As previously reported here, Gladman Developments Ltd have filed a planning application seeking “Outline planning permission for up to 107 dwellings, site access, highway works, landscaping, public open space and associated works” on a site below Linglongs Road behind the existing houses on the southern side of Macclesfield Road.
Chair of residents campaign group Whaley Bridge Matters, Kevin Worthinton, said: “Don’t think that just because you have already registered your objections under the local plan, that’s it. I’m sorry to say we need to do it all over again, with as much spirit as we showed earlier this year. This will be our final effort – we need to flood the planning office with our objections.
“The Local Plan for site C9 is to build 84 houses. Gladman’s plan is for 107 houses! But we can beat their plan if we all work together, pointing out the ludicrous nature of their proposal. If it went ahead, t would ruin the Gateway to the Goyt and the national park.”
The Gladman application is HPK/2014/0119. To make a response online, click on http://planning.highpeak.gov.uk/portal/servlets/ApplicationSearchServlet?PKID=162384
You can post or hand deliver your comments to High Peak Borough Council, Planning Department, Town Hall, BUXTON. You must refer to planning application. HPK/2014/0119.
The consultation period ends 21st May 2014.
The application will come before the Development Control Committee of High Peak Borough Council, in May, or more likely June.
Whaley Bridge Town Council will be making its own comments on the application following its Planning Meeting on 8th May. The meeting will take place after the Council Meeting, and so some time after 9pm (NB This meeting will have to be brought forward if HPBC schedule the planning application for the May Development Control Committee).
Residents making comment to the Borough Council are invited to copy the Town Clerk at firstname.lastname@example.org so that their comments can be considered by the Town Council.
I have in the past got fully involved in 3 public inquiries to try to save green belt. In all cases it was a done deal to agree the schemes even before the inquiry took place. All very dispiriting so I have given up, but you all must keep trying. Must use “planning reasons” not emotional “green & pleasant land” stuff. Brownfield sites should be used in all cases before any green space is even considered, but developers don’t like that (less profit in it) so this government (Pickles) panders to their every demand. Greenfield development means we subsidize the developers by paying (through our ever increasing utility bills) to provide them with gas, electric, water, telecomms and roads to their new housing sites.Unfortunately I don’t think that’s a planning reason.
Also, we need to look at national food security and protect all farmable land from builders. But this is not included in “planning reasons” despite its obvious importance to us all. Best of luck in the fight.