be the shabbiest episode in the 30+ years that I have lived in Marple.

Two months ago the Lib Dems published a “News Extra” with the massive headline:-
                                                         ASDA
                                                     Supermarket
                                                     Could Cause
                                                       Gridlock
                                                      For Marple
Now, it seems, SMBC are making land available to ensure that the Armageddon the Lib Dem newsletter predicted, and which is causing “outrage” locally, will be centred in the middle of the town rather than “near to centre” (MIAs words). If they do not issue another newsletter with the same caption but substituting “Chadwick Street” for “Asda” or provide some other explanation they will lose credibility and risk standing accused of cynicism and hypocrisy.

Then there is MIA who, earlier this month, restated their sole raison d’etre as “Marple in Action is a group formed in response to the threat of a proposed giant supermarket opening on Hibbert Lane. We do NOT have any other objectives.” (their emphases). Perhaps they haven’t noticed but there isn’t going to be a “giant Supermarket” on Hibbert Lane, not that anyone in their right mind could ever have thought there would be. Even if Asda were to get planning permission it will be a modest supermarket and , if they make an application and it fails, it is difficult to see they, or anyone else, submitting an application for a bigger one.

So MIA no longer has a purpose in life and yet it continues to seek to raise funds? Perhaps they are planning to respond to the plea that has been published for their support in opposing the Chadwick Street proposal??

The Kirkland presentation was as good as it could be and they appear to have been well briefed on the failings of CAMSFC/ASDA’s PR but it is still pie in the sky. I was told at the exhibition that construction will result in 18 months of disturbance in the town centre and the only thing they could tell me about potential occupiers of the supermarket was that it definitely would not be Aldi since they have already been excluded by SMBC. So much for the 2012 “Supermarket of the Year” .

Victor M,
"What the choice is now for the local community is do they want a new supermarket on Hibbert lane or one on Chadwick St."   

 The choice is not as simple as that . More important to me than the options you state is the future of our sixth form college. The choice is a modern sixth form college with all the facilities that it will provide for both students and the community plus a modest supermarket on Hibbert Lane or a similar supermarket on Chadwick Street with, at best,  cut price improvements to the existing college buildings in Buxton Lane or, at worst, a college slowly sinking into oblivion with its existing facilities (I say that because at least one of our councilors objects strongly to any development at Hibbert Lane and will presumably oppose any new housing on that site).

I am sure that, should all this lead to the eventual demise of our college, Marple Civic Society will wish to erect on Hibbert Lane a plaque identifying those responsible.


Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Victor M on October 24, 2012, 02:29:28 PM
Quote
The choice is not as simple as that

Unfortunately Alstan, that is what it boils down to. With no development on the Chadwick St. car park then ASDA would get their planning permission. If the ASDA development is turned down (probably on appeal) then there will be a development on Chadwick St. When CAMSFC decided to sell the land on Hibbert Lane to a Supermarket they took the lid of Pandora's Box.

Both developments will bring extra traffic to Marple, which development are people in favour of, it has to be one or the other? There are no other options.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on October 24, 2012, 03:46:28 PM
When CAMSFC decided to sell the land on Hibbert Lane to a Supermarket they took the lid of Pandora's Box.
Indeed they did.  But when Victor adds:
Both developments will bring extra traffic to Marple, which development are people in favour of, it has to be one or the other? There are no other options.

.....he implies that we have a choice.  We don't - the matter is entirely out of our hands.  Sure, in due course we may express support for, or object to, planning applications, but the likelihood is that supporters and objectors will cancel each other out, and matters will then take their course, and our beloved councillors, with the support of our MP, will have succeeded in their objective of sabotaging plans to improve educational facilities for the people who elected them.  ::)
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Victor M on October 24, 2012, 04:00:33 PM
Quote
and our beloved councillors, with the support of our MP, will have succeeded in their objective of sabotaging plans to improve educational facilities for the people who elected them.

I don't think any of our elected officials want to do that Dave. There are other options that CAMSFC could follow to raise the funds required to develop Buxton Lane. Linking the Buxton Lane site to the ASDA development on Hibbert Lane is a very good tactic on ASDA's part, they would like us all to think that is the only way the Buxton Lane site is developed. But it isn't.

Therefore the only decision that has to be made is, a Supermarket on Hibbert Lane or one on Chadwick St. car park. Come on Dave which one do you want?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on October 24, 2012, 04:08:59 PM
There are other options that CAMSFC could follow to raise the funds required to develop Buxton Lane.
Such as?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Victor M on October 24, 2012, 04:17:31 PM
Sell the spare land at Cheadle, take up Kirkland's offer to develop the land at Hibbert lane, or see if SMBC will give them an interest free loan (or better still a part of the proceeds from the Chadwick St. sale). There are endless possibilities if only they (CAMSFC) will talk to the council and our elected officials.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on October 24, 2012, 04:40:37 PM
Sell the spare land at Cheadle, take up Kirkland's offer to develop the land at Hibbert lane, or see if SMBC will give them an interest free loan (or better still a part of the proceeds from the Chadwick St. sale). There are endless possibilities if only they (CAMSFC) will talk to the council and our elected officials.
So you don't want an ASDA .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Victor M on October 24, 2012, 05:03:27 PM
I was answering Dave's question regarding possible alternative funding options for CAMSFC to develop Buxton Lane. Irrespective of which Supermarket it is. I get back to my original point, the choice is a Supermarket on Hibbert Lane or one on Chadwick St. Perhaps we should have a poll on it?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on October 24, 2012, 06:45:00 PM
I was answering Dave's question regarding possible alternative funding options for CAMSFC to develop Buxton Lane. Irrespective of which Supermarket it is. I get back to my original point, the choice is a Supermarket on Hibbert Lane or one on Chadwick St. Perhaps we should have a poll on it?

Ok go on .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on October 25, 2012, 12:01:19 AM
see if SMBC will give them an interest free loan (or better still a part of the proceeds from the Chadwick St. sale).

Sadly, the prospect of either of the above happening is virtually nil.  Even is there were the political will to do so (unlikely) and the spare money available (even more unlikely) the government restrictions on local authority spending would rule it out. 

Sell the spare land at Cheadle

It's a very long shot, but that may be our best hope.  As far as I can recall, this was raised on this forum some months ago by an anonymous poster from casmfc staff.  We have no idea whether it is a serious possibility, but if by any chance there is a piece of land at Cheadle with development potential which could be sold off to finance the college's Marple scheme, then that could yet be a solution.  But don't hold your breath, Victor!   
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on October 25, 2012, 04:57:05 PM
Asda on Hibbert Lane seems the only sensible answer. That way the college can carry out the proposed improvements. In addition the Chadwick Street store will probably not be a low cost supermarket (just my guess from what I have read and heard) which then still leaves Marple's lower income residents with the same issue that they cannot afford a full weeks shop in their town. This is why Asda is attractive to many; those without cars and the choice to access stores in neighbouring towns. As has been said above on this thread, either way there will be increased traffic, possible effects on local shops (could be positive or negative) and effects for residents.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on October 25, 2012, 07:55:29 PM
Victor, how is it a choice for the local community?

The local community aren't making the choice, there is not going to be a referendum of the good people of Marple, all 25,000 of them or even a section of them. Six Councillors will be the decision.

Yes because they took the trouble to get themselves elected if you want the same decision making powers get yourself elected.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on October 25, 2012, 08:40:33 PM
There's just one problem with that: as far as I am aware, none of ou councillors were elected with a mandate to oppose the improvement of educational provision in Marple.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Howard on October 25, 2012, 09:53:00 PM
There's just one problem with that: as far as I am aware, none of ou councillors were elected with a mandate to oppose the improvement of educational provision in Marple.

Dave, I wish you'd stop using this simplistic argument. It's the equivalent of "if you're not with us then you're against us" or "if you're not part of the solution then you're part of the problem". I seem to remember GW Bush using it in the early days of his "War on Terror" and how that turned people off from valid points that the US might actually have made.

Just because the councillors oppose the development of Asda on Hibbert Lane does not necessarily mean they "oppose the improvement of educational provision in Marple". Of course they'd be in favour as it would be suicidal for their election chances to say anything otherwise. But they weren't elected on that single issue (and in fact only two of the current six councillors have been re-elected since the supermarket issue became public knowledge).

Some people take the view that Asda's arrival will damage local businesses (and I'm not really bought into that argument). If the councillors stood on the issue that they "fully support all measures to improve the provision of educaltion in Marple" the argument could be turned right around and they could be accused of having a mandate to oppose all development of local businesses.

You know that the argument is much more shaded than one opposes or supports education and your black and white argument diminishes some of the excellent points you have made.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: thebigshed on October 25, 2012, 11:33:40 PM
The Kirkland development is estimated to create 18 months of major upheaval right in the centre of Marple and will remove most of the town's car parking during that time. What will that do to local trade?  I suspect that visitors to Marple will think twice before coming to spend their money.  At least the Hibbert Lane option wouldn't get in the way of normal trading while it's being built.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Franz on October 26, 2012, 06:26:50 AM
Howard. Dave is far from simplistic. He is knowledgeable, coherent and well able to hit the nail on the head but if you wish it to be put in different terms lets just say that the opposition of our councillors (and MP) to the development of a modest supermarket at Hibbert Lane is detrimental to the prospects of further education in Marple for our children and grandchildren.

Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Howard on October 26, 2012, 08:16:42 AM
Howard. Dave is far from simplistic. He is knowledgeable, coherent and well able to hit the nail on the head but if you wish it to be put in different terms lets just say that the opposition of our councillors (and MP) to the development of a modest supermarket at Hibbert Lane is detrimental to the prospects of further education in Marple for our children and grandchildren.

At times Dave has been the lone voice of reason amongst the many more emotional posts that have been made on this forum. However, you clearly didn't read my post properly. What I said was that using such black and white arguments diminishes some of the excellent points he has made.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Maria on October 26, 2012, 09:38:38 AM
Howard. Dave is far from simplistic. He is knowledgeable, coherent and well able to hit the nail on the head but if you wish it to be put in different terms lets just say that the opposition of our councillors (and MP) to the development of a modest supermarket at Hibbert Lane is detrimental to the prospects of further education in Marple for our children and grandchildren.



I have to say I disagree it is detrimental.  It is by far the easiest option for the college but I do not feel realistically the students will suffer.  Ms Cassidy herself confirmed other options were available, just that this was the most simplistic and Mr Hubert also confirmed contingency plans are in place to allow for redevlopment of Buxton Lane if the Hibbert lane application is denied.  In reality however, our comments on this forum mean very little if anything and we will all have differing opinions-indeed I expect a few retorts to my own comment here!
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on October 26, 2012, 12:06:14 PM
There's just one problem with that: as far as I am aware, none of ou councillors were elected with a mandate to oppose the improvement of educational provision in Marple.

Dave, I wish you'd stop using this simplistic argument. It's the equivalent of "if you're not with us then you're against us" or "if you're not part of the solution then you're part of the problem". I seem to remember GW Bush using it in the early days of his "War on Terror" and how that turned people off from valid points that the US might actually have made.

Just because the councillors oppose the development of Asda on Hibbert Lane does not necessarily mean they "oppose the improvement of educational provision in Marple". Of course they'd be in favour as it would be suicidal for their election chances to say anything otherwise. But they weren't elected on that single issue (and in fact only two of the current six councillors have been re-elected since the supermarket issue became public knowledge).

Some people take the view that Asda's arrival will damage local businesses (and I'm not really bought into that argument). If the councillors stood on the issue that they "fully support all measures to improve the provision of educaltion in Marple" the argument could be turned right around and they could be accused of having a mandate to oppose all development of local businesses.

You know that the argument is much more shaded than one opposes or supports education and your black and white argument diminishes some of the excellent points you have made.

Good post Howard .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on October 26, 2012, 01:44:22 PM
There's just one problem with that: as far as I am aware, none of ou councillors were elected with a mandate to oppose the improvement of educational provision in Marple.

Dave why is the location of the provision so important. Are you suggesting that those people who get on the bus and go to Aquinas or Stockport College are in some way getting an inferior education. Marple Campus is used widely by people from Breadbury, Romiley. New Mills etc do they have a lesser experience because they have to travel. Thus would it really matter if people had to travel to Cheadle or whereever?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on October 26, 2012, 06:45:04 PM
Yes, I think it would matter a great deal. This is a town of 23,000 people, as we frequently remind ourselves. It's not Bredbury or Romiley or New Mills - it's bigger and more important than any of those. The idea that a town of Marple's size and status should have no educational provision for 16 -18 year olds is unthinkable. Imagine what the centre would be like without the students! (Better, a few people might say!) But it would be a pretty dead place - and the shops would certainly miss them!
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on October 26, 2012, 08:34:41 PM
Yes, I think it would matter a great deal. This is a town of 23,000 people, as we frequently remind ourselves. It's not Bredbury or Romiley or New Mills - it's bigger and more important than any of those. The idea that a town of Marple's size and status should have no educational provision for 16 -18 year olds is unthinkable. Imagine what the centre would be like without the students! (Better, a few people might say!) But it would be a pretty dead place - and the shops would certainly miss them!
For once I agree with you Dave 'for one thing we would be able to get on a bus between 3and 4 going either way they must be good for trade during dinner time certainly gregs would miss them .and the chippy on derby way .and if dominos opens . No keep the students good for marple .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on October 26, 2012, 11:17:45 PM
Yes, I think it would matter a great deal. This is a town of 23,000 people, as we frequently remind ourselves. It's not Bredbury or Romiley or New Mills - it's bigger and more important than any of those. The idea that a town of Marple's size and status should have no educational provision for 16 -18 year olds is unthinkable. Imagine what the centre would be like without the students! (Better, a few people might say!) But it would be a pretty dead place - and the shops would certainly miss them!

Ah but the economic benefits are not the same as saying that  first class educational provision can only be provided within walkig distance of marples youngsters front doors. I don't actual see that that jumpingon your bike or bus to go to college is a massive problem
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on October 27, 2012, 08:26:27 AM
It is not a straight forward issue and never has been.

The College, really started it all and although it is right to want the best for their students their senior management was arrogant and disengaged itself from the Community. They believed that they had a surefire way to realise their project and didn't take into account the strength of local feeling and also the influence of local Councillors. 

It is my understanding that they were informed by SMBC, 18 months ago that they were highly unlikely to obtain planning permission but they put their faith in the power and money of ASDA and treated our elected representatives with disdain. They figured that ASDA would hire some expensive slick, sophister and he would save the day at appeal. Lets be honest ASDA couldn't care less about Marple or the students. They just see Marple and the College as a catalyst to put more profit into their business but MACSFC had no reservation about riding with the devil on this issue.
 
To compound the felony the community was further divided by the tactics and behaviour of some members of MIA and lets face it what have they actually achieved ?

If we have to have a supermarket in Marple then it is better for the future of the town centre ( although I'm apprehensive about the traffic)  if that supermarket is in the town centre. If nothing else this is compliant with our Council's policy and we voted the Council in. There has been one election since the supermarket issue and the sitting local Councillors absolutely annihilated the opposition. There is also in my view much ill-informed opinion about our local Councillors. They at least all live /work in Marple and they have a vested interest in the town -ASDA don't. Councillors at least believe they are doing what's best for Marple. ASDA couldn't care less.
 
I also believe that the College should stay in town for the sake of education and for the sake of the local economy.

I am sure that all is not lost and that a supermarket in the centre and a College refurbishment can be accommodated. The College now has to accept that barring some miracle/disaster (they can happen) the ASDA plan for Hibbert lane is all but dead.

If I was ASDA now I would be contacting Kirkland and if I was CAMSFC I would be contacting local Councillors.

Oh and if I was MIA I would be contacting nobody and would completely fade away.       
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on October 27, 2012, 09:07:21 AM
As usual, Simone writes good sense. Her faith in the ability/willingness if our councillors to help the college is touching but, I fear, misplaced.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on October 27, 2012, 04:09:22 PM
It is not a straight forward issue and never has been.

The College, really started it all and although it is right to want the best for their students their senior management was arrogant and disengaged itself from the Community. They believed that they had a surefire way to realise their project and didn't take into account the strength of local feeling and also the influence of local Councillors. 

It is my understanding that they were informed by SMBC, 18 months ago that they were highly unlikely to obtain planning permission but they put their faith in the power and money of ASDA and treated our elected representatives with disdain. They figured that ASDA would hire some expensive slick, sophister and he would save the day at appeal. Lets be honest ASDA couldn't care less about Marple or the students. They just see Marple and the College as a catalyst to put more profit into their business but MACSFC had no reservation about riding with the devil on this issue.
 
To compound the felony the community was further divided by the tactics and behaviour of some members of MIA and lets face it what have they actually achieved ?

If we have to have a supermarket in Marple then it is better for the future of the town centre ( although I'm apprehensive about the traffic)  if that supermarket is in the town centre. If nothing else this is compliant with our Council's policy and we voted the Council in. There has been one election since the supermarket issue and the sitting local Councillors absolutely annihilated the opposition. There is also in my view much ill-informed opinion about our local Councillors. They at least all live /work in Marple and they have a vested interest in the town -ASDA don't. Councillors at least believe they are doing what's best for Marple. ASDA couldn't care less.
 
I also believe that the College should stay in town for the sake of education and for the sake of the local economy.

I am sure that all is not lost and that a supermarket in the centre and a College refurbishment can be accommodated. The College now has to accept that barring some miracle/disaster (they can happen) the ASDA plan for Hibbert lane is all but dead.

If I was ASDA now I would be contacting Kirkland and if I was CAMSFC I would be contacting local Councillors.

Oh and if I was MIA I would be contacting nobody and would completely fade away.       

They were on the precinct again this morning looking frozen and all alone .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on October 27, 2012, 05:12:16 PM
Do they have permission to be there or do they justlike blocking the pavement
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on October 27, 2012, 05:18:41 PM
As usual, Simone writes good sense. Her faith in the ability/willingness if our councillors to help the college is touching but, I fear, misplaced.

I think you are both wrong the Marple 6 are generally weak and ineffective and are not well regarded within the controlling group. However I do have  total confidence that the controlling Lib Dem group will resolve the issue for the benefit of Marple dispite rather than because of our weak local councillors.

Stunell of course has no role here contenting himself with frightening people and pretendig to run campaigns but come the end of the day he has no voice or vote.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on October 28, 2012, 06:32:17 AM
As usual, Simone writes good sense. Her faith in the ability/willingness if our councillors to help the college is touching but, I fear, misplaced.

I think you are both wrong the Marple 6 are generally weak and ineffective and are not well regarded within the controlling group. However I do have  total confidence that the controlling Lib Dem group will resolve the issue for the benefit of Marple dispite rather than because of our weak local councillors.

Stunell of course has no role here contenting himself with frightening people and pretendig to run campaigns but come the end of the day he has no voice or vote.

Wheels, you are of course right about the MP who has no direct input into the situation and even less now that he has been relieved of his ministerial role.

However, I am amazed at your perception of local Councillors to dismiss them as ineffective is miles off the mark and appears to be an entrenched view that you have been backed into a corner with and come what may you will persist in holding. It is exactly the view that CAMSFC & MIA held.

 Do you actually know any of the Marple 6 ? Have you ever spoken to any of them? Do you know anything about any of them ?  In what way do you believe that the controlling group will resolve the issue for Marple, please explain ? I am fascinated by your assertion as I have obviously missed something that is blindingly obvious. Also can you also explain why 3 Marple Councillors are members of the executive is that symptomatic of the group not holding them in high regard?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Bowden Guy on November 03, 2012, 11:43:47 AM
So, is Marple in Action in favour of, or opposed to, the proposed 25,000 sq ft supermarket on Chadwick Street?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on November 03, 2012, 01:00:36 PM
So, is Marple in Action in favour of, or opposed to, the proposed 25,000 sq ft supermarket on Chadwick Street?

You won't get an answer to this I've tried .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Bowden Guy on November 03, 2012, 04:58:32 PM
Yes, the silence is deafening.....where are you, MIA? (although, of course, MIA also stands for Missing in Action)
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: admin on November 03, 2012, 05:11:31 PM
MIA published a statement about this on their web site on 11 October: www.marple-in-action.org.uk
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Belly on November 03, 2012, 09:15:46 PM
But that's a non statement isn't it? I appreciate that the game has moved on somewhat and MIA were not formed to fight a town centre supermarket, but I would like to know how MIA can continue to be seen to be fighting for local traders in vehmently objecting to a medium sized store at Hibbert Lane and yet not see anything wrong with a similar sized store right in the back yards of the same traders. Worse still (potentially) stealing the parking spaces that these traders currently rely on!

Now I don't have such a problem with either store - as I don't necessarily see a new supermarket as the death nell to local business, but it's clear MIA do. So it seems slightly odd that they refuse to set out any views at all on Chadwick Street. Do we infer a degree of unstated support from this, or is it that the campaign is simply split on the subject and therefore there is no common view.

Frankly i think that this lack of position significantly weakens MIAs validity to act as a 'community voice' on the subject of supermarkets if they cannot provide a consistent narrative.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: 1877 on November 07, 2012, 12:34:42 PM
As I understand it the college has to generate the highest capital receipt from the sale of any land. Presumably the Asda offer was therefore the highest. All accept that a retail development will bring in the highest capital receipt. Housing would generate significantly less. Policy dictates that some of the housing would have to be "affordable", further reducing the money made available to improve the estate at Buxton Lane. Most of the college's specialist facilities, sport, science, art and design, its library, are at Hibbert Lane making the redevelopment of Buxton Lane a costly business. Kirkland Development's claims of there being another way to resolve the college's problem with its aging estate are self-serving, misleading and mendacious. The company's interest in the education post-16 of our young people is no more significant than that of Asda simply because of it being a "local" firm.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on November 07, 2012, 01:56:31 PM
Sadly, I fear 1877 has hit the nail on the head.  In their statement ('What about the College?') developers Kirkland write that 'if a town centre store was approved, the Marple College redevelopment is still possible without Asda. Proposing new homes at Hibbert Lane, as opposed to a foodstore, combined with the return generated by a store at Chadwick Street, will provide a sum [my italics] that could be used to redevelop Marple College.'

There are at least two problems with that.  First, what do Kirkland mean by 'a sum'?   Do they mean the 12 million which would have been paid by Asda?  And second, what do they mean by the phrase 'combined with the return generated by a store at Chadwick Street'?  Are they actually suggesting that they would top up the 4 million (or whatever) that the college would receive for disposing of Hibbert Lane for housing, by passing over some of their own profits from the Chadwick Street scheme?   If so, we should all be suitably grateful - but I think we would also be absolutely astonished!   
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on November 07, 2012, 03:04:40 PM
I am sorry Dave I think you and 1877 are well off the mark there is at least one further option and I have absolute confidence in our local authority  and that they will help resolve this issue.

Although personally I am yet to hear an argument other than economic for retaining the collage at all certainly no education reasons have been put forward.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on November 07, 2012, 04:44:06 PM
Wheels keeps repeating this:
I have absolute confidence in our local authority  and that they will help resolve this issue.
..without ever providing a shred of evidence for his 'absolute confidence'.

And this time he adds
there is at least one further option
..without (of course) telling us what it is ::)
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on November 07, 2012, 06:01:14 PM
Your right there Dave.

And you never explain to me why the college has to stay in Marple.

Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on November 07, 2012, 06:57:04 PM
OK wheels. You deal with the two points which I raised in my previous post, and I will provide the (non-economic) explanation as to why we need a 6th form college in Marple. Is that a deal?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on November 08, 2012, 10:12:17 AM
OK wheels. You deal with the two points which I raised in my previous post, and I will provide the (non-economic) explanation as to why we need a 6th form college in Marple. Is that a deal?

No
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: 1877 on November 08, 2012, 12:45:00 PM
Sixth Form Colleges, the "gem" of the education system to quote Michael Gove but the young people of Marple and beyond should be denied the opportunities that they offer. On your bike, Wheels.  ::)
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on November 08, 2012, 01:41:11 PM
Sixth Form Colleges, the "gem" of the education system to quote Michael Gove but the young people of Marple and beyond should be denied the opportunities that they offer. On your bike, Wheels.  ::)

What rubbish are you really suggesting that the young people of Breadbury and Romiley are denied education because they have to get on a bus to get to Marple. Are you really saying that the education Marple teenages have is better than that of Breadbury teenages, in the same class, because they don't have to get a bus. What nonesense.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on November 08, 2012, 02:29:16 PM
Wheels is fond of a good rant, and he asks a lot of questions.....
are you really suggesting that the young people of Breadbury and Romiley are denied education because they have to get on a bus to get to Marple. Are you really saying that the education Marple teenages have is better than that of Breadbury teenages, in the same class, because they don't have to get a bus.
and
I am yet to hear an argument other than economic for retaining the collage at all certainly no education reasons have been put forward.
not forgetting:
And you never explain to me why the college has to stay in Marple.

...but he doesn't actually want to hear the answers - when you offer to explain it to him, the answer is simply:
No

This is not all that unusual on forums - you often get the odd poster who uses the forum as a ranting platform, but doesn't actually want to engage directly in discussion.  It's normally best to ignore them. 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: 1877 on November 08, 2012, 02:30:23 PM
Majority "in favour" of town centre store, or so the article in this week's Stockport Express would have us believe. Now closer examination of the article reveals that 56% of the 278 who bothered to respond to the consultation were actually "in favour". I make that a total of 155 citizens. At the last count Marple had a population of circa 23,000. Now one could take that to mean that 0.006% of the population of Marple are "in favour" of the Chadwick Street development. Amazing what you can do with statistics isn't it? Probably no heads hanging in shame though. Shoddy journalism no doubt and shameful abuse of the English Language Mr Hogarth, "localism" really, words fail me.  ;)
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: admin on November 08, 2012, 02:34:54 PM
More detail was published here on 2 November:

http://www.marple-uk.com/smf/index.php?topic=4688.0
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on November 08, 2012, 04:19:23 PM
Majority "in favour" of town centre store, or so the article in this week's Stockport Express would have us believe. Now closer examination of the article reveals that 56% of the 278 who bothered to respond to the consultation were actually "in favour". I make that a total of 155 citizens. At the last count Marple had a population of circa 23,000. Now one could take that to mean that 0.006% of the population of Marple are "in favour" of the Chadwick Street development. Amazing what you can do with statistics isn't it? Probably no heads hanging in shame though. Shoddy journalism no doubt and shameful abuse of the English Language Mr Hogarth, "localism" really, words fail me.  ;)

No it says 99% of the population can't be bothered to express a view. Don't knock the messenger
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on November 08, 2012, 04:22:44 PM
Wheels is fond of a good rant, and he asks a lot of questions.....
are you really suggesting that the young people of Breadbury and Romiley are denied education because they have to get on a bus to get to Marple. Are you really saying that the education Marple teenages have is better than that of Breadbury teenages, in the same class, because they don't have to get a bus.
and
I am yet to hear an argument other than economic for retaining the collage at all certainly no education reasons have been put forward.
not forgetting:
And you never explain to me why the college has to stay in Marple.

...but he doesn't actually want to hear the answers - when you offer to explain it to him, the answer is simply:
No

This is not all that unusual on forums - you often get the odd poster who uses the forum as a ranting platform, but doesn't actually want to engage directly in discussion.  It's normally best to ignore them.  


There is no ranting Dave calm down I just ask why a bus journey reduces the quality of education.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Berni inn on November 08, 2012, 07:04:37 PM
The students should get cycles and get fit at the same time.
Too many pies at that college.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on November 08, 2012, 07:47:16 PM
The students should get cycles and get fit at the same time.
Too many pies at that college.

Sound response BlueZerro
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: tricky on November 19, 2012, 05:45:27 PM
I was talking earlier today to someone who lives on Church Street, overlooking the proposed site.

They absolutely do not want a supermarket on Chadwick Street and nor do her neighbours apparently.



Marple In Action? pffft.. only if Miss Marple has relatives opposite.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on November 19, 2012, 06:10:27 PM
Of course not - no surprise there.  And let's be honest, we are all nimbies.  But we all use supermarkets too, and as long as they are in someones else's backyard then that's OK......
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Mrs O on November 19, 2012, 07:53:46 PM
I was talking earlier today to someone who lives on Church Street, overlooking the proposed site.

They absolutely do not want a supermarket on Chadwick Street and nor do her neighbours apparently.



Marple In Action? pffft.. only if Miss Marple has relatives opposite.
I am not surprised they don't want one, I wouldn't. It will also create increased traffic through Marple as would Asda on Hibbert Lane.
I know MM wouldn't want one either. Why don't the residents start a protest group? Marple in Action can't fight against evey planning application. It is very,very time consuming. There are lots of No to Asda posters around that site, nothing about Chadwick Street development.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on November 19, 2012, 08:16:03 PM
I was talking earlier today to someone who lives on Church Street, overlooking the proposed site.

They absolutely do not want a supermarket on Chadwick Street and nor do her neighbours apparently.



Marple In Action? pffft.. only if Miss Marple has relatives opposite.
I am not surprised they don't want one, I wouldn't. It will also create increased traffic through Marple as would Asda on Hibbert Lane.
I know MM wouldn't want one either. Why don't the residents start a protest group? Marple in Action can't fight against evey planning application. It is very,very time consuming. There are lots of No to Asda posters around that site, nothing about Chadwick Street development.

Go on then .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Mrs O on November 20, 2012, 12:00:08 AM
I was talking earlier today to someone who lives on Church Street, overlooking the proposed site.

They absolutely do not want a supermarket on Chadwick Street and nor do her neighbours apparently.



Marple In Action? pffft.. only if Miss Marple has relatives opposite.
I am not surprised they don't want one, I wouldn't. It will also create increased traffic through Marple as would Asda on Hibbert Lane.
I know MM wouldn't want one either. Why don't the residents start a protest group? Marple in Action can't fight against evey planning application. It is very,very time consuming. There are lots of No to Asda posters around that site, nothing about Chadwick Street development.

Go on then .
Did you read my post ? I said it is very time consuming and MIA can't fight every planning application! >:(
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on November 20, 2012, 11:17:10 AM
I was talking earlier today to someone who lives on Church Street, overlooking the proposed site.

They absolutely do not want a supermarket on Chadwick Street and nor do her neighbours apparently.



Marple In Action? pffft.. only if Miss Marple has relatives opposite.
I am not surprised they don't want one, I wouldn't. It will also create increased traffic through Marple as would Asda on Hibbert Lane.
I know MM wouldn't want one either. Why don't the residents start a protest group? Marple in Action can't fight against evey planning application. It is very,very time consuming. There are lots of No to Asda posters around that site, nothing about Chadwick Street development.

Go on then .
Did you read my post ? I said it is very time consuming and MIA can't fight every planning application! >:(
 
Sorry but marple needs an alternative supermarket to the rip of coop .as its been said most people go out of marple to do there supermarket shopping .so how do you get people to shop in marple . With the shops we have .they may be a few left of the no to Asda brigade but if Asda do come I bet they use it as they will Chadwick street .



Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Cyberman on November 21, 2012, 08:15:35 AM
Sorry but marple needs an alternative supermarket to the rip of coop .as its been said most people go out of marple to do there supermarket shopping .so how do you get people to shop in marple . With the shops we have .they may be a few left of the no to Asda brigade but if Asda do come I bet they use it as they will Chadwick street .

I wish folks would stop referring to Co-op prices as "rip-off". I don't think they are much higher than Tesco, Asda etc. These guys are very good at enticing you in with special deals, but their basic stuff can be similar to Co-op prices. Aldi and Lidl are a dirrerent matter - they are cheap. If Co-op prices are higher it's because a) they don't shaft their suppliers as the likes of Tesco and Asda do, and b) they probably employ their staff on a reasonable wage, not on minimum-wage zero-hour contracts. Granted to some customers price is everything, and for them a competitor in Marple would be useful. I am happy with Co-op prices, although I wish they could be more switched-on with their customer service!
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on November 21, 2012, 09:03:45 PM
]Sorry but marple needs an alternative supermarket to the rip of coop .as its been said most people go out of marple to do there supermarket shopping .so how do you get people to shop in marple . With the shops we have .they may be a few left of the no to Asda brigade but if Asda do come I bet they use it as they will Chadwick street .

Very true.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on November 21, 2012, 09:15:17 PM

I wish folks would stop referring to Co-op prices as "rip-off". I don't think they are much higher than Tesco, Asda etc. These guys are very good at enticing you in with special deals, but their basic stuff can be similar to Co-op prices. Aldi and Lidl are a dirrerent matter - they are cheap. If Co-op prices are higher it's because a) they don't shaft their suppliers as the likes of Tesco and Asda do, and b) they probably employ their staff on a reasonable wage, not on minimum-wage zero-hour contracts. Granted to some customers price is everything, and for them a competitor in Marple would be useful. I am happy with Co-op prices, although I wish they could be more switched-on with their customer service!

I think as you say it is a relative to income thing. For the low income though, i think the Co-op is extremely expensive and often badly stocked. It's fine for a few bits; but a full weeks shopping is much more than Aldi/Asda. I also think the appeal of Asda is being able to get things like cheap kettles and school uniform. That is not easy to get in Marple at all. I am often having to go to Stockport for these types of things when it would be good to get them in Marple (you were able to in the past). As people have said on here, once you are in Stockport for something you often then use other shops taking potential trade away from Marple. I am in favour of Asda now (was on the fence at first) and I use local shops very often and will continue to do so. I do weekly shop online-not with Asda but would switch to a local Asda.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on November 22, 2012, 10:03:17 AM
once you are in Stockport for something you often then use other shops taking potential trade away from Marple.

Exactly.  And if we had a proper supermarket in Marple, you could then reverse Stockport and Marple in that sentence, to make it read 'once you are in Marple for something you often then use other shops taking potential trade away from Stockport.'

As for the issue about Coop prices, I do most of our food shopping at Morrison's or the Coop, and occasionally use Tesco.  I am in no doubt that overall prices are significantly lower at Morrison's.  As for Tesco, you have to navigate such a thicket of special offers (especially 3 for 2 deals), that it's very hard to compare.  But here are some 'official' figures from Which magazine, which don't include the Coop or Morrison's, strangely, but do indicate that Asda is a bit cheaper than Tesco.  http://www.which.co.uk/money/bills-and-budgeting/reviews-ns/grocery-prices-what-you-need-to-know/grocery-prices-supermarkets-compared/
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on November 25, 2012, 11:56:21 AM
I think many people are finding MIA a bit (or massively) hypocritical. At first they were saying a big supermarket would kill local shops etc., and then they focused on the 'out of town' side of it saying that it wasn't the actual supermarket but the location. Of course this now leaves them unable to say they are against any supermarket since they were so focused on the 'out of town' aspect.

BUT as many local traders have said (on facebook etc) local shops will still be affected as well as residents of Chadwick street. But nobody seems to really care. In addition many still associate MIA with the scaremongering stories and outspoken members (or ex members?). It has been said by at least one MIA person that they don't care about the college. 'Kids can get the bus' etc. Also that low income people could easily afford the co-op etc. Also there are rumours that many want a Waitrose but not a 'down market' Asda. That is partly what made me go from on the fence to YES to Asda/College.

Either way (with Chadwick or Hibbert) we are going to get more traffic (although this is a matter for debate). So I think on balance there is nothing wrong with supporting the Asda and college plans. Asda have taken local views on board by not having a cafe etc. in their plans due to the local traders/provision. In addition it is the only plan that can give the college what it needs for the future and rebuild. I have college age children and suspect that many against the plans do not. Losing the college would be dreadful for Marple. Students often fill the town centre at lunch times. Asda would provide those on a low income with cheaper alternatives to the Coop and cheaper clothing, possibly also small electrical items. These would save trips to Stockport and keep people in Marple. Waitrose/other retailer would not do any of these things. In addition surely MIA would be against lots of new houses being built on Hibbert lane. I suspect more so if these are council housing. Some of the snobby remarks about council housing/tenants by MIA supporters  can still be seen on the facebook groups (YES and NO groups).

 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on November 25, 2012, 12:55:46 PM
Losing the college would be dreadful for Marple.

Absolutely - well said!  There's one frequent poster who has repeatedly argued that it wouldn't matter at all if the college closed and our youngsters had to get on buses and take their A levels elsewhere, but it would, and not just because it would be catastrophic for Greggs and the cafes and the Derby Way chippy! 

Marple is a town with a population of 23,000 - more than Buxton, for example.  So as you would expect for a place of its size, it has several primary schools, a big comprehensive school, a sixth form college, a cinema, a police station, a library, two petrol stations, many pubs, several doctors and dentists' surgeries, a wide range of shops and cafes, and a couple of supermarkets.

These are the very fabric of a local community, and are part of what makes this a good place to live.  You could argue that none of them are essential - why should our younger children not be bussed out of the town to other primary schools?  Why should we not allow even more pubs to close - we can all get the bus and do our boozing in Romiley, can't we?  Why do we need a library here - we can catch a bus to Stockport, can't we?   And so on, and on. 

If the college closed it would be a sad day, and a depressing step down the road towards Marple becoming some kind of dead-during-the-daytime dormitory town.   :'(

Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on November 25, 2012, 11:38:42 PM
But Dave you still do not address the educational benefits of locating the college in Marple only the econmonic benefits.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on November 26, 2012, 07:47:28 AM
I have never suggested that there are specifically educational benefits from retaining the college in Marple. The benefits are social, as I have explained above.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on November 26, 2012, 10:01:51 AM
If the college closed it would be a sad day, and a depressing step down the road towards Marple becoming some kind of dead-during-the-daytime dormitory town.   :'(

I agree. We have for a long time had a 6th form in Marple. With compulsory schooling now changing to 18 we need continuity of provision in Marple. Why would losing this provision be anything other than disaster? I guess many of these posters do not have college age kids? As you say, Dave, they are the lifeblood of the shops in Marple. I disagree with the poster that said they do not really affect the business at Gregs etc. There are always queues of students at Gregs and other shops at lunch time.

Back to the supermarket issue, if I were Asda I would be looking at ways to promote the Asda and not just the college. There must be a way that they could promote the local town through the proposed Asda. Some stores have signposted routes to the town for example. Or they could give out leaflets about local shops or have a scheme where you are rewarded for using local shops after your Asda shop. Maybe join up with a local cafe for discounts etc.

I still don't get how Chadwick street store would work. Where would people park if not shopping in the new store? Surely people would park down Lyme Grove etc?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Mrs O on November 26, 2012, 12:49:21 PM
Quote from JMC. Some of the snobby remarks about council housing/tenants by MIA supporters  can still be seen on the facebook groups (YES and NO groups). I cannot find them. Where are they?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on November 26, 2012, 01:05:30 PM
Quote from JMC. Some of the snobby remarks about council housing/tenants by MIA supporters  can still be seen on the facebook groups (YES and NO groups). I cannot find them. Where are they?

On the YES group on one of the photos of the YES logo, there are comments from somebody who tells someone she must be one of those who lives in sh**y housing (in other words council) and that a supermarket job would be ideal for her due to where she lived. Fair enough not all MIA supporters may have this attitude but there were posts on this website that people who didn't own their house (ie council tenants) didn't have the right to a say as they didn't have the issue of their houses being devalued. This doesn't help the fairly widespread view that MIA would be happy with a 'higher quality' supermarket eg Waitrose.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on November 26, 2012, 03:50:03 PM
Quote from JMC. Some of the snobby remarks about council housing/tenants by MIA supporters  can still be seen on the facebook groups (YES and NO groups). I cannot find them. Where are they?

On the YES group on one of the photos of the YES logo, there are comments from somebody who tells someone she must be one of those who lives in sh**y housing (in other words council) and that a supermarket job would be ideal for her due to where she lived. Fair enough not all MIA supporters may have this attitude but there were posts on this website that people who didn't own their house (ie council tenants) didn't have the right to a say as they didn't have the issue of their houses being devalued. This doesn't help the fairly widespread view that MIA would be happy with a 'higher quality' supermarket eg Waitrose.

I don't think MIA no what they do want they don't want supermarkets in marple but quite happy with a Waitrose . 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on November 26, 2012, 04:05:58 PM
I don't think MIA no what they do want they don't want supermarkets in marple but quite happy with a Waitrose . 

Agreed. Also don't understand how they can be all for, or not objecting to, the Chadwick street site? Yes it is in the main town centre (although the town centre could be classed as going down to Mcphee's newsagents or further depending on how you define the centre). What about the residents there? Local shops etc?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: the rover on November 26, 2012, 05:00:09 PM
I don't think MIA no what they do want they don't want supermarkets in marple but quite happy with a Waitrose . 

Agreed. Also don't understand how they can be all for, or not objecting to, the Chadwick street site? Yes it is in the main town centre (although the town centre could be classed as going down to Mcphee's newsagents or further depending on how you define the centre). What about the residents there? Local shops etc?

I live down near to Mcphee's and I do not consider where I live as being part of the town centre. to me the town centre is the Market Street area. By the way the college is closer to Market Street than where I live.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Cyberman on November 26, 2012, 09:41:57 PM
Agreed. Also don't understand how they can be all for, or not objecting to, the Chadwick street site? Yes it is in the main town centre (although the town centre could be classed as going down to Mcphee's newsagents or further depending on how you define the centre). What about the residents there? Local shops etc?
Well it seems obvious to me - People visiting the Hibbert Lane site by car (as most probably will) are unlikely to make the 10 min walk to the centre of Marple to visit other shops - they will get everything at Asda. Those visiting the Chadwick St site can easily make linked trips to other shops and some may prefer to use e.g a butcher  or deli in the center. Simples.

MIA have always said they are AGAINST A SUPERMARKET ON HIBBERT LANE.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: tricky on November 26, 2012, 09:53:52 PM
the 10 min walk to the centre of Marple

 :D 10 minutes? really? to walk 150yds..

 :-\
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Belly on November 26, 2012, 10:32:34 PM
Agreed. Also don't understand how they can be all for, or not objecting to, the Chadwick street site? Yes it is in the main town centre (although the town centre could be classed as going down to Mcphee's newsagents or further depending on how you define the centre). What about the residents there? Local shops etc?
Well it seems obvious to me - People visiting the Hibbert Lane site by car (as most probably will) are unlikely to make the 10 min walk to the centre of Marple to visit other shops - they will get everything at Asda. Those visiting the Chadwick St site can easily make linked trips to other shops and some may prefer to use e.g a butcher  or deli in the center. Simples.

MIA have always said they are AGAINST A SUPERMARKET ON HIBBERT LANE.

But MIA are also against traffic, noise, deliveries, size of store, impact on local residents, etc associated with a supermarket all of which apply to the Chadwick Street,or doesn't that matter? If MIA had only campaigned on protecting local business then thats fine, but when they threw the kitchen sink at the ASDA scheme in terms of reasons to object, it seems a little disingenuous not to raise the same issues about the Chadwick Street site now and demand the same answers. They are the "voice of the people" are they not?

I seem to recall that someone suggested that MIA didn't have time / resources / energy to fight another supermarket battle. That will no doubt please those local residents to the Chadwick Street with their 'No to a supermarket at Hibbert Lane signs in the window".....

Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on November 26, 2012, 10:53:25 PM
I have never suggested that there are specifically educational benefits from retaining the college in Marple. The benefits are social, as I have explained above.

Somethingelse to agree on. Oh dear.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Cyberman on November 27, 2012, 12:57:44 AM
the 10 min walk to the centre of Marple

 :D 10 minutes? really? to walk 150yds..

 :-\

Looking at Google Maps, i'd say its 550m from the centre of the college car park to the Market St / Stockport Road junction. I think 150yds is from the edge of the Asda development to the edge of Marple shopping area. Wikipedia gives a typical human walking speed of 1.23m/s, so that gives 7.5 minutes. If the traffic is very busy on Church Lane, as it will be after Asda is built, it might take 2.5 minutes to cross....

Regarding traffic, yes either site would be bad news although the Chadwick St site will be acessed via Trinity St which ready has significant commercial traffic (Boots, Iceland, Post Office).
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Belly on November 27, 2012, 07:48:30 AM
the 10 min walk to the centre of Marple

 :D 10 minutes? really? to walk 150yds..

 :-\

 If the traffic is very busy on Church Lane, as it will be after Asda is built, it might take 2.5 minutes to cross....


Really? Come on........
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on November 27, 2012, 08:17:45 AM
Maybe I'm just being simplistic, but I've always assumed that MIA was driven primarily by people living close to the Hibbert Lane site, and that this was why they were not bothered about other possible sites. Maybe people living close to the Chadwick St site need to start their own protest group. They might call it, er, AIM (Action In Marple :-).

Basically it's mainly nimbyism - and btw that is not a criticism: we are all nimbies, and none of us would want to live next to a supermarket.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Berni inn on November 27, 2012, 09:26:08 AM
Yes Dave you were very simplistic and wrong about your original assumptions.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on November 27, 2012, 09:37:15 AM
Basically it's mainly nimbyism - and btw that is not a criticism: we are all nimbies, and none of us would want to live next to a supermarket.

Good point. Also people concerned about their small businesses. Again, perfectly understandable of them. But they do seem a bit hypocritical if they don't mind the same sized supermarket just a bit further up the road. As somebody earlier said many of MIA's arguments were about effects on local shops, traffic etc. All these apply at Chadwick street just as much as Hibbert Lane.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on November 27, 2012, 09:42:39 AM
Well it seems obvious to me - People visiting the Hibbert Lane site by car (as most probably will) are unlikely to make the 10 min walk to the centre of Marple to visit other shops - they will get everything at Asda. Those visiting the Chadwick St site can easily make linked trips to other shops and some may prefer to use e.g a butcher  or deli in the center. Simples.

I could do that in a couple of minutes, i don't think it is 10 mins away. I also think that many people at Chadwick would simply shop there and drive away as much as they would do round the corner at Hibbert. But if the people who live in Marple, who usually go out of Marple, stay to the new store they may use other shops more than previously. Eg. if they go to Stockport Tesco now and pop to the health food shop and card shop while they are there, they may now (if staying in Marple) use the Marple health food shop and the card shop here to save going all the way to Stockport. Same with people from New Mills etc. Also there could be a scheme devised with one of the supermarkets encouraging the use of local shops. Maybe a discount at coffee shops, reward scheme etc.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on November 27, 2012, 09:46:44 AM
But MIA are also against traffic, noise, deliveries, size of store, impact on local residents, etc associated with a supermarket all of which apply to the Chadwick Street,or doesn't that matter? If MIA had only campaigned on protecting local business then thats fine, but when they threw the kitchen sink at the ASDA scheme in terms of reasons to object, it seems a little disingenuous not to raise the same issues about the Chadwick Street site now and demand the same answers. They are the "voice of the people" are they not?

I seem to recall that someone suggested that MIA didn't have time / resources / energy to fight another supermarket battle. That will no doubt please those local residents to the Chadwick Street with their 'No to a supermarket at Hibbert Lane signs in the window".....

Agreed.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on November 27, 2012, 09:48:49 AM
the 10 min walk to the centre of Marple

 :D 10 minutes? really? to walk 150yds..

