Tesco store given approval in Hattersley

Tesco planning application – Stockport Road, Hattersley, Hyde – 10/00483/FUL I write in objection to the planning application for a Tesco store in Hattersley. This objection is not specifically against Tesco but any supermarket on the site. I believe the site should be used for sustainable re-generation of the area to support the local residents and be in keeping with the surroundings. Location to other supermarkets There appears to be no requirement for another supermarket in this catchment area. A range of local supermarkets can be easily accessed as detailed below. Supermarket Town Miles (from SK14 3AU) Time (minutes) Morrisons Hyde – SK14 2NG 2.5 3 Farmfoods Hyde – SK14 2QU 2.5 4 Iceland Hyde – SK14 1PA 2.6 5 ASDA Hyde – SK14 1BD 2.9 7 Tesco Stalybridge – SK15 2BJ 3.4 10 Tesco Glossop – SK13 8HB 3.9 14 Sainsbury Denton – M34 3SJ 5.7 10 Furthermore, no survey has been submitted which reviews the effect of the supermarket on local shops in Hattersley, Mottram, Broadbottom and Glossop. Access to the site Following the decision not to proceed with the proposed A57/A628 Mottram -Tintwistle Bypass, Tameside Council commissioned an integrated transport study to identify a range of measures to alleviate the congestion in Longdendale. Until the findings are complete; a preferred strategy determined following completion of a stakeholder and public consultation exercise; and determination made, the building of a supermarket which will significantly affect the traffic in this area should not be considered. I have read the Transport Assessment included in the planning application and recommend that a third party expert reviews the detailed content. The content is technical in places but as a local resident I cannot concur with the conclusion that “the proposed foodstore development will have only a minimal impact on the operation of the local highway network” (section 10.36). The supermarket does not have adequate accessibility to public transport. Pedestrians from Hattersley would have to cross an increasingly busy Ashworth Lane to obtain access to the supermarket. There is no provision for enhanced access from the train station which is a busy commuter line between Hadfield and Manchester Piccadilly. In addition, the report does state (section 6.35) that the train station is 1.8km from the site which is further than the recommended walking distance of 800m set out in the IHTs ‘Planning for Public Transport in Developments’. Furthermore, that distance relates to staff commuting distance rather than shoppers. The report suggests that Broadbottom is within acceptable walking and cycling distance from the supermarket; may I suggest the applicant actually test theory with a weekly shop. On a serious note the distances used in the report are for “Commuting/ School/ Sight seeing’ which has two implications; firstly the “450 new jobs (with half guaranteed for the long-term unemployment)” (page 7 of the Design & Access Statement) will be from the broader catchment area than Hattersley; consequently, should these areas not have been part of the consultation exercise. Secondly, the report gives the implication that these distances are for shoppers, which is not correct. Shopping distances would be more appropriate if they used the distance to the “town centre” but this would significantly reduce the catchment area for public transport. Furthermore, there are mention of cycle routes to the local towns and villages including Stalybridge, Mottram and Broadbottom. However, these have not been identified in sufficient detail. Public consultation There has been limited public consultation in respect of this application. There appears to have been discussion within Hattersley which is positive but nothing with the wider community. I live only 2 miles away and will be significantly affected by the proposed supermarket but there has been no consultation with the wider community. The planning application details consultation period from 16 June to 15 July 2010. However, the submission details a 2 day exhibition on 12 & 13 May 2010 at Hattersley Community Centre. Although, this may adhere to statutory requirements it is not a practical length of time to consult thoroughly with the community, especially as it is during the main holiday season. CABE review CABE the government’s advisor on architecture, urban design and public space has conducted a review of the proposed supermarket site. CABE is a national body which woks on local initiatives and as a public agency they are impartial. Their review highlighted the incorrect focus on the supermarket rather than the community areas. It also details the inadequate provisions for local sustainable access by pedestrians and bicycle. The review can be found at http://www.cabe.org.uk/design-review/tesco-store-hattersley but an extract of the summary is below: “In light of the concerns raised, we find very little to support within this application and therefore, as the application currently stands, we suggest that it is not given planning permission. Redeveloping this prominent site brings a unique opportunity to create a new piece of town that brings many benefits to its residents. It is extremely disappointing that this opportunity has been lost to a development such as this. We recommend that a fundamental re-think is given to the development and in particular to the site layout.” Other options for the area The planning documentation constantly refers to a “district centre” and community facilities. Only the supermaket is seeking planning permission at this stage. If this was a truly sustainable and holistic development I would expect planning permission to be considered on the complete site at the same time. Hattersley and the surrounding area has significantly historic legacy and is the gateway for the Peak District. The site deserves a sustainable scheme for the benefit of locals. No other ideas for the site have been discussed with the local community. Has consideration been given to a sustainable small scale community development including independent shops focusing on local produce? The site could promote a farmers’ market on specific days of the week. Stalybridge allotments are a superb example of a local initiative for the community and allotments in the Hattersley area would be in keeping with the national “grow your own” initiative. Has consideration been given to building on the success of Manchester’s cycling reputation? With the velodrome down the road, the area could be a center for promoting healthy exercise and involving local children. For example the skate park under the Mancuian Way (Projects MCR) has been a great success with children taking ownership for their own area. There were rumors of a Reddish Vale Bike Park which has not been fulfilled. It was going to incorporate family areas for mountain biking and other cycling activities. These are ideas which would be of permanent benefit for the local community. I hope that there is significant public consultation on this proposal and other options for the area before there is a decision made for the future of a special historic and beautiful area.

are there going to be any jobs going in this new store? if so how do i apply? charliefennell1@hotmail.com email me if you know thankyou

I wish "local resident" had broken his comments into paragraphs and cut its content by 70 per cent. Then people would have read it. As it is its just a rant that wil not be read. I guess it makes them happy to offload it though.

the only reason that the land is (so called) derelict is simply that `they` demolished all the houses,why? probably for a few pieces of silver. this `land` morally belonged to the residents of hattersley,who,over 48 years,have managed quite well with local shops and trips into the `town`.What have we got now? no local shops,serving the different areas of the estate,the promise of jobs! don`t make me laugh,most of em go to people all over the region.i was told a new community centre would be built, guess what, it`s proposed to be on the “wrong”? side of the estate,rents for groups to meet will be at full market rate (too expensive for the majority to use)and then what?, yep let`s pull it down cos no one uses it. hattersley has been neglected for donkeys years,but some people actually like being on the “outside”, we were (are)quite capable of being self sufficient,but suddenly we have become `desirable` and with that threatened by the money grabbers such are developers.shame on you m/c council,for your neglect and for selling us out,shame on you harvest housing for profiteering?,and shame on all you councillors who will watch our `exclusive`, and `unique` area become yet another bland boring and expensive pile of brick and concrete. thanks for nowt!

SO WHAT IS THE LATEST NEWS THEN?

The reason they demolished the houseds is for the purposes of regeneration. New houses will be built in an attempt to create a shift in tenure and create tenure mix which will eventually eradicate urban decay and rejuvinate the area. As far as the Tesco is concerned, I agree with the first comment. There is a saturisation of supermarkets in the area and it will only exacerbate the current travic issue unless the increase in traffic will push for the Longdendale bypass (which is unlikely). A problem which could easily be solved by a toll placed on the road between Hattersley and Woodhead, excluding the local residents which would generate the funds for the bypass in a few years.