CONTROVERSIAL plans for the biggest house building project Macclesfield has seen ‘in a generation’ have been approved in the face of huge opposition.
At a Cheshire East Council planning meeting members gave approval for a total of 398 homes across three sites in green belt land off Chelford Road, in Henbury, west of Broken Cross roundabout.
Although each site was discussed - and approved - as a separate application common major concerns of traffic generation and therefore a reduction in air quality were raised for all.
Concerns are the increase in traffic will make the nearby Broken Cross Roundabout, where it was said there are already queues of up to 250m in all directions, an even more congested bottleneck.
And this will lead to a decrease in air quality in an area already falling below government standards, it is feared.
Altogether the plans attracted objections from existing residents at 270 homes. It is planned to mitigate the increase in traffic by turning Broken Cross Roundabout into a traffic light controlled junction to regulate the flow of cars.
But opponents say this will make the situation worse.
Councillor Nick Mannion, who represents the West and Ivy ward and is not on the planning committee, was one of nine people to speak against the applications at the meeting.
He told the committee that it would be the biggest house building project Macclesfield has seen ‘in a generation’.
He said: “The applicant has failed to demonstrate that the negative effects of these developments will be mitigated and there will be an increase in the already unlawful levels of air pollution through increased congestion at Broken Cross.
“(The committee should) insist the applicant returns with real sustainable proposals on these key issues rather than relying on an over optimistic interpretation of hotly disputed data.”
The separate developments are 232 dwellings by Redrow Homes and Jones Homes North West, 135 by Frederic Robinson Ltd and 31 by Jones Homes North West.
Questions were also raised about the data collected to predict any potential rises in pollution as an air quality reader was moved during the tests.
Simon Browne, also not on the committee but from Henbury Parish Council, suggested this achieved more favourable results.
But council officer Richard Law countered that the moving of the reader was due to the land it was on changing hands and the new owner not wanting it there.
Serious concerns were raised about the pressure on the area’s infrastructure to cope with the influx of people, particularly schools as it was said all in the area were full.
And even though the developers would give £1.1m to the area’s education needs no schools nearby had room to spend this on expansion, the meeting was told.
Gareth Jones, of Macclesfield Town Council, asked the committee to refuse the plans and said: “Do the maths the schools will not cope. Extra cars on an already congested road, can all the GPs cope? They struggle now.”
Although there was no data available to the meeting as to whether it was possible for schools to expand, assurances were given that had the council’s education team thought this was a problem it’s officers would have flagged it up.
Data submitted by the applicants had also been verified by the council, who sent it to an independent third party for scrutiny, it was said.
Speaking on behalf of all the applicants, Gary Halman said: “This is a well considered, sustainable proposal on a site that was specifically selected for this purpose [in the local plan], it will be of great benefit to Macclesfield. Quality developers have worked with the council to address all technical matters.”
All three applications are outline, meaning specific details other than access to the site will be decided at a later date.
Speaking after the meeting Broken Cross and Upton councillor Liz Durham, also on the admissions panel at Fallibroome High School, said: “Roads and air quality are still issues and there will be possibly 400 extra pupils, there’s no space.
“I know we need houses but we should think about the future not pass the applications and worry about what happens later.”
Macclesfield MP David Rutley also expressed his objections before the meeting, saying ‘detailed action plans’ to mitigate air quality and traffic issues were needed.
He said: “It is clear that there is strongly-held opposition from across the community.
“I am pleased to be able to add my voice to those, including calling on the planning board to reject these applications until further work has been undertaken on vital air quality issues.”