 :-\

Looking at Google Maps, i'd say its 550m from the centre of the college car park to the Market St / Stockport Road junction. I think 150yds is from the edge of the Asda development to the edge of Marple shopping area. Wikipedia gives a typical human walking speed of 1.23m/s, so that gives 7.5 minutes. If the traffic is very busy on Church Lane, as it will be after Asda is built, it might take 2.5 minutes to cross....

Regarding traffic, yes either site would be bad news although the Chadwick St site will be acessed via Trinity St which ready has significant commercial traffic (Boots, Iceland, Post Office).

Didn't Asda say they are making access all along the side of Hibbert lane? And possibly pedestrain through Lyme grove or other road? (I am not 100% of the facts so will check later) So from there would be a lot quicker than middle of the car park.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Victor M on November 27, 2012, 10:49:12 AM
Quote
Didn't Asda say they are making access all along the side of Hibbert lane? And possibly pedestrain through Lyme grove or other road? (I am not 100% of the facts so will check later) So from there would be a lot quicker than middle of the car park.

We will have to wait until the plans are made public which probably won't be until around Dec 15th making it very difficult for people to look at them and put in any objections/comments with the run up to Christmas. But I think that is probably what ASDA want!
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Cyberman on November 27, 2012, 11:13:46 AM
Didn't Asda say they are making access all along the side of Hibbert lane? And possibly pedestrain through Lyme grove or other road? (I am not 100% of the facts so will check later) So from there would be a lot quicker than middle of the car park.

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.

My comment about taking 2.5mins to cross Church Lane was meant to be a joke. Will add a smiley next time.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Maria on November 27, 2012, 01:43:56 PM
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!
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on November 27, 2012, 06:16:05 PM
Maria writes that 'the college have already confirmed they have other options if ASDA is refused'.

Have they? What is it? 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Maria on November 27, 2012, 07:37:31 PM
Ms Cassidy did not divulge her plans to me, save to say the college could look to refurbish without selling to ASDA.  For them it was just the easiest option initially.  The architect also confirmed refurbishment could take place without the sale to ASDA. 

The fact is our college can stay if Ms Cassidy chooses and we can all still have another supermarket in Marple.  ASDA want us to believe the college will fail without them building on Hibbert lane but it is simply not true.  The only way Marple will end up without a college is if CAMSFC choose to leave Marple. 

Dave, I suspect you may not believe what I have to say re Ms Cassidy's comments to me regardless but there you have it.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on November 27, 2012, 07:45:37 PM
Maria, of course I believe you. But if, as we have been told, the site is worth 12 million for a supermarket and only 4 million for housing, then how do the college's sums add up??
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Maria on November 27, 2012, 07:56:40 PM
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. 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on November 27, 2012, 08:41:50 PM


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?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on November 27, 2012, 09:01:30 PM
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 .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Maria on November 27, 2012, 09:37:55 PM
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.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on November 27, 2012, 09:57:21 PM
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.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Belly on November 27, 2012, 10:29:15 PM
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.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on November 27, 2012, 10:54:19 PM
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.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: tricky on November 27, 2012, 11:15:41 PM


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..
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on November 28, 2012, 09:31:11 AM
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.   
 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on November 28, 2012, 09:52:07 AM
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.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Victor M on November 28, 2012, 10:21:09 AM
Quote
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.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on November 28, 2012, 10:29:30 AM
Quote
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.

Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on November 28, 2012, 11:30:35 AM
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.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Belly on November 28, 2012, 01:59:43 PM
Quote
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 (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.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on November 29, 2012, 08:15:21 AM
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.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on November 29, 2012, 08:27:28 AM
Asda price - nice one :-) However, I can assure Simone that the college will not have let Asda get in any way involved in the design and costing of their own construction project.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Chris78 on November 30, 2012, 09:22:26 AM
Planning application fees went up by 15% on 22/11/12 which is may be why it was seen as the "wrong fee".
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: hollins on December 10, 2012, 03:50:04 PM
According to the Marple Area Committee's web page (on 10/12/2012):

Update 10 December 2012

Chadwick Street Car Park site -   A planning application for the Demolition of existing structure and erection of Class A1 foodstore and flexible use unit with associated public realm and highway works, vehicular access, car parking, servicing area and hard and soft landscaping on land bounded by Trinity Street/Chadwick Street, Marple has been received by the Council and is now valid.  The proposal is being sent out for consultation and is available for viewing at Marple Library and on the Councils website
http://www.stockport.gov.uk/services/environment/planningbuilding/planning



I can't yet find it on the planning portal. Seems a bit premature.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: tricky on December 10, 2012, 04:53:47 PM


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..

Not Queen street.. I meant Church Street.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on December 11, 2012, 03:33:51 PM


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..

That is a good point. Surely also there would be people parking on Lyme grove and Mount Drive.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: mikes on December 12, 2012, 10:04:38 AM
According to the Marple Area Committee's web page (on 10/12/2012):

...


I can't yet find it on the planning portal. Seems a bit premature.

It's there now
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Berni inn on December 12, 2012, 09:24:47 PM
Weighing up the pros and cons of the Chadwick Street development against Hibbert Lane, I am now of the opinion that Marple would be better off with Asda at Hibbert Lane.

The traffic chaos around Chadwick Street could actually put people off coming into marple, which would help shut some of the existing businesses.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Franz on December 14, 2012, 06:41:36 AM
You are absolutely right, Bluezorro. Our local councillors and MP went to the trouble of producing a "News Extra" and distributing it throughout the town to promote their view that the ASDA/camsfc proposal would lead not to just increased traffic or traffic jams but to GRIDLOCK!, ie paralysis.

They have choices, either they can issue an identical statement in respect of the Kirkland proposal and throw it out, they can issue a staement explaining why the Kirkland proposal will not lead to the same, or worse, traffic problems, or they can do nothing and stand accused of cynical hypocrisy which is probably what they will settle for.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on December 14, 2012, 08:42:43 AM
The location of the supermarket in Hibbert Lane contravenes Council planning policy. If my recall is accurate,this was also stated by the MP in the 'Gridlock' leaflet that you refer to. In addition to which I believe that comment was made by only one Councillor (SA) and she will simply say that the Marple Supermarket issue has changed out of all recognition, since she made that comment - which of course it has. 

SMBC planning policy allows for the siting of a retail development in town centre. Trinity Street qualifies as being in the town centre ASDA DOES NOT. Our Local Councillors are SMBC Councillors. So naturally we would expect them to support Council policy - wouldn't we? Surely we elected them to represent us to the Council and the Council to us. So where is the argument? If there has to be supermarket in Marple and it seems that there has to be then surely the Council (this includes our Councillors as they are on it) will support its own policy. To suggest that there is some way that they will do something else is surely a futile argument.

Whilst this continues to be a two horse race between ASDA and Kirkland then the actual decision will come outside the Council and it will depend on whether ASDA choose to appeal and whether Kirkland can successfully relocate the sorting office and resolve the not unimportant issue of finding a client, neither of which they have yet managed to do. Both ASDA and Kirkland have a strong influence on each other.

The issue is nothing to do with traffic. There will be increased whatsoever the choice. Traffic will probably be worse at Trinity Street than at Hibbert Lane as all the Supermarket traffic from the High Lane/A6 will stop at Hibbert Lane and not come into Marple whereas the Trinity Street scheme will bring all the traffic into Marple Centre. Plus the ASDA car park has more spaces than Kirkland's and is therefore less likely to overflow.  However, traffic implications will not stop these schemes nor will local Councillors nor will SMBC. These schemes will only be stopped by each other. Only ASDA can stop Kirkland and only Kirkland can stop ASDA.

Currently, they are waiting for each others' next move but these moves will come be after the local planning decisions have been made, early next year. Whosoever leves town first is the loser. Arguments about traffic, although traffic it is a real issue, are just red herrings and will not stop either of these schemes.             
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on December 14, 2012, 09:11:46 AM
Good post Simone in particular emphasising that the ASDA development is not in the town centre whilst Kirkland is and Council policy allows development within the town centre why therefore would anyone elected our local authority reps to opposes their own policy. I still expect the Marple 6 to bottle it at area committe and send the Kirkland application to the Planning Committee thereby  removing the decision from their hands.

Your MP of course is totally irrelevant in this matter he has no say and is not part of the decision making process.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on December 14, 2012, 09:29:11 AM
I too go along with Simone's summary, but I don't quite follow this bit: 
Only ASDA can stop Kirkland and only Kirkland can stop ASDA.

It's obvious that the Kirkland development could scupper the Asda/camsfc scheme, simply because the latter, on its 'edge of centre' site, will presumably only get planning consent if it can be shown that Marple needs a proper supermarket and that there is no prospect of providing one within the centre.   As long as the Trinity Street/Chadwick street scheme remains a possibility, that will clearly not be the case, so the camsfc/Asda application looks likely to be refused.

However, I can't see how Asda could stop Kirkland.  How would that work, Simone? 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on December 14, 2012, 10:55:41 AM
Wheels,

After some prevarication it has now been decided that both applications will be going to H & P. Therefore local Councillors will not need to "bottle it" or otherwise. The decision has been taken away from them. It's probably something that has been orchestrated by Marple 6 so that they can say whatever they like and still keep face. The way things have changed throughout, it could revert back who knows? Maybe you, Dave and I will ultimately be asked to make the decision in the Navigation bar.     

     
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on December 14, 2012, 11:02:36 AM
'Planning guidelines require that sites in town centres are given priority, with sites on the edge of centres (which is defined as being within 300m) being the next choice. If there was a site in the town centre that could accommodate the store then Asda would use it. The only possibility in the town centre – the car park at Chadwick Street – is simply too small, and can’t be used by Asda. So, using a site within 300m of the centre is wholly in accordance with the guidelines and planning policy.'
(http://www.marplecollegeandasda.co.uk/#/)

Asda claim that the site meets planing policy because there is no suitable site in the centre. As it is within 300m it is classed as edge of centre and not out of town. So I don't see how they can just refuse it simply as it isn't within the actual centre. Marple town actually spreads quite a long way than just Market Street part. Chadwick Street isn't an alternative for Asda because it isn't big enough, not enough spaces etc. Hibbert Lane is perfect for Asda. I am pretty certain Asda will appeal it if it is turned down. What worries me is that we could end up with more Co-ops if they go for the Kirkland site to stop competition.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on December 14, 2012, 11:57:09 AM
Wheels,

After some prevarication it has now been decided that both applications will be going to H & P. Therefore local Councillors will not need to "bottle it" or otherwise. The decision has been taken away from them. It's probably something that has been orchestrated by Marple 6 so that they can say whatever they like and still keep face. The way things have changed throughout, it could revert back who knows? Maybe you, Dave and I will ultimately be asked to make the decision in the Navigation bar.  
If orchestrated by the 6 it's much the same as bottling it, avoiding having to make a decision. Keeping clean hands so thay can face both ways.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on December 14, 2012, 12:39:56 PM
If there was a site in the town centre that could accommodate the store then Asda would use it. The only possibility in the town centre – the car park at Chadwick Street – is simply too small, and can’t be used by Asda...... Chadwick Street isn't an alternative for Asda because it isn't big enough, not enough spaces etc.

Just because Asda regard Chadwick Street as too small, it doesn't necessarily mean that the planners will take the same view.   Both schemes provide an identical 25,000 sq.ft sales area.  So as long as Kirkland maintain that they can find a tenant who wants to run the same size supermarket on their town centre site, then the danger is that SMBC will regard that as a good enough reason to turn down an edge-of-centre application, even though there may not be sufficient car parking spaces at Chadwick Street. 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on December 14, 2012, 01:49:11 PM
If things remain as they are I'll be shocked if SMBC (whomsoever within its ranks is deemed to make the decision) do anything other than approve Trinity Street and refuse ASDA, but will it end there ?

There are lots of nuances in relation to both schemes and you could make a case for/against both of them.

There is though one thing that has never been in doubt about ASDA but conversely is wholly in doubt about Kirkland and that is that ASDA's  scheme is deliverable. At the time of writing the same cannot be said about Kirkland. It is becoming repetitive but there is still no sign of the sorting office re-locating and this is a significant problem. It is almost a year now and still there is no solution. The issue regarding the size of the Kirkland car park is a traffic issue but is it also a viability issue for any prospective client. Not enough parking...not enough cars...not enough customers ?

Where and who is Kirkland's client ? Who has even declared an interest let alone signed up. Kirkland will say that nobody will declare an interest until ASDA disappear completely from the scene. Then they will have their pick of clients. ASDA will say that Kirkland will not be able to get a client because the car park is too small therefore the store is not viable. They will say that Kirkland haven't got a client because there is not one to be had, and that their scheme cannot be delivered. as promised. Is Kirkland right - is ASDA right ? 

The country is littered with granted planning applications that got no further than that, a granted planning application and a delivered scheme are two different things.

The Council now will not want to be stuck with no supermarket and if they can't have Kirkland's scheme they might just go for ASDA at least that gives them a new College and keeps the students in town which is something that we all want - well I would hope so anyway.   

     
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on December 14, 2012, 01:54:46 PM
 
[/quote]
If orchestrated by the 6 it's much the same as bottling it, avoiding having to make a decision. Keeping clean hands so thay can face both ways.
[/quote]

Wheels, That's a very good definition of politics and that's what politicians do.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on December 14, 2012, 01:58:27 PM
The Council now will not want to be stuck with no supermarket and if they can't have Kirkland's scheme they might just go for ASDA at least that gives them a new College and keeps the students in town which is something that we all want - well I would hope so anyway.   

I hope you're right Simone, but I don't entirely share your confidence that the council 'will not want to be stuck with no supermarket'.  How do we know?  In the early days of the Hibbert Lane scheme, the councillors all seemed to come out against it, and at that time, before Chadwick Street came along, that would have meant no supermarket at all, and they didn't seem too bothered about that! 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on December 14, 2012, 02:19:23 PM
That was before the  ASDA.CAMSFC enabling application, before certain schools applied for 6th form status, before Kirkland.

Things have shifted but we have to bear in mind things are shifting all the time and if Kirkland do come up with a client and resolve the sorting office problem then they'll shift again.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on December 14, 2012, 02:28:05 PM
Simone is correct here the Planning Committee will follow guidelines and Refuse ASDA and Accept Kirkland. That is what has made the MiA activities so misleading in that that was always going to be the outcome instead they go around frightening people and pretending they can have some effect. Enough of that.

I expect ASDA will then appeal and Kirkland will continue to look for a developer to work with, the Kirkland approval will of course be useful evidence for the Council is fighting any appeal.

What you cannot say is ASDA has to be approved at all cost because that helps the college, that is not an appropriate consideration when addressing the planning application which needs to be decided on planning issues alone.

I personally remain firmly in the "Not bothered either way" group.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on December 14, 2012, 02:31:04 PM
That was before the  ASDA.CAMSFC enabling application, before certain schools applied for 6th form status, before Kirkland.

Things have shifted but we have to bear in mind things are shifting all the time and if Kirkland do come up with a client and resolve the sorting office problem then they'll shift again.

I would not expect the sorting office to be addressed until Kirkland have a partner and in any event does it really matter where it is. If I have to cycle to Romiley, Offerton or Stockport to pick up a parcel is that really any bother. The sorting office is a red herring.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on December 14, 2012, 03:36:03 PM
The sorting office is not a red-herring it is a major obstacle to the Kirkland scheme and if they cannot be re-located to a place that they are happy with then the Trinity Street Development is in great jeopardy of loss. It might not matter to you Wheels where they are re-located but it may matter to others and it certainly matters to Royal Mail. The sorting office will need to be addressed before Kirkland finds a partner and not after.

I am most certainly no defender of MIA or at least some of its members conduct, but it has to be remembered that when the news about the Hibbert Lane supermarket first came out there was no mention of Trinity Street so MIA did not have all the information. Although it has to be said that didn't stop some of them "speculating". Anyway they have died now so RIP.     
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on December 14, 2012, 03:59:10 PM
The sorting office will need to be addressed before Kirkland finds a partner and not after.

I don't see it that way at all.    If Kirkland don't find a partner, the whole deal will presumably collapse, the land will remain council property, and the sorting office won't need to be relocated after all.   So it's the other way round, surely: a supermarket will have to be signed up as a pre-requisite of the land disposal by SMBC to Kirkland going ahead.  Then, and only then, will it be necessary to find a new home for the sorting office.  But that should be no great problem: SMBC owns loads of land all over this area, and there will be plenty more people ready to sell plots at the right price.   Finding a suitable site for the sorting office should be no great problem. 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on December 14, 2012, 04:14:43 PM
Agreed Dave, the deal has to be signed first then you address the sorting office. The location of the sorting office is not of sufficient importance that it can or should be an impediment to the development.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on December 14, 2012, 04:39:53 PM
As far as the Council is concerned Trinity Street doesn't have to be a supermarket. There is a list of "other" things in line with the Council's Policy that it could be. The supermarket on Trinity Street is the scheme of local Councillors, the sole purpose being to prevent ASDA building on Hibbert Lane. Even if ASDA are successful and the Council develop Trinity Street as something else the sorting office will still have to be re-located and it has not yet been resolved. But we distract ourselves whilst the sorting office is very relevant it is not the subject.   

Even Kirkland developments are not compelled to develop it as a supermarket but they probably thought that it was as good a use as any and that they'd have local Councillor support which would eliminate ASDA. In fact many thought that ASDA would have seen the writing on the wall and left town by now even before the planning application was refused but of course they haven't. 

Now it seems that ASDA have got a second wind but the marple 6 will be in there somewhere behind town hall doors.

   
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on December 14, 2012, 06:30:53 PM
That all makes sense, Simone.  Someone (JMC?) has argued persuasively on this thread, or one of the other Chadwick St threads, that there is a significant problem with a shortage of parking on the Chadwick Street site, and that this may be enough to cause potential supermarket tenants to turn it down.  Even as it is, it looks like an expensive scheme, with its rooftop car park, and the cost may well turn out to be prohibitive.  If either or both of those scenarios emerges, it will leave our conspiratorial councillors without their anti-Hibbert lane plan, and hopefully give the Asda/college scheme a clear run, ensuring that the college is able to achieve its much-needed redevelopment at Buxton Lane. 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Franz on December 14, 2012, 07:52:53 PM
Simone, thank you for your critique of my post earlier today regarding “gridlock”. The “News Extra” was, I think, published by the Lib Dem Constituency Association. The reference to “Gridlock” was not attributed to anyone in particular and it presumably represents a widely held view within the Association. It was however merely put forward by me as an example of the hype, mind games and manipulation to which the people of Marple have been subjected over the past twelve months

In relation to the ASDA issue Mr Stunnell refers to ‘traffic’ as one of the ‘very powerful planning arguments against such a development’ and if that is what he thinks in relation to the ASDA proposals then it is difficult to see how he can think otherwise in relation to the Kirkland proposals.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on December 14, 2012, 08:08:45 PM
Simone, thank you for your critique of my post earlier today regarding “gridlock”. The “News Extra” was, I think, published by the Lib Dem Constituency Association. The reference to “Gridlock” was not attributed to anyone in particular and it presumably represents a widely held view within the Association. It was however merely put forward by me as an example of the hype, mind games and manipulation to which the people of Marple have been subjected over the past twelve months

In relation to the ASDA issue Mr Stunnell refers to ‘traffic’ as one of the ‘very powerful planning arguments against such a development’ and if that is what he thinks in relation to the ASDA proposals then it is difficult to see how he can think otherwise in relation to the Kirkland proposals.


Well first of all it matters no a jot what Stunell thinks as he has no more say on the application than you or I, less in fact as he lives in Romiley. The decision is not his to make so we can sideline him. THe fact is the Kirkland proposals meet the already agreed planning guideline and I would therefore expect members will approve the application.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on December 15, 2012, 08:56:54 AM
Alstan,

There is of course much validity in what you say and I certainly hope that my "critique" did not seem to suggest otherwise, but the Lib Dem Constituency Association would not itself even claim to speak for all Lib Dems on all issues. Naturally they will grab a headline as they did in your example but they will of course dissect it at a later date if it suits.

Given the current information, I personally cannot see how the traffic generated in the Trinity Street scheme is not going to be much worse for the people of Marple than the traffic generated by ASDA and unless our MP is a bit thick (and if he's reading this and even if he isn't, I DON'T THINK HE IS- thick, I mean, ) then he must see the same. Nevertheless, I think that his comments were made when the view was still held that it was the Hibbert Lane Supermarket or the status quo and naturally as you would expect an MP to do he was playing to the gallery at the time.

Wheels, Stunnell's view is not irrelevant. He may not have a seat on the various committees but he is the Lib Dem MP in Lib Dem ruled Marple, in Lib Dem ruled Stockport. He is decidedly not without influence. He will know what the blow- by- blow situation is with both these planning applications as they are happening, long before you and I will. He will know anybody worth knowing that plays any part in that decision both locally and probably nationally. Marple is the Lib Dem jewel in the crown for the party. The MP and Marple 6 are close to each other. Three of the Marple 6 are on THE Council Executive and one of them is vice - chair of planning. They are a party within a party and they influence happenings in Marple, not always openly, in fact often in a covert way but they do. When you say that they have no influence - with respect you are just ...wishfully thinking...

Ponder on this, if there had been no Marple 6 and no Andrew Stunnell, there would have been no Trinity Street/ Kirkland development and the C&MSFC/ASDA would now be well on its way to sailing through. This you cannot deny.

Here is something else to ponder upon. Does anybody know what would be the overall  implications of Kirkland reducing the size of its proposed store ( not the car park, just sales and backup) by say 25% ?                 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on December 15, 2012, 09:53:12 AM
Here is something else to ponder upon. Does anybody know what would be the overall  implications of Kirkland reducing the size of its proposed store ( not the car park, just sales and backup) by say 25% ?                 

Pure speculation (but hey, that's what we all deal in here!): if the sales area went down to, say, 17,000 sq.ft (similar to the Co-op, I think?), that could strengthen the camsfc/Asda case, because the Kirkland scheme would no longer be a full-size supermarket. 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on December 15, 2012, 10:50:56 AM
Here is something else to ponder upon. Does anybody know what would be the overall  implications of Kirkland reducing the size of its proposed store ( not the car park, just sales and backup) by say 25% ?                  

Pure speculation (but hey, that's what we all deal in here!): if the sales area went down to, say, 17,000 sq.ft (similar to the Co-op, I think?), that could strengthen the camsfc/Asda case, because the Kirkland scheme would no longer be a full-size supermarket.  


Dave, as you say "pure speculation". What is the definition of a  "full size supermarket"?

Conversely, could it strengthen the Trinity Street case. I.E. less sales area, less customers needed, less traffic caused, car park now adequate, scheme now more viable, particularly to retailers who build smaller supermarkets?

Will local Counccillors have overlooked this possibility as by all accounts they now seem hell - bent on defeating C&MSFC/ASDA at all costs?      
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on December 15, 2012, 11:40:49 AM

Will local Counccillors have overlooked this possibility as by all accounts they now seem hell - bent on defeating C&MSFC/ASDA at all costs?      

I personally don't understand why they are so against it.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on December 15, 2012, 12:58:26 PM

Will local Counccillors have overlooked this possibility as by all accounts they now seem hell - bent on defeating C&MSFC/ASDA at all costs?      

I personally don't understand why they are so against it.

Because some of them don't want to go back on there word .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on December 15, 2012, 04:47:49 PM
Alstan,

There is of course much validity in what you say and I certainly hope that my "critique" did not seem to suggest otherwise, but the Lib Dem Constituency Association would not itself even claim to speak for all Lib Dems on all issues. Naturally they will grab a headline as they did in your example but they will of course dissect it at a later date if it suits.

