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
Cheshire East press ahead with plans for 1,500 homes off the A34
by Lib Dem team on 24 August, 2018
Cheshire East Council are pushing ahead with plans to build 1,500 homes in a new “garden village” on the other side of the A34 from Handforth Dean.
Map showing North Cheshire Garden Village layout
Place North West reports:
The village is to include a primary school, sports facilities including a grass pitch and 3G surfaces, village hall and space for self-build homes. There will be 116 acres of open space. With linkages to Handforth itself a priority, the plans also call for the replacement of the existing A34 footbridge with a more accessible design that could act as a gateway feature.
Beyond the village centre, the development proposal is divided into three neighbourhoods. To the north will be Dairy House, a residential-led area featuring medium density homes featuring townhouses and semi-detached and detached homes – this segment of the site already includes the Ministry of Defence offices and a Total Fitness gym, which will both remain, and access from Dairy House Lane.
Kissing Gate, the south western part, will feature the most dense housing, with townhouses the predominant model. Blossoms Lane, in the south eastern part of the development, and furthest from the bypass, will be the lowest density, with a “mixed suburban and rural feel” – the rural elements will be situated at the scheme’s edges.
The commercial space is to be primarily offices, R&D and light industrial, with parameters suggested in the SPD as office space of up to 24,000 sq ft, 97,000 sq ft of R&D space and the same volume of light industrial; with 26,900 sq ft of general industrial space.
“New homes need new infrastructure,” said Cllr Iain Roberts. “We’ve said all along that if Cheshire East Council wants to build this many homes on our doorstep, the Gatley lights junction must be sorted out as part of the development. The A34 can’t cope with ever-higher levels of traffic. We’ll be looking for a firm commitment from Cheshire East.”
12 Comments
great more traffic… absolutely brilliant…. there really is no point fighting anymore….
Do we really need more expensive that first time buyers cannot afford, and the A34 and other local roads are already up to the limit with nightmare traffic.
This is really not needed and should be stopped.
Surely its worth pushing hard for a regular (every 10 mins) tram or train link and a cycle super highway parallel to the A34 and forget about trying to improve the A34.
We’ve spent the past 50+ years building more roads / bigger roads only to be ‘surprised’ when people make more journeys by car and the ‘bigger’ roads just get as clogged up as the little roads were… If we stop trying to make it more convenient to go by private motor vehicle and solely focus on making it more convenient to use other modes of transport then congestion will naturally self limit (probably at much lower levels than it is at the moment – thus improving journey times for commercial traffic and improving our economy).
The new estate gets a primary school and a football pitch. Any idea what the plans are for medical facilities (doctors, dentists, hospitals and social services) Who is catering for the secondary school children?
I am sure other contributors will add more services that will be required.
Further erosion of the greenbelt! I particular object to the Blossoms Lane developments. Surprise surprise, little though to transport strategy and amenities, a common theme.
Why do so many politicians of all parties immediately push for road improvements?
Fewer people would use the A34 and other roads if there was regular, reliable and affordable public transport – preferably that doesn’t finish at 6.30pm. Unfortunately we can’t even manage this in Cheadle let alone in Handforth.
I don’t care about where these new homes are (the issues on affordable housing can be saved for another debate) but I do care that the automatic assumption from planners, politicians, developers and prospective residents is that the answer is ROAD ROADS ROADS when we should actually be encouraging people to use other methods of transport whenever possible and this just isn’t happening – or certainly not with enough force.
You have to give people the good public transport choices first before you can lure them out of their cars; then you can build the houses wherever you like… So long as it’s near a transport hub. Perhaps the developers – and the local authorities that will benefit with increased council tax revenues – should be made subsidise a good public transport service to the area in perpetuity then you might actually…
Iain – can you please tell us what new infrastructure your party authorised for the all the new homes in the Barnes development?
Hi Bruce. I think I can answer that one. Nothing. Zero. But the sales on Barnes will tell people they can cut through the South Park – I know as I’ve acted for some buyers. The Barnes development is really lovely. I’d like to live there. But there is no proper transport/road link. So I wouldn’t buy there.
Robert – I posed as a potential buyer last year and was told the same thing – go through the estate.
Can’t blame the residents as the alternative is either a two mile detour to Cheadle Royal or a U-turn somewhere around the Gatley road junction.
Classic LD propaganda by distraction.
Robert
There’s no need for cars to cut through the South Park estate, as cars leaving Barnes can turn north or south directly from the estate. That said, I’m all for greater enforcement of the “access only” restrictions we have on the estate.
By the by, I’m in touch with Iain Roberts over the new “No u-turn” sign there. I distinctly remember council officers telling me that the u-turn facility would not disappear with the development – with them accepting that the increased danger of us having to use the motorway slip road would only be temporary inconvenience. Iain’s recollection is the same as mine.
John – turning right and left or north and south is not the issue – it is the vehicles using the M60 east or west.
Bruce – I was responding to Robert’s and your point about Barnes traffic. If you do not see it as an issue, why on earth did you bother mentioning it?