Mickle Trafford set to grow as Rowland seeks consent in Green Belt
A 16.5-acre site on the western edge of the Cheshire village is being eyed up by the housebuilder for redevelopment into 160 dwellings.
Rowland Homes has submitted an outline planning application for the scheme, which is located on the edge of Mickle Trafford within Cheshire West and Chester Council’s Green Belt.
The development would provide a mix of house types and 45% affordable provision, according to planning documents.
A planning statement prepared by PWA Planning claims the development would “create a well-connected, attractive, and sustainable development that contributes positively to meeting local housing needs, while respecting the character and setting of Mickle Trafford.”
Rowland and its consultant team believe the site should be considered as Grey Belt. PWA’s planning statement also sets out that the council’s current housing need position.
In April, it was calculated that Cheshire West and Chester Council had a housing land supply of less than two years. The statutory target is five years.
“There is therefore evidence of a clear and pressing need,” the statement says.
“This position represents not merely a shortfall, but a substantial and sustained failure to meet national policy requirements for a minimum five-year housing land supply, an acute need.”
To learn more, search for reference number 25/03028/OUT on Cheshire West and Chester Council’s planning portal.
It doesn’t matter that developer and it’s consultant’s believe that the land should be considered as Grey Belt – if it’s Green Belt, it stays as Green Belt until it’s reclassified to Grey Belt. Developers and their consultants are trying to use the argument of what the land should be classified as in a lot of planning applications now. It needs to stop as the developers don’t control what any is classified as.
Philip Smith Lawrence
By Philip Smith-Lawrence
Mr Smith-Lawrence, it has to be Green Belt in order to be able to apply the relevant tests to consider whether it qualifies as Grey Belt. Based on those tests, a developer is perfectly entitled to conclude their site is Grey Belt and the Local Planning Authority may or may not agree. A developer doesn’t have to wait for some form of “formal” reclassification to take place.
By Mr N Imby
The “but a substantial and sustained failure to meet national policy requirements” is interesting and grossly misleading – CWaC did not have a shortfall against previous targets – the ‘shortfall’ arose when the Government unilaterally moved the goal posts
By Squiggle
Nice rural area with farmland and a golf driving range already now being polluted by the massive carbon capture pipeline. Not wanted here thanks and will be vigorously opposed by us NIMBYs
By Harry Turnbull
45% homes in an area like this is a dream, maybe ill be able to afford a place to live close to Chester
Yes please
By Homes please
At some point people will just have to start blockading these sprawl attempts and drive the vandals off, just like we did with the Fracking barbarians.
By Note to Future Self
The banner of green belt land is the problem… Its inception was over 100 years ago and needs to be revised and brought into the 21st century. People need to accept that our country has changed, houses are needed and a few fields previously private farmed land shouldn’t fall under that banner. Here’s to Labour & the NPPF reform moving more land into grey belt…
By P C McGarry
Young people do need new housing but also supportive infrastructure and services.
By John Taylor. Councillor PC.