Given the current information, I personally cannot see how the traffic generated in the Trinity Street scheme is not going to be much worse for the people of Marple than the traffic generated by ASDA and unless our MP is a bit thick (and if he's reading this and even if he isn't, I DON'T THINK HE IS- thick, I mean, ) then he must see the same. Nevertheless, I think that his comments were made when the view was still held that it was the Hibbert Lane Supermarket or the status quo and naturally as you would expect an MP to do he was playing to the gallery at the time.

Wheels, Stunnell's view is not irrelevant. He may not have a seat on the various committees but he is the Lib Dem MP in Lib Dem ruled Marple, in Lib Dem ruled Stockport. He is decidedly not without influence. He will know what the blow- by- blow situation is with both these planning applications as they are happening, long before you and I will. He will know anybody worth knowing that plays any part in that decision both locally and probably nationally. Marple is the Lib Dem jewel in the crown for the party. The MP and Marple 6 are close to each other. Three of the Marple 6 are on THE Council Executive and one of them is vice - chair of planning. They are a party within a party and they influence happenings in Marple, not always openly, in fact often in a covert way but they do. When you say that they have no influence - with respect you are just ...wishfully thinking...

Ponder on this, if there had been no Marple 6 and no Andrew Stunnell, there would have been no Trinity Street/ Kirkland development and the C&MSFC/ASDA would now be well on its way to sailing through. This you cannot deny.

Here is something else to ponder upon. Does anybody know what would be the overall  implications of Kirkland reducing the size of its proposed store ( not the car park, just sales and backup) by say 25% ?                 

Lets revisit this after the Group AGM in May.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on December 15, 2012, 06:55:59 PM
To answer JMC's question ('I personally don't understand why they are so against it'), I've always assumed that they came out against the Hibbert Lane scheme when they were shouted at by a hysterical crowd in the Memorial Park in July last year, and they can't change their views for fear of losing face.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on December 15, 2012, 07:39:15 PM
To answer JMC's question ('I personally don't understand why they are so against it'), I've always assumed that they came out against the Hibbert Lane scheme when they were shouted at by a hysterical crowd in the Memorial Park in July last year, and they can't change their views for fear of losing face.

Already said that Dave .i still don't think there's that many against it .people that I've asked in marple
Most would like a supermarket at the ridge ,would save them having to go out of marple to supermarket shop
Mia says it would close the shops . If that's so why is there quite a number of shops already closed . Could it be large business rates . The coop is deadly for prices .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on December 16, 2012, 10:51:24 PM
Alstan,

There is of course much validity in what you say and I certainly hope that my "critique" did not seem to suggest otherwise, but the Lib Dem Constituency Association would not itself even claim to speak for all Lib Dems on all issues. Naturally they will grab a headline as they did in your example but they will of course dissect it at a later date if it suits.

Given the current information, I personally cannot see how the traffic generated in the Trinity Street scheme is not going to be much worse for the people of Marple than the traffic generated by ASDA and unless our MP is a bit thick (and if he's reading this and even if he isn't, I DON'T THINK HE IS- thick, I mean, ) then he must see the same. Nevertheless, I think that his comments were made when the view was still held that it was the Hibbert Lane Supermarket or the status quo and naturally as you would expect an MP to do he was playing to the gallery at the time.

Wheels, Stunnell's view is not irrelevant. He may not have a seat on the various committees but he is the Lib Dem MP in Lib Dem ruled Marple, in Lib Dem ruled Stockport. He is decidedly not without influence. He will know what the blow- by- blow situation is with both these planning applications as they are happening, long before you and I will. He will know anybody worth knowing that plays any part in that decision both locally and probably nationally. Marple is the Lib Dem jewel in the crown for the party. The MP and Marple 6 are close to each other. Three of the Marple 6 are on THE Council Executive and one of them is vice - chair of planning. They are a party within a party and they influence happenings in Marple, not always openly, in fact often in a covert way but they do. When you say that they have no influence - with respect you are just ...wishfully thinking...

Ponder on this, if there had been no Marple 6 and no Andrew Stunnell, there would have been no Trinity Street/ Kirkland development and the C&MSFC/ASDA would now be well on its way to sailing through. This you cannot deny.

Here is something else to ponder upon. Does anybody know what would be the overall  implications of Kirkland reducing the size of its proposed store ( not the car park, just sales and backup) by say 25% ?                 

You really are out of touch with reality if you believe any of that Simone. Group members reading your comments have laughted out loud.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on December 16, 2012, 10:56:11 PM
I find myself wondering - not for the first time - whether wheels has any connection with the Libdem group on Stockport Council.  :o Perhaps a declaration of interests would be in order, wheels? 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on December 17, 2012, 07:31:52 AM
Like Dave, not for the first time have I wondered the same. Of course Wheels you can be affiliated in any way with anybody you wish, it is entirely up to you. It is just that an honest perspective is always appreciated and if their are vested interests then that perspective is often compromised.

For my part my comments on this issue whether steeped in reality or not have no political, party bias in any way, they are just my comments as I see them. I expect and welcome disagreement it is part of the fun. Exactly which group members do you refer to? Please for once elaborate on your assertions.

As for political parties in general...a plague on all their houses.   
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on December 18, 2012, 11:25:57 AM
Wheels' silence is quite eloquent, and in the absence of any denial we can take it that he has some connection with the Libdem group on the council.    Although judging from these posts from a few weeks ago, not with any of the six Marple councillors! 

I believe our authority is in good hands under the leadership of Cllr Derbyshire ......... I do accept therr are some extremly weak and illliberal  members in Marple.

I think the Marple ward councillors in this whole situation are largely irrelevant they are not part of the decision making process or of any wider strategic thinking. Thus I have much more confidence than you Dave. I would have concerns if the Marple six mattered at all.

I urge you to have confidence in the Coucnil leadership Dave.

So wheels' Libdem connection is likely to be with one or more other councillors, and probably senior ones.  Nothing wrong with that, of course - but it's the kind of connection which is best declared openly rather than kept under wraps! 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on December 18, 2012, 12:45:07 PM
I find myself wondering - not for the first time - whether wheels has any connection with the Libdem group on Stockport Council.  :o Perhaps a declaration of interests would be in order, wheels? 

Don't worry Dave I am not in any way a party member. In fact I am sat in the office at the moment reading the Morning Star
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on December 18, 2012, 01:53:20 PM
Like Dave, not for the first time have I wondered the same. Of course Wheels you can be affiliated in any way with anybody you wish, it is entirely up to you. It is just that an honest perspective is always appreciated and if their are vested interests then that perspective is often compromised.

For my part my comments on this issue whether steeped in reality or not have no political, party bias in any way, they are just my comments as I see them. I expect and welcome disagreement it is part of the fun. Exactly which group members do you refer to? Please for once elaborate on your assertions.

As for political parties in general...a plague on all their houses.   


Just to be clear Simone my comments are just bases on those of an aware observer not as a supporter or member and anyone at all could have come to the same conclusion.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on December 18, 2012, 03:06:52 PM
Don't worry Dave I am not in any way a party member.

An interesting denial, of something that was never suggested!   Party membership is not the issue - being chums with one or more senior Libdem councillors is what we're talking about.   :-*

anyone at all could have come to the same conclusion.

'Anyone at all' could not have heard 'group members laughing out loud'! 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on December 18, 2012, 03:52:45 PM
Rest assured Dave I am not "chums" with any elected member. Just an aware observer who comes to a different conclusion to you and it seems to makes you suspicious that anyone can think differently to you.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on December 18, 2012, 04:58:59 PM
Fair enough Wheels.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on December 18, 2012, 05:23:57 PM
Ah, I see.  So you just happened to be walking past the Town Hall when through an open window you heard 
Group members reading your comments have laughted out loud.
    ;)
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on December 18, 2012, 05:33:25 PM
Stop it now Dave, you know that Wheels sometimes makes things up.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on December 20, 2012, 09:42:25 AM
If the Kirkland scheme is purely an attempt to stop Asda Hibbert Lane, could the whole thing be a smokescreen? In other words could it be possible there is no real intention to build a foodstore on Chadwick Street? Is there any possibility we could get another Coop?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on December 20, 2012, 10:09:31 AM
I don't see the Chadwick Street development putting a stop to Hibbert Lane unless it becomes a done deal.   The mere existence of a proposal for Chadwick Street would not be enough, because Asda/camsfc would argue at their planning appeal that Chadwick Street won't actually happen, for the sort of reasons (cost, insufficient car parking etc) that have already been pointed out on this forum. 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on December 20, 2012, 10:25:31 AM
Thanks Dave. I hope you are right.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Victor M on December 20, 2012, 10:50:34 AM
Quote
I don't see the Chadwick Street development putting a stop to Hibbert Lane unless it becomes a done deal.
As previously stated the choice is either a Supermarket on Hibbert Lane or one on Chadwick St. there will be one or the other. The Chadwick St. development is just as much a done deal as the ASDA one.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on December 20, 2012, 11:39:36 AM
The Chadwick St. development is just as much a done deal as the ASDA one.

i.e. not at all - indeed so!  But if Kirkland can get a supermarket chain signed up and irreversibly committed to going ahead, that would almost certainly scupper Hibbert Lane. 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on December 20, 2012, 11:44:28 AM
If the Kirkland scheme is purely an attempt to stop Asda Hibbert Lane, could the whole thing be a smokescreen? In other words could it be possible there is no real intention to build a foodstore on Chadwick Street? Is there any possibility we could get another Coop?

Do you really think Kirkland would spend the time and money they have just to help the Council defeat ASDA I think not.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on December 20, 2012, 01:31:13 PM
If the Kirkland scheme is purely an attempt to stop Asda Hibbert Lane, could the whole thing be a smokescreen? In other words could it be possible there is no real intention to build a foodstore on Chadwick Street? Is there any possibility we could get another Coop?

Do you really think Kirkland would spend the time and money they have just to help the Council defeat ASDA I think not.

That (your response) was my first thought but I really don't know.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on December 20, 2012, 01:34:24 PM
Its not how planning and local government work. I thnk you can be assured your first thoughts were correct.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on December 20, 2012, 02:07:06 PM
As Victor has pointed out several times there is either going to be a supermarket on Hibbert Lane or one on Trinity Street. It is not impossible that it could be another co-op that would be up to the co-op. Can't see it myself but it's not impossible.

The Trinity Street project will have to be more advanced than it is now to stop CAMSFC/ASDA. At the time of writing it seems little more than a presentation from a drawing, good drawings I'll grant you but all flash and no pan.  It also appears to be rather expensive and if ASDA are to be believed the proposed car-park is woefully inadequate. If the car-park is woefully inadequate and the parking cannot accommodate the customers to support the sales area.Then either the sales area is reduced or the scheme may be deemed not viable...which again is currently a claim being made about it by ASDA. Who are saying that there is currently no client because, no client will ever be found. ASDA are also claiming the traffic management fo Trinity street won't work and that Marple will be besieged with cars. These are all allegations which Kirkland are refuting but in all their denials they still haven't come up with a client. Whilst this situation remains I cannot see how ASDA can be disbelieved - whether we want them or not. So for me there is no current evidence that Kirkland can deliver.   

ASDA on the other hand is a real scheme and looks deliverable. If/when they go to Appeal and Kirkland still haven't got a client ASDA will make this claim and they will further say that there is no alternative site.

So the balance shifts again and at the moment ASDA's case looks the stronger but Kirkland may come up with a client to-morrow.

At the moment nothing is finalised and neither site looks like a done deal although ASDA is looking more like one then Kirkland.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on December 20, 2012, 02:52:40 PM
But Simone that's not how it works, you would not expect Kirkland to have a developer on board until they have planning permission that's the normal process. No partner will sign up or show themselves until that hurdle has been achieve. We don't know nor have we any right to know if Kirkland have someone they are speaking to who will declare after the application is approved.

Nothing whatsoever has changed other than in folks heads nor is the status of one let us say Kirkland a planning issue to take into account when considering the other. The decision is made on planning grounds alone and the status of another application is not a factor to take into account.

Currently Kirklands application must be seen as the front runner as it is the only one of the two that meets planning guidelines end of.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on December 20, 2012, 03:12:53 PM
There is good sense in what both Simone and wheels write, but I'd take issue with wheels on this bit:
The decision is made on planning grounds alone and the status of another application is not a factor to take into account.

AFAIK if it came to an appeal it would be based on the argument by Asda/camsfc that their edge-of-centre site passes the 'sequential test' because there is no suitable town centre site. 

If SMBC are to win that argument, and successfully make the case that there IS a suitable town centre site, then the status of the Kirkland scheme will become a critical deciding factor.  As long as Kirkland don't have a tenant, then Chadwick/Trinity Street is by definition not a suitable site, because, er, no supermarket chain deems it to be 'suitable'. 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on December 20, 2012, 03:34:47 PM
Dave I would agree with that, but you are there talking about the appeal process. Also you do agree do you, that you would not expect Kirkland to have a publicly declared partner before planning approval have been agreed.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on December 20, 2012, 05:08:47 PM
Yes, I do mean the appeal, because IMO there is no way Hibbert Lane will be approved by SMBC. 

I could envisage a prospective tenant being provisionally signed up by Kirkland in advance of planning, but given the conditions which would probably be attached to the planning consent, it's hard to see it being a completely done deal at that stage.  The tenant would want to be satisfied with the conditions before they signed on the dotted line. 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on December 20, 2012, 05:22:12 PM
Yes, I do mean the appeal, because IMO there is no way Hibbert Lane will be approved by SMBC. 

I could envisage a prospective tenant being provisionally signed up by Kirkland in advance of planning, but given the conditions which would probably be attached to the planning consent, it's hard to see it being a completely done deal at that stage.  The tenant would want to be satisfied with the conditions before they signed on the dotted line. 

Agreed and I would not expect it to be public knowledge who that tenant is, its not our business.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on February 07, 2013, 02:19:51 PM
Yes, I do mean the appeal, because IMO there is no way Hubert Lane will be approved by SMBC. 

I could envisage a prospective tenant being provisionally signed up by Kirkland in advance of planning, but given the conditions which would probably be attached to the planning consent, it's hard to see it being a completely done deal at that stage.  The tenant would want to be satisfied with the conditions before they signed on the dotted line. 

Agreed and I would not expect it to be public knowledge who that tenant is, its not our business.

So in ten years time we could still be stuck with the coop .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on February 07, 2013, 03:07:45 PM
Why do you say that Amazon, Kirkland are a highly successful developer for this size and type of development, is your glass always half empty.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on February 07, 2013, 03:14:20 PM
Why do you say that Amazon, Kirkland are a highly successful developer for this size and type of development, is your glass always half empty.

I don't drink .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on February 07, 2013, 04:03:59 PM
So in ten years time we could still be stuck with the coop .

Awful thought! Let's hope Asda get it on appeal.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on February 07, 2013, 10:46:27 PM
I did not specify the contents of the glass areyou saying you never take any fluids. Strange
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Duke Fame on February 14, 2013, 11:01:34 PM
But Simone that's not how it works, you would not expect Kirkland to have a developer on board until they have planning permission that's the normal process. No partner will sign up or show themselves until that hurdle has been achieve. We don't know nor have we any right to know if Kirkland have someone they are speaking to who will declare after the application is approved.

Nothing whatsoever has changed other than in folks heads nor is the status of one let us say Kirkland a planning issue to take into account when considering the other. The decision is made on planning grounds alone and the status of another application is not a factor to take into account.

Currently Kirklands application must be seen as the front runner as it is the only one of the two that meets planning guidelines end of.

Gosh, I agree with you wheels. Kirkland are going to keep things under wraps, let's be honest, Morrisons, Sainsbury and Waitrose would kill for that site and Tesco or Asda wouldn't mind it either. It really matters not that Asda think the carpark isn't big enough, in fact the best bit of the idea is that parking will not just be outside the 'main' shop but in the 4-5 car parks that service the shopping area so the shopper going to let's say the New Morrisons will have to walk the 25 metres passing Toast, the chippy, the greengrocer, butcher and Pub. The Asda plan completely isolates the shopping precinct.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 15, 2013, 09:44:18 AM
Morrisons, Sainsbury and Waitrose would kill for that site and Tesco or Asda wouldn't mind it either. It really matters not that Asda think the carpark isn't big enough,

Hmmm, I'm not so sure, Duke - time will tell, of course.  The size of the car park is only one issue, and not the major one, I suspect.    More significant will be the relatively low turnover on Chadwick Street compared with the Hibbert Lane site (as projected by the council's consultants Hollis Vincent), and the greater cost of developing the site, with its slope, limited space, and the need for a very expensive vehicle turntable for delivery trucks to turn round.  Also the lack of a petrol filling station.  Doesn't sound much like a site to kill for to me! 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on February 15, 2013, 03:59:56 PM
Morrisons, Sainsbury and Waitrose would kill for that site and Tesco or Asda wouldn't mind it either. It really matters not that Asda think the carpark isn't big enough,

Hmmm, I'm not so sure, Duke - time will tell, of course.  The size of the car park is only one issue, and not the major one, I suspect.    More significant will be the relatively low turnover on Chadwick Street compared with the Hibbert Lane site (as projected by the council's consultants Hollis Vincent), and the greater cost of developing the site, with its slope, limited space, and the need for a very expensive vehicle turntable for delivery trucks to turn round.  Also the lack of a petrol filling station.  Doesn't sound much like a site to kill for to me! 
Asda  application published today copy sent to me by email .anyone else had copy by email .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on February 15, 2013, 04:03:38 PM
so the shopper going to let's say the New Morrisons will have to walk the 25 metres passing Toast, the chippy, the greengrocer, butcher and Pub.

I can't see people going that far with a full weeks shopping. They are likely to just do the shop and drive away as at Hibbert lane. In addition it may be that they are going later on after work and the precient is shut. Or a Wednesday. For top up shopping it may be true. But will it retain those who currently go outside of Marple to do their main shop?

I haven't had any emails about the Asda application.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Duke Fame on February 15, 2013, 11:04:50 PM
so the shopper going to let's say the New Morrisons will have to walk the 25 metres passing Toast, the chippy, the greengrocer, butcher and Pub.

I can't see people going that far with a full weeks shopping. They are likely to just do the shop and drive away as at Hibbert lane. In addition it may be that they are going later on after work and the precient is shut. Or a Wednesday. For top up shopping it may be true. But will it retain those who currently go outside of Marple to do their main shop?

I haven't had any emails about the Asda application.

Funny you say that.

Dave believes the  great thing for Hibbert lane will be the swathes of overweight Asda shoppers, ditching their cars at Hibbert lane and escorting their tracksuit clad, obese offspring to try some Black Bomber in ATN, Welsh Dragon sausage in Whites, razor clams at the fish guy before picking up some good value mobs & buckets in pound plus.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Duke Fame on February 15, 2013, 11:16:01 PM
Morrisons, Sainsbury and Waitrose would kill for that site and Tesco or Asda wouldn't mind it either. It really matters not that Asda think the carpark isn't big enough,

Hmmm, I'm not so sure, Duke - time will tell, of course.  The size of the car park is only one issue, and not the major one, I suspect.    More significant will be the relatively low turnover on Chadwick Street compared with the Hibbert Lane site (as projected by the council's consultants Hollis Vincent), and the greater cost of developing the site, with its slope, limited space, and the need for a very expensive vehicle turntable for delivery trucks to turn round.  Also the lack of a petrol filling station.  Doesn't sound much like a site to kill for to me!  

Never believe a consultant for a council. Consultants are used by councils to justify something obviously flawed. A couple of pals worked for KPMG when they did consultancy for the TIF thing to prove the TIF thing would be good for Manchester. Of course, it was an expensive load of tosh but it said what the local authority wanted which meant they would be paid.

That said, I'd not be surprised that the supermarket at hibbert Lane could gain more sales than Chadwick street but Chadwisk St + the rest of the town would be far greater than Hibbert a + dead town centre.

Now a very expensive vehicle turntable sounds fun but I happen to know where a cheap one is, there is a boat in Middlesboro that has been neglected called the tuxedo royale which was a former sealink ferry with a vehicle turntable converted to a revolving dance-floor on which I'd spent many an hour trying to pull lady loves. That will do for the job.

As for petrol? there is a petrol station within 30 sec drive of Chadwick street, Marple is not going to stop.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Belly on February 16, 2013, 11:06:57 AM
I really hope you are right Duke, because I see the Chadwick St site (as proposed) as having the potential to cause real damage to the centre of Marple - all down to parking. Despite what the Council say, I have major doubts that the parking provided at the Chadwick St site is enough to service the proposed store on its own (hence the reason why Asda's car park is much bigger for a similar store size), which means a lot of displaced parking to all the other car parks in the town. Now I go into Marple most Saturdays and I don't think that (apart from the Chadwick St car park itself) that there are that many spare spaces across the other car parks at peak shopping times. To me this means only one thing, lots of on street parking and fed up local residents in future - or people avoiding Marple as its too difficult to park uo and visit the shops. If you read the Chadwick St proposals carefully, they base their parking analysis on a relatively quiet period of the year and justify their store by saying that all parking displaced by the proposals (assuming no overspill) could simply fill up all the other spaces in town, so that all the car parks would operate pretty much at capacity. The whole town fully parked - every week! Increadible, especially as many of those car parks are cramped, with spaces that in practice are nigh on unsuable for larger vehicles. God only knows what it will be like in the run up to Christmas or when we have an event on.

I've no problem with a foodstore at Chadwick Street as a principle - I simply think the exitsing scheme is too big for the level of car parking it can deliver.  I suspect that this is the only way to make the site deliverable financially (for all the reasons that Dave has set out), but the town shouldn't suffer as a consequence.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on February 16, 2013, 11:28:28 AM
I really hope you are right Duke, because I see the Chadwick St site (as proposed) as having the potential to cause real damage to the centre of Marple - all down to parking. Despite what the Council say, I have major doubts that the parking provided at the Chadwick St site is enough to service the proposed store on its own (hence the reason why Asda's car park is much bigger for a similar store size), which means a lot of displaced parking to all the other car parks in the town. Now I go into Marple most Saturdays and I don't think that (apart from the Chadwick St car park itself) that there are that many spare spaces across the other car parks at peak shopping times. To me this means only one thing, lots of on street parking and fed up local residents in future - or people avoiding Marple as its too difficult to park uo and visit the shops. If you read the Chadwick St proposals carefully, they base their parking analysis on a relatively quiet period of the year and justify their store by saying that all parking displaced by the proposals (assuming no overspill) could simply fill up all the other spaces in town, so that all the car parks would operate pretty much at capacity. The whole town fully parked - every week! Increadible, especially as many of those car parks are cramped, with spaces that in practice are nigh on unsuable for larger vehicles. God only knows what it will be like in the run up to Christmas or when we have an event on.

I've no problem with a foodstore at Chadwick Street as a principle - I simply think the exitsing scheme is too big for the level of car parking it can deliver.  I suspect that this is the only way to make the site deliverable financially (for all the reasons that Dave has set out), but the town shouldn't suffer as a consequence.


But the town would not be suffering a few local residents near to the store would be suffering and many might consider that a price worth paying.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: tricky on February 16, 2013, 11:52:41 AM
I really hope you are right Duke, because I see the Chadwick St site (as proposed) as having the potential to cause real damage to the centre of Marple - all down to parking. Despite what the Council say, I have major doubts that the parking provided at the Chadwick St site is enough to service the proposed store on its own (hence the reason why Asda's car park is much bigger for a similar store size), which means a lot of displaced parking to all the other car parks in the town. Now I go into Marple most Saturdays and I don't think that (apart from the Chadwick St car park itself) that there are that many spare spaces across the other car parks at peak shopping times. To me this means only one thing, lots of on street parking and fed up local residents in future - or people avoiding Marple as its too difficult to park uo and visit the shops. If you read the Chadwick St proposals carefully, they base their parking analysis on a relatively quiet period of the year and justify their store by saying that all parking displaced by the proposals (assuming no overspill) could simply fill up all the other spaces in town, so that all the car parks would operate pretty much at capacity. The whole town fully parked - every week! Increadible, especially as many of those car parks are cramped, with spaces that in practice are nigh on unsuable for larger vehicles. God only knows what it will be like in the run up to Christmas or when we have an event on.

I've no problem with a foodstore at Chadwick Street as a principle - I simply think the exitsing scheme is too big for the level of car parking it can deliver.  I suspect that this is the only way to make the site deliverable financially (for all the reasons that Dave has set out), but the town shouldn't suffer as a consequence.


But the town would not be suffering a few local residents near to the store would be suffering and many might consider that a price worth paying.

..but this is EXACTLY why MIA was formed.

(although Miss Marple didn't consider the price worth paying, obviously)
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Belly on February 16, 2013, 12:15:13 PM

But the town would not be suffering a few local residents near to the store would be suffering and many might consider that a price worth paying.

Why would it not be suffering? If I can't park in Marple because there is no spare parking spaces I'll simply go somewhere else. Given that the supermarket car park would be full of their own customers - they would be fine. Not so sure about the other shops though.

The town would also suffer if the community events that are organised, struggle due to the fact that visitors can't park in the town to attend.

I've literally just come back from Marple town centre this morning. Coop car park full, Derby Street car parks full - I'm guessing the Memorial Park car park was full (it always is in my experience) - so just where is all the displaced parking from Chadwick Street going to go to exactly?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: thebigshed on February 16, 2013, 03:27:56 PM
When we go into Stockport we often park on the Asda car park, go into Mersey Square etc. and then come back to do our Asda shop thereby benefiting from the cash back for the car park.  Why shouldn't visitors to Chadwick Street do something similar in Marple?

If you don't mind walking from the Tesco Portwood car park you don't even have to pay or shop at Tesco! You can cut through under the motorway.

I still believe that if the Chadwick Street site is developed the lack of car parking whilst the building is being done would do more harm to local traders than the eventual supermarket would.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on February 16, 2013, 07:23:58 PM
When we go into Stockport we often park on the Asda car park, go into Mersey Square etc. and then come back to do our Asda shop thereby benefiting from the cash back for the car park.  Why shouldn't visitors to Chadwick Street do something similar in Marple?

I think they might if they could park at Chadwick Street. But if they cannot park there (due to not enough parking) and have to instead park at nearby car parks such as Derby Way, would they carry a weeks shopping all the way across the centre? I can't see it. Could they even wheel a trolly all the way across? Most people want to park right outside where they do their main shop. For that reason if the parking is better at Hibbert Lane people may be more likely to walk to the centre and then back to do main shopping than  to park away from where they do their weeks shopping and have to carry it a long way. I agree that the Chadwick Street scheme could cause awful traffic issues. Especially for residents on Lyme Grove, Mount Drive and near the Cottage Surgery.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 16, 2013, 10:13:58 PM
Never believe a consultant for a council. Consultants are used by councils to justify something obviously flawed. A couple of pals worked for KPMG when they did consultancy for the TIF thing to prove the TIF thing would be good for Manchester. Of course, it was an expensive load of tosh but it said what the local authority wanted which meant they would be paid.

I would tend to go along with that, Duke, being almost as cynical about such things as you are  ;)  But this is different: these consultants did not say what the local authority will have wanted.   SMBC will no doubt have been keen to ensure that the consultants made Chadwick Street look like a much more viable proposition than Hibbert Lane.  But sadly HV did not oblige  ;).  They projected a turnover of 21.6 million for Hibbert Lane in 2017, and only 17.4 million for Chadwick Street. That is not at all what the council will have wanted to hear!
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Duke Fame on February 17, 2013, 10:53:07 PM
Never believe a consultant for a council. Consultants are used by councils to justify something obviously flawed. A couple of pals worked for KPMG when they did consultancy for the TIF thing to prove the TIF thing would be good for Manchester. Of course, it was an expensive load of tosh but it said what the local authority wanted which meant they would be paid.

I would tend to go along with that, Duke, being almost as cynical about such things as you are  ;)  But this is different: these consultants did not say what the local authority will have wanted.   SMBC will no doubt have been keen to ensure that the consultants made Chadwick Street look like a much more viable proposition than Hibbert Lane.  But sadly HV did not oblige  ;).  They projected a turnover of 21.6 million for Hibbert Lane in 2017, and only 17.4 million for Chadwick Street. That is not at all what the council will have wanted to hear!

Ahhh, but you ignored my secondary point. £17.4m turnover from the new supermarket added to the £8m of other shops all paying corp tax & rates is better than £21.6m to and a precinct of charity shops not paying rates nor corp tax.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 18, 2013, 07:49:59 AM
I think Duke and I are at cross purposes (not for the first time  :D).  Duke suggested that
Morrisons, Sainsbury and Waitrose would kill for that site and Tesco or Asda wouldn't mind it either.

I disagreed, on the basis that
The size of the car park is only one issue, and not the major one, I suspect.    More significant will be the relatively low turnover on Chadwick Street compared with the Hibbert Lane site (as projected by the council's consultants Hollis Vincent), and the greater cost of developing the site, with its slope, limited space, and the need for a very expensive vehicle turntable for delivery trucks to turn round.  Also the lack of a petrol filling station.  Doesn't sound much like a site to kill for to me!  

Duke's most recent point about the other shops in Marple may or may not turn out to be true, but it is irrelevant to the decision making of any supermarket chain considering the Kirkland site.  It will be a straightforward investment decision: they will look at the costs and the potential turnover, and having crunched those numbers they will come to a decision.  They will not be the slightest bit interested in how well or badly other shops in Marple may do, let alone how much corporation tax and business rates they may or may not pay.   It's pretty obvious that the cost of developing Chadwick Street will be significantly higher than Hibbert Lane, whilst the turnover will be lower.  Whichever purveyor of horseburgers is considering the Kirkland site, I suspect their accountants will be taking a long hard look at the numbers! 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Duke Fame on February 18, 2013, 12:25:51 PM
I think Duke and I are at cross purposes (not for the first time  :D).  Duke suggested that
Morrisons, Sainsbury and Waitrose would kill for that site and Tesco or Asda wouldn't mind it either.

I disagreed, on the basis that
The size of the car park is only one issue, and not the major one, I suspect.    More significant will be the relatively low turnover on Chadwick Street compared with the Hibbert Lane site (as projected by the council's consultants Hollis Vincent), and the greater cost of developing the site, with its slope, limited space, and the need for a very expensive vehicle turntable for delivery trucks to turn round.  Also the lack of a petrol filling station.  Doesn't sound much like a site to kill for to me!  

Duke's most recent point about the other shops in Marple may or may not turn out to be true, but it is irrelevant to the decision making of any supermarket chain considering the Kirkland site.  It will be a straightforward investment decision: they will look at the costs and the potential turnover, and having crunched those numbers they will come to a decision.  They will not be the slightest bit interested in how well or badly other shops in Marple may do, let alone how much corporation tax and business rates they may or may not pay.   It's pretty obvious that the cost of developing Chadwick Street will be significantly higher than Hibbert Lane, whilst the turnover will be lower.  Whichever purveyor of horseburgers is considering the Kirkland site, I suspect their accountants will be taking a long hard look at the numbers! 

Now don't get me wrong, any store would prefer the Hibbert Lane site as a profit centre, it's bigger / less compromise.

However, as a planning proposal, the Hibbert Lane site would normally be refused for all the reasons already been thrown about. Given the choice for the supermarket is a  profitable centre which will go ahead compared to a very profitable centre that has a 25% chance of going ahead and that should Chadwick St go ahead, Hibbert la is dead in the water, Chadwick st is a goer.

Parking capacity can't be a deal breaker though. Derby way could have a 2nd level added and road layout remodelled.

I agree that for some, they will be too lazy to walk to their car but I think that really shows that there is no way the Obese Asda shopper will waddle down to the Marple centre to get the bits & bobs they didn't pick up in Asda.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 18, 2013, 02:00:34 PM
Given the choice for the supermarket is a  profitable centre which will go ahead compared to a very profitable centre that has a 25% chance of going ahead

Two problems with that, Duke:

1.  Who says it's a profitable centre?   We've seen projected income for Chadwick Street, but we have no clue as to its costs.   Therefore we simply can't know whether it would be profitable or not. 

2.  It isn't a two-way choice, it's a three-way choice.  The third option for any supermarket is simply to walk away from both sites.   That is beginning to look just as likely as a development on Chadwick Street going ahead.  I agree that Hibbert lane is now trailing a poor third.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Victor M on February 18, 2013, 04:30:08 PM
Quote
1.  Who says it's a profitable centre?   We've seen projected income for Chadwick Street, but we have no clue as to its costs.   Therefore we simply can't know whether it would be profitable or not. 

The cost of building on the land will be reflected on the price that the land is eventually sold for. Chadwick St will be far more costly to build on than Hibbert lane therefore the land on Chadwick St. will cost less per sq. m. than the land on Hibbert Lane.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Duke Fame on February 18, 2013, 04:45:29 PM
Given the choice for the supermarket is a  profitable centre which will go ahead compared to a very profitable centre that has a 25% chance of going ahead

Two problems with that, Duke:

1.  Who says it's a profitable centre?   We've seen projected income for Chadwick Street, but we have no clue as to its costs.   Therefore we simply can't know whether it would be profitable or not.  


I'm assuming that either site will give the minimun IRR otherwise nobody will go for it. As Victor says, the difference in the NPV of either project will be refelceted in the price of the land that any interested party will pay. Every major supermarket will know what the costs are for a store of that size.

2.  It isn't a two-way choice, it's a three-way choice.  The third option for any supermarket is simply to walk away from both sites.   That is beginning to look just as likely as a development on Chadwick Street going ahead.  I agree that Hibbert lane is now trailing a poor third.

Agreed to an extent but it's very unlikely. It's WM Morrisons stated strategy to open smaller central stores, obtaining out of town planning permission is increasingly difficult unless on truely brown field sites and even if such sites are not as profitable than others, if the site can return more than the long-term interest rate, a supermarket will invest, otherwise, they may as well return all cash holdings to their shareholders.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Tina on February 18, 2013, 05:32:16 PM
Why do you keep referring to Asda shoppers as obese? I've read a few comments now by you which says this! and I'm surprised no one has asked you sooner or your comments removed




I agree that for some, they will be too lazy to walk to their car but I think that really shows that there is no way the Obese Asda shopper will waddle down to the Marple centre to get the bits & bobs they didn't pick up in Asda.

Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 18, 2013, 06:35:09 PM
The cost of building on the land will be reflected on the price that the land is eventually sold for. Chadwick St will be far more costly to build on than Hibbert lane therefore the land on Chadwick St. will cost less per sq. m. than the land on Hibbert Lane.
Good point.  So it comes down SMBC not being too greedy about how much they want for the site, I guess, bearing in mind that there will be a cost involved in relocating the sorting office.

  if the site can return more than the long-term interest rate, a supermarket will invest, otherwise, they may as well return all cash holdings to their shareholders.
To attract a supermarket chain I think the Chadwick Street investment appraisal will have to offer something a bit better than merely 'more than the long-term interest rate'.   We can be sure that all supermarket chains are at any one time appraising dozens of possible new sites throughout the country, and without unlimited access to capital, they will choose to invest in those which offer the best return.  Some of the weaker projects which are not selected may nevertheless offer more than the long-term interest rate - but that's no big deal! 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Duke Fame on February 18, 2013, 07:03:01 PM
Why do you keep referring to Asda shoppers as obese? I've read a few comments now by you which says this! and I'm surprised no one has asked you sooner or your comments removed

Because I'm not saying all Asda shoppers are obese. It's been claimed that Asda @ Hibbert Lane will energise the centre of the village as shoppers will park in Asda, shop for the mechanically recovered meat products and then, having placed items in their car, they will walk the 400m to Marple to but some nice things.

Given the above arguments that the car park at Chadwick street will be too small & shoppers will not be bothered to walk to the other car parks, I think the Eutopia of an energised centre on the back of Hibbert lane is not likely and the shops in Marple will die.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Duke Fame on February 18, 2013, 07:08:57 PM
The cost of building on the land will be reflected on the price that the land is eventually sold for. Chadwick St will be far more costly to build on than Hibbert lane therefore the land on Chadwick St. will cost less per sq. m. than the land on Hibbert Lane.
Good point.  So it comes down SMBC not being too greedy about how much they want for the site, I guess, bearing in mind that there will be a cost involved in relocating the sorting office.

  if the site can return more than the long-term interest rate, a supermarket will invest, otherwise, they may as well return all cash holdings to their shareholders.
To attract a supermarket chain I think the Chadwick Street investment appraisal will have to offer something a bit better than merely 'more than the long-term interest rate'.   We can be sure that all supermarket chains are at any one time appraising dozens of possible new sites throughout the country, and without unlimited access to capital, they will choose to invest in those which offer the best return.  Some of the weaker projects which are not selected may nevertheless offer more than the long-term interest rate - but that's no big deal! 

Of course Dave, that's why I refer to the IRR. Yes,  there will be other potential sites and the best will be developed first but supermarkets are working to diminishing returns now. All i'm saying is that Chadwick St may offer a lower return on investment that Hibbert Lane, it would also offer a lower return on Farmer Parmer's prime field, neither of the latter sites are likely to get through planning without a lot of objection. Chadwick street will go ahead if there is a will and the supermarket that takes it will see the site creating an income within 24 months, any other site will take a decade.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Belly on February 18, 2013, 10:14:06 PM
Quote from: Duke Fame link=topic=4619.msg28980#msg28980 date=
Given the above arguments that the car park at Chadwick street will be too small & shoppers will not be bothered to walk to the other car parks, I think the Eutopia of an energised centre on the back of Hibbert lane is not likely and the shops in Marple will die.

Thats not my argument - I don't think that there will be any other car parks to walk to, as they will all be full! On the strength of last Saturdya at 11am, when the only spare parking in the town was at the soon to be lost Chadwick St - that is a definite realty.

Adding another deck to Derby Way car park. Are you for real Duke - who is going to pay for that? Another bill to add to the cost of Chadwick St or would it come out of your beloved Council Tax?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Duke Fame on February 18, 2013, 11:22:59 PM
Quote from: Duke Fame link=topic=4619.msg28980#msg28980 date=
Given the above arguments that the car park at Chadwick street will be too small & shoppers will not be bothered to walk to the other car parks, I think the Eutopia of an energised centre on the back of Hibbert lane is not likely and the shops in Marple will die.

Thats not my argument - I don't think that there will be any other car parks to walk to, as they will all be full! On the strength of last Saturdya at 11am, when the only spare parking in the town was at the soon to be lost Chadwick St - that is a definite realty.

Adding another deck to Derby Way car park. Are you for real Duke - who is going to pay for that? Another bill to add to the cost of Chadwick St or would it come out of your beloved Council Tax?

Two little points,i)  yes another deck on Derby would be paid for by the developer and in turn by newsupermarco. ii) Moreover, Derby way does not have to be a through road, a little reworking could increase capacity.

It wasn't your post I had in mind,  it was suggested that shoppers would not want to walk so far with a shopping trolly. I don't think it's that far  to walk and has the advantage of including other shops. I used to work in Tesco's in Chineham, Basingstoke as a 16-18 yo at college. The carpark was at the other side of the shopping area to the superstore and for that reason the other shops did benefit from the Tesco footfall (until Tesco doubled in size and changed their entrance)
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on February 19, 2013, 03:13:04 PM
it was suggested that shoppers would not want to walk so far with a shopping trolly. I don't think it's that far  to walk and has the advantage of including other shops.

Presumably you would also have to walk the trolley all the way back? (to get your £1 back and take it back to store) They can be very hard to steer with a full weeks shopping! Also potentially up and down kerbs, squeezing past the fish man etc. I really can't see people pushing trolleys through market street!
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on February 19, 2013, 03:44:57 PM
I suppose that this gives us an opportunity for further conjecture and speculation. Though the burning issue is that Kirkland is almost certain to gain planninng permission whereas ASDA/CAMSFC is just as certain not to.

Asda may appeal but a large part of their case would have to be the condemnation of the other site.

Councillors will know that this is/ was always going to be a course of action for ASDA and will surely have a contingency for such a situation.

The situation that has now developed is that in one corner we have a side that knows every option  that the other can use whereas in the other corner the side has many options that have yet to be indentified.

Once, both these applications have been formalised by the H & P Committee expect to see a strategy unfold which starts with "leaked expressions of interest" in the Trinity St site, followed by rumours of the breakup in the ASDA/CAMSFC relationship....followed by ??       
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Harry on February 19, 2013, 04:07:03 PM
Presumably you would also have to walk the trolley all the way back? (to get your £1 back and take it back to store) They can be very hard to steer with a full weeks shopping! Also potentially up and down kerbs, squeezing past the fish man etc. I really can't see people pushing trolleys through market street!

The plans show the back of the Bulls Head as being opened up and used as an outdoor refreshment area. The fish man is notable by his absence from the plans. I can't see anyone wanting the walkway through from Market Street being obstructed by his van/hut.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Duke Fame on February 19, 2013, 05:04:20 PM
it was suggested that shoppers would not want to walk so far with a shopping trolly. I don't think it's that far  to walk and has the advantage of including other shops.

Presumably you would also have to walk the trolley all the way back? (to get your £1 back and take it back to store) They can be very hard to steer with a full weeks shopping! Also potentially up and down kerbs, squeezing past the fish man etc. I really can't see people pushing trolleys through market street!

I'd expect at least the Derby road car park (remodelled) would include a trolly park. I really think the fish man will need to move but on hte other hand, having pickup the basics in the supermarket, I'd think it was great to be able to stop and pick up a bit of fish, go to whites and get som enice meat nad pop along for a bit of Veg.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 19, 2013, 06:14:24 PM
I suppose that this gives us an opportunity for further conjecture and speculation. Though the burning issue is that Kirkland is almost certain to gain planninng permission whereas ASDA/CAMSFC is just as certain not to.

Asda may appeal but a large part of their case would have to be the condemnation of the other site.

I don't think that will get Asda anywhere.  I fear the only way they could get their application approved now would be by waiting around on the off chance that no other supermarket goes for Chadwick Street.   And as Victor M has pointed out, that would probably only happen if the council is too greedy in pricing the site - they will need to make it pretty cheap to offset the relatively high construction costs on that site.   
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Harry on February 19, 2013, 09:38:36 PM
I'd expect at least the Derby road car park (remodelled) would include a trolly park. I really think the fish man will need to move but on hte other hand, having pickup the basics in the supermarket, I'd think it was great to be able to stop and pick up a bit of fish, go to whites and get som enice meat nad pop along for a bit of Veg.

I think this is cloud cuckoo land thinking. Although Asda had promised to not have a cafe, meat, fish or deli counter, at Hibbert Lane, there are no such assurances if anyone takes on the Trinity Street site. You can bet they will be competing with all the local traders.

Last time I did a price check, fillet steak was £27/kg at a 'high quality' supermarket, but was £41 at a Marple butcher. At this sort of price differential, who is going to get the business?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on February 20, 2013, 07:46:21 AM
I suppose that this gives us an opportunity for further conjecture and speculation. Though the burning issue is that Kirkland is almost certain to gain planning permission whereas ASDA/CAMSFC is just as certain not to.

Asda may appeal but a large part of their case would have to be the condemnation of the other site.

I don't think that will get Asda anywhere.  I fear the only way they could get their application approved now would be by waiting around on the off chance that no other supermarket goes for Chadwick Street.   And as Victor M has pointed out, that would probably only happen if the council is too greedy in pricing the site - they will need to make it pretty cheap to offset the relatively high construction costs on that site.   


I think that you are absolutely correct Dave with your assumptions. The way it looks now, any initiative has been completely removed from ASDA/CAMSFC.  They have become eventual bystanders in a game of their own making. There are many who would conclude..."serves them right". At least it goes to show that (on this occasion anyway) if you ignore the community - the community ignores you. 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 20, 2013, 07:55:06 AM
Yes, you could well be right, Simone. Who knows how different it might have been if, instead of trying to hush it up, the college had come out with a charm offensive right from the start, telling the world what a super new college they were going to get!  Obviously there would still have been objections from people living next to the Hibbert Lane site, but MIA would have found it much harder to get so much widespread support for their campaign and petition, and without all that noise, maybe the councillors would have sat on the fence, and the Chadwick Street scheme might never have happened.  Hey ho........
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Duke Fame on February 20, 2013, 11:00:54 AM
I'd expect at least the Derby road car park (remodelled) would include a trolly park. I really think the fish man will need to move but on hte other hand, having pickup the basics in the supermarket, I'd think it was great to be able to stop and pick up a bit of fish, go to whites and get som enice meat nad pop along for a bit of Veg.

I think this is cloud cuckoo land thinking. Although Asda had promised to not have a cafe, meat, fish or deli counter, at Hibbert Lane, there are no such assurances if anyone takes on the Trinity Street site. You can bet they will be competing with all the local traders.

Last time I did a price check, fillet steak was £27/kg at a 'high quality' supermarket, but was £41 at a Marple butcher. At this sort of price differential, who is going to get the business?

I was speaking on a personal basis, when the other shops are open, I go to the individual shops, get what I want and fill in at the co-op. What I will say generally, there is far more chance of Newsupermarkco complementing the centre of Marple & for that matter the co-op than a site at Hibbert La.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on February 20, 2013, 11:04:05 AM
I'd expect at least the Derby road car park (remodelled) would include a trolly park. I really think the fish man will need to move but on hte other hand, having pickup the basics in the supermarket, I'd think it was great to be able to stop and pick up a bit of fish, go to whites and get som enice meat nad pop along for a bit of Veg.

I think this is cloud cuckoo land thinking. Although Asda had promised to not have a cafe, meat, fish or deli counter, at Hibbert Lane, there are no such assurances if anyone takes on the Trinity Street site. You can bet they will be competing with all the local traders.

Last time I did a price check, fillet steak was £27/kg at a 'high quality' supermarket, but was £41 at a Marple butcher. At this sort of price differential, who is going to get the business?

Great post.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on February 20, 2013, 11:42:52 AM

I'd expect at least the Derby road car park (remodelled) would include a trolly park. I really think the fish man will need to move but on hte other hand, having pickup the basics in the supermarket, I'd think it was great to be able to stop and pick up a bit of fish, go to whites and get som enice meat nad pop along for a bit of Veg.

I think this is cloud cuckoo land thinking. Although Asda had promised to not have a cafe, meat, fish or deli counter, at Hibbert Lane, there are no such assurances if anyone takes on the Trinity Street site. You can bet they will be competing with all the local traders.

Last time I did a price check, fillet steak was £27/kg at a 'high quality' supermarket, but was £41 at a Marple butcher. At this sort of price differential, who is going to get the business?

I don't think that the decision makers of Marple put much faith in "assurances" given by ASDA.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: hollins on May 15, 2013, 09:31:14 AM
Now that they have planning permission, is anything actually happening with this development?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Victor M on May 15, 2013, 10:15:24 AM
I don't think that there will be any further news on the Chadwick St. site until ASDA have decided to appeal or not. They (ASDA) have 6 months in which to lodge an Appeal so by my reckoning that would be end of August.
Also ASDA could wait until that time and then submit a new planning application that would have to follow the same procedure as last time.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on August 19, 2013, 02:57:17 PM
Is there any news on this development yet?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: admin on August 19, 2013, 06:29:12 PM
According to Marple Civic Society, at the Marple Area Committee Meeting of 7th August 2013 Committee Chairman Cllr. Martin Candler made a statement that included the following information:

Kirkland Developments were granted planning permission for a food store on the site of Chadwick Street car park in March 2013.  They now have 3 years to implement their proposal.

The council is in active discussion with Kirkland about several aspects of the proposal.

Discussions are ongoing with Royal Mail about their relocation to another sorting office facility.  The recently announced privatisation of the Royal Mail may influence their view on the facilities they need.

ASDA have until 1st September 2013 to make further representations (appeal) regarding the CMSFC Hibbert Lane site.  It may be that a retail user for the Chadwick Street site will not come forward until after the 1st September 2013 deadline.

The college is bringing forward proposals for housing on their Hibbert Lane site and a decision on an application is expected in due course.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: My login is Henrietta on October 22, 2013, 09:47:53 PM
I was speaking to the postman the other day and asked where we would have to go to pick up parcels when the sorting office is relocated. He said that they had been told that there had been a change of plan and it wasn't closing.

(I am merely reporting what I have been told so please don't shoot the messenger.)
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on October 22, 2013, 11:58:56 PM
I was speaking to the postman the other day and asked where we would have to go to pick up parcels when the sorting office is relocated. He said that they had been told that there had been a change of plan and it wasn't closing.

(I am merely reporting what I have been told so please don't shoot the messenger.)



pity
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Harry on October 23, 2013, 09:10:19 PM
This comes as no surprise at all. I never thought there were any plans to develop Trinity Street. It was just a ruse to prevent Asda getting into Marple.

The college will be gone within two years as well.

Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on October 27, 2013, 11:24:21 AM
This comes as no surprise at all. I never thought there were any plans to develop Trinity Street. It was just a ruse to prevent Asda getting into Marple.

Agreed.

The college will be gone within two years as well.

...not so sure about that though, Harry.  This is a town of 23,000 people, and it would make no sense for it to have no post-16 education provision.  All those students have got to go somewhere, and commuting across to Cheadle wouldn't work.   But clearly camsfc has been going through a difficult period, with its development plans frustrated, a poor Ofsted inspection, and a change of principal, so things are probably far from settled at the moment. 

I don't want to set hares running, and I have absolutely no knowledge as to whether MHS will eventually become an academy, but it's not beyond the realms of possibility to imagine the redeveloped Buxton Lane site becoming the 6th form part of an 11 - 18 academy formed from a merger with MHS...........
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: JMC on October 27, 2013, 01:01:54 PM
I have a child at Marple College and worry for its future. Many, if not most, of my daughter's peers went to Aquinas as it is deemed 'better' by many parents. My daughter is doing OK at MC but there are some concerns about it and will see how she does before choose to send my other children there.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on October 27, 2013, 04:23:23 PM
There is no doubt in my mind that Harry is right and that Trinity Street was a 'ruse' devised to thwart ASDA's plans to develop Trinity Street.

We should not forget though that out of this ruse has risen a granted planning application to build a 25,000 square supermarket which currently lies on file.

It is my understanding that as we are there is no political will to push this issue through. This together with the naturally, multi-aspect  difficulty of developing this project on that site means that in the foreseeable it is probably not on the agenda. However should the  political will change then who knows.

So this project is mortally wounded but it is not dead and it is certainly not buried. Either way, fine fellow that he surely is I wouldn't give Wheels's postman much credence as far a the outcome of the supermarket issue or the location of the sorting office is concerned. If the will was there then the Council can CPO the sorting office any time they like.

In addition to this with the recent revolution in Royal Mail. They may just decide that they don't need an operation in Marple.

So nothing in this whole saga can be called anything like resolved just yet.           
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on October 27, 2013, 07:50:10 PM
There is no doubt in my mind that Harry is right and that Trinity Street was a 'ruse' devised to thwart ASDA's plans to develop Trinity Street.

We should not forget though that out of this ruse has risen a granted planning application to build a 25,000 square supermarket which currently lies on file.

It is my understanding that as we are there is no political will to push this issue through. This together with the naturally, multi-aspect  difficulty of developing this project on that site means that in the foreseeable it is probably not on the agenda. However should the  political will change then who knows.

So this project is mortally wounded but it is not dead and it is certainly not buried. Either way, fine fellow that he surely is I wouldn't give Wheels's postman much credence as far a the outcome of the supermarket issue or the location of the sorting office is concerned. If the will was there then the Council can CPO the sorting office any time they like.

In addition to this with the recent revolution in Royal Mail. They may just decide that they don't need an operation in Marple.

So nothing in this whole saga can be called anything like resolved just yet.           

marple will change for the better some day .and we will have a alternative supermarket ..
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: My login is Henrietta on November 01, 2013, 11:30:09 PM
marple will change for the better some day .and we will have a alternative supermarket ..
....And Amazon will continue to flog a dead horse.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on November 01, 2013, 11:40:48 PM
as opposed to your old donkey
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on November 03, 2013, 08:16:13 PM
 :D
as opposed to your old donkey
:D
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: hollins on November 28, 2013, 10:24:52 PM
So what is this "Revised Offer" all about:
http://democracy.stockport.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=16252&PlanId=425 (http://democracy.stockport.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=16252&PlanId=425)
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on November 29, 2013, 01:41:33 PM
I hate to say 'I told you so', but.....
The size of the car park is only one issue, and not the major one, I suspect.    More significant will be the relatively low turnover on Chadwick Street compared with the Hibbert Lane site (as projected by the council's consultants Hollis Vincent), and the greater cost of developing the site, with its slope, limited space, and the need for a very expensive vehicle turntable for delivery trucks to turn round.  Also the lack of a petrol filling station.  Doesn't sound much like a site to kill for to me! 

So it's not hard to figure out what's going on here.   Kirkland have discovered that the site is going to be costly to develop, and/or no retailer is interested in taking it at the planned price.   So they are holding a gun to the council's head: accept a lower offer for the site, or we will walk away.  This would leave the council with an unsold plot of land, but that's the least of their problems.    More to the point, the council's tactic to sabotage the college/Asda scheme will be in tatters. 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on November 29, 2013, 01:54:16 PM
I hate to say 'I told you so', but.....
So it's not hard to figure out what's going on here.   Kirkland have discovered that the site is going to be costly to develop, and/or no retailer is interested in taking it at the planned price.   So they are holding a gun to the council's head: accept a lower offer for the site, or we will walk away.  This would leave the council with an unsold plot of land, but that's the least of their problems.    More to the point, the council's tactic to sabotage the college/Asda scheme will be in tatters. 
So could a supermarket still be interested in the college site or is it to late .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on November 29, 2013, 02:23:08 PM
Try this one Dave,

...'Kirkland have discovered that the site is going to be costly to develop'.... So they say accept  this lower offer or we'll walk away. Exactly as you say except that the Council say - walk away then it was a car park before, it is a car park now and it can stay a car park. It doesn't make any difference to us.     

                                                                         OR

SMBC MAY SAY:As there has been a significant revision in the market for retail land we will put the land out to the market again. If you (Kirkland) are not going to pay the original price then everybody else should have the same opportunity.  Only this time it will go to someone who has a more direct connection to the Council. This would then give SMBC more control over the project.

Either way the scheme to scupper ASDA/CAMSFC is not in tatters - there will be no supermarket on Hibbert Lane so how can it be in tatters?

It looks to me as if SMBC are trying to shaft Kirkland and not the other way around. It looks to me that SMBC are trying to find a way to ditch Kirkland and if Kirkland do try and hold a gun to their head then they've found it. 

What's your view on that ?     
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Howard on November 29, 2013, 02:52:16 PM
I hate to say 'I told you so', but.....
So it's not hard to figure out what's going on here.   Kirkland have discovered that the site is going to be costly to develop, and/or no retailer is interested in taking it at the planned price.   So they are holding a gun to the council's head: accept a lower offer for the site, or we will walk away.  This would leave the council with an unsold plot of land, but that's the least of their problems.    More to the point, the council's tactic to sabotage the college/Asda scheme will be in tatters. 

Nonsense, Dave. Why on earth would the tactic be "in tatters". We know there will be no supermarket on Hibbert Lane and the only likely place could be Chadkirk St. which was what the counil intended all along. It's entirely possible that the council is thinking that they may get more for the site rather than less and have gone out looking for other options.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on November 29, 2013, 03:11:43 PM
I hate to say 'I told you so', but.....
So it's not hard to figure out what's going on here.   Kirkland have discovered that the site is going to be costly to develop, and/or no retailer is interested in taking it at the planned price.   So they are holding a gun to the council's head: accept a lower offer for the site, or we will walk away.  This would leave the council with an unsold plot of land, but that's the least of their problems.    More to the point, the council's tactic to sabotage the college/Asda scheme will be in tatters. 

Let me add my voice to those who say your totally wrong here Dave.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: admin on November 29, 2013, 03:14:42 PM
Maybe it is simply that the supermarket doesn't need to be as big as the current proposal as it doesn't need to "compete" with the Hibbert Lane plans now?

What was on the Kirkland web site? It seems to be off-line at the moment.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on November 29, 2013, 03:19:38 PM
The proposal being presented to the council is 'To consider a revised offer from the previously selected developer'.   Before we make it ever so complicated, it would surely make sense to take the words literally, and assume (until there is evidence to the contrary) that Kirkland have simply reduced their offer.  This is something that happens all the time, and it would not be at all surprising if it happened here, for reasons which I have given in the previous post.  On the other hand, it could be something even more straightforward, as Mark suggests. 

Howard asks 'Why on earth would the tactic be "in tatters".'   Any failure by the council to get a supermarket on the Chadwick Street site could mean that if a new planning application were to be submitted for a supermarket on Hibbert Lane, it might no longer fail the so-called 'sequential test', which was crucial in ensuring that the Asda planning application was rejected. 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Belly on November 29, 2013, 07:47:16 PM
The proposal being presented to the council is 'To consider a revised offer from the previously selected developer'.   Before we make it ever so complicated, it would surely make sense to take the words literally, and assume (until there is evidence to the contrary) that Kirkland have simply reduced their offer.  This is something that happens all the time, and it would not be at all surprising if it happened here, for reasons which I have given in the previous post.  On the other hand, it could be something even more straightforward, as Mark suggests. 

Howard asks 'Why on earth would the tactic be "in tatters".'   Any failure by the council to get a supermarket on the Chadwick Street site could mean that if a new planning application were to be submitted for a supermarket on Hibbert Lane, it might no longer fail the so-called 'sequential test', which was crucial in ensuring that the Asda planning application was rejected. 

Yes, ish, Dave. But the Chadwcik Street site will still have planning for a superstore for at least 3 years (i haven't checked the time on the consent) so for a while, at least, its a decent block to anyone else having a pop elsewhere outside the town centre.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Berni inn on November 29, 2013, 08:51:11 PM
The website was along the same lines as the leaflets.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on November 29, 2013, 09:21:57 PM
Maybe it is simply that the supermarket doesn't need to be as big as the current proposal as it doesn't need to "compete" with the Hibbert Lane plans now?

What was on the Kirkland web site? It seems to be off-line at the moment.

Could Kirkland have gone out of business ....
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on November 30, 2013, 09:54:16 AM
the Chadwcik Street site will still have planning for a superstore for at least 3 years (i haven't checked the time on the consent) so for a while, at least, its a decent block to anyone else having a pop elsewhere outside the town centre.

A good point. But it's worth having a look at the relevant government guidance:   https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/7781/towncentresguide.pdf

Section 6 (starts p 33) is the relevant bit, and the most relevant in this case is this:

ARE SITES SUITABLE, AVAILABLE AND VIABLE?

6.36 National policy requires those promoting development, where it is argued that no
other sequentially preferable sites are appropriate, to demonstrate why such sites are
not practical alternatives in terms of their availability, suitability and viability.

6.37 These terms are defined as:
•    Availability – whether sites are available now or are likely to become available
for development within a reasonable period of time (determined on the merits
of a particular case, having regard to inter alia, the urgency of the need). Where
sites become available unexpectedly after receipt of an application, the local
planning authority should take this into account in their assessment of the
application.
•    Suitability – with due regard to the requirements to demonstrate flexibility,
whether sites are suitable to accommodate the need or demand which the
proposal is intended to meet.
•    Viability – whether there is a reasonable prospect that development will occur
on the site at a particular point in time. Again the importance of demonstrating
the viability of alternatives depends in part on the nature of the need and the
timescale over which it is to be met.


Looking at the above definitions, I would suggest that any new planning application for a supermarket on Hibbert Lane would fail to meet the first two factors, because Chadwick Street is demonstrably available, and also deemed suitable , in that it has planning consent.  However, if there were to be no interest in Chadwick Street from any retailer, than the Hibbert Lane planning applicant could argue that Chadwick Street fails to meet the viability criterion, on the grounds that 'there is no reasonable prospect that development will occur on the site at a particular point in time.'
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on November 30, 2013, 11:02:23 AM
Dave,

Perhaps you're still a little bit mad about C&MSFC not getting its all singing/dancing new campus on Hibbert Lane.

Government guidelines or not this project is not going to happen if it means building a supermarket on that site. The political will is against it and whilst we have the local Councillors that we have then they will find a way of stopping it. Currently that way is the planning application for Trinity Street. As Belly says that application is valid for three years but I'm fairly sure that if required it could be extended or altered in some way beyond that if necessary. Remember 'guidelines' are exactly that - they are not laws.

IMHO a 25,000 square feet supermarket on Trinity Street is a vehicular traffic, disaster. Perhaps the Council have concluded the same and are looking to revise it.

There is also the stance of C&MSFC. They now have new management and my understanding is that they are trying to build bridges with the Council. They will hardly do that if they start talking to another supermarket. If they are still looking to sell that land then they will need the support of local Councillors in relation to its use.

As far as Kirkland/SMBC relationship is concerned. I think that the partnership is irrelevant. As I have said previously my reading of the situation is that the Council as a body doesn't need them and in these straitened times would be content to leave the site as a car park and divorce Kirkland, if that is what the have to do. I notice by the way that SMBC have just entered into a trading relationship with Carillion. So Carillion could develop TS under the auspices of the Council.

Finally the land on Hibbert Lane has dramatically reduced in value so nobody is going to pay C&MSFC the 'alleged' amount needed to refurbish Buxton Lane.

So Dave, the £11m refurbishment of Buxton Lane is dead - ACCEPT.

The key here to TS/C&MSFC is local Councillors.

For what it is worth this is my forecast.

Hibbert Lane  sold for houses.

TS either remains a car-park or is developed as a much smaller supermarket than on the original plan.

Marple Co-op becomes an Sainsbury's OR Tesco.               
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on November 30, 2013, 12:27:10 PM
Dave, Perhaps you're still a little bit mad about C&MSFC not getting its all singing/dancing new campus on Hibbert Lane.
I am.  >:(

So Dave, the £11m refurbishment of Buxton Lane is dead - ACCEPT.
I do.   :'(

Marple Co-op becomes an Sainsbury's OR Tesco. 
In your dreams!   :D
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on December 04, 2013, 11:25:47 AM
Interesting new post by MIA on the Hibbert lane thread. It includes the following statement by the College: 'The College is committed to full and frank consultation with the community about any plans.'

So we can all agree that's a welcome (if overdue) change of approach!   

And the College has also said 'A logical option is that the Hibbert Lane site could be sold for housing development.'  Not the logical option, just a logical option...........
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on December 04, 2013, 03:07:05 PM
Interesting new post by MIA on the Hibbert lane thread. It includes the following statement by the College: 'The College is committed to full and frank consultation with the community about any plans.'

So we can all agree that's a welcome (if overdue) change of approach!   

And the College has also said 'A logical option is that the Hibbert Lane site could be sold for housing development.'  Not the logical option, just a logical option...........
Thought MIA had disbanded .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: admin on December 04, 2013, 03:40:53 PM
Thought MIA had disbanded .

They have..........

4 December 2013 - MARPLE COLLEGE STATEMENT

MARPLE COLLEGE STATEMENTformer members of Marple in Action met up with Edward Vitalis...........
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on December 06, 2013, 11:00:14 AM
Interesting new post by MIA on the Hibbert lane thread. It includes the following statement by the College: 'The College is committed to full and frank consultation with the community about any plans.'

So we can all agree that's a welcome (if overdue) change of approach!   

And the College has also said 'A logical option is that the Hibbert Lane site could be sold for housing development.'  Not the logical option, just a logical option...........


What do you expect them to build there Dave ?

What would you like to see there ?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on December 06, 2013, 11:33:22 AM
As I've mentioned more than once, my humble opinion, for what it's worth, is that the College needs to get the best possible price for the Hibbert Lane site, so that they have sufficient resources to invest in Buxton Lane and give the next few generations of Marple youngsters the best possible educational facilities.  Our kids deserve nothing less.  I seem to recall that Hibbert Lane was valued at about £4 million for housing, but if planning consent can be obtained for an alternative use which would have more value, then they owe it to the community to go for that, obviously. 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Franz on December 06, 2013, 02:19:28 PM
If MIA has disbanded why is information being published "on the MIA website"?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on December 06, 2013, 02:34:36 PM
If MIA has disbanded why is information being published "on the MIA website"?

This is what I asked and was told they had Disbanded and yet they seem to be in discussion with the college .
Will be interesting if ASDA .go for Chadwick street .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: admin on December 19, 2013, 06:23:35 AM
Marple Civic Society asked the following questions at Marple Area Committee on December 11th:


Question regarding the proposed foodstore development on the site of Chadwick Street car park.

The Kirkland Planning application to build a foodstore on the site of Chawick street car park was approved by the Stockport MBC Planning and Highways Committee on 1st March 2013 and the ASDA/CAMCFC proposal was rejected at the same meeting.

On 31st May 2013 ASDA/CAMSFC announced that they would not appeal the decision made by Planning and Highways. (The appeal deadline expired on 1st September 2013).

On 10th July 2013 we asked members for an update on progress with the development.

On 25th September 2013 Cllr. Candler reported that the council is eager to progress the project and are working with their preferred partner to achieve an agreement to provide a good offering to the town.

Two and a half months has passed since that report and it is now eight months since the planning application was granted.

The Civic Society requests that councillors provide an update on progress with the Kirkland project including when the development is planned to start.

David Hoyle asked four questions all relating to the proposed foodstore on the site of Chadwick Street car park. He asked:

1. that negotiations with the developer be concluded as soon as possible.

2. serious consideration would be given to (the effect on) Marple town centre during negotiations.

3. that the long term importance of the site to Marple should be weighed against any short term gains to SMBC.

4. the council’s pro-active Town Centre First policy needs to be maintained during negotiations.

This is the council's reply:

Further to the public questions asked at the Area Committee on 11th December 2013 concerning the Chadwick Street development, the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration has provided a response and confirms that:

It is not possible to say when the development is planned to start. For this to be possible an end user will need to be contracted and for this to be possible, the relocation of the Royal Mail will need to be agreed. This remains the subject of detailed negotiations.

In respect to the request that any negotiations on the sale of the Chadwick Street site be concluded as quickly as possible - it is the intention for a report to be submitted to the council's Executive in February.

Serious consideration will be given to the future of Marple town centre in all negotiations.

In respect to the request that the long term importance of the site to Marple will be weighed against a short term financial gain to the Council - it is not a question of short term financial gain to the Council, the key issue is the optimum means of delivering the site.

In response to the suggestion that a proactive Town Centre First policy which has been applied so far in Marple should be maintained - the answer is yes. That is the council's adopted planning policy (as well as national policy) and there is no question of changing it.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Franz on February 05, 2014, 10:38:46 AM
See the following regarding tonight's Area Committee Meeting

http://democracy.stockport.gov.uk/documents/b15999/Marple%20Area%20Committee%20-%205%20February%202014%20-%20Report%20Marked%20To%20follow%20-%20item%2010%20Chadwick%20Street%2005th-.pdf?T=9

So Kirkland, who are now backtracking presumably having served their purpose at our expense, are likely to be dumped.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on February 05, 2014, 11:37:00 AM
Dam having been outed I can't speculate in the same way or throw handgranades in .

;-)

Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 05, 2014, 12:22:46 PM
Very interesting paper, Alstan - thank you. 

Looks like the Council is going to play hardball with Kirkland, along the lines of 'If you can't afford to stick to the original agreed price, then we'll develop the site ourselves'.

This could be seen as a negotiating tactic, of course, but my feeling is that Kirkland will take the opportunity to walk away from what we have all seen is a potentially costly and complex scheme.  This would leave SMBC to pick up the pieces and develop the site, in the knowledge that if they don't, they could well be receiving another application for a supermarket on Hibbert Lane.  :D

Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: hollins on February 05, 2014, 01:33:59 PM
That is a great document alstan - I'll add my thanks to those of Dave.

I'm bemused that the Council thinks it can seek reimbursement from Kirkland (items 4.2 and 9.1) when even the council's new advisors Carillion think that Kirkland's revised offer is "not unrealistic" given current market conditions (item 7.5). It's like giving someone a birthday present ... and then demanding it back! I hope that our council taxes aren't going to be paying Stockport MBC's legal bills.

The site clearly isn't viable - stop wasting our time and money and revisit Hibbert Lane.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Franz on February 05, 2014, 01:40:56 PM
Being outed, speculation and hand grenades have nothing whatsoever to do with it.

If the Executive accept the recommendation of the Corporate Director for PM&R they will reject Kirkland, compensate them for the cost of obtaining planning permission and start all over again using the SSPP.

Useful comments and information are of interest.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on February 05, 2014, 02:13:28 PM
Being outed, speculation and hand grenades have nothing whatsoever to do with it.

If the Executive accept the recommendation of the Corporate Director for PM&R they will reject Kirkland, compensate them for the cost of obtaining planning permission and start all over again using the SSPP.

Useful comments and information are of interest.

Recon about ten years for this development if it goes ahead ....
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on February 05, 2014, 03:30:21 PM
Considering this topic has been done to death on this site and every conceivable opinion expressed then we don't seem to have taken any notice of what anybody has said.

Of course the Executive will accept the recommendation of the Director. There is absolutely no doubt about that whatsoever there is no 'if' in it. That is why the issue is making an appearance tonight at the AC to fulfil protocol. If any body asks any difficult questions then the blind of confidentiality will be brought down by the Council.

Our Council taxes are paying for the work done by Kirkland to keep Asda out of Hibbert Lane which is what most people in Marple seemed to want at the time.



Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Barbara on February 05, 2014, 03:48:50 PM
Simone I am not sure that it was 'the majority of people' who were against the development of Hibbert Lane - but it was a very vocal group of 'antis' who scuppered these plans.  (I shall now sit back and await the flak!)  ;)
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 05, 2014, 04:17:15 PM
I'm bemused that the Council thinks it can seek reimbursement from Kirkland (items 4.2 and 9.1) when even the council's new advisors Carillion think that Kirkland's revised offer is "not unrealistic" given current market conditions (item 7.5). It's like giving someone a birthday present ... and then demanding it back! I hope that our council taxes aren't going to be paying Stockport MBC's legal bills.

Although it is not entirely clear, my reading of paras 4.2 and 9.1 is different from hollins: nearly two years ago, SMBC undertook to repay Kirkland for the cost of the various reports and surveys required for their planning application, if the scheme should fail to go ahead for any reason.  Kirkland paid for those reports at the time, and that cost would have been 'rolled up' into the total costs of the development if it had gone ahead.  No doubt SMBC regarded this as a necessary sweetener (for political reasons of which we are all well aware)  to get Kirkland to submit the application, by offering to mitigate any abortive costs.

