Warburton Lane, Redrow, c Google Earth snapshot

The scheme would effectively be a southern extension to Partington. Credit: Google Earth

Redrow goes bigger in Partington after 2021 rejection

Trafford Council and the Planning Inspectorate both rejected the housebuilder’s plans for 400 homes off Warburton Lane a few years back. Now the developer is back with proposals for 560 units. 

Redrow Homes has lodged early-stage plans for a residential development across three greenfield plots totalling 111 acres dissected by Warburton Lane south of Partington. 

The plans build on earlier rejected proposals for 400 homes across 61 acres that were turned down mainly due to a lack of affordable housing in 2021.  

Trafford claimed that 45% of the homes should have been designated as affordable but Redrow did not include any affordable provision in its scheme. 

Redrow subsequently appealed and the decision went to a public inquiry. Planning inspector Christina Downes sided with the council, stating in her decision letter that Redrow’s failure to provide affordable housing was given “very substantial weight” in the case. 

The revised application, which comprises an additional 50-acre plot of land and up to 160 more homes, would feature 84 affordable homes.

Paul Murray, strategic land director at Redrow North West, said: “We are holding a public consultation over the next three weeks until Friday 18 October to share our plans for the development in Warburton, where we are proposing to build 560 homes including 84 affordable homes.

“We are hoping to submit our planning application in November 2024.”

The site falls within the New Carrington allocation, which is earmarked for a total of 5,000 homes under the Greater Manchester joint development plan, Places for Everyone. 

Stantec is advising Redrow on its Partington plans. To learn more, search for reference number 114524/EIASCO/24 on Trafford Council’s planning portal. 

Your Comments

Read our comments policy

Why bother? They’re proposing 15% affordable so will surely get rejected again (unless, did the Inspector say a lower level than 45% would be okay?).

By Anonymous

They should be building affordable home full stop. Get the families out of tempery accommodation & save the tax payer millions. Its a Disgrace.

By Nigel

The government should fund affordable housing from general taxation if it is so valuable. Direct levies on new development would be far more transparent, reduce uncertainty for developers and allow the value captured to be spent in the best way possible – which will rarely be on long term housing subsidies.

By Observer

Dumping ground no facilities medical or otherwise, poor public transport, no local employment prospects, They should be made to employ 50 apprentices as part of the permission from the Trafford area.

By Anonymous

We need more facilities for the existing partington population. The dentists, doctors, schools cannot cope with a larger population

By Anonymous

No building on green belt ,plenty of gray sites around. Shops and roads not good enough to support 560 more houses..

By Nigel coldrick

No building on greenfield sites should be granted when there are other sites elsewhere available. Once greenfield has gone it never comes back – lost for good.
How does this help any housing problem 54 affordable out of 560 – ridiculous.

By Anonymous

Homes will never be “affordable” as long as supply is constrained

By Anonymous

That site is already 3.5k allocated to new housing on flood land. Their surface water holding tanks will help but are limited. They are putting in bus stops, building a primary school and have a small area for shops. But no proper infrastructure- doctors, dentist, traffic reduction measures, etc. The trouble is we do need more housing. Perhaps high-rise buildings are the way forward? By creating a new city jobs, infrastructure and housing will all be solved.

By Cath

The economics of building affordable housing in a world without Affordable Housing Grant. Doesn’t look like Labour will restore it which is baffling given the crisis. Also here is the housing or infrastructure conundrum again – who will invest in facilities and infrastructure when there is no certainty of development, footfall, patients, customers? Housing first and a public sector plan and commitment to follow this with necessary facilities – Primary Care and Education capital budgets continue to be a postcode game of roulette.

By Dave

Totally object to this not enough services in Partington plus getting in and out of the area no matter which way your travelling is a nightmare what’s is going to be like if this planning application gets passed ?

By Anonymous

I’ve no idea how much these houses will cost when released but will people be able to pay the affordable price?
What is the percentage difference?
Forty five percent of affordable houses sounds like a ridiculous amount and may well make the whole scheme unviable to Redrow or anyone else.

By James Plant

We don’t need more homes we need more infrastructure in partington for the residents here already,it’s ok building more homes but they don’t put in more roads to cope with the extra traffic new homes bring.

By Anonymous

Why build on green land when there is brown land, in Carrington not Partington, with planning permission already in place?

By Anonymous

I support this housing scheme but a new doctors surgery and local shops should be integrated into the scheme as well as tge affordable housing

By Bobby

Related Articles

Sign up to receive the Place Daily Briefing

Join more than 13,000 property professionals and receive your free daily round-up of built environment news direct to your inbox

Subscribe

Join more than 13,000 property professionals and sign up to receive your free daily round-up of built environment news direct to your inbox.

By subscribing, you are agreeing to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

"*" indicates required fields

Your Job Field*
Other regional Publications - select below