Uncertainty clouds Godley Green aspirations
An amended application for Tameside’s proposed 2,150-home garden village has been rejected by councillors, throwing the flagship project off track.
The local authority itself is the applicant for Godley Green, working with MADE Partnership, which is intended to act as master developer. MADE is a joint venture between Barratt Redrow, Homes England and Lloyds Banking Group.
Tameside Council’s speaker’s panel planning committee considered the application at its meeting on 14 January, which was also attended by Save Tameside Green Belt campaigners, according to the MEN. Councillors voted against the project due to concerns around developer contributions in the Section 106 agreement.
This was the third time Godley Green has been to committee. During meetings in November 2023 and October 2024, members had resolved to approve the project subject to conditions. The Secretary of State confirmed that the scheme should not be called-in for inquiry.
No decision notice had issued though, and with amendments being re-consulted on last year, another verdict was sought.
In a wider sense, the project in itself has a sounder footing in planning terms than it had when approved. Back then, it was Green Belt and not allocated for housing. Now, it is not classed as Green Belt and is allocated for housing within Greater Manchester’s Places for Everyone housing strategy.
However, work remains to be done to get the project legally cleared to start work in earnest. The target date for a start had been this year, for a project inked in for phased delivery over 15 years.
“The decision not to approve the revised Godley Green outline planning application is of course very disappointing for the council and our partners,” said a Tameside Council spokesperson.
“Tameside, like all local authorities is facing a housing crisis, and we cannot meet our housing needs by building on brownfield land alone,” they continued.
“Godley Green therefore remains a key strategic site where we can meet our housing needs while increasing accessible green space and remains a designated site allocation in the Greater Manchester Places for Everyone Plan.
“We remain committed to delivering the much-needed homes for future generations in the best possible way and we will now look together with our development partner, MADE, at options available to us to in light of the decision.”
A refresher – the site and proposal
Godley Green comprises 254 acres of agricultural land to the north of the A560 Mottram Old Road, between Godley, Hyde, Hattersley and Gee Cross. The site is bordered by Werneth Brook to the west, the TransPennine trail to the north, the Manchester-Glossop railway to the east and Mottram Old Road to the south.
The masterplan broadly breaks down as twin villages, with the homes being supported by social and physical infrastructure: local centre retail and amenities, community and education facilities, vehicle, cycle and pedestrian connections.
The amendments tabled
Amendments were summarised in the officer report as:
- Removal of agricultural land to the south of the A560 Mottram Old Road which was previously included within the site’s red line boundary
- Inclusion of an indicative internal link road across Godley Brook between east and west village centres, subject to technical viability 0 this could be a road or green infrastructure
- Amendment to the location of the emergency access to the western village in the event the provision of the internal link is not viable
- Changes to the provision of onsite education and community facilities to allow provision to meet needs identified by the LEA
- Amendments to the drainage strategy to include more above ground surface water attenuation (SUDS)
- Amendments to the configuration of village centres to broaden the range of uses, also removing maximum floorspaces, while capping building heights at four storeys but with a greater allowance on floor to ceiling heights
- Inclusion of a ‘skills hub’ within the permitted uses – the hub would be a temporary facility provided in conjunction with the National House Building Council to provide a construction training base
- Amendments to the boundary and location of development parcels including an additional residential parcel in the north-west corner
- Adjustments to the alignment of the primary road infrastructure to address site easements and non-participating third-party land
- Amendments to the green buffer proposals along Green Lane where the high-pressure gas main or site entrances prohibit such works.
In addition, the team wants to replace the site-wide design code, replacing it with an updated design code to be agreed prior to the submission of the first reserved matters application.
There are minor tweaks to the quantum of development in each parcel of land, as plans are firmed up. The level of affordable housing remains at 15%.
The heads of terms for the Section 106 agreement have been updated, and include items such as £3m to local secondary education, £3.6m towards a Hattersley railway station link bridge and £2.6m to improvements on Brookfold Lane and Green Lane.
The latest round of publicity led to around 480 objections being registered, adding to the thousands that greeted the initial plans.
All documents relating to Godley Green can be seen on Tameside’s planning portal, reference 21/01171/OUT.
What is the point of greenbelt land, if the Council can remove the greenbelt designation to suit their agenda?
The people of Hyde do not want this development.
By John Gregory.
@John Gregory (January 17, 2026 at 11:17)
The boundaries of the Green Belt can only be amended through the preparation of a local plan. In this case that plan was the joint Places for Everyone Plan. It was done, as a sound plan should be, in the pursuit of an overall balance of planning matters, including meeting development needs, so as to help bring about sustainable development.
Your comment somewhat ignores the point that the Green Belt designation was imposed in the first place by the council so as to suit their agenda.
By Martin Stannage
Crying shame to see this can kicked down the road again – Tameside don’t seem to understand the alternative is a Stockport-style free-for-all when it comes to greenbelt.
By Ben
Get some nice homes built Tameside needs it..old school needs modernised worked for Stockport to some point..in the suburbs.So much potential in Manchester
By Pat
Ouch! Not a great outcome for the planners leading the MADE team.
By Jon
A poor decision by the committee, who will have known that the Secretary of State will approve it. Buck-passing of the highest order.
By Anonymous
@John Gregory I assure you you’re wrong on that. A fair few people want new development in Hyde to breathe fresh life in to the area and to bring more footfall to an otherwise small dying market town.
By Hyde-ing my identity
You’re correct John Gregory, “what is the point of greenbelt land”, we should sack it off completely. Time has moved on and we should let our towns and cities expand in the most sustainable way possible.
By Mr N Imby
Crazy decision by Tameside planning committee. This isn’t greenbelt and should be developed to help deal with the Tameside housing crisis.
By Anonymous
What a waste of government time and resource from the council. They know the government will approve it – it’s not even in green belt anymore! This just seems like posturing from the local councillors who are presumably teriffied of their re-election hopes in May…
By Lee
Absolutely ridiculous decision once again by Councillors who don’t understand how the planning system works! The amendments are all completely reasonable and expected as a scheme develops and evolves. Utter stupidity and a complete waste of time and money for all involved (including tax paying residents)!
By Anonymous