So the reimbursement which is referred to is from the Council to Kirkland, on the basis that if the Council is now going to develop the site, then it should now be bearing the costs of those necessary reports.  Or as para 9.1 puts it.'Decline the revised offer from Kirkland Developments Ltd and approve their reimbursement for appropriate ‘planning’ costs for obtaining planning permission on
Chadwick Street in return for the assignment of any outputs produced by these costs'.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Franz on February 05, 2014, 04:29:04 PM
No flak, Barbara, you are absolutely right. Perhaps 1000 plus did turn out for the march on 21st August 2011, a big response considering that during the school holidays part of their support would be out of town, but that was before any proposals had been put forward and the campaign could, for the time being, rely upon rumour and outrageous and ridiculous claims.

Once proposals were put forward the support evaporated at a surprising rate until, by the time of the second ASDA/CAMSFC exhibition on Saturday 29th September 2012, their protest march could muster little more than 100. I counted 108 but I have to admit that I might have missed some of the children.

Dave, I agree with your reading of paras 4.2 and 9.1 except, of course, when they say that the Council might be bearing those costs they actually mean us. There is a small quid pro quo in that the Council might claim the right to the benefit of any reports for which they (us) compensate Kirkland
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on February 05, 2014, 07:01:46 PM
That is a great document alstan - I'll add my thanks to those of Dave.

I'm bemused that the Council thinks it can seek reimbursement from Kirkland (items 4.2 and 9.1) when even the council's new advisors Carillion think that Kirkland's revised offer is "not unrealistic" given current market conditions (item 7.5). It's like giving someone a birthday present ... and then demanding it back! I hope that our council taxes aren't going to be paying Stockport MBC's legal bills.

The site clearly isn't viable - stop wasting our time and money and revisit Hibbert Lane.

I think that misses the point. If Kirkland whan to come it at a different price it would be quite wrong for the council to agree to that and other developers might rightly complain if the council just gave it to Kirkland at a lower price. If that were the case then developers would always over bid and then come back saying the market does not bear the price. No if Kirkland want a lower price the council have to re offer it to all or take the work in house which would not require any bidding process.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on February 06, 2014, 08:51:15 AM
Barbara, what about the 8000 plus signatory petition delivered to Council opposing ASDA'S plans?

Alstan, you obviously weren't in attendance when the Area committee heard the planning application and the Cricket Club was packed to the rafters with virtually everybody in it being opposed to the proposal.

Opposition didn't evaporate after the party in the park and the ensuing  street marches, it increased dramatically.

Anyway, Hibbert  Lane is old hat now it will not be revisited and the site will contain houses within a year. It is my understanding that dialogue to bring this about between C&MSFC and SMBC is much past the initial stages.

Kirkland are also history as far as the current Trinity Street scheme is concerned and it doesn't matter Dave how much you preoccupy yourself with 'translating' the contractual arrangements between SMBC & Kirkland as this relationship is going to cease.  

What is of great relevance here and now is what is going to happen to Trinity Street ? What do we want to happen to Trinity Street ?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 06, 2014, 09:11:00 AM
Anyway, Hibbert  Lane is old hat now it will not be revisited and the site will contain houses within a year.

I doubt it - there hasn't even been a planning application yet! 

What is of great relevance here and now is what is going to happen to Trinity Street ?

My bet is - nothing. 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: tricky on February 06, 2014, 09:39:06 AM
Barbara, what about the 8000 plus signatory petition delivered to Council opposing ASDA'S plans

The petition that was collected BEFORE any plans were actually released.

Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on February 06, 2014, 09:55:50 AM
I doubt it - there hasn't even been a planning application yet! 

My bet is - nothing. 

Dave, I'm not surprised that you doubt it - you doubt everything until it has actually happened. There is a series of 'doubts' attributed o you on this website that have all happened - go on own up. You can't keep operating under a stable door/horse bolted policy.

What then do you think will happen to Hibbert Lane ?   
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on February 06, 2014, 09:57:56 AM
The petition that was collected BEFORE any plans were actually released.




And ?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: tricky on February 06, 2014, 10:06:54 AM
And?

It's worthless.

Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on February 06, 2014, 10:31:22 AM
And?

It's worthless.



So tricky, you are saying that the views of 8000 + People of Marple are "useless."
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on February 06, 2014, 10:34:37 AM
Sorry -"worthless."
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: tricky on February 06, 2014, 11:05:56 AM
No.

I am saying that the petition generated by MIA before any plans were actually released, and signed by people who were told that a 24hr megastore would be arriving, demolishing the baths etc was worthless.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on February 06, 2014, 02:48:05 PM
So tricky, you are saying that the views of 8000 + People of Marple are "useless."

They weren't all from Marple ...you made sure of that when you have people signing from Hyde and other areas ...... ........ Planning permission has not bean even sent in yet for Hibert lane . They are waiting .

Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 06, 2014, 04:36:06 PM
There is a series of 'doubts' attributed o you on this website that have all happened

Such as?

What then do you think will happen to Hibbert Lane ?  

It will probably be used for housing - but there's no way that will happen within a year if there hasn't even  been a planning application.  
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Franz on February 06, 2014, 06:28:38 PM
I agree with Tricky. I think the petition can be easily dismissed. It was started in August 2011 and by the end of October 2011 there were claims on the website that it had received 7500 signatures. That was at a time when Mr Hoyle claimed that Marple in Action represented the views of some 19,000 Marple residents and MIA was, as Tricky suggests, fat on a diet of ”development the size of  seven football pitches”, “swimming pool to be demolished to make way for a roundabout “ etc, etc. etc.

By the time the petition was presented, in December 2012, a great deal of information was available and scaremongering had of necessity been replaced by the consideration of facts. During that intervening fourteen month period the petition had apparently gained just 770 signatures. In addition MIA have always ignored suggestions that they should reveal just how many of the signatories were Marple residents. Somewhat less than 19,000 obviously.

No one has ever said that MIA had no support, there is obviously a hardcore. How many would you say were at the Marple Area Committee meeting, 200?

I believe that the numbers turning out for protest marches give some indication of the rate of evaporation of support among the general public. At the first such march in August 2011 the turnout was estimated to exceed 1000. It  was on a Saturday and the weather was good. The campaign was well and truly in la la land at the time but the fact that it was during the school holidays could have reduced the turnout.

There was another protest march on 7th July 2012, at the time of the first ASDA/CAMSFC public consultation. By then the campaign had found itself in the real world and MIA estimated the turnout at “around 200”. Again it was on a Saturday with fine weather, there was a similar campaign to raise support, and this time turnout would not have been affected by school holiday absentees.

Finally there was the march on 29th September 2012 at the time of the second public consultation. Again neither the weather nor school holidays were an issue and similar requests for support were made. To be honest I was staggered by tiny turnout of about 100 supporters. Subsequently MIA said virtually nothing about this march and  published no estimate of the numbers, which is hardly surprising. I can add to that the number of comments I heard at the July 2012 consultation to the effect that it all seemed quite reasonable and “I wouldn’t have signed the petition if I had known it was going to be like this”.
 
I  think it reasonable to describe a fall of 90% in public support as a dramatic decrease. It was always likely that support would fall when the facts were known and it became clear that the proposals were for a facility commensurate with the needs of Marple, not the nightmare scenario that MIA had endeavoured to portray, but nothing on this scale

Don’t spend a lot of time trying to analyse the terms of any contract between Kirkland and SMBC. There isn’t one and there never has been. It seems to be some sort of arrangement. This, of course gives rise to a host of questions which our councillors seem reluctant to answer.
Is this the way SMBC normally do business?
If not why was this one different?
Was it for any reason expected to be a temporary arrangement?
Presumably if Kirkland have no contractual obligations then, presumably, SMBC don’t either?
In which case why does the report prepared for Marple Area Committee recommend that SMBC throw some of the Council Tax payer’s cash at Kirkland?
To name a few.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: admin on February 06, 2014, 06:52:34 PM
Not been able to get this tune out of my head for a couple of days. Thankfully it's one of my favourites!

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1H-Y7MAASkg&feature=kp
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 06, 2014, 07:15:22 PM
Presumably if Kirkland have no contractual obligations then, presumably, SMBC don’t either?
In which case why does the report prepared for Marple Area Committee recommend that SMBC throw some of the Council Tax payer’s cash at Kirkland?

Because if they don't, the whole scheme will collapse, leaving the way open for another planning application for a supermarket somewhere else (e.g. Hibbert Lane).  :o

You're right, Mark, we all ought to get over it and move on.  On the other hand, there's nothing our councillors would like better than for us all to avert our eyes from the slow-motion car crash that's taking place - so I don't think we should!  
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: admin on February 06, 2014, 07:56:16 PM
You're right, Mark, we all ought to get over it and move on.  On the other hand, there's nothing our councillors would like better than for us all to avert our eyes from the slow-motion car crash that's taking place - so I don't think we should!  

I'm not suggesting we stop talking about Chadwick Street - that's really important - or even start a NEW campaign for a Supermarket on Hibbert Lane if that's what you want. Go and meet with the college and try to influence their plans, form a pressure group, whatever - it's all this recycling about validity of old petitions and raking over what happened with a fine tooth comb - MiA this, MiA that! That's history, it doesn't matter - ASDA has gone. Move on and focus on achieving something positive for Marple, whatever you think that is.

It is a great intro though, don't you think?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 06, 2014, 11:05:22 PM
MiA this, MiA that! That's history, it doesn't matter
Agreed.

It is a great intro though, don't you think?
Also agreed.   :D
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: marpleexile on February 07, 2014, 06:33:13 AM
I'm not suggesting we stop talking about Chadwick Street - that's really important - or even start a NEW campaign for a Supermarket on Hibbert Lane if that's what you want. Go and meet with the college and try to influence their plans, form a pressure group, whatever - it's all this recycling about validity of old petitions and raking over what happened with a fine tooth comb - MiA this, MiA that! That's history, it doesn't matter - ASDA has gone. Move on and focus on achieving something positive for Marple, whatever you think that is.

It is a great intro though, don't you think?

There has probably been a little too much raking over old ground, but the fact is, Chadwick Street is only on the table as a spoiling tactic for the proposed Hibbert Lane development, so some of the history is relevant.

Take, for example, the Council reimbursing the developers for the cost of reports and surveys. If Chadwick Street had been the Council trying to dispose of derelict/unused land, and they had promised to underwrite the costs of investigating doing so to ensure that someone did, then that would be fair enough. It would have been a gamble that unfortunately in this instance didn't pay off.

However, that's not the case, and essentially what has happened is that the Council will pay out what must surely be a good few thousand pounds (if not 10s of thousands of pounds) just to stop the Hibbert Lane development. In my opinion that is a horrendous waste of tax payers money.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on February 07, 2014, 09:03:20 AM
I think Exile that you might be looking at 'compensation' in  the hundreds of thousands of pounds not tens but that should be easy enough to establish one way or the other for those that are interested in establishing such things. There are many who would think that this is money well spent on preventing ASDA coming to Hibbert Lane. 

I don't see it as a gamble that hasn't paid off unless you see CAMSFC as the gambler as it certainly didn't pay off for them but then they dealt the hands from the beginning and just saw their playing partner as too powerful and underestimated others around the table.

As far as local Councillors are concerned they didn't want a supermarket on Hibbert Lane at any cost and they set about destroying that ambition. It's true that they did it in a devious (some would say clever) way but they are Politicians aren't they.

I personally wasn't at the AC the other night when the Director presented on Chadwick Street but I have spoken to somebody who was and she told me that it was totally obvious who was calling the shots as far as any future development of Chadwick Street is concerned and it was the Marple 6 OR The Marple 4 as they were on the night.

She said that it certainly didn't seem to her that Chadwick Street was just a 'spoiling tactic' for Hibbert Lane. It seemed that the Marple 4 genuinely had plans for it - it's just that they weren't telling anybody what they were.

On a positive/creative note I hope and IMHO and now that all the dust has settled on Hibbert Lane I think that Local Councillors were right to stop it. I also think that the right size/identity supermarket on Trinity Street with the right kind of traffic management would be an asset to Marple Community.

I certainly don't understand where this slow car crash is that is waiting to happen.   
 

       
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Franz on February 07, 2014, 09:25:41 AM
You’re lucky admin, my current earworm is Nurse with Wound and Easy Listening Nightmares. Like all their work it might be regarded by many as monotonous but there is a place and time for everything. Thankfully, when they take a break another earworm steps in, Joan as Policewoman with Game of Life.

Perhaps you should have started an earworm thread, this could catch on
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 07, 2014, 09:58:18 AM
There are many who would think that this is money well spent on preventing ASDA coming to Hibbert Lane.

Yes they would - but only if it works.   But if the Chadwick Street site ends up staying as it is (which IMO is the most likely outcome), then there is nothing to stop another planning application for a supermarket on Hibbert Lane or another 'edge of centre' site.  And as we know, such an application would now stand a better chance of success, by passing the so-called 'sequential test'.  In which case, as marplexile so rightly says, the money spent by SMBC will have been 'a horrendous waste of taxpayers money''.  

That is what I meant when I referred to a 'slow-motion car crash'.  
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Franz on February 07, 2014, 11:24:31 AM
I agree that my, perhaps too lengthy, post (353), delved into the past but Simone’s suggestion that support for MIA grew “dramatically” during the period of street marches could not be left unanswered.

This current burst of activity stems from the posting of the link to the report being presented at the MAC meeting 3 days ago and this cannot be regarded as “old hat”.

At the meeting those parts of the report which are entrusted to the public were summarised . At the end of the summary, and with some resistance from the chair,  a question was asked, ie  “Why is there not a fifth option for Councillors to consider, that is to require Kirkland to continue and fulfil their contractual obligations?”. The answer given was that there is no contract and thus nothing that can be enforced. Obviously this immediately gave rise to a number of further questions but an attempt to ask them was rebuffed, the meeting was declared closed to the public forthwith and members of the public were asked to leave the room.

Of course the Councillors appeared enthusiastic regarding the Chadkirk St development, the largest group present were members of Marple Business Forum, and former stalwarts of the demised MIA but the possibility of finding alternative sites was also mentioned. As for “calling the shots”, their failure to reach a decision regarding a muddy footpath did not inspire confidence.

I think you may not be too far off the mark, Simone, in suggesting that the compensation might amount to six figures and there might be a few, mainly MBF members, who would think it money well spent, but “there are many”? I rather doubt it. Perhaps you are thinking that this would be Marple’s money but it would not, it would be SMBC’s money. Do you honestly think the people of Hazel Grove, Brinnington and Bredbury would stand up and say “Good old Marple, you go for it, splash our cash, we’ve got nothing better to spend it on” ?

Just assume, hypothetically and purely for the sake of argument, that the answers to the questions set out in my earlier post were;-

No, it’s not the way we normally do business.
This wasn’t normal business
Looks like it’s turned out that way
Yes that would be right
Errr, I need to take advice on this one

In those circumstances I can think of only one way forward. The dilemma is, of course, what conclusion would we draw if no answers were forthcoming.

Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 07, 2014, 05:29:10 PM
A pretty good summing up there, I think.  However, a reading of the committee paper which alstan kindly published on this thread a few days ago does provide some justification for this:
In which case why does the report prepared for Marple Area Committee recommend that SMBC throw some of the Council Tax payer’s cash at Kirkland?

Para 9.1 of the report refers to 'reimbursement for appropriate ‘planning’ costs for obtaining planning permission on Chadwick Street in return for the assignment of any outputs produced by these costs.' (my italics).  So if SMBC decide to develop the site themselves, they will presumably either take over the existing planning consent, or submit a new application.  If they take over the existing consent, then it's reasonable for them to compensate Kirkland for the cost of securing it.  On the other hand, if the Council submits a fresh planning application, then the site surveys and other reports which Kirkland commissioned and paid for to support their own planning application can be used by SMBC for the same purpose, so it would be equally reasonable that the Council should pay for them.

Of course, if in the end the Council doesn't develop the site (which would not surprise me at all - far from it), then the justification for reimbursing Kirkland disappears, and we are left with marplexile's 'horrendous waste of taxpayers' money'  
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on February 10, 2014, 08:29:56 AM
As innocent bystanders we can debate the effect of petitions and marches time over. In fact we have.

What mattered of course was the perception of local Councillors in relation to this opposition. It seemed to me that they considered it strong  enough to come out in support of it. So in that sense the Marches and Petitions worked for as we now all realise even though some of us are still clinging on by our fingernails - there will be NO supermarket on Hibbert Lane.  

From the onset the preferred developer made proclamations and assertions about interested parties though to my knowledge they didn't name any of these parties. Names did surface but they had their origins in speculation. Some of it from this website.

The decision makers could easily leave Trinity Street fallow for 2/3 years maybe more. It may be for the sake of outside appearances but they seem to be not doing that. Again the decision makers seem to have lost patience when a lethargic attitude would be to keep it.

As I say all old hat and we are left with our own assumptions, hypothesis and for the sake of arguments in fact we are even now using these very words only thinly disguised.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Franz on February 10, 2014, 03:12:07 PM
Yes, Simone, I was led to believe by Kirkland’s representatives at their PR exercise at the library that all the supermarkets, particularly the “quality” retailers, were queuing up to bid for the site. Not so it seems.

I don’t think our councillors will be left in peace if they attempt to let the issue lie fallow for a while. They are under considerable pressure from Marple Business Forum to ensure that Marple develops as a “district” shopping centre and, at last weeks meeting, they were assured by the chairman that it was the intention of the local committee to actively pursue that objective, including the possibility of finding an alternative site for a supermarket if necessary.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: tinsley on February 10, 2014, 03:50:23 PM
MIA have a lot to answer for. We need a decent shopping outlet store in Marple. Never seen the the Two Ronnie's  shopping in Marple.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 10, 2014, 05:05:27 PM
I don’t think our councillors will be left in peace if they attempt to let the issue lie fallow for a while. They are under considerable pressure from Marple Business Forum to ensure that Marple develops as a “district” shopping centre and, at last weeks meeting, they were assured by the chairman that it was the intention of the local committee to actively pursue that objective, including the possibility of finding an alternative site for a supermarket if necessary.

But we already know that the Chadwick Street/Trinity Street site was identified by SMBC as the only site within the designated 'town centre' area which was deemed to be available, suitable and viable for a supermarket.  So the only possible alternative sites will be 'edge of centre', such as, er, Hibbert Lane?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Barbara on February 10, 2014, 08:57:07 PM
All the people I talk to about this proposed development are appalled at the probable (I would say certain) traffic chaos it will cause! I agree another supermarket in Marple would be a good idea, as the population has increased enormously over the years, but the effect of a development on Chadwick/Trinity Street is awful to contemplate.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Howard on February 10, 2014, 09:36:27 PM
I agree Marple needs competition for the co-op. Hibbert Lane will not be developed as retail so there are two spaces where a large(ish) retail centre could be built. CHadwick Street is 1 and the only other possible space is the Rec. The Rec has no planning permission and Chadwick Street does. Therefore, if a new supermarket is built, it will be on Chadwick Centre.

Let's face it, the way that the centre of Marple has developed over the years means there are no decent spaces that don't have houses or other popular amenities which could be demolished to build on.

PS, I only mentioned the Rec as a largely unused open space close to the centre, not because I have any inside knowledge or have heard any rumours at all about it. In fact, forget I ever mentioned it.  :)
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on February 10, 2014, 11:46:45 PM
All the people I talk to about this proposed development are appalled at the probable (I would say certain) traffic chaos it will cause! I agree another supermarket in Marple would be a good idea, as the population has increased enormously over the years, but the effect of a development on Chadwick/Trinity Street is awful to contemplate.

You are of course absolutely right Barbara and there is no apparent answer to this conundrum. If the supermarket is a small one then what is the point of it and if it is a large one then how will the traffic be managed. If the held view for some was that a large supermarket on Hibbert Lane would cause traffic chaos then what will a large supermarket in the centre of Marple do for the traffic chaos? Improve it tremendously  no doubt - the chaos I mean not the situation.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 11, 2014, 09:49:20 AM
if a new supermarket is built, it will be on Chadwick Centre.

Indeed - but the key word there is 'if'.  We can be sure that Kirkland will have tried very hard indeed to persuade one of the big supermarket chains to take the site, but without success.  So as things currently stand, there is no prospect of a supermarket being built on any town centre site.  For the planners' definition of 'town centre', see this map:  http://www.marplepartnership.org.uk/map.htm.  The boundary of the town centre is in red.  Anything outside that boundary but within 300 metres of it is officially designated 'edge of centre'.  

In which case, as I pointed out in a recent post, the inescapable conclusion is that the only way a new supermarket can be built in Marple will be on an edge-of-centre site.  Howard mentions the rec, and that is certainly edge-of-centre, but no-one could seriously imagine a supermarket being built there.   So where could it be built?  
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: tricky on February 11, 2014, 12:44:43 PM
Goyt Mill is still for sale..

that's a very big site..
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 11, 2014, 01:42:29 PM
But that's even less likely to become a supermarket, because it's not in the town centre, and as it's more than 300 metres beyond the town centre boundary it's not edge of centre either.  

Looks like the link in my previous post isn't working, so I'll try it again:  http://www.marplepartnership.org.uk/map.htm
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: gazwhite on February 11, 2014, 05:40:19 PM
Knock down the Fire Station/redevelop the car park next to it and stick an Aldi on the site...

Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Franz on February 11, 2014, 06:58:04 PM
An excerpt from the agenda for this evening's SMBC Executive meeting:-

17.   Chadwick Street, Marple (EDR22)  PDF 36 KB
    View the background to item 17.
To consider a joint report of the Executive Councillors (Economic Development & Regeneration) and (Corporate, Customer & Community Services)
 
The report seeks to inform the Executive of the submission of a revised offer from Kirkland Developments Ltd (attached as a Confidential Appendix 1) and review options for progressing the proposed retail development scheme in Marple District Centre
 
(Note: this report contains information ‘not for publication’ contained in its appendices that have been circulated to executive councillors only)
 
The Executive is recommended to:
 
•         Decline the revised offer from Kirkland Developments Ltd and approve their reimbursement for appropriate ‘planning’ costs for obtaining planning permission on Chadwick Street in return for the assignment of any outputs produced by these costs.
 
•         Give delegated authority to the Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services and the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration, in conjunction with the Executive Councillors (Corporate, Customer & Community Services) and (Economic Development & Regeneration), to bring forward the delivery of a retail scheme on Chadwick Street, Marple utilising the Stockport Strategic Property Partnership.
 
Officer contact: George Perrin, 0161 474 4510, George.perrin@stockport.gov.uk
Additional documents:
    Chadwick Street, Marple Main Report , item 17.  PDF 36 KB
    Restricted enclosure 33

Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on February 12, 2014, 11:03:07 AM
Indeed - but the key word there is 'if'.  We can be sure that Kirkland will have tried very hard indeed to persuade one of the big supermarket chains to take the site, but without success.  So as things currently stand, there is no prospect of a supermarket being built on any town centre site.  For the planners' definition of 'town centre', see this map:  http://www.marplepartnership.org.uk/map.htm.  The boundary of the town centre is in red.  Anything outside that boundary but within 300 metres of it is officially designated 'edge of centre'.  

In which case, as I pointed out in a recent post, the inescapable conclusion is that the only way a new supermarket can be built in Marple will be on an edge-of-centre site.  Howard mentions the rec, and that is certainly edge-of-centre, but no-one could seriously imagine a supermarket being built there.   So where could it be built?  
Dave,

I'm not quite sure what you are trying to prove here. You seem to be having some kind of debate with yourself as to what defines town centre/edge of centre/boundaries. The definitions themselves don't really matter that much.

