Abbeyfield Sandbach 1

PLANNING | Sandbach homes on Cheshire East agenda

The second phase of a development by Anwyl and Redrow Homes, providing 151 homes off Middlewich Road in Sandbach, is set to be discussed by Cheshire East’s Southern planning committee next week.

Anwyl and Redrow have made two applications on the site: a reserved matters application for 126 homes, and a full planning application for 25 houses at the site’s southern end.

The wider 39-acre site was granted outline planning permission for up to 280 homes, alongside public open space and highways improvements, in 2012, and a reserved matters planning application for the first phase of 154 houses was approved in 2015.

The latest reserved matters application includes a mix of 74 four-bedroom homes; 26 three-beds; 21 two-beds; four one-beds; and one five-bed house. The four-bed units are expected to vary in price between £264,000 and £475,000.

Recommending the application for approval, Cheshire East planning officers said the proposals would “much needed affordable housing provision” and “would help in the Council’s delivery of five-year housing land supply”.

Cheshire East planning officers have stipulated that 30% of the homes – around 38 units – should be provided as affordable homes under the application’s Section 106 agreement.

A contribution of £514,000 towards education services was already secured as part of the outline planning permission, secured in 2012.

The recommendation to approve has been put forward despite objections from Sandbach Town Council, which argued the housing was “far too dense” in the second phase, and that it offered “no green space of any significance”.

The Town Council also criticised the application for not providing any bungalows “for older residents who wish to downsize”.

However, planning officers said the development’s open space was already covered under the outline application, which provides a six-acre park on the site.

Cheshire East planners also recommended the full planning application, covering 25 homes, for approval.

The homes on designated open countryside land are in addition to the 280 houses approved as part of 2012’s outline planning application.

These will provide a mix of 17 four-bed homes; four three-beds; three two-beds; and a single five-bedroom house, with prices for a four-bed house expected to be in a similar range as for the wider development.

Planning officers said the additional homes would “not have a detrimental impact upon residential amenity” in the area, and recommended the scheme for approval, subject to agreeing affordable homes on the site, as well as a £120,000 provision towards local education provision.

The professional team for the development includes Astle Planning & Design.

Your Comments

Read our comments policy here

Please ask Anwyl when will they start on the two cleared sites in Liverpool. It is particularly annoying with the cleared old Norton coach station as developments are happening all around it and the loss of the coach station for a bus stop in Liverpool One is not the same.

By Man on Bicycle

How can the emphasis on three and four bedroom properties possibly be seen as “affordable housing”? Sandbach is now at saturation point. The traffic is deadlocked and there is nowhere to park. More houses is just crazy.

By WRH

Exactly, the country is full, we’ll have no countryside left at his rate.

By L33

Won’t somebody please think of the children!!

By PJ & Duncan

Children?! Apparently the country is full so we can’t have any more children. Personally I believe that children are our future, teach them well and let them lead the way…

By Helen Lovejoy

Sandbach Town Council were correct in their appraisal of the plans. The town is suffering congestion from traffic for most of the day on a Saturday from Middlewich Road to Mill Road. The traffic is at a stand still most days on Mill Road. CEC appear to believe that building in the Wilmslow area, which is the commute to Manchester area is not necessary and is allowing Sandbach to take more than its fair share.

By K Ratcliffe

Pah!!
When planning officers say that the additional homes would “not have a detrimental impact upon residential amenity” in the area – perhaps they ought to come and live here and see how they like it. Traffic is at a stand still every day in town heading towards and down Middlewich Road. It’s a bleedin’ joke. Sandbach does not need nor want any more new builds.
Coming home today, saw the startings of a new 190 home development just south of Holmes Chapel on the A50 London Road just opposite the Pugh’s factory site. When will it all stop??
NO MORE BUILDING ON GREEN FIELDS.

By AS

This green and historic town which is now choked with traffic and pollution has to loose even more of its countryside to development. Try to get a doctors appointment or a hospital or a dentist

By M Adams

The Chancellor is aiming for 300,000 new homes per annum so get used to it, as housebuilding is not going to stop anytime soon.

By MD

Please do not build on open countryside. Are these homes in this location needed? Where will residents work? Please consider other options. We all need open space and countryside. Developers should and could do better. Use your imagination. Do good and not bad.

By Rachel White

Build new homes in North Wales, there is lots of land and no traffic, we need to spread out a bit instead of all living on top of each other.

By LIA

less than 11% of the UK is urban area and a large portion of that is garden/”natural” landscape rather than “built form” stop complaining.

By QuaysMan

Quote no effect on residential amenity unquote who are these people in planning that make such absurd ludicrous statements. The whole nature of the place is being changed before our eyes. We residents don’t want anymore development.

By Tom Fishburn

65 million people on a tiny island, no wonder people are moving to Australia and Canada where the standard of living is so much higher because people aren’t packed in like sardines.

