Area of land is subject of another development hope

A DEVELOPER who failed in a bid to build on an area of Mossley and has come back with a nine-home development.

Uppermill-based Wickens Estates has applied to Tameside Council to construct the three-bedroomed properties on Stamford Road.

However, they have previously failed with an application to put two four-bedroomed houses, two two-bedroomed homes and a block of 12 apartments on the same site thrown out.

Even an appeal to the Planning Inspectorate was dismissed, with inspectors saying: “The proposed development would cause significant harm to the character and appearance of the area.”

Stamford Road, Mossley

However, new plans have been lodged aimed at placing a row of properties on what is currently a grass bank.

And documents supporting them state: “The site is in a sustainable location within the town centre and was previously occupied by dwellings.

“The proposed development will bring clear economic benefits in terms of construction jobs, spend in the local community and make use of brownfield land.

“The site is not of ecological value and will not result in any drainage or flood risk. It is close to local shops and services and is well served by public transport.

“The proposal is therefore considered to constitute sustainable development with no adverse impacts that significantly or demonstrably outweigh the benefits from the delivery of new housing.

“In the light of the council’s current housing supply position, any application for residential development on the site should be supported.

“The development does not give rise to any impacts that outweigh the benefits of redeveloping the site and delivering housing in a sustainable location.”

Each of the homes would have a back garden but developers admit, ‘parking will not be provided.’

But the fact houses stood on that area until ‘about 1975’ is highlighted as a reason why the scheme should be given the go ahead.

Tameside Council’s Speakers Panel (Planning) committee will decide whether to grant or refuse planning permission.

7 Replies to “Area of land is subject of another development hope”

  1. This is just getting ridiculous now. When will Mr Wilcox realise the site is not right for any kind of development and just leave it alone. Sometimes you have to know when to give up. Just re-wild it, or plant it into a park for the people of Mossley and do something decent for once.

  2. You cannot possibly grant planning, in this day and age, for any properties WITHOUT PARKING. Its ludicrous. Construction vehicles at this busy junction would cause huge traffic issues, let alone deliveries parked in the future at a this busy crossroads. I lived opposite for many years, we had no parking either so to me its not logical

  3. To build house of any kind on this site would be a disaster not only to the people who live here but to the people who plan to buy them if it was to be granted you can clearly see the traffic lights the cars most of the the day line up outside the site how would it work I mean really think about never mind out door space just leave it alone and move on.

  4. Just because houses were on the site until 1975 doesn’t mean it should be built on again! Traffic would have been a little less nearly 50 years ago, factor in the increase in car ownership & it’s a crazy proposal. Better to keep it as open space or even make it into parking for other properties there.

  5. An absolute ridiculous idea it is not suitable to build on end of. This is all about profit and nothing else its at a busy junction with traffic lights there’s no parking the traffic on that road is busy enough it doesn’t need adding to! If this is approved then the approver needs their head read!

  6. I’m in agreement with most people who have commented, completely unlogistical where will construction vehicles park when they start to clear the land, where will delivery vehicles park to unload, and once built where the new residents park
    No no no the council must not allow this to happen and must say any further applications will be rejected

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *