Green light for controversial Stanneylands development

Having been deferred last month, due to insufficient information being provided, the controversial planning application for a new residential development on land north of Stanneylands Road - on land that was released from the Green Belt following adoption of the Cheshire East Local Plan - has been approved today (Wednesday, 20th December).

The Strategic Planning Committee voted 7 in favour and 4 against (with 1 member abstaining) for the David Wilson Homes' plan to build 174 homes, which includes 24 apartments and 150 houses.

The accommodation includes eight 1 bedroom properties, nineteen with 2 bedrooms, thirty 3 bedroom properties and 112 properties with 4 bedrooms.

The scheme also includes a new roundabout onto Stanneylands Road, public open space, a pedestrian/cycleway connection between Linneys Bridge and the River Dean and a new bridge crossing of the River Dean.

Cheshire East Council received 815 letters objecting or commenting on the scheme.

Amongst the issues raised are: inadequate access into the site; increase in traffic and impact on highway safety; the proposed roundabout will not ease congestion; impact on drainage in the area; loss of trees; loss of Green Belt; over-development of the site and the footpath and cycle links should not cross local farmland.

Wilmslow Town Council's Planning Committee recommended refusal of this application on the grounds of inadequate access onto Stanneylands Road, stating that the primary access for the development should be directly from Manchester Road.

The Planning Officer recommended the application for approval, subject to a Section 106 Agreement which had been amended to include: an educational contribution of £499,567; contribution to indoor recreation of £25,500; contribution towards health provision of £185,679; contribution for monitoring of Travel Plan £5,000; provision of the bridge across the River Dean; a financial contribution to be agreed for the provision of a direct pedestrian / cycle route to Manchester Road or improvements to the local cycle and footpath network between the site and Manchester Road of £150,000 and a contribution of £80,000 for the junction of Manchester Road and Stanneylands Road.

The Planning Officer's report for the Strategic Planning Meeting concluded by saying "The matters for which the application was deferred have been fully addressed.

"It has been demonstrated that adequate visibility can be achieved for vehicles leaving the site from the private driveways and the roundabout. The position of the pedestrian crossing is considered acceptable and the details of the type of crossing will be agreed through an additional condition on the decision notice. The site is a sustainable site and the proposals are acceptable from an ecological perspective. The application continues to be recommended for approval in accordance with the heads of terms above and the conditions listed in the main report."

Tags:
Little Stanneylands, Planning Applications, Strategic Planning Committee
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Comments

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

Jane Mitchell
Wednesday 20th December 2017 at 4:33 pm
Another batch of GREENBELT bites the dust. Thanks Cheshire East for fighting our corner. You won't be happy till the whole borough is concreted over.
Julian Barlow
Wednesday 20th December 2017 at 4:53 pm
The matters haven't been addressed, they've been ignored.

The original planning proposal made reference to a "direct link" to Handforth village and local amenities, yet it was admitted that no such link exists. This was an important part of the original proposal as government guidelines stress that local services should fall within a set distance, enabling all residents to access services on foot. It was also acknowledged that should such a link ever be created (and that's a big "should"), it is likely to be unsuitable for wheelchair users and prams due to the terrain of the area. The developers have 10 years to identify and create this link so it's reasonable to assume it's unlikely to ever materialise.

Furthermore, the original proposal imagined access to the site via a new entrance created on Manchester Road, this would take congestion away from the already gridlocked Stanneylands Road. However, it was accepted that the estate will now be accessed via Stanneylands Road whatever the consequences.

Concerns over the lack of available school places were "addressed" with the promise of a £500K contribution from the developer. However, as local schools are already full to capacity what we really need are new schools . How many of those would we get with £500K? CEC regularly give that sort of money away in golden handshakes.

Yet, despite a lack of infrastructure and a failure to adhere to central government guidelines, seven councillors thought it appropriate to pass this application. Anyone intrigued by the mechanics of local planning might also be interested to know that if the Council refuse a development, the builder can launch appeal. However, if the council approve a development, there's no right to appeal.

