Residents launch open letter on new Chelford Road homes
By Alex Greensmith 28th Oct 2021
A Macclesfield campaign coalition have sent an open letter to politicians, councils and individuals of our town regarding the controversial Chelford Road housing developments.
This follows our report last week on David Rutley MP's comments on the project
The residents of Henbury, Whirley and Greenside, wishes a call to action after housing developer Bellway broke terms agreed by the council including premature building.
The open letter reads as follows:
Open letter to Mr David Rutley MP, and Councillors of Macclesfield Regarding Bellway Homes Development, Chelford Road
Dear Mr Rutley & Councillors
We are writing to you regarding the land between Whirley Road and Chelford Road, Macclesfield which Bellway Homes have outline permission under planning application 17/4277M, approved permission on reserved matters application 19/3097M, and refused reserved matters application 19/3098M.
Over the last three weeks works have commenced, despite there being outstanding conditions to be satisfied on the reserved matters. Some of the first works to take place were the cutting down of the 450 trees, which made up the Whirley community woodland, planted by children who attend the school and reside in the locality. The next action was that a large section of hedge was removed on Whirley Road; I cannot understand why this hedge was removed, as the plans and permissions show no access to Whirley Road.
We are writing to you today because I have grave concerns about the planning process on this site, and the developers approach to trees, hedges and the substantial amounts of peat across this field.
Firstly, we'd like to raise my concerns about the removal of hedge on Whirley Road. Throughout the process of removing this site from Greenbelt and placing in the Local Plan, it has been stated quite sensibly that no vehicular access should be allowed from the development on to Whirley Road due to safety. Whirley Road is semi-rural road which runs from Chelford Road, through to Alderley Edge, the road is narrow, and the pavements are extremely narrow and, to be honest quite dangerous especially as vehicle speed down the road.
By removing the hedge, it appears that Bellway may have applied for temporary access from Whirley Road to construct the development. As you are aware, there is a primary school, and two pre-schools on the road, with parents/carers and children walking up and down Whirley Road between the sites at least twice a day, and also to access the play areas at Jasmine Park and Henbury. The route is also popular with pedestrians, going about their daily business. Another recent concerning issue is that Cheshire East have for some odd reason removed the road from the winter gritting route.
Mr Rutley, We wonder if you would kindly write to The Transport Secretary & Cheshire East Highways please and express our concerns; there must be no vehicular access to this site. In actual fact condition 5 of the planning decision notice for 17/4277m states "The vehicular access to serve the development hereby permitted shall be via the new junction onto Chelford Road only with no vehicular access to Whirley Road. Reason: In the interests of highway safety."
Councillors, please can you work as a team, cross party to ensure no access, not even temporary is allowed.
Application 19/3098M
It appears this application to the north of the site was used as a back door to get even more houses than the number originally approved on the outline application. We understand from Henbury Parish Council that the applicant has lodged an appeal with the Planning Inspectorate. Our concerns with this part of the development are:
- That this would create over-development. The total number of dwellings for site LPS18 (The north side of Chelford Road) were confirmed as 150 dwellings total in the Local Plan. The original outline permission was for 135 dwellings, application 19/3098M was for 23 dwellings, a parcel to the southeast of the site has outline permission for 30 dwellings, and as yet an unclaimed parcel in the northeast which can take up to 30 dwellings making a total of 217 dwellings, over 50% increase from the Planning Inspectors numbers.
- To build on this part of the site, the developer would need to remove a significant amount of peat, which it appears nobody, developer, planners, experts etc have any actual idea of just how much peat there is. In fact, when samples were being taking in 2018, the contractor said that there was peat down to a level of five metres, but that was as deep as he could check with his equipment, too much to estimate. Locals say that throughout the planning process, all concerned have done their best to quell any noise regarding the peat removal, which is quite shocking especially for a local authority with a climate emergency.
- The proposed development would result in a net loss to biodiversity. It has not been demonstrated that the proposal would be able to achieve a biodiversity net gain.
- There is a significant body of water in the north west corner of the site, referred to as surface puddling during planning meetings, but measures at least 2.2 acres, and up to five feet deep. It appears that dwellings would be sited in this water?
- The increased dwelling number will put a strain on school places, which there appear to be none spare, increased pollution close to an air quality management area, and in a pandemic setting a strain on already over-stretched medical facilities and the NHS.
Mr Rutley, we ask if you would kindly, please write to The Environment Secretary, Mr Eustice as this certainly appears to go against The Prime Minister's statement at the party conference, and also to Mr Gove, The Secretary of State for housing, as we believe that the Planning Inspectorate must refuse any appeal on application 19/3098M.
CHECK OUT OUR Jobs Section HERE!
macclesfield vacancies updated hourly!
Click here to see more: macclesfield jobs
Share: