MORE THAN 160 homes are likely to be placed at the site of a former power station and railway siding, even though it was described as ‘dreadful.’
And The Correspondent understands some of the councillors who voted the scheme at Hartshead, in the Millbrook area of Stalybridge, are almost apologetic for doing so.
About 700 people lodged objections to the £12.5 million development by Casey Group that will see 162 properties placed at the location, which has stood empty since the power station was demolished 35 years ago.
Councillors Christine Beardmore and Adrian Pearce, who excused himself from Tameside Council’s Speaker’s Panel (Planning) committee to do so, voiced their displeasure and the financial viability was questioned.
But by a majority of four to two, it was voted to approve the scheme, which would be accessed once built from Crowswood Drive.
That decision will now go to the office of Secretary of State for Housing – Ashton-under-Lyne MP and Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner – for ratification.
However, feelings will remain high – especially as the housing site is away from where the former power station was.
And Cllr Beardmore explained her misgivings, including doubts over planned schemes that come under a section 106 agreement.
She said: “Very little of the proposals actually happen in the Stalybridge North ward – our residents are getting, frankly, all the pain for very, very little gain. I can’t see how that can be right or correct.
“To recover the carbon capture of taking down the trees in the existing woodland would take 30 years and plans for remediation are at best sketchy. There’s no real detail.
“It’s not sustainable. The housing is situated at least a mile away from Huddersfield Road, which is already congested and anyone who know the area knows it is. We estimate 162 houses would bring another 400 cars.”
Ward colleague Cllr Pearce, who described the siting of a play area next to a pond as ‘bizarre’ and claimed benefits are ‘very dubious,’ added: “My main concern, besides the loss of Green Belt, is round the viability of the scheme.
“This application is not viable.
“All the housing appears to be leasehold, with a management scheme. Even if affordable housing was put in, there would be a substantial management fee associated with those houses.
“While the Labour Party has put forward about scrapping leasehold arrangements, this development wants to reintroduce them.
“The difference between this and Godley Green is that has infrastructure and defined green benefits. I think this is a dreadful scheme.”
Resident Lee Holden, who represented the many objectors who attended, said: “This project is not financially viable, so why are we going ahead with it? This won’t happen because it will run out of money. There is no benefit for locals.”
Hartshead Power Station closed on October 29, 1979 and its cooling towers demolished about 10 years later – but nothing has been done with the area since.
Millbrook Sidings, which was used to feed coal to trains, has seen most buildings demolished with a large goods shed and coal hopper facility remaining.
The development would take place over four sites, with the first seeing an ecology enhancement zone created, as a protected space with a focus on ecology/biodiversity through the enhancement and creation of different habitats.
According to documents, it ‘would not be ordinarily accessible to the public, but would be available occasionally, for school and educational trips, for example.’
The second would see footpaths, cycleways and picnic areas created, with existing ponds enhanced with planting areas.
The Printworks site, situated to the south of Spring Bank Lane and where the cooling towers stood, would be reclaimed and the wider area improved, with public access restricted.
While the most controversial, land off Crowswood Drive, would be redeveloped for the mix of two, three, four and five-bedroomed properties, described as the ‘enabling development for the remaining parts of the scheme.’
Neil Pickering, representing Casey Group at the meeting, said the project was financially viable.
He said: “We know this plan is controversial and we know it divides opinion, but I think most would agree that decommissioning the site should’ve been immediately followed by its restoration.
“Knocking down the cooling towers just wasn’t enough. While nature has done its best, it had to face up to the legacy of crumbling infrastructure.
“Our proposal is to invest £12.5 million into the reclamation of the land. We believe this balances the need to protect the character of the area with the practicalities.
“It will better connect Stalybridge and Mossley and deliver high-quality homes entirely on previously developed land, at a time when the need to deliver more homes is acute.
“We are committed to this scheme wand we are able to deliver it.”
Rachel Glover-White, again for Casey, added: “It offers a unique opportunity to meet some of the housing need the borough is currently facing.”
Access to and from the scheme, particularly the extra pressure it would place on Huddersfield Road, which Cllr Doreen Dickinson said at its junction with Mottram Road records the highest pollution levels in Tameside, was focused on by councillors.
However, when it came to the vote, only she and Cllr Mike Glover were against approval.
Ms Rayner’s department will now have the final say on whether it should be called in for further scrutiny.
We should be focusing on the conservation. Of the area to reduce our carbon footprint print and reduce the emissions levels. Brought by already heavy traffic in the surrounding areas not concentrating on financial gain for those who are involved. Yet again it feels like the voice of the public does not matter any more and the powers that be just want what they want with no interest in the public’s opinion or wellbeing. What a disgrace.
Newts, a rare and protected species has a risk assessment been made to protect this species? are there any colonies there? Bats, another protected species… any risk assessments done..real ones, not those assessments that are written on the back of a packet of fags.
The worst worry is when they start clearing the land, decades of chemical pollutants, lying dormant, until the heavy machinery start to rip the ground, these pollutants will react with Oxygen, creating a ecological disaster, but that’s ok, the river Tame and the canal can wash it all away.
Maybe, we are naive to believe, the trees and plants have broken down all the toxic waste it’s been unused for decades.. yes about 2000 yeas later most of the toxins would be broken down .the question is would you live there??
This council totally ignore any objections from the public on every decision they make. The people of Tameside are never listened too on any development at all. Our objections are totally ignored every time.
They need to just leave it alone. The area has recovered. It is a beautiful thriving forest now. If they wanted to build on the site they should’ve done it when it was still rubble. Tearing down the lush new forest just so they can cram in some poorly built sardine houses is a crime.