By L33

Jesus, there are some properly ill-informed people that post on here nowadays. More suburban sprawl is NOT the answer in this country. High density living, in cities, walking/cycling distance from all amenities you need IS the way forward. Too many people in this country drive everywhere precisely because most people live in dull dreary suburbia, where nothing is accessible on foot. Places like Vancouver regularly rate highly on the liveability index and it’s because they’re high density places where everybody can and do cycle/walk everywhere, thus making them healthier and happier.

By Anonymous

What a load of nonsense anon, people don’t want to live in these cities of rainy Britain. Happier? people in cities are far LESS happy, that’s why house prices rise the further you are from cities. In Vancouver most people drive and don;t even bother with downtown.

By L33

People are demonstrably happier in high density areas : https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/oct/06/inner-city-living-makes-for-healthier-happier-people-study-finds

By Bradford

L33 – would love to find your stats there. Pretty sure Manchester had the highest house price growth in the UK in 2017, how do you explain that?

By Anonymous

I thought this was a website for property professionals, not disgruntled residents

By Nordyne

House prices in cities are still low, crime is high, schools are inferior and the streets are dirtier. People who work in Manchester still choose to live in Worsley / Altrincham, not Hulme. I don;t believe anything in the Guardian either, worst paper in the UK, on it’s last legs.

By L33

People don;t say “let’s leave Hoylake and move to Toxteth, I love having less space and more traffic”

By L33

Anonymous. Apparently Manchester has the fastest growing economy in Britain in one paper but in another it was lagging behind Oxford,Cambridge and God forbid Luton. Statistics are easy to manipulate. I think Manchester’s house price surge is sketchy. There are areas in Manchester where a house can be bought for a song and other areas where the prices are as high as the South East.

By Elephant

I like the picture illustration, looks like everyone is happy, and not congested at all. Let’s get them built.

By Helen Lovejoy

Our cities have a homeless problem, walking around Manchester and Liverpool is not a nice experience, comparing them to other cities, Berlin, Vancouver, London, Sydney wouldn’t put up with this homeless situation. Until we do something about it suburbia will be best place to live.

By bytheway

Most cities develop with high value core with lower prices and values the further you move out; London being the classic example.

Industrial cities had a different path developng along a donut structure with an affluent core, a ring of deprivation and an affluent outer suburbs.

That doesn’t mean the same principles don’t apply – working practices and lifestyle choices, particularly of the young and the retired are drawing more and more people into the centres. Most companies will want to locate to where they can attract talent and co-operate, meaning city centres mainly. High density settlements are more economically, socially and environmentally sustainable, more efficient and better for people’s wellbeing assuming pollution can be controlled.

The challenge for Mancheste, Liverpool and other post-industrial cities is to re-fit their infrastructure and housing offer to accommodate this trend with investment into public transport, urban public realm, urban green spaces and a transformed housing offer. Suburban commuting is costly, wasteful and unsustainable for large numbers of people and so the planning system should be used to limit sprawl and jumping of the green gap. Time for greater co-operation in terms of planning policy between GMCA and Cheshire East; and LCR and Cheshire West, I think,

By Suburban land promoter watch

it makes me laugh, when they show computer generated images, of how these developments will look when finished….full of lush green areas full of wildflowers and an abundance of vibrant healthy trees.. when, in reality, the image should show a few random diseased, dying saplings, (probably chosen because of a cheap deal, rather than their suitability for the area and conditions), which have been stuck in the ground wherever they can manage to dig a shallow grave, oops, i mean hole, in amonst the rubble, concrete and building debis left over from the build..the same debris and detritus, will then (if its lucky), get a very light sprinkling of top soil, before becoming the base for turf to be laid…then, any turf lucky enough to take root through the concrete , will probably be regularly mowed, and often treated with some sort of “lawn weed n feed” or “moss off” ..not to mention, the surrounding pathways kept regularly sprayed with carcinogens oops, i mean weed killer, so that everywhere stays looking neat and tidy.. sadly, the reality doesn’t quite paint the same picture, as the one the developers have dreamt up in the image above !
even more heartbreaking, the knowledge that, had the land been left alone, there would have been saplings growing, but growing healthy and strong, suited to their surroundings , able to thrive, because they would have began as an acorn falling from an oak tree very nearby.. a tree that maybe had lived there for 300 years..giving it time to settle into its environment, and nourish and prepare the ground on which their acorns fall .. alas 300 years of living and creating a perfect environment for many plants and wildlife (us humans included) to thrive in, seems to mean absolutely nothing..if a person were to boast these achievements, they would be awarded an mbe.. all our trees are being awarded, is a death sentence, and a headstone, oops, i mean house, with number “52”, or “28” oak tree gardens, erected on top of them , cementing in, and suffocating any roots left behind after the chainsaws and diggers have ripped through.. when will people realise we are cementing in our own fate.. every tree we fell becomes another nail in our coffin..seems very clear to me, what the outcome will be, if we continue to decimate our countryside..we humans are parastoids..our host is nearly dead… copy and paste this link to an article from the guardian (written september 2017)..and then tell me its ok to continue to take our green spaces, and concrete over them..

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/sep/28/alarm-as-study-reveals-worlds-tropical-forests-are-huge-carbon-emission-source

By mummyfunk

Subscribe to our newsletter