Cheshire East has refused plans for a 'cramped' 42-home scheme for Lyme Green on the grounds of over-development.

Morris Homes and the trustees of the Lyme Green Settlement had applied for full planning permission for the development on land west of London Road and south of Gaw End Lane.

The application was deferred at the July meeting of Cheshire East's strategic planning board because of concerns over a number of matters including over-development of the site and the lack of play area and open space.

On Wednesday (October 26) the planning board unanimously refused the scheme, with Knutsford councillor Stewart Gardiner (Con) describing the apartments proposed in it as 'back-to back' and a backward step.

"Reverting back to something we did 40 years ago and [which] was rejected then and happened a hundred years before that and was rejected then, I do not see the benefit of going backwards," said Cllr Gardiner.

He said the scheme represented over-development and asked the applicants' agent, Jonathan Ainley, why the developer had not amended the layout when councillors had previously made it clear they felt there was too much building relative to open space.

Mr Ainley told him: "It's a viability point to a degree, in terms of the scheme needing to work and be deliverable for Morris and to work for the trustees."

Cllr Gardiner continued: "I think, if the developer was genuinely considering reviewing this scheme when we deferred it last time, they would have looked again at the layout and they would have reduced the number of larger properties."

He later said, if the application was refused and the developer appealed: "I would be happy to speak to that inspector, if it was a public inquiry, and explain why I, as a councillor, was not happy.

"If you reduce the number of large houses on this site you will then have enough space to do all the other things you need to do to create a good quality scheme."

During the meeting, several councillors raised concerns about the lack of a play area on site.

They were particularly concerned that, if children used the play area in Sutton, they would have to cross the busy London Road.

Congleton councillor Suzie Akers Smith (Ind) said to the developer's agent: "As this is a family development there's going to be lots of young families and they're not going to want to cross a very busy road… I don't understand why you wouldn't include public open space within that development."

Mr Ainley said the proposed development was adjacent to the much larger Vistry Homes scheme which does contain a play space and there would be connections through to that site.

Earlier in the meeting ward councillor Andrew Gregory (Ind), speaking as a visiting councillor, had told the board there were issues in relation to the boundary of the site.

He said the owner of Rayswood Nature Reserve claims the existing boundary, as suggested by the plans and by Morris Homes, is actually on the Rayswood land.

"That's really important because that's where the drainage ditch is," said Cllr Gregory.

Macclesfield councillor Brian Puddicombe (Lab) said he couldn't support the application because he had concerns about highways issues and over-development.

He proposed the scheme be refused and this seconded by Cllr Gardiner.

The application was refused unanimously on the grounds it would result in a cramped form of development which would undermine the visual amenity and landscaped area.

This is despite it looking likely to be approved this time last week.