11.2 C
Congleton
Sunday, April 19, 2026
0,00 GBP

No products in the cart.

Home Our Areas Congleton Affordable homes are ‘not the required mix’

Affordable homes are ‘not the required mix’

0
11

Proposals for 22 affordable homes in Congleton have been refused because they would not be of the “required mix”, according to planning officers.
The application site was at the Broadhurst Lane junction with the Clayton Bypass.
Cheshire East Council received 18 letters of objection to the plans, submitted by Stonebond Properties (Manchester), Great Places Housing Group and Castleton Property Company.
Concerns related to access and traffic, harm to wildlife, the impact on the River Dane and lack of infrastructure, such as schools and doctors.
Congleton Town Council objected for various reasons including the narrowness of Broadhurst Lane, which has no passing points, as well as the fact that vehicle movements from Dane Mill had not been taken into consideration, a loss of biodiversity and flooding concern due to run-off.
The planning officer’s report said the site was located within the settlement boundary for Congleton and was considered to be sustainably located.
It added that the proposal would provide 100% affordable dwellings, which would assist the council in its housing land and affordable housing delivery.
“However, the affordable units would not be the required mix and provide only intermediate shared ownership affordable housing, when there is a clear housing need and policy requirement to provide five social or affordable rental properties in this development,” said the report.
In addition, the planning officer said the site drainage had not been confirmed, so the full drainage impact was not known and that the proposal “does not provide safe and suitable means of access and would result in severe highways safety concerns”.
The report said: “The adverse impacts of the proposal would not significantly and demonstrably be outweighed by the benefits when assessed against the policies within the national planning policy framework. Therefore, the application is recommended for refusal.”

(Photo: Stonebond via planning application).