A planning application to create a watersports and outdoor activity centre on a Green Belt site in Chelford will be decided next week.
Cheshire Lakes' proposal includes a cable wakeboard park, low ropes course, open water swimming, paddle sports, café, watersports shop, showers and changing facilities at the former Mere Farm sand quarry, which is currently undergoing environmental restoration.
The scheme, which would create 30 jobs, also includes a new entrance, parking for 100 vehicles and a single-storey multi-use building which will provide a reception, small kitchen; indoor seating; staff office, toilets and changing rooms as well as a kit room and plant room.
The intention is to have the site fully operational in Spring 2017, however the planning officer is recommending that the Strategic Planning Committee refuse the application at their meeting on Wednesday, 27th July.
The proposed development is considered to be acceptable in terms of the Green Belt, as the use of the lakes maintains openness. it considered to be socially sustainable as it would provide an opportunity for local residents to participate in sport and it is considered that the proposed development would be very positive in terms of contributing to the local rural economy and supporting local businesses. It would also attract visitors from the local area and from further afield to use the facility, therefore making a positive economic contribution.
With regard to flood risk, noise, air quality, highways and design these matters are considered to be acceptable. However, the site has a rich biodiversity, which is proposed to be enhanced further through the continued development of the restoration scheme.
The planning officer feels that the biodiversity would suffer as a result of the proposals and in particular the birdlife at the site. It is considered that even with mitigation, the levels of disturbance would be detrimental to the biodiversity at the site.
The report prepared for the Strategic Planning Committee states "When weighed in the planning balance, it is clear that there are a number of positives to the scheme, however the harm to biodiversity, in particular bird populations cannot be overcome in order to achieve a scheme that would see the proposed use and the biodiversity exist together.
"Therefore, it is considered that on balance, the proposal is unacceptable and contrary to policy NE11 of the Macclesfield Borough Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework which aims to achieve sustainable development."
Chelford Parish Council recommended the planning application for refusal stating "The argument that this development will somehow allow more people to experience the local countryside of Cheshire East is a spurious one. Similarly, the argument that this is some sort of brownfield site is simply not true.
"On balance, councillors believe that the Lakes proposal is not appropriate for our local environment and will do much to detract from our rural setting. It is felt that the development will do little to enhance the amenity of our area and in fact may have a negative effect on the desire of people to move into the area."
Nether Alderley Parish Council felt the application is an inappropriate development within the Green Belt and no special circumstances exist to substantiate this type of commercial development within the Green Belt.
Cheshire East Council also received 66 letters from the public, 29 of which were letters of objection and 37 were letters of support.
The plans can be viewed on the Cheshire East Council website by searching for planning reference 16/1353M.
Comments
Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below.
Or maybe we should have a referendum, we are good at those.
This must be the only news article I've seen here about a planning report where the environmental report carries any weight.
Housing developments on green field sites (green field not just green belt) also have an environmental impact but I'm yet to see one of those rejected to save the birds, hedgehogs or any other species that doesn't pay council tax.
If PE above is cynical then I think he may have company.
Central government are constantly warning us about the perils of alcohol and obesity and yet the moment someone bravely proposes a business that isn't a wine bar or coffee shop, CEC demonstrate uncharacteristic creativity in dreaming up reasons why this project shouldn't go ahead. CEC-Ignoring the people who pay their wages since 2009.