Supply shortfall boosts Miller’s Oldham bid
The housebuilder has set out plans for 50 homes south of Denbigh Drive in Crompton, within a borough that it said is delivering only 80% of its housing target.
Miller Homes plans to deliver three- and four-bedroom housing on a 7.9-acre agricultural plot, insert a new access point off Denbigh Drive, and add landscaping across the scheme.
The site, which sits to the south of the High Crompton housing area, is identified as “Other Open Protected Land” in Oldham’s adopted development plan: however, it also sits within the Cowlishaw draft housing allocation area included in the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework, this zone being proposed as capable of delivering 460 dwellings.
According to the covering letter submitted by Miller’s planning advisor WSP, Oldham currently has a housing supply of less than three years. A further scheme is being advanced in the Cowlishaw area by Redrow, as detailed by Place North West earlier this week.
WSP also outlines how pre-application discussions with Oldham Council have established that the principle of residential development is acceptable, and that schemes on similar OPOL protected sites have been permitted due to the lack of supply. These include a consent for Grasscroft Property for 77 homes off Hebron Street, Royton, in May 2019 and a hybrid application for 265 houses by Russell Homes at Knowls Lane, Lees.
Regardless, the proposals have attracted a welter of opposition. To date, 125 comments have been made on the plans within Oldham’s planning portal, all but a handful objecting.
Consultation on the project was carried out by BECG in December 2020, with the application being validated in late March.
Miller’s professional team also includes STEN Architecture, Lanpro Services, Wardell Armstrong, Lees Roxburgh, Trevor Bridge Associates, TPM Landscape and Eddisons.
The way forward for the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework itself will be expected to become clearer as the outcomes of local elections are reported in the coming days. In March, a panel of experts agreed that a joint cross-border framework is still the best way forward, regardless of the issues faced in attempting to secure agreements in the last few years. .