As far as Kirkland are concerned we can't be 'sure' of anything. Maybe they just didn't try hard enough to bring a supermarket to  Chadwick St and the Council became disillusioned with their failure to do so. Or maybe they just did exactly what they were supposed to do and received whatever they received for a job done.

It seems to me now that the Council are genuinely looking at bringing a Supermarket to that site and that now having taken everything in -house they will have total control over such aspects as the final choice retailer.

There is no 'inescapable conclusion' whatsoever to be had at this stage.

We will as usual all have to wait and see.        
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on February 12, 2014, 11:31:57 AM
Knock down the Fire Station/redevelop the car park next to it and stick an Aldi on the site...


It will not hapen were stuck with what we have . The councill will be fafing around for years .. ..
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 12, 2014, 02:18:48 PM
There is no 'inescapable conclusion' whatsoever to be had at this stage.

Sorry, I obviously failed to make my point clear.  I'll try again.

1.  A quick look at this map confirms that only possible site for a new 25,000 sq.ft. supermarket within the boundaries of the town centre is Chadwick Street.   http://www.marplepartnership.org.uk/map.htm
2.  Kirkland have tried and failed to persuade any supermarket chain to take the site.
3.  SMBC may have more success, but as amazon rightly points out, they are more likely to fail.  After all, why should they succeed after others have failed.  
4.  If they fail, the 'inescapable conclusion' is that the only place for a supermarket will be edge of centre.  

By the way, there's no 'debate..... as to what defines town centre/edge of centre/boundaries.'  It's all laid down in black and white in government planning guidelines. 
 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: hollins on February 12, 2014, 03:51:50 PM
By the way, there's no 'debate..... as to what defines town centre/edge of centre/boundaries.'  It's all laid down in black and white in government planning guidelines. 

Towns develop. Their centres change and it is perfectly possible for a council with the will ... to redraw whatever boundaries it chooses. Marple's population has increased many times since somebody arbitrarily drew a boundary on that map. There are plenty of retail outlets outside it anyway.

A lot of the data in the marplepartnership website seems very out of date; for example, one of the "Groups represented" is Ridge Danyers College, whilst the last data for "Marple's Performance" is 2001 (12 or 13 years old). Either way, this is definitely not an elected (or representative) body.

The Chadwick Street development is not feasible or economic and probably isn't desirable (at least that is what the big supermarkets clearly think, or there would be a firmer tenant in the wings by now). It was an ill-thought-out (and wasteful and costly) attempt to block a Hibbert Lane development.

Simply redraw the "town centre/town edge" boundaries to include the Hibbert Lane site. Otherwise someone may eventually end up putting a large supermarket at the Goyt Mill or the Marple Garden Centre and that really would cripple the centre of Marple.

What was actually decided at the Stockport MBC Executive Meeting by the way?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 12, 2014, 05:22:29 PM
Hollins sums up the position well, although I think this is stretching a point:
There are plenty of retail outlets outside it [the town centre boundary] anyway.

Actually, a close look at the map suggests that there is not a single shop outside the red line, apart from those which are not in the centre at all, such as Marple Bridge, Rose Hill and Hawk Green. 

A supermarket at Dooley Lane can almost be ruled out, because it is so far 'out of town' and therefore completely contrary to planning guidance.  However, if Hibbert Lane is sold for housing, and therefore no longer available for retail use, then it's possible that Goyt Mill could come in to the frame as a supermarket site by virtue of passing the sequential test. 

It would be ironic if the gang that stymied the college's development plans (MIA, MBF, councillors, MP) found that their actions had led to a supermarket being built further away from the town centre, and therefore, as hollins points out, potentially more detrimental to local shops than a Hibbert Lane Asda would have been.   ::)
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Barbara on February 12, 2014, 07:19:05 PM
And also detrimental to the businesses sited in the Goyt Mill!
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on February 12, 2014, 08:32:58 PM
And also detrimental to the businesses sited in the Goyt Mill!
Most likely be turned into apartments .same for Compstall mill if that's ever sorted .both mills are in a bad state of repair . Don't think they are listed buildings .A lot of Compstall mill is empty .....
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: My login is Henrietta on February 12, 2014, 09:54:09 PM
Knock down the Fire Station/redevelop the car park next to it and stick an Aldi on the site...


And to where would you relocate the fire station?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: PhilB on February 12, 2014, 09:57:15 PM
If the coop wasn't a coop and it was a decent supermarket, would Marple actually need a second supermarket?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: My login is Henrietta on February 12, 2014, 10:05:41 PM
Goyt Mill is still for sale..



Who sez?

There was a link, which seems to have disappeared, to Right Move but it wouldn't work and now I can't find it.  There are plenty of units WITHIN the mill to let and for sale on Right Move but I can't find any reference to the mill itself being for sale apart from on the Marple website.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: PhilB on February 12, 2014, 10:11:46 PM
It's on rightmove. 6 million pounds.

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/commercial-property-for-sale/property-40002676.html
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: My login is Henrietta on February 12, 2014, 10:19:05 PM
It's on rightmove. 6 million pounds.
Yes, in the meantime I've found it.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on February 13, 2014, 12:30:52 PM
If the coop wasn't a coop and it was a decent supermarket, would Marple actually need a second supermarket?

Just depends on what super market marple needs competition .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on February 13, 2014, 12:39:06 PM
Yes, in the meantime I've found it.

Have you seen the state of the mill outside .its a eyesore apartments or pulled down . Problem is not a lot of spare money available .for redevelopment . Compstall mill classic example . That's been sold four times over a five year period .jenkins now owni it they buy. mills up for apartments . Very large one doing now in Bolton .

They are doing up but that's stopped lack of cash ....
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: ringi on February 13, 2014, 06:48:03 PM
If the coop wasn't a coop and it was a decent supermarket, would Marple actually need a second supermarket?

Yes, as different people expect a different mix of “cheap” and “quality” so will never agree on what a decent supermarket is.   (But can agree on what is not a decent supermarket!)
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Bowden Guy on February 13, 2014, 09:54:22 PM
Northwich is a similar size town to Marple. For many years it has had a Tesco, a Sainsbury's, an Aldi, a Lidl as well as M & S Food.  A few months ago, a new Waitrose store opened on the banks of the Weaver. Just a few days ago, plans were announced for a new flagship Asda store in the new Baron's Quay development.

And what have we got? A glorified convenience store and an Iceland. Well done, Councillors.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on February 14, 2014, 10:22:19 AM


And what have we got? A glorified convenience store and an Iceland. Well done, Councillors.
So you think the Local Authority should have the power to compel stores to local in Marple- Strange.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Bowden Guy on February 14, 2014, 12:03:14 PM
Not compel, encourage.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 14, 2014, 03:30:43 PM
...rather than prevent, which is what our lot have done.   ::)
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Franz on February 14, 2014, 05:20:17 PM
I was in Congleton yesterday.The busy main shopping street has a similar mix of shops to Marple, a reasonable mix of retailers, four vacant premises, some charity shops, coffee shops, and various service providers but there are also a Morrisons, Aldi, Farmfoods and Costcutter in the centre plus a Tesco Superstore (average Superstore sales area 38,000 sq ft) and M&S Simply Food on the edge of centre and a Coop supermarket within 1km. 

Congleton has a population of 26,000 so it is larger than Marple but, even taking that into account, the facilities for shopping bear no comparison. Since we moved here 35 years ago I have forgotten what it is like to shop locally, the weekly commute out of town has become second nature although we do use just one local retailer, The Hollins, a shop that never ceases to amaze me
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 14, 2014, 06:03:47 PM
And you are not alone, Franz.  The report commissioned by SMBC from consultants Hollis Vincent identified a total of £27 million per year being spent by residents of Marple at supermarkets in Stockport, Hyde, Bredbury, Hazel Grove, Glossop and Whaley Bridge.  This is money that could (and should, IMO) be being spent in Marple, and be contributing to the economy and to job creation in our own area.  

See para 4.12 of http://democracy.stockport.gov.uk/documents/s25234/FINAL%20Marple%20Foodstores%20Report%20-%2022%2001.pdf.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Bowden Guy on February 14, 2014, 06:57:37 PM
Hollins is, indeed, a great shop!
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on February 14, 2014, 08:51:50 PM
And you are not alone, Franz.  The report commissioned by SMBC from consultants Hollis Vincent identified a total of £27 million per year being spent by residents of Marple at supermarkets in Stockport, Hyde, Bredbury, Hazel Grove, Glossop and Whaley Bridge.  This is money that could (and should, IMO) be being spent in Marple, and be contributing to the economy and to job creation in our own area.  

See para 4.12 of http://democracy.stockport.gov.uk/documents/s25234/FINAL%20Marple%20Foodstores%20Report%20-%2022%2001.pdf.

Quite right Dave but the opportunity has now gone .certain people some from Marple and outlining areas demonstrated that they wanted marple to stay as it is .even though a lot of them did there supermarket shopping else were ...what will Marple be like in a few years time .Marple is going to sleep slowly .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on February 15, 2014, 11:38:32 AM
...rather than prevent, which is what our lot have done.   ::)

This isn't true Dave, they prevented a supermarket coming to HIBBERT LANE for reasons rightly or wrongly that are open and well documented.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 15, 2014, 12:02:51 PM
I take Simone's point: the intention of our councillors was to prevent a supermarket being built on Hibbert Lane.  However, unless the council succeeds in persuading a supermarket chain to take Chadwick Street (don't hold your breath), the effect of the councillors' actions will have been to prevent a supermarket being built on any site in Marple. 
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Bowden Guy on February 15, 2014, 09:03:52 PM
Have the "Marple 6" (as Simone calls them)  ever wondered what will happen to our town centre if the small, independent shops go out of business, whether due to high rents, high business rates or as a result of the fundamental migration to internet shopping we are now witnessing?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on February 16, 2014, 11:35:55 AM
Have the "Marple 6" (as Simone calls them)  ever wondered what will happen to our town centre if the small, independent shops go out of business, whether due to high rents, high business rates or as a result of the fundamental migration to internet shopping we are now witnessing?

That's probably why Bowden they opposed the Hibbert Lane Supermarket so as not to accelerate the process you have just described. As well as this you could always write to them and ask them directly.

Furthermore there are local elections in May and if the media is to believed then the LibDems needn't bother turning up.   
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Barbara on February 16, 2014, 12:21:27 PM
Do we all believe what the media tell us?   ;)
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: corium on February 16, 2014, 02:45:41 PM
"..... independent shops go out of business, whether due to high rents, high business rates or as a result of the fundamental migration to internet shopping we are now witnessing?"

I'm sorry to say in a number of cases also due to total indifference to the concept of serving customers, doing what you say you will etc. Not in all cases there are some good shops here, but too many mediocre ones as well
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Franz on February 18, 2014, 12:54:38 PM
The minutes of the SMBC Executive Committee meeting on 11th February have now been published.

“ 18. CHADWICK STREET, MARPLE (EDR22)
A joint report of the Executive Councillors (Economic Development & Regeneration) and
(Corporate, Customer & Community Services) was submitted (copies of which had been
circulated) informing the Executive Meeting of the submission of a revised offer from
Kirkland Developments Ltd (attached as a Confidential Appendix to the report) for the
purchase of the Chadwick Street Car Park, Marple. The Executive were invited to review
options for progressing the proposed retail development scheme in Marple District Centre.
(Note: this report contains information ‘not for publication’ contained in its appendices that
have been circulated to executive councillors only)
The Leader of the Council (Policy, Reform & Finance) confirmed that the report had been
considered by the Marple Area Committee at its meeting on 5 February 2014 and that they
had supported the proposed approach.
RESOLVED – (1) The revised offer from Kirkland Developments Ltd for the purchase of
Chadwick Street Car Park be declined and that they be reimbursed for appropriate
‘planning’ costs for obtaining planning permission on Chadwick Street in return for the
assignment of any outputs produced by these costs.
(2) That the Corporate Directors for Corporate and Support Services and for Place
Management & Regeneration, in conjunction with the Executive Councillors (Corporate,
Customer & Community Services) and (Economic Development & Regeneration) be
authorised to bring forward the delivery of a retail scheme on Chadwick Street, Marple
utilising the Stockport Strategic Property Partnership.”
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on February 18, 2014, 02:46:29 PM
Or as amazon so wisely observed:
It will not hapen were stuck with what we have . The councill will be fafing around for years .. ..
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: simonesaffron on February 18, 2014, 05:54:05 PM
Or as amazon so wisely observed:

Let's just hope that the Council don't see Amazon's view as a 'wisely observed' or they may just think ...why bother?     
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: admin on February 24, 2014, 08:57:58 PM
Marple Civic Society have reported their concerns about traffic on their web site yesterday:

http://marplecivicsociety.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/chadwick-street-car-park-change-of.html?spref=tw

Quote from: Marple Civic Society Web Site
At a closed session of Marple Area Committee on 5th February 2014 councillors voted to recommend acceptance of a report by the Director for Place Management and Regeneration on the future development of Chadwick Street car park.

The report recommended that the contract with their previously preferred developer, Kirkland Developments, should be terminated and the council proceed with an in-house scheme using their new property partners Carillion:CBRE.  The Civic Society submitted a report to the Area Committee restating its position that it supports the foodstore development as a means of regenerating Marple but has grave concerns regarding the council's traffic scheme and calls for an independent study. See here for our report. The Director's report came before the Council Executive the following week for final approval and was approved. See here for minutes of the Council Executive meeting (Item 18).

We have two serious concerns:


  • an in-house scheme removes commercial pressure and therefore could delay the start date of the development.
  • there will be no requirement to resubmit a new planning application.  This means that the council's traffic scheme, which will create a 'ring road' effect around the new store and precinct, has planning permission to go ahead.

Would you like to see this space used for an extra lane of traffic?

The Director's report states that the development "is strongly supported by the local community".  This may well be the case for the foodstore but the traffic scheme was NOT part of the Kirkland consultation. Therefore, the community has NOT been consulted on the widening of Stockport Road at the Hollins Lane junction (including pedestrian island and two stage crossing) or traffic lights to replace the roundabout at Littlewoods butchers. Indeed residents consulted by the Civic Society, many of whom attended the Kirland consultation, were not aware of the traffic proposals.

Following the Area Committee meeting, chair of committee Cllr. Candler wrote to the Civic Society in response to our submission.  He said that our report would be minuted, that the Area Committee understood our concerns and that "there may well be a need for a complete review of the highway implications of any revised scheme as we move forward".  

However, the minutes of the Council Executive meeting, where the decision was taken, show that the Civic Society's concerns were not discussed.  Only public pressure now stands in the way of a full implementation of the council's traffic scheme.  

The Civic Society's position remains that we support the provision of a food store on Chadwick Street car park with the condition that an independent urban design exercise is carried out to include meaningful consultation with the local community.

In view of the long term effects the development will have on our town the Civic Society believes that this is not too much to ask.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Berni inn on February 24, 2014, 09:10:38 PM
Did the civic society object or raise concerns at last years planning stage?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: admin on February 24, 2014, 09:40:40 PM
Did the civic society object or raise concerns at last years planning stage?

Yes, they raised exactly the same traffic concerns as they are reiterating now (as explained in the text below and on their web site).
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Belly on February 24, 2014, 10:09:33 PM
Interesting and hardly surprising really.

The Chadwick St scheme has the potential to be a total nightmare for Marple in traffic and parking terms. Something that a few of us have been harping on about for some time and something that was brushed under the carpet during the hullabaloo regarding the other scheme. Out of the frying pan into the fire.

It would be nice to think that the Council might try to look at alternatives on the scheme but I doubt that will happen. Why would it. Unless a campaign gets up.........
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on February 25, 2014, 08:23:53 PM
Interesting and hardly surprising really.

The Chadwick St scheme has the potential to be a total nightmare for Marple in traffic and parking terms. Something that a few of us have been harping on about for some time and something that was brushed under the carpet during the hullabaloo regarding the other scheme. Out of the frying pan into the fire.

It would be nice to think that the Council might try to look at alternatives on the scheme but I doubt that will happen. Why would it. Unless a campaign gets up.........

What alternatives it will never Hapen there will be another man on the moon first ....
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: wheels on March 01, 2014, 06:17:09 PM
Or as amazon so wisely observed:

I shall save this quote Dave and continually remind you and Amazon of it in years to come
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Berni inn on March 25, 2014, 11:56:18 PM
Aldi are growing at such a rate that the new store in offerton has had no affect on the hazel grove store.

They are actually going to open a second hazel grove store adjacent to carpet right.

That looks like a cheap conversion, so the cost per sqft of the chadwick st build looks again silly.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: bat man on March 26, 2014, 12:29:50 PM
Hi,
     could you please let me know were you got the information about a second Aldi in Hazel grove.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: ringi on March 27, 2014, 10:49:42 AM
Aldi are growing at such a rate that the new store in offerton has had no affect on the hazel grove store.

If you think about the road network rather than just distance then I expect that the catchment area does not overlap much.
As top end of Offerton had no supermarket close by (even worse than Marple), I wonder how much the Aldi is being used for “catch up” shopping by people that do their main shopping elsewhere?

Bluezorro, do you have access to the sale figures for Aldi’s stores?

From what I have seen on the limited times I have been into local Aldi stores there are lot of people not buying match, maybe doing shopping most days – however that may just be the times of day I went in.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Barbara on March 27, 2014, 10:53:10 AM
Came past the site where the Dialstone Centre is being demolished and was amazed how large it is.  If this site is scheduled for housing, then Aldi have made a good move as there will be hundreds of people within walking distance of this new store.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: ringi on March 27, 2014, 11:10:20 AM
Came past the site where the Dialstone Centre is being demolished and was amazed how large it is.  If this site is scheduled for housing, then Aldi have made a good move as there will be hundreds of people within walking distance of this new store.

I don’t know, I think the housing may be too up market for Aldi’s target customers, but they will get some trade from there.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Berni inn on March 27, 2014, 07:41:13 PM
How can you suggest that certain housing areas are too upmarket for aldi?
Have you not seen the customers that use them?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: thebigshed on March 27, 2014, 08:56:12 PM
I don’t know, I think the housing may be too up market for Aldi’s target customers.

Aldi's produce is good quality as well as being very good value.  They may not stock as many lines as the big stores but it's fantastic for basic shopping. Those who won't shop at Aldi because it's "too down market" don't know what they're missing!

We need an Aldi in Marple.  I'd use it all the time.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Blossom on March 27, 2014, 09:43:34 PM
Aldi's produce is good quality as well as being very good value.  They may not stock as many lines as the big stores but it's fantastic for basic shopping. Those who won't shop at Aldi because it's "too down market" don't know what they're missing!

We need an Aldi in Marple.  I'd use it all the time.


This is so true.  I would love one in Marple as well.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: the rover on March 28, 2014, 06:54:17 AM
This is so true.  I would love one in Marple as well.

Me too, we do 98% of our shopping in Aldi and have done so since the first one opened nearby. Our dog won't eat their dog food but then she is a very fussy dog, I seem to remember somebody saying their cat does not like their cat food either.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Berni inn on March 28, 2014, 08:41:38 AM
Where do you shop ringi?

Does the supermarket you go to reflect who you are or where your house is?
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Lily on March 28, 2014, 03:52:45 PM
https://corporate.aldi.co.uk/en/property/requirement-towns/north-england/



Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: ringi on March 28, 2014, 04:31:43 PM
We shop at CostCo a few times a year for items like toilet paper; tin, most basic shopping that will last comes from CostCo.   Then most weeks we have a Tesco delivery – we found that the cost of our food shopping went down when we started a weakly delivery as we plan meals better.

We make our own “everyday” bread in a bread maker; milk etc lasts for a week.

Our “top up” shopping tends to be salad if we have run out and nice bread with drips for lunch at the weekend.

I have found that Aldi tends to only sell “plastic” bread and is also limited on nice dips.   I do like some of their wines and cold meats.  Also it never seems to be very pleasant with lots of children running about and long queue,   but I may have just picked bad times.

So if we are passing a Tesco we will do the “top up” there, or if we are passing a Waitrose we will shop there, otherwise we use the CoOp in Marple.    Waitrose always seems expensive, but we don’t need to buy much when we go there.   

Whenever I have an Amazon order to pickup from the CoOp I land up buying something from the CoOp.

Some people have little money so are forced to shop at the cheaper supermarket there are also forced to live in the cheaper housing.  Along with most people in Marple we have the option to choose where we shop.

Before we started to use CostCo we used to buy a lot from Tesco when it was on offer, stocking up enough to last until the next offer, with CostCo we do not have to play these games.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Cyberman on March 28, 2014, 05:24:32 PM
Aldi's produce is good quality as well as being very good value.  They may not stock as many lines as the big stores but it's fantastic for basic shopping. Those who won't shop at Aldi because it's "too down market" don't know what they're missing!
Quite right about Aldi - their range is smaller but quality is excellent - I often shop in the Stockport store which I pass regularly. For example - Tesco posh bacon has 10% added water, Aldi posh bacon has no added water and is cheaper. For electrical goods, Aldi / Lidl have always given 2 year or even 3 year guarantees as you get in other E.E.C countries. Things are good value because Aldi don't waste money duplicating products, on Nectar / Clubcard points, OTT advertising etc.

An Aldi would hit the co-op, but possibly not other shops as their range is relatively small. You could always get some Waitrose bags from Poynton and use them in Aldi so no-one knew..
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Dave on March 28, 2014, 06:35:47 PM
https://corporate.aldi.co.uk/en/property/requirement-towns/north-england/
A very interesting linlk - thanks Lily.  So Aldi are actively looking to open in Marple.  But as bluezorro pointed out, Aldi would probably not be interested in Chadwick Street:
the cost per sqft of the chadwick st build looks again silly.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Berni inn on March 29, 2014, 08:25:33 AM
If iceland in marple relocated to a unit of similar size to the woodley one and had the same product range  there would be no need for another budget supermarket.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Berni inn on March 29, 2014, 08:36:14 AM
Sorry unable to divulge any further details on aldi in hazel grove as would like my relative to keep her job.

remember where you heard it first though.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: Bowden Guy on March 29, 2014, 10:13:50 AM
An Aldi in Marple would be excellent. We have started to go the store in Romiley and have been impressed by the quality and value of many of the goods on offer (although they also sell their fair share of cheap, horrible processed foods for those who can't be bothered to cook). Doubt if we would ever want to do a "full shop" at Aldi but would welcome a store that I could walk to.
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: amazon on March 29, 2014, 01:23:54 PM
If iceland in marple relocated to a unit of similar size to the woodley one and had the same product range  there would be no need for another budget supermarket.

Good point but where do they go . Not in favour Alldi in marple can't see them developing Chadwick street
To expensive to do .
Title: Re: Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced
Post by: My login is Henrietta on March 29, 2014, 08:50:11 PM
Aldi's produce is good quality as well as being very good value.  They may not stock as many lines as the big stores but it's fantastic for basic shopping. Those who won't shop at Aldi because it's "too down market" don't know what they're missing!

We need an Aldi in Marple.  I'd use it all the time.

Their raw meat isn't very good so they wouldn't be a threat to L'woods or Whites but a lot of their other stuff is excellent. As supermarket fruit and veg goes, Aldi is reasonably good - not my first port of call as I prefer specialist greengrocers where the choice is wider and the goods fresher, but in an emergency it's fine.

Hazel Grove and some other Aldi sites have decent sized car parks but the Glossop site is a nightmare. On Saturday you can forget it as the car park has very few spaces and the access and egress is very tight and shared with their delivery wagons at all times of the day. So as for space is concerned Chadwick Street would probably be within their footage.