Chadwick Street / Trinity Street Development Announced

[wheels]

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.

[1877]

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. 

[wheels]

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

[Dave]

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?

[wheels]

Your right there Dave.

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

[Dave]

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

[wheels]

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.

[Dave]

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!   

[1877]

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.

[Belly]

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.

[admin]

MIA published a statement about this on their web site on 11 October: www.marple-in-action.org.uk

[Bowden Guy]

Yes, the silence is deafening.....where are you, MIA? (although, of course, MIA also stands for Missing in Action)

[amazon]

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 .

[Bowden Guy]

So, is Marple in Action in favour of, or opposed to, the proposed 25,000 sq ft supermarket on Chadwick Street?

[simonesaffron]

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?