Outline plans for 250 new homes in Handforth

Outline planning permission is being sought for a new residential development of up to 250 homes on land between Clay Lane and Sagars Road in Handforth.

HIMOR (Land) Ltd are also applying for permission to demolish one residential property at 15 Hampson Crescent, in order to facilitate a new access for vehicles into the site, and associated works. All other matters (layout, scale, appearance and landscaping) are reserved for future consideration.

The 8.35 hectare site, which is currently used as agricultural grazing land and consists of three fields, has been allocated in the recently adopted the Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy (LPS) for the delivery of 250 dwellings.

This outline planning application has been submitted as soon as possible following adoption of the LPS in order to ensure the earliest possible delivery of the site.

It is proposed that 75 of the 250 properties will be affordable housing.

The application states that HIMOR (Land) Ltd is willing to enter into a Section 106 agreement and provide an education contribution where appropriate and necessary in order to provide additional capacity in local schools.

According to the supporting documentation "A Transport Assessment has been submitted with this outline planning application, which demonstrates that the traffic arising from the development would be negligible with no significant impacts arising. The proposed access design has already been endorsed by the local highways authority and considered by the Local Plan Inspector through the examination for the Cheshire East LPS."

The application concludes that "The principle of residential development on this site for 250 dwellings has already been fully established through the adoption of the Cheshire East LPS and Policy LPS34. It is also recognised by the Council as being critical that housing is delivered on this site within the short-term in order to contribute to the 5-year housing land supply and significantly boost the supply of housing."

Handforth Parish Council has called an extra-ordinary meeting to discuss this planning application.

The meeting will take place on Tuesday 22nd August at The Youth Centre on Old Road, Handforth starting at 7:00pm.

 

The outline plans can be viewed on the Cheshire East Council website by searching for planning reference. The last date for submitting comments is 7th September and a decision is expected by 8th November.

Tags:
Planning Applications
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Comments

Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below.

Clive Cooksey
Wednesday 16th August 2017 at 4:30 pm
So this land is currently used for grazing. Therefore has anyone got any ideas on how we will feed our cattle and sheep when this council and central government have finished covering our pastures with concrete and bricks. Probably import it from New Zealand and South America. Then when a minimum of at least 500 people move into these properties how will doctors surgeries, hospitals, schools, roads and just about anything else thats currently overloaded now, cope?
The Blue Sky Thinkers, strike again. Come on Esther, start shouting against it, on our behalfs
Julian Barlow
Wednesday 16th August 2017 at 4:42 pm
Firstly, the definition of affordable housing is vague, see the government definition below:

"The government definition of affordable housing states it must be provided at a level at which the mortgage payments on the property should be more than would be paid in rent on council housing, but below market levels."

Secondly, I believe that property developers are able to buy their way out of any obligation to build affordable homes. If this is true, then it's scandalous.

We're seeing the wholesale destruction of our greenbelt and we should all be furious. No one, other than a clueless and discredited Council and greedy property developers want it, it defies any sort of logical argument and we don't have the infrastructure to support it. In fact, we don't have the infrastructure to support the homes we already have.


CEC are so utterly pompous they're completely detached from the people who pay their wages. The public have gone through all the various consultation processes, voiced their concerns and have been totally ignored. CEC have made not a single gesture to demonstrate they're listening to the people they serve, the bulldozing of Cheshire continues. Mass public action is required urgently.
Christine McClory
Wednesday 16th August 2017 at 4:48 pm
Gosh! 250 dwellings with 250 (minimum) cars will not cause any additional traffic problems.
Miraculous!
Julian Barlow
Wednesday 16th August 2017 at 5:07 pm
Christine McClory- I believe that Cheshire East Council obtain their traffic data from a census carried out in 2009 and assume every home to have 1.7 cars (and possibly one horse and cart).
Christian Hurstfield
Wednesday 16th August 2017 at 5:27 pm
The actual layout looks just like the current sprawl of houses that are already there (and which probably took away other grazing fields in their production all those years ago), but with more attention to keeping some green aspects instead of just building on every sqm possible.

If it has to be done and they maintain or improve on this design then I see no real issue, and assuming that 250 cars will all exit the estate every morning is a little naive.

If three ugly tower blocks around the Spath lane area can be built to essentially ruin the landscape forever then in comparison this is trivial.
Martin Kitchin
Wednesday 16th August 2017 at 5:56 pm
As I read this then 250 cars at least will be coming on to Hampson Crescent and through the width of the existing house at No 15.. Surely this cannot be right ?!

