Graham reports back from Friends of Scholes Park meeting
Cheadle and Gatley Liberal Democrats
Demand more Learn more
Graham reports back from Friends of Scholes Park meeting
Gatley's Lucy Boxes
Sign up for weekly emails
Have your say on Stockport’s future – where we live and the types of homes we live in
by Lib Dem team on 22 August, 2017
The Lib Dem team want you to have your say on where we’ll live and the types of homes we’ll live in over the next 20 years.
Stockport Council is drawing up its Local Plan. There are five different topics and we’ll be looking at one each week. The Lib Dems on Stockport Council will be putting our submission in and we want to include your views. Of course, you can also have your say directly.
The questions the Council wants to answer on homes are:
- Where should new housing and places to live be located?
- What should be the balance of new housing types, sizes, development design and density?
- If you have struggled to find a home in Stockport, what have the problems been and how do you think the planning process can help with these issues in the future?
- Do you have any other comments about housing provisionin Stockport.
To help, we’ve included the Council’s briefing paper on homes. It’s 4 pages long and worth a quick read before you give your answers.
Portrait of the Cheadle Area
Over the next few weeks Stockport Council is consulting on its Local Plan. This is the first of three sets of consultations on the plan, and it’s important. It will shape our borough for the next twenty years: what our town and village centres look like, what jobs we have, where people live, our health, parks, green spaces and more.
You can read all the documents and have your say on any part of it here.
7 Comments
I understand that there are about 6000 applicants on the council’s waiting list for social housing, almost all of whom have long term connections with the borough. Seems to me that meeting these families’ needs should the first priority. Many of these will be low income families, for whom ownership of even “affordable” housing is out of reach. As such, the council must look to building homes for rent – “council houses”, as we used to know them.
Ideally, these need to be built on brownfield sites, close to existing retail and other services as well as close to employment – as many of these families will be reliant on public transport for getting about. But, the use of greenfield sites mustnt be ruled out because of NIMBY opposition – the need is too great to pander to that opposition.
I feel that council Accommodation should be built or at least affordable rented Homes from Developers wanting to build their type of expensive homes. Time for the big builders to give something back. Don’t have to be Houses as apartments could be built either two or three stories but no higher. The council need to look after these British people first and not allow anymore building until they have a signed contract to say these types of accommodation will be built before any other housing. The hospital site was a farce when the builders promised a certain amount of affordable houses then turned around and said it wasn’t prifitable for them so didn’t build them.
I think the only realistic way forward is to allocate certain sites specifically for affordable homes. No builder, unless subsidised, is to going to manage any project where a portion of affordable homes is mandatory – as it will affect the potential selling price of the rest on the estate.
I would like to see the plans to provide Schools, Hospitals ,Doctors , Dentists, Social Services, Roads and Transport. etc.to cope with this increase the increase in population. Most of us are aware that all these services cannot cope now with some services at breaking point.
Don’t put the horse before the cart.
John H is quite right – look at the Cheadle Royal development and the by-pass. No thought process at all. Train, bus (although that is up to the profitability of the operators) and the Metro (a must now) are key ingredients as are roads that go somewhere – flyovers/underpasses to keep traffic flowing. Also, if I may, Barnes. All those cars, no good access to transport and the illegal use of the South Park estate……. I’d be happy to provide advice
My heart sank on reading the first response but rose beating again on John H’s comments. “Pack ’em in” will only result in busting out in the near future.
Am afraid if you look around the country as a whole, you will find Social Cleansing going on. Our neighbour Wythenshawe is a prime example all the building around the Airport and other places on the estate not social and unafordable to many many families ?