It's apparent that public opinion based upon legitimate concerns have no place in Cheshire Easts version of democracy. Keep that in mind when they next ask if they can count on your vote.
Pete Taylor
Wednesday 20th December 2017 at 5:01 pm
Any information on which members of the Planning Committee voted for and against?
Julie Lowe
Wednesday 20th December 2017 at 5:21 pm
Oh dear! Yet again public opinion has been ignored!
Terry Bowes
Wednesday 20th December 2017 at 5:32 pm
815 ignored. Wonder how it would have gone without the section 106 bribery?
Nick Jones
Wednesday 20th December 2017 at 5:35 pm
Perhaps one of our anonymous Wilmslow 4 Councillors, or one of their proxy representatives can explain ??
Robert Bracegirdle
Wednesday 20th December 2017 at 5:38 pm
Ha ha. Ever been had? Blame yourselves. You voted for them.
Keir Faulkner
Wednesday 20th December 2017 at 5:50 pm
£150k for cyclists and pedestrians, none for bus services and none for a totally inadequate collapsing Linney's Bridge.
Julian Barlow
Wednesday 20th December 2017 at 6:00 pm
Julie Lowe-The standard argument from CEC is that if they refuse too many planning applications which are later won on appeal, they lose all jurisdiction over planning in the region. This means that virtually all major developments are waved through unchallenged, whatever the level of public opposition. This begs the question, why bother with the expense of a local planning committee if by default they are unable to reflect the views of the constituents they're supposed to represent.

However, try planning a modest extension on your own home and you'll feel the full weight and pendantry of CEC's building largely ridiculous regulations as you leap through flaming hoops trying to appease them.
David Hoyle
Wednesday 20th December 2017 at 6:02 pm
How can we find out who voted for and who voted against.
DELETED ACCOUNT
Wednesday 20th December 2017 at 6:05 pm
Wonder if the audio tape of the meeting will be working this time? - unlike last time when it was deferred. All that science and technology guff which spews out of Cheshire East and yet they can't even manage the basics. It's amazing that it seems to happen when they don't want you to hear who says what. The official minutes aren't worth the paper they are written on. For Adlington Road the "official minutes" amounted to what had been decided, a list of monies they would receive and a list of conditions which had been imposed. Minutes should include more than that and all planning meetings should be webcast, - then you can see which councillors are reading their iphones whilst the debate is in progress and yet are able to vote in favour of the motion having heard nought.
Clive Cooksey
Wednesday 20th December 2017 at 6:32 pm
Well surprise surprise! Who would ever have thought our loving caring Council would pass such a thing. OK folks. You know how to vote next time, dont you.
Bob Jones
Wednesday 20th December 2017 at 6:36 pm
Why waste money on public consultation when it could be used to fund salaries for suspended officer, pay offs and speculative ventures!
Clive Cooksey
Wednesday 20th December 2017 at 6:44 pm
Also be warned. The owner of land behind Heald Court apartments on Hawthorn Lane is planning another building coup . Despite being refused several times, he is still trying to build on a cherished preservation area.. Gird your loins all you many past objecters. You are warned!!
Maria Quin
Wednesday 20th December 2017 at 7:54 pm
I totally agree with all the above, very valid and informed comments. What I can’t understand is why some of these “councillors” aren’t in jail!! It’s almost got to the point where I’m ashamed to live in Wilmslow because the Council clearly have no respect whatsoever for It’s residents! If all their shenanigans were written in a book as a true story - no-one would Adam and Eve it! The only ones who seem to have our interests at heart are the Town Council and even they get pushed aside if they don’t tow the CE corrupt line!
Martin Kitchin
Wednesday 20th December 2017 at 8:49 pm
Very sad day for democracy and commonsense.

I wonder : -

(a) will the councillors who voted for this say why they did ?

and

(b) how many more road traffic accidents will there now be on that narrow lane up to Styal and the M56 ?
Buster Wild
Wednesday 20th December 2017 at 9:24 pm
This needs an investigation by the vigilance commitee. If the councillors don't know who this is, they soon will.
Terry Roeves
Wednesday 20th December 2017 at 9:33 pm
Wilmslow and Handforth continue to be a cash cow to fund the CEC mahogany row. But what can we do? Nothing from the police yet, more golden handshakes, nothing from central government and now there’s more money on its way from tax payers, yet nothing in return.
A Swiss businessman once said to me, that the trouble with the British is that you are lazy, dirty and above all poor - a culture exemplified by CEC inactions, repair programmes and wasted money.
Stuart Redgard
Wednesday 20th December 2017 at 10:37 pm
The proposal to recommend the application for approval was made by Councillor Hough and seconded by Councillor Smetham.

The proposal was carried by 7 votes to 4 with 1 abstention as follows.

For
Derek Hough, Liberal Democrat
Lesley Smetham, Conservative
Gill Merry, Conservative
Steve Edgar, Conservative
John Hammond, Conservative
Sarah Pochin, Conservative
Mike Sewart, Conservative


Against
Barry Burkhill, Handforth Ratepayers (Independent)
Toni Fox, Residents of Wilmslow (Independent)
Steven Hogben, Labour
Janet Jackson, Labour

Abstention
Jamie Macrae, Conservative


Prior to this proposal being made an early proposal was made to recommend the application for rejection by Council Fox, and seconded by Councillor Burkhill.

