Ahead of the Strategic Planning Board meeting on Tuesday 4th September, MP for Macclesfield, David Rutley, has reiterated his strong opposition to planning applications that would lead to the development of up to four hundred homes on either side of Chelford Road in South West Macclesfield.
David has consistently campaigned against the proposed developments along with Save Macclesfield Green Belt Group, Henbury Parish Council, the Henbury Society, and many concerned local residents.
He shares the concerns of local residents that longstanding air quality issues in the Broken Cross area – which is recognised as an Air Quality Management Area – would be significantly exacerbated by these proposed developments, if they are approved and has once again called on Cheshire East Council to bring forward detailed action plans, setting out how these serious air quality concerns would be mitigated, before any applications for development are approved in such a sensitive area.
He also believes that further work needs to be undertaken by Cheshire East Council on the cumulative impact of these proposed developments and other planned developments nearby on traffic flows, particularly in view of the proposed replacement of the Broken Cross roundabout with traffic lights, which is part of these development plans. David also shares the concerns raised by local residents in relation to wider infrastructure needs; the number of additional school places in the area that would be required as a result of the developments; and the significant loss of biodiversity on important wildlife sites, and the extraction of peat.
Speaking ahead of the Strategic Planning Board meeting, David said, “It is clear that there is strongly-held opposition from across the community in and around Henbury and Broken Cross to these applications. I am pleased to be able to add my voice to those, including Save Macclesfield Green Belt Group and Henbury Parish Council, who are calling on the Strategic Planning Board to give the most serious consideration to the important points raised by many concerned local residents, and reject these applications until further work has been undertaken on vital air quality issues at these sensitive and strategic locations.”