Ward councillors in Nantwich have spoken out over fears of multiple housing development bids for the Stapeley area.
Cllrs Geoff Smith and John Priest were at Cheshire East Council’s Strategic Planning Board today (March 25th) regarding a planning application for 75 homes off Broad Lane.
The application from Nightingale Land was originally deferred by councillors earlier this month.
Some had voiced concerns about the cumulative impact with two other forthcoming applications from Seddon Homes and Muller Property.
Seddon are eyeing 275 new homes in fields further along close to Stapeley Broad Lane Primary School.
Meanwhile, Muller Property want to build a second phase of 400 homes on land between Broad Lane and Peter De Stapleigh Way.
Nightingale had hit back at the deferral, saying a new traffic assessment was not needed and that they were seeking legal advice.
As a result, planning officers again recommended approval for the 75-home application, which included demolition of a bungalow to allow access to the site.
Cllr Smith told the Board: “I want to stress that the concerns being voiced today are not speculative; they arise from challenges that residents are already experiencing on a daily basis.
“The current situation along Peter de Stapleigh Way is extremely strained.
“Traffic levels coming off the housing estates are significant, and this pressure is regularly made worse when heavy goods vehicles access the Baddington Lane bridge which is currently out of use to heavy goods vehicles.
“Residents are deeply worried — and I share their concern — that this proposal would add further traffic to an already overstretched road network.
“This takes me to infrastructure more broadly. Nantwich South and Stapeley have experienced considerable development over recent years, and the cumulative impact on local services cannot be ignored.
“Our schools Stapeley Broad Lane, Pear Tree, Weaver, St Anne’s and Brine Leas — are already under pressure.
“Safe routes to school are an important part of any planning assessment, and residents are understandably concerned about whether the surrounding infrastructure can safely and sustainably accommodate further growth.
“In addition to highways and community infrastructure, residents have highlighted questions regarding the evidence base that underpins this application.
“Several have raised concerns about the flood risk modelling, specifically the reliance on historic rainfall datasets.
“The Nantwich area has experienced recent and significant flood events, and it is not clear to residents — nor to me — whether the modelling presented fully reflects current climatic conditions and the frequency of heavy rainfall.
“There are also questions about the timing and completeness of ecological surveys submitted in support of the application, particularly given the environmentally sensitive areas nearby and the potential presence of protected species.
“These concerns are highly technical in nature, and residents want reassurance that assessments are based on the most accurate and up to date data available.
“I am further aware that there are still outstanding matters relating to the advice of key statutory consultees.
“Given the complexity of the issues at stake — hydrology, drainage, ecology, highways capacity — it is essential that both officers and members are satisfied that all relevant evidence is robust, current, and comprehensive.
“The size of this proposal, the number of material planning considerations involved, and the level of public interest all mean that full transparency and detailed scrutiny are essential.
“For these reasons, as ward councillors, we believe determination by this Strategic Planning Board is not only appropriate but necessary.
“I ask the Board to give careful weight to the issues raised: road safety, air quality, cumulative infrastructure pressure, flood risk reliability, and the adequacy of the technical evidence base.
“These matters have real implications for both existing and future residents.”
We revealed last week how campaigner Jane Wagg had launched a Facebook group to rally residents to object to Muller’s application.
Another lazy greedy builder arriving to chance their arm, well it isn’t going to happen, the houses on this plan are copy and paste, far too dense cheek by jowl living, too dated, not diverse enough and no thought to elderly disabled or kids actually being able to travel from home to town without yet another car journey, How come other countries do better, they have a wide range of homes, no awful cheap wooden fences in the back gardens more community space, trees and country hedging, Peter De Stapeleigh way is unique in having a wide wildlife corridor, how come this is not the compulsory with all sites? there should be bike lanes direct from the homes to the school, no parent has to drive kids to school ever, why are we so fixed on car ownership 24/7?