Please Cheshire East balance any financial incentives the developers are offering you and think about the impact this will have on existing residents.
Martin Kitchin
Wednesday 16th August 2017 at 6:03 pm
As I read this then 250 cars at least and probably more if each house has adult occupants will be coming snd going on to Hampson Crescent and through the width of the existing house at No 15

Surely this cannot be right ?!

And as for the Spath Lane flats they were buit in 1962 when tall was good. In their favour they do provide affordable homes at £80k each of which there are not that many in SK9

Back to Hampson Meadows, lease Cheshire East balance any financial incentives the developers are offering you and think about the impact this will have on existing residents.
Sheila Rovira
Wednesday 16th August 2017 at 6:14 pm
What I don't understand is why they cannot build a school and a smallish medical centre because we are overloaded both at the grange and at the Drs and what price will the none affordable houses be ,because jones built houses at the RBI site at a cost per house of over £375.000 ,who's going to buy these houses there are houses for sale in handforth for much less already
Graham Peters
Wednesday 16th August 2017 at 7:23 pm
This site plus the 175 houses at the site opposite M&S - Handforth won't know what's hit it!
Hope all the Health Centres, Dentists and schools etc can cope with the influx.
Martin Kitchin
Wednesday 16th August 2017 at 7:37 pm
As I read this then 250 cars at least and probably more if each house has adult occupants will be coming snd going on to Hampson Crescent and through the width of the existing house at No 15

Surely this cannot be right ?!

And as for the Spath Lane flats they were buit in 1962 when tall was good. In their favour they do provide affordable homes at £80k each of which there are not that many in SK9

Back to Hampson Meadows, lease Cheshire East balance any financial incentives the developers are offering you and think about the impact this will have on existing residents.
Janet Taylor
Thursday 17th August 2017 at 8:14 am
As far as Cheshire East is concerned, Handforth is the ideal place to dump their housing needs, on the border of the neighbouring local authority and as far away from their administritive centre as it can possibly be. All our green space disappears in the local plan with the exception of the small public parks and the neighbouring planned developments at Stanneylands and Seashell Trust will also have a huge affect on our roads and amenities....or what we have left after Cheshire East have finished stripping them all.
Jackie Pass
Thursday 17th August 2017 at 9:17 am
Janet - agree entirely. Cheshire East seem to be treating everything in our area with disdain. Their Retail Study 2015 classes Wilmslow/Alderley/Handforth as one area. When they break down their analysis - Handforth makes very sorry reading indeed. Also what I can't understand is how this planning application can be part of Handforth's housing allocation. It is in Wilmslow. Councillor Stockton is the Ward Councillor. Why has he allowed this to happen?
Christian Hurstfield
Thursday 17th August 2017 at 9:25 am
I think if people are looking at keeping Handforth as nice as possible and maintain that illustrious 'SK9 postcode' then having any type of housing available for £80k (and surrounding it with council housing) does nothing to aid this, regardless of the era in which they were built.

If new housing is built so only affluent types can afford them then that helps bring an area up, which you can see in any area where this already occurs. Contrast that with the areas where housing is dirt cheap and you get the picture.
Christian Hurstfield
Thursday 17th August 2017 at 10:06 am
The actual layout looks just like the current sprawl of houses that are already there (and which probably took away other grazing fields in their production all those years ago), but with more attention to keeping some green aspects instead of just building on every sqm possible.

If it has to be done and they maintain or improve on this design then I see no real issue, and assuming that 250 cars will all exit the estate every morning is a little naive.

