Marple Website Community Calendar
Archive => Archived Boards => Sale of Hibbert Lane Campus to Supermarket Chain => Topic started by: Bluezorro on January 13, 2013, 10:50:13 PM
-
http://planning.stockport.gov.uk/PlanningData/AcolNetCGI.gov?ACTION=UNWRAP&RIPNAME=Root.PgeNeighbours&TheSystemkey=116256
8000 on petition but only 392 objected to planning?????????
-
http://planning.stockport.gov.uk/PlanningData/AcolNetCGI.gov?ACTION=UNWRAP&RIPNAME=Root.PgeNeighbours&TheSystemkey=116256
8000 on petition but only 392 objected to planning?????????
WOW that is quite a collapse from all those in the park, all those stalls in the street, all the verbage.
-
I would have thought that having a few thousand objections would add more weight in objection.
Shame more of the 8000 did'nt make the effort.
-
I don't know if the "list of consultees" in the above link is everyone who has responded, but if so my address isn't there and I responded by e-mail before the deadline. Perhaps the numbers don't include e-mail responses, or perhaps mine (and others) were lost?
-
It's not easy to make sense of, is it. ::) However, my guess is that the addresses in capitals, which have a date in the column on the left headed 'Consultation Letter Sent', are those near the site who were automatically sent a neighbour consultation letter. The other addresses are mostly in lower case, and without a date beside them, and those are the responses from the rest of us. I scrolled down and eventually found mine, and I had responded electronically on the council website.
-
It's not easy to make sense of, is it. ::) However, my guess is that the addresses in capitals, which have a date in the column on the left headed 'Consultation Letter Sent', are those near the site who were automatically sent a neighbour consultation letter. The other addresses are mostly in lower case, and without a date beside them, and those are the responses from the rest of us. I scrolled down and eventually found mine, and I had responded electronically on the council website.
Glad to see I'm on with my neighbor two votes for Asda .
-
It's not easy to make sense of, is it. ::) However, my guess is that the addresses in capitals, which have a date in the column on the left headed 'Consultation Letter Sent', are those near the site who were automatically sent a neighbour consultation letter. The other addresses are mostly in lower case, and without a date beside them, and those are the responses from the rest of us. I scrolled down and eventually found mine, and I had responded electronically on the council website.
Glad to see I'm on with my neighbor two votes for Asda
Look at some of the addresses one from leyland and Hyde ,as I said a the time. A lot won't be from round hear .fidling the list
-
It's not easy to make sense of, is it. ::) However, my guess is that the addresses in capitals, which have a date in the column on the left headed 'Consultation Letter Sent', are those near the site who were automatically sent a neighbour consultation letter. The other addresses are mostly in lower case, and without a date beside them, and those are the responses from the rest of us. I scrolled down and eventually found mine, and I had responded electronically on the council website.
Glad to see I'm on with my neighbor two votes for Asda .
So given that everyone had the opportunity to respond, those for 58 those against 392. The proposal is duly rejected ;D
-
I too responded by email and have no date in the "letter sent" column. My wife also responded, yet our address only appears once
-
In advance of the forthcoming Area Committee meeting on 6 February, I see that MIA have posted the following claim on the 'Latest News' thread: 'This is your opportunity to show the Councillors who remain neutral on the issue of a Hibbert Lane supermarket, that the majority of people in Marple oppose that development.'
The population of Marple is around 23,500. 392 people have objected to the planning application. At the risk of stating the obvious, 392 is not a majority of 23,500.
-
In advance of the forthcoming Area Committee meeting on 6 February, I see that MIA have posted the following claim on the 'Latest News' thread: 'This is your opportunity to show the Councillors who remain neutral on the issue of a Hibbert Lane supermarket, that the majority of people in Marple oppose that development.'
The population of Marple is around 23,500. 392 people have objected to the planning application. At the risk of stating the obvious, 392 is not a majority of 23,500.
Correct Dave. MiA will also whip people up to think that the meeting has some significance when it fact all that will happen is that it will refer the application to the Planning Committee. The only reason its being held as a special meeting is so that the business of the normal meeting is not disrupted
-
It's not easy to make sense of, is it. ::) However, my guess is that the addresses in capitals, which have a date in the column on the left headed 'Consultation Letter Sent', are those near the site who were automatically sent a neighbour consultation letter. The other addresses are mostly in lower case, and without a date beside them, and those are the responses from the rest of us. I scrolled down and eventually found mine, and I had responded electronically on the council website.