This was defeated by 7 votes to 4 with 1 abstention as follows

For
Toni Fox, Residents of Wilmslow (Independent)
Barry Burkhill, Handforth Ratepayers (Independent)
Steven Hogben, Labour
Janet Jackson, Labour

Against
Derek Hough, Liberal Democrat
Lesley Smetham, Conservative
Gill Merry, Conservative
Steve Edgar, Conservative
John Hammond, Conservative
Sarah Pochin, Conservative
Mike Sewart, Conservative


Abstention
Jamie Macrae, Conservative
Christine McClory
Wednesday 20th December 2017 at 11:49 pm
Buses? Schools? Doctors? Oh! I do hope water and sanitation is in place!!
But what do they care? Money, money,money.
We should all remember the REAL mantra.
Do think before you vote next time.
Pete Taylor
Thursday 21st December 2017 at 1:31 pm
I take it that none of the Pochin construction companies will be involved.
DELETED ACCOUNT
Thursday 21st December 2017 at 7:39 pm
Councillor Smetham. Who proposed that Adlington Road motion now be put.
Stuart Redgard
Friday 22nd December 2017 at 9:37 pm
Where is a possibility that this decision could be overturned by a legal challenged. I have already contacted a lawyer.
Marc Staples
Saturday 23rd December 2017 at 8:35 am
Another terrible decision by CEC. Wilmslow and Handforth will soon be just one huge housing estate all liked together. Their seems no point in objecting to any planning application as it will eventually get approved. I would like to know where these councillors who voted FOR live. I wonder if the development was on their doorstep they would still vote for it. I think not !!!!!
Cllr. Barry Burkhill
Thursday 18th January 2018 at 10:18 am
The majority Conservative Group at CEC have imposed a Local Plan on us without any involvement of other groups. It is in fact a Conservative Local Plan. The Plan proposes 36,000 houses across the Borough, more than twice the number we actually need for CEC's population growth, to be provided using strategic sites of which both the Clay Lane/Sagars Road site and Little Stanneylands site are included. The Conservative Group are determined to vote through all these strategic sites come hell or high water, so as they have the majority votes, there is very little the rest of us can do to stop them. The answer is in residents' hands to make sure you do not vote for a Conservative candidate in the CEC elections next year.
Nick Jones
Thursday 18th January 2018 at 1:35 pm
Cllr Burkhill clearly once again demonstrating how common sense has failed and how residents alone can ensure ‘meaningful’ development occurs in the future. Is it any wonder there is a call to place CEC into ‘Special measures’. As an entity it needs to be merged with CWC ASAP. If residents are happy to be continually treated with arrogance, contempt and deceit, then don’t complain. But If you want to make a change the only method is at the ballot box . Whilst May 2019 is too far away, It will be interesting to get the W4’s reasoning for their conduct when they start campaigning for re-election and whilst they wear the words of; Duplicitous, Inept, Incompetent, Deceitful as a badge of honour. If they would like to explain their individual and collective conduct on this public forum it would be interesting to read their explanation now before we get to canvassing /polling. If there was any dignity or deference amongst them to respect the harm and breach of trust they have caused to the public in relation to their iniquity, A person of greater honour (and there are none evidenced in the multifarious documented denouements of CEC here) may have ‘fallen on their sword’ in what is so obviously a COMMON SENSE and NON –PARTISAN issue. No one is saying No to all development, but eradication of Green belt and ignoring public objection on such a grand scale demonstrates their inability to represent their community. Esther McVey has commented her commitment to “to focus on protecting our green belt” W4 take note!.. Before imposition of this CEC Tory £3.7M CEC Local Plan (a document that clearly doesn’t represents the electorates position to build social infrastructure, use brownfield, support 1st time buyers and social housing), the charade of consultation on this and other ‘Planning’ issues has been no more than a ‘Grand Deception’. The W4’s role in CEC’s notoriety is perturbing , well evidenced on these pages, hoodwinking the electorate saying one thing and then doing quite the opposite; ‘Adlington -Never build on these fields- Road’ ‘Royal -I have publicly opposed any housing on the Royal-London site’ ‘Lyme -Asleep on my Watch -Green’, 815 objections to Stanneylands development ignored…. CEC justified recipients of their 2017 ‘Filthy Liars of the Year’ award from Private eye ! for their ‘deliberate and systematic failure’ with air quality data clearly appertaining to other areas of their business as well.