Planning permission denied by CW&C Council for three major applications
Cheshire West & Chester Council have rejected three applications to build a total of 317 homes on Greenfield land in Tattenhall. The applications included 100 units with car parking, open space landscaping, ecological mitigation works to rear of Adri in Chester Road and off site highway works by Taylor Wimpy. The second application which was denied planning permission was by Ashley Wall for 137 units as well as open space and associated works at land to the rear of 15-17 Greenalands. The third planning application which wasn’t granted planning permission was by Redrow Homes North West who proposed to build 70 units including open space and access at land to the rear of 2 – 32 Harding Avenue.
Cheshire West & Chester have claimed the reason why all three planning applications were rejected is due to the sustainability grounds despite also admitting their planning policy is out of date. According to the CW&C Council leader Mike Jones, ‘developers are seeking to exploit a window in the system driven by the old and out of date policies of the Regional Spatial Strategy are using pre 2003 data before the new system comes fully into place.’
He continues to admit that even though the Local Plan is out of date the council will ‘not abandon common sense’ and he claims that, ‘It is wrong that such a disproportionate burden should fall on Tattonhall on a first come first serve basis.’ The three planning applications were opposed by local residents and members of the parish council. The members of Cheshire West & Cheshire Council planning committee overruled the advice of officers who recommended the scheme for approval on the grounds that the developments would have an adverse impact on the landscape, character and appearance of the village as well as the surrounding rural area which out weighted the benefits of the three developments.
The National planning policy now states it essential for local authorities to carry five years worth of housing land supply identified in the Local Plan which Cheshire West & Cheshire Council do not have along with many other local authorities.
However, one of the applications was accepted by Cheshire West & Chester Council for the Oak Room site redevelopment to include 31 homes, a shop, pub and post office. The developer is Blackham Developments who have previously tried to secure planning permission but lost out to a public inquiry in 2011 when the planning inspector decided the site was not central enough to meet planning policy.
Planning committee chairman Jill Houlbrook wanted to make sure that Tattenhall would not have one large housing estate surrounding it and that the refusal of planning permission was the correct decision. If all three developments did get the go ahead it would have have resulted in a 70% increase of dwellings in the form of 460 extra properties which would have ‘swamped’ the village. It was also pointed out that there was little evidence that the three developments would have been completed within a 5 year time scale to contribute to the boroughs housing supply target which is ironically, the only basis it was recommended for approval.
What do you think of the decision to deny planning permission for the three large developments? Was it the right choice in the interest of the village or do you believe more housing is the key to the recovery of the economy therefore the developments should have been granted planning permission.(0) Comments
- Stamp Duty Holiday Extension And Your Options
- Indemnity Policies - New Online Feature
- London Town House Collapse
- HALLOWEEN COMPETITION!
- Eastchurch House Falls After Second Collapse
Subscribe to receive a weekly update of our blog posts