Glad to see I'm on with my neighbor two votes for Asda
Look at some of the addresses one from leyland and Hyde ,as I said a the time. A lot won't be from round hear .fidling the list
Wow Amazon, How do you know how they voted? Do tell.
-
I too responded by email and have no date in the "letter sent" column. My wife also responded, yet our address only appears once
I was told only one response per household.
-
In advance of the forthcoming Area Committee meeting on 6 February, I see that MIA have posted the following claim on the 'Latest News' thread: 'This is your opportunity to show the Councillors who remain neutral on the issue of a Hibbert Lane supermarket, that the majority of people in Marple oppose that development.'
The population of Marple is around 23,500. 392 people have objected to the planning application. At the risk of stating the obvious, 392 is not a majority of 23,500.
You could say out of a population of 23,500 only 58 want the store, that is certainly not a majority ;D
In fact you could based on the responses 13% in favour & 87% against ;D
I presume that is not an accurate reflection ? or is it?
Figures can manipulated and "spun" in many ways to suit one's needs.
-
I agree entirely jethroh. But it's MIA who claim that 'the majority of people in Marple oppose that development'. But AFAIK there is no reliable information as to the majority view of residents on this issue. We simply don't know what the majority view is.
-
MIA gave plenty of notice about the ways to complain and the time constraints etc.
Surely this shows the majority couldn't be bothered to object..
A small number objected and some people felt compelled to mail in support.
-
It's not easy to make sense of, is it. ::) However, my guess is that the addresses in capitals, which have a date in the column on the left headed 'Consultation Letter Sent', are those near the site who were automatically sent a neighbour consultation letter. The other addresses are mostly in lower case, and without a date beside them, and those are the responses from the rest of us. I scrolled down and eventually found mine, and I had responded electronically on the council website.
Glad to see I'm on with my neighbor two votes for Asda
Look at some of the addresses one from leyland and Hyde ,as I said a the time. A lot won't be from round hear .fidling the list
Wow Amazon, How do you know how they voted? Do tell.
Idont say I new how they voted I said months ago that a lot of people won't be from marple and I was right .
-
My in laws were asked to sign recently. They said they were from a place 5 hours away and were told it didn't matter. The in laws replied that they were in support of Asda anyway. I can only speak from my own friends, family and aquaintences but I find that there were more against it originally when MIA were spouting about losing the swimming baths, huge tescos etc. When the truth came out most people simply weren't bothered either way unless they lived nearby or own a business they fear will be affected. I found this the case even with people who were very opposed originally. Problem is the more shops die out and nothing comes in more people will have to go to Stockport etc for things and Marple will lose out.
-
My in laws were asked to sign recently. They said they were from a place 5 hours away and were told it didn't matter. The in laws replied that they were in support of Asda anyway. I can only speak from my own friends, family and aquaintences but I find that there were more against it originally when MIA were spouting about losing the swimming baths, huge tescos etc. When the truth came out most people simply weren't bothered either way unless they lived nearby or own a business they fear will be affected. I found this the case even with people who were very opposed originally. Problem is the more shops die out and nothing comes in more people will have to go to Stockport etc for things and Marple will lose out.
Thank you JMC there are quite a few shops in marple that are for sale with no boards up stating so if those shops were to close because they can't sell marple could soon become a quite empty place . Then perhaps people would relise if ASDA don't come what they have done .
-
I think it is generally accepted that only people who have a objection will voice their concern and those that don't will remain silent. Also given that all the campaigning by MIA including everything posted on this web site only encouraged you to register an objection, I have not seen anywhere that you could register a vote in favour of Asda I think therefore that it speaks volumes that 50 odd people did in fact bother to register a vote in favour and only 300 odd against.
I am in favour of Asda because I think Marple needs it and I believe this confirms the silent majority do also.
-
I agree entirely jethroh. But it's MIA who claim that 'the majority of people in Marple oppose that development'. But AFAIK there is no reliable information as to the majority view of residents on this issue. We simply don't know what the majority view is.
Given 392 have objected & 58 in favour, the planning committee has to conclude that the majority are against. In the same way that we elected our GMP police commissioner on a 14% turnout. On what basis can the planning committee gauge public opinion? They can only use evidence put before them i.e. Majority of responses are against & also 8,000 person petition, they can't assume or guess there is a silent majority.