If three ugly tower blocks around the Spath lane area can be built to essentially ruin the landscape forever then in comparison this is trivial.
Terry Roeves
Thursday 17th August 2017 at 1:18 pm
This site is in Wilmslow, where the Local Plan calls for 900 houses.
Add this site, windfalls at 20 annually and our brownfield sites, then 900 becomes more like 1500.
Cllr Stockton knows this yet did do anything to correct matters? Wilmslow Town Council did not consider this site when making their recommendations to CEC. The Local Plan Inspector was incorrectly advised.
This, or another Wilmslow site should be removed from the plan. Has Wilmslow been cheated yet again?
I hope that WTC are able to assess the impact of this site, where the s106 monies will be targeted and comment robustly on the plan.
And as for cars, most drivers will commute into Manchester and Moms will take their children to some distant school. An additional exit route to Styal would divide the traffic, if this is ever to be passed. Perhaps, like the Jones site next to M&S it will be landbanked.
Roger Bagguley
Thursday 17th August 2017 at 8:42 pm
This site is within Wilmslow, Lacey Green Ward and Styal Parish Council. One might have expected Ward Councillor, Don Stockton, to have at least alerted Wilmslow Town Councillors to discussions going on at the site allocation stage. Neighbours of this site objected as did Styal Parish Council but to no avail. RoW raised the issue of the site being in Wilmslow with CEC and Government Inspector, Mr Pratt, at the public hearings. It made for a few minutes questioning, somewhat longer than my discussion with Councillor Stockton on the issue lasted. As he told neighbours of Little Stanneylands recently, “You have to obey the rules. There is little you can do to object to a Local Plan.” But there really should have been with councillors insisting the amount of land being taken from the Green Belt be based upon accurate mathematics. Meekly they accepted whatever CEC officers told them.
Thus, today both Wilmslow and Handforth are allocated more houses than are required. I do not have the Handforth figures but today 1081 houses are committed to Wilmslow since 2010 with a further estimated 340 coming along at a conservative 20 per year windfall rate, all on brown sites. Now add the 250 on this site and by 2030 1771 new houses will all have Wilmslow addresses.
It is within the spirit of a Local Plan Process that neighbouring Boroughs ask if they can help each other out by taking some of the required number of houses. No Boroughs here, but Wards within a Borough. Without being asked Wilmslow has provided 250 houses to meet the Handforth need. But the Wilmslow figures indicate that 250 houses on this site are not required, just like 2 of the allocated sites for Wilmslow are also not required. This is the bit that makes us so angry with those councillors who have blindly supported this Local Plan throughout in that they have allowed CEC to remove from the Green Belt far more land than this Local Plan actually requires.
In addition to housing figures the very extravagant growth ambitions CEC have for our area has brought the people of Wilmslow and Handforth together. Any Green Belt divide is almost gone, reduced to the width of a link road to the Airport. Together we are destined to suffer the consequences of a lack of infrastructure and most likely in due course to be sucked into Greater Manchester. But we should not complain: In the words of Rachel Bailey, our Council Leader, “It is good for Cheshire East” - so many job opportunities, so many retail outlets and so much quality coming our way. Wonderful, and just think, it starts all over again in 2030 continuing every 20 years from now on. Happy days ahead, including for the occupants of the new Sagars Lane estate lucky if they still live in Handforth with a Wilmslow address.
Nick Jones
Friday 18th August 2017 at 7:31 am
Lyme Green, doctored report +Cllrs conduct in breaking planning rules / Michael ‘corefit ‘Jones and lemming Cllrs with Adlington “Never build on these fields” Road / £3.7M spend on flawed local plan- (Now further evidenced here ! ) / Non-compliance to Govt planning policy / Ignoring the ‘exceptional circumstance’ criteria re green belt / Ignoring Brownfield development / Ignoring Govt commitment to protect green belt / Documented actions by Cllrs on several occasions not to represent resident’s wishes voting to eradicate green belt protection / Public disengagement over planning issues in favour of party colours / Cllrs individual and collective failures constantly swept to one side with a total absence of meaningful explanation / ‘Deliberate and systematic’ failures re Pollution data etc..
Toni Fox, Barry Buckhill ,Dennis Mahon + 1 other, 13 Labour and 3 Conservatives recently voted against CEC Cllrs own (not the electorates ) flawed local plan, demonstrating it to be a non-party common sense issue that Barton Brooks Stockton ,The Lyme Green Cllr and others chose to ignore . I have not met 1 person who supports the presented L/P Document. So it’s now down to the electorate to make sure those responsible are held to account at the ballot box. Their silence when challenged on these issues on these pages is again deafening, I along with others have asked for a public explanation and nothing emerges, merely confirming Abe Lincoln’s observation that; “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt “
Rachel Bailey may be “disappointed yet again at the negative portrayal of CEC for no good cause”… But perhaps common sense and listening to the electorate is a good cause ?? Ian Hislop’s Private Eye's Rotten Boroughs headlines "CHESHIRE CHEATS" "CEC, a Tory council notorious for telling lies and fiddling figures has been caught at it again" would appear to have some traction. I can only surmise with regard to these latest identified antics CEC is disappointed at only being rated the Second worst planning dept in the country by the LGO as they challenge for the top spot.
Manuel Golding
Friday 18th August 2017 at 1:10 pm
To be fair to Nick Jones and to Roger Bagguley, they have about summed up what has been so obviously wrong with CEC since its inglorious birth. I must eat humble pie here, these boys have said it all, there is not more I can add!

However CEC is worse than its morally corrupted "political" leadership, its lemming like Conservative majority group councillors, including "The Wilmslow Four" who all recently lined up to show their unstinting party support in destroying Wilmslow and indeed the whole of the north of the borough, rather than supporting their voters their maxim has been & will continue to be "Party First", as proven yet again. They willingly preferred to meekly approve the notorious Local Plan whilst spouting worthless & meaningless verbal garbage to voters who were gullible enough to listen to them over the weeks, months & years before THE vote.

The only Wilmslow councillor who has consistently listened to voters' very real concerns has been Toni Fox, Residents of Wilmslow independent for Dean Row. Also both Handforth's independents, Cllrs. Burkhill & Mahon, stood up for their residents.

In addition to the leadership, we have a nasty clique of masters of double-speak in the leading "planning" officers. I have to ask, what are they planning for? Certainly not for the betterment of residents of north of the borough. Why not? What is in it for them? Where & what is the gain? Just look at the disgraceful fiddling of air pollution data - this corrupted perversion of data could well have influenced planning applications, in spite of another apparatchik officer, David Malcolm, offering his & the council's view that the corrupted data would have made no difference to the planning board. How does he know? How dare he assume that councillors if in full knowledge of correct, i.e. not fiddled, data would not have voted differently. Marshall has had the gall to set himself up as judge and jury. Yet another call for governmental examination of all the players in this data juggling game. For whose benefit was this done? Why, if the fiddled data would not have made a difference to approval (Marshall's assertion) was it fiddled? Who ordered the fiddle? I nearly forget, all Marshall's & that of the Bureau Veritas' comments are dutifully endorsed by yet another lemming, Cllr Arnold By the way, B. Veritas was not asked nor did opine on the viability of councillors' approvals if they had had knowledge of the then unknown fiddled data. These and more questions will need to be asked, either by the police or government inspectors.

These guilty parties will eventually be brought to book for all their gerrymandering of figures to suit their very own agendas and for all we know, their futures. Hopefully, that process is starting.

In the meanwhile, the betterment of Wilmslow's residents will be best served by voting for Residents of Wilmslow candidates in the 2019 elections - let us together "drain the Cheshire East, and Wilmslow, swamp" - RoW's maxim is People Before Party.
Greg Aspinall
Saturday 19th August 2017 at 9:33 am
Protect our Green Belt areas.
No development on CS49 (Sagars Rd/Clay Lane)

Despite a large number of residents objecting to the proposed development of CS49 (Sagars Rd / Clay Lane), as evidenced in more than 350 written responses to the Local Plan consultation, approx 400 petition signatures, and significant attendance at local consultation meetings, Cheshire East Council have paid no regard to the clear wishes of local residents.

Reported traffic analysis grossly underestimates the impact of vehicle movement on the one entry point at Meriton Road, and surrounding streets.

The benefit that the green space and pathways around CS49 must be is greatly valued by residents, and must be protected

Confidence in our local council has been further eroded by the recent revelation that air quality monitoring figures have been deliberately falsified, prior to being submitted to DEFRA. This illegal, criminal act must be investigated and those responsible be brought to task.

I am strongly in favour of the government's plan to increase / improve the stock of housing nationally, but object to the excessive concentration, both housing and commercial, to the north section of the county, principally in the Handforth area.
1650 homes in the North Cheshire Growth Village
175 residences / Care Village
250 homes south of Coppice Way
175 homes east of Hill Drive
10 town houses next to the station
44 apartments on the site of Cypress House
250 new homes CS49

The population of Handforth is planned to increase in number by 6000, and the urban area to increase in size by 100%.
Immediately to the north, and east of the parish boundary, Greater Manchester Spacial Plan has proposed an additional 8000 new homes in Heald Green, the Seashell Trust site, and Woodford.
The three industrial estates with Handforth parish are planned to be increased in size, and as yet unspecified new commercial developments will occur, further to the opening of the new A555 link to the Manchester Airport.

This proposed development is disproportionately centred on too small an area. It is unwanted and will be detrimental to the wellbeing of all.

When I moved to Handforth 32 years ago, I was surprised that local people referred to the place as 'the village'. I am even more surprised, and delighted that they still do. Be assured that in 10 years time it will be just another part of a very large urban sprawl, unless residents' wishes are listened to.

Protect our Green Belt areas.
No development on CS49 (Sagars Rd/Clay Lane)
Roger Bagguley
Sunday 20th August 2017 at 7:51 pm
Greg

Think you and RoW should get in touch. We are on common ground with this site and our efforts to protect the Green Belt. We have Independent councillors in common too.
Estelle Lewis
Sunday 20th August 2017 at 9:43 pm
"Planning application" my derriere! A fait accompli - as with all these new builds.
Terry Roeves
Tuesday 22nd August 2017 at 9:32 am
I'm in thinking that CEC have distorted the spacial plan to get as many builds as they can up here near to the Stockport boundary before selling us to GMC.
More houses = more money to CEC. How much would you pay for a perpetual mostly inflation linked income stream of property taxes?

Add Your Comment

Share what you think of this story. In order to post a comment click here to sign in or register to become a member (it's free and will only take one minute).