The proposed housing development at Henbury, Macclesfield, has been deferred by councillors — after a lengthy three-hour discussion.
The scheme, by Bellway Homes, is for 134 houses built on greenfields off Chelford Road.
However, the council’s strategic planning board requested more information on the peat that lies beneath the land and expressed concerns over the design and mix of proposed housing.
Cllr Ashley Farrall, (Macclesfield Central ward), said: “The whole area is visible. There is nothing to stop you seeing it — just because they are in a bit from the road doesn’t mean they cannot be seen.
Cllr Ashley Farrall, (Macclesfield Central ward), said: “The whole area is visible. There is nothing to stop you seeing it — just because they are in a bit from the road doesn’t mean they cannot be seen.
“We do not want to ask the developer to provide an exact mix [of housing in line with Macclesfield’s demands] but we would want it to be more reflective.
“If your solution is to use peat for landscaping, and you do not know how much peat there is, then you might have excess peat on your hands.”
Plans submitted by Bellway show that just two of the proposed properties were less than three or four bedrooms — although Cllr Farrall pointed out that data from Macclesfield suggested there is far greater demand for one or two bed homes.
Outline planning permission, granted in 2019, only allowed them to focus on landscaping and layout issues — despite ‘serious concerns’ being expressed over the land’s susceptibility to flooding, and pollution levels nearby being of an ‘unlawfully high’ levels.
Broken Cross and Upton Councillor Cllr James Barber said: “There are some permanent streams that run along the area. They go across and lead into where the surface water issues are.
“If you ever visited the fields, you would wonder why anyone wants to build housing here — visit the fields when there are issues and you would think ‘it’s not a house you need, you need a boat’.
“This application will also have a hugely detrimental impact on our young people — children will have to walk to school in an already dangerous air quality management area.”
In effect, that decision of a previous planning committee painted this afternoon’s (January 27) members into a corner.
Developers can now re-submit the application with amendments, should they choose to.
This website uses cookies to improve the experience our website users receive and to track page hits and the like. If you continue to use our website then we are assuming you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish.AcceptRead More
I ❤ Macc Cookie Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login