The silent majority have had plenty of opportunity to present a petition and to show their public support, no excuses.
-
also 8,000 person petition
I dispute this. They cannot take it into account surely.. It was started BEFORE plans were public and was based on scaremongering about knocking down the swimming baths, it was claimed to be a Tesco Extra etc. Three of my own family members signed it but now support Asda. On the basis of that being taken into account it would be a scandal. People have already written to the council to protest against this being used.
-
Unpopularity is not grounds for refusal of planning permission. A proper reason for refusal of planning permission must be based on the tangible harm which would be brought about by the proposal, as reflected in a relevant policy or other matter relating to planning, and in order to protect the public interest.
-
also 8,000 person petition
I dispute this. They cannot take it into account surely.. It was started BEFORE plans were public and was based on scaremongering about knocking down the swimming baths, it was claimed to be a Tesco Extra etc. Three of my own family members signed it but now support Asda. On the basis of that being taken into account it would be a scandal. People have already written to the council to protest against this being used.
OK Ignore the petition.Of the people that have responded to the planning application, the overwhelming majority are against the plans.
-
Jethroh, I take your point about the large number of objections to the planning application, compared with the relatively small number of supporting responses. But that is a different issue. The fact remains that MIA wrote 'the majority of people in Marple oppose that development.' They do not have any evidence to support that claim.
-
I am surprised that as many as 300+ people objected to the ASDA/CAMSFC planning application given the startling collapse in practical support for MIA. (1000+ marching in August 2011, 100+ marching in September 2012). Of course the 2011 march was in those halcyon days when there were no facts and a campaign could be safely influenced by rumours, hyperbole, and falsehoods, those “the size of the supermarket will be the size of six football pitches and don’t let them tell you any different” or “this will involve demolishing the swimming baths” or “our volunteer emergency services personnel will be massively hindered in turning out to emergency calls from the public.. literally lives could be put at risk” days, the days when 85% of the petition signatures were obtained.
Things changed dramatically when the consultation period started and it became necessary to deal with facts. The downscaling of the “petition” presentation from the plan for a ceremony on the steps of 10 Downing Street proudly announced at the SMBC Area Committee meeting last August, and enthusiastically supported by councilors Candler, Wright, and Alexander, to a rather to a more modest event at Stockport with no elected representative appearing in the publicity photo is symptomatic of the problems faced by the campaign when reality inconveniently set in
-
I am surprised that as many as 300+ people objected to the ASDA/CAMSFC planning application given the startling collapse in practical support for MIA. (1000+ marching in August 2011, 100+ marching in September 2012). Of course the 2011 march was in those halcyon days when there were no facts and a campaign could be safely influenced by rumours, hyperbole, and falsehoods, those “the size of the supermarket will be the size of six football pitches and don’t let them tell you any different” or “this will involve demolishing the swimming baths” or “our volunteer emergency services personnel will be massively hindered in turning out to emergency calls from the public.. literally lives could be put at risk” days, the days when 85% of the petition signatures were obtained.
Things changed dramatically when the consultation period started and it became necessary to deal with facts. The downscaling of the “petition” presentation from the plan for a ceremony on the steps of 10 Downing Street proudly announced at the SMBC Area Committee meeting last August, and enthusiastically supported by councilors Candler, Wright, and Alexander, to a rather to a more modest event at Stockport with no elected representative appearing in the publicity photo is symptomatic of the problems faced by the campaign when reality inconveniently set in
Good post
-
Jethroh, I take your point about the large number of objections to the planning application, compared with the relatively small number of supporting responses. But that is a different issue. The fact remains that MIA wrote 'the majority of people in Marple oppose that development.' They do not have any evidence to support that claim.
Now that planning permission has been applied for, it is effectively the first time the public have been given the platform to express their actual responses. MIA & the 'YES' campaign cannot do anymore now.
Given that this is the first opportunity the public has had to effectively vote for or against,there is a significant majority against.
Maybe everyone has been underestimating the well educated folk of Marple.
The people of Marple may not have been influenced by MIA scaremongering or corporate dream picture promised by Walmart.
Have the people of Marple waited for the correct time & place to voice their opinion i.e. when the planning application is submitted ???
We will see.
-
I am surprised that as many as 300+ people objected to the ASDA/CAMSFC planning application given the startling collapse in practical support for MIA. (1000+ marching in August 2011, 100+ marching in September 2012). Of course the 2011 march was in those halcyon days when there were no facts and a campaign could be safely influenced by rumours, hyperbole, and falsehoods, those “the size of the supermarket will be the size of six football pitches and don’t let them tell you any different” or “this will involve demolishing the swimming baths” or “our volunteer emergency services personnel will be massively hindered in turning out to emergency calls from the public.. literally lives could be put at risk” days, the days when 85% of the petition signatures were obtained.
Things changed dramatically when the consultation period started and it became necessary to deal with facts. The downscaling of the “petition” presentation from the plan for a ceremony on the steps of 10 Downing Street proudly announced at the SMBC Area Committee meeting last August, and enthusiastically supported by councilors Candler, Wright, and Alexander, to a rather to a more modest event at Stockport with no elected representative appearing in the publicity photo is symptomatic of the problems faced by the campaign when reality inconveniently set in
The founder members of MIA arranged the presentation of the petition to Downing Street with the full support of Andrew Stunnell. It was hijacked by Marple Business Forum members and presented at Stockport Town Hall for reasons only known to themselves
-
Thank Goodness for MBF then a much more sensible decision
-
Of the people that have responded to the planning application, the overwhelming majority are against the plans.
Eaxactly. We can agree on that. But that is not at all the same as claiming that the majority of people in Marple are against them. No-one knows what the majority of Marple residents feel about it. 450 people responded to the planning application - that's less than 2% of the population! The message from that is very clear: 98% of residents aren't particularly bothered either way.
-
Eaxactly. No-one knows what the majority of Marple residents feel about it.
The message from that is very clear: 98% of residents aren't particularly bothered either way.
I am confused!!!
-
OK, point taken marplex :-[. I'll have another go: No-one knows what the majority of Marple residents feel about it. 450 people responded to the planning application - that's less than 2% of the population! We might infer from that that 98% of residents aren't particularly bothered either way. Is that better?
-
Sorry Dave I could resist :) I think we can safely conclude that 98% are not opposed to it.
-
Sorry Dave I could resist :) I think we can safely conclude that 98% are not opposed to it.
I'm not sure we can conclude that either.
I suspect it just means that the vast majority of the population are prepared to let the planning process take its course, without needing to directly input to it. Either that or they are too lazy or too busy to get involved!
-
You can also conclude that it is so blindingly obvious what is going to happen at each stage that there is little point making representation. Thats not lazy that just awareness of the process.
-
Mrs O, according to one of my friends who runs a shop on stockport road. The MIA petition has nothing to do with the marple business commerce chamber. The gentlemen in dark glasses resigned his chairmanship from the forum over the summer about a difference of views with the other members. My friend is in favour of a supermarket as it will bring more passing trade up stockport road.
-
Mrs O, according to one of my friends who runs a shop on stockport road. The MIA petition has nothing to do with the marple business commerce chamber. The gentlemen in dark glasses resigned his chairmanship from the forum over the summer about a difference of views with the other members. My friend is in favour of a supermarket as it will bring more passing trade up stockport road.
I did not mention Marple Business Commerce Chamber. I know nothing about them. I said Marple Business Forum. They have members active within MIA.
-
Sorry mrs o its my age.
I meant the business forum.
The chair and vice chair both resigned in summer.
These i believe were prominent members of mia.
The dark glasses gentlemen is assistant chair of mia.
-
Thats o.k Bluezorro, but at the time the decision was made for the petition not to go to Downing Street. The chairman of the Business forum ( man in dark glasses ) was also the vice chair of MIA, the vice chair of the Business forum was also a prominent member of MIA and also David Hoyle (chairman) of MIA was a previous chairman of the Business forum. Make of that what you will! I know what I make of it :o
-
Thats o.k Bluezorro, but at the time the decision was made for the petition not to go to Downing Street. The chairman of the Business forum ( man in dark glasses ) was also the vice chair of MIA, the vice chair of the Business forum was also a prominent member of MIA and also David Hoyle (chairman) of MIA was a previous chairman of the Business forum. Make of that what you will! I know what I make of it :o
From what I hear MBF is in much better hands these days. What a silly idea to present a petition to Downing St.
-
Well i think the fact he and his vice chair had to resign speaks volumes that the commerce forum is not mia in disguise as you probably suspect and members may not have agreed with his views.