An inspector granted outline permission for up to 200 homes off Prestbury Road, ruling the Green Belt fields are grey belt. Affordable share: 45%.

Up to 200 homes can be built on Green Belt fields at the northern edge of Macclesfield. A government planning inspector allowed Bloor Homes North West’s appeal on 10 August, overturning Cheshire East Council’s refusal and granting outline planning permission for the 15.4-hectare site off Prestbury Road. (Appeal decision APP/R0660/W/25/3374597)

The decision turned on one word: grey belt. The inspector, Phillip J G Ware, found that the fields do not strongly serve the purposes the Green Belt exists for. Under the 2024 National Planning Policy Framework, that means housing on them is not “inappropriate development”.

What has been approved

Everything except the site access is reserved for a later application. The permission covers:

  • up to 200 dwellings on 15.4 hectares of three fields, bounded by housing to the south and southeast, ancient woodland at Upton Park to the north and the River Bollin valley to the northeast
  • 45% affordable housing, well above the 30% the council’s own Local Plan Strategy policy SC5 requires
  • a single T-junction access onto Prestbury Road, 6.5m wide, with a footway on one side and a shared footway and cycleway on the other
  • public open space, with no housing on the sloping ground down to the river

Reserved matters must be applied for within three years, and building must start within two years of the last of those approvals. The council’s application reference was 25/0210/OUT.

Why the council lost

Cheshire East refused the scheme on the single ground that it was inappropriate development in the Green Belt. To defeat that, the developer had to show the site does not strongly contribute to three of the five Green Belt purposes in paragraph 143 of the Framework.

Two were conceded. The council accepted in the agreed statement of common ground that the site does not strongly check the sprawl of a large built-up area, and does not strongly prevent Macclesfield and Prestbury merging. The inspector agreed on both, noting that a ribbon of housing along Prestbury Road already extends the town past the site, and that Prestbury is classed as a Local Service Centre rather than a town.

The third purpose, preserving the setting and special character of historic towns, was the contested one. The council argued the fields make a strong contribution to the setting of historic Macclesfield. The inspector did not accept it, and was blunt about why:

the Council has not indicated the extent of what it regards as the historic town, and this is a weakness in the Council’s approach.

He preferred the developer’s analysis, which put the edge of the historic town about 600 metres south of the site, at the cemetery entrance. The land in between, he found, is modern development that “does not add anything of significance to the story of the historic town”.

The council’s landscape case fared no better. Its position was that the River Bollin area is a high value landscape of high sensitivity. That level of sensitivity “would equate the area with an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty or a National Landscape”, the inspector said, and “cannot logically be the case”. Maintaining it “added nothing to the Council’s position”. He found the harm to landscape character would be minor.

The housing shortfall did the rest

Cheshire East accepts it cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites. That single fact carried substantial weight in the balance.

Cheshire East housing land supply against the five-year minimum Bar chart. The national minimum is five years of deliverable housing land supply. Cheshire East's most recently published position is 3.8 years, a shortfall of about 3,151 dwellings. A draft housing monitoring update discussed at the appeal hearing showed 3.3 years. Source: appeal decision APP slash R0660 slash W slash 25 slash 3374597, paragraphs 74 and 75. Cheshire East's housing land supply Years of deliverable supply, as recorded in the appeal decision National minimum 5.0 years Published position 3.8 years Draft update, at hearing 3.3 years The shortfall against the published position: about 3,151 dwellings Below five years, paragraph 11(d) of the Framework tilts the decision towards granting permission. Source: Appeal decision APP/R0660/W/25/3374597, paragraphs 74 and 75. Graphic by The Macclesfield Times.
The two figures put before the inspector. He treated them as broadly similar, and said the precise number would not have changed the weight he gave to housing need.

The most recently published position is 3.8 years, a shortfall of about 3,151 dwellings. A draft housing monitoring update discussed at the hearing showed 3.3 years. The developer argued for 2.6 years, drawing on evidence from a different appeal, and the inspector gave that no weight at all.

A local resident put forward a detailed case that the borough is oversupplied with housing. The inspector rejected it, noting it was supported by neither policy, nor other appeal decisions, nor either of the main parties.

The access, and what residents argued

Highway safety was raised by residents, not by the council. The objection was that Prestbury Road is regularly driven above the speed limit and that visibility from the new junction would be too short, particularly looking north.

The inspector recorded that residents had measured and marked out their own version of the visibility splays. He did not accept the result, because the measurement point on site is obstructed by a large hedge, so a measured survey from that position is unlikely to be accurate. He also noted that residents had never suggested a joint survey with the developer.

The agreed splays are 2.4m by 45.8m to the south and 2.4m by 49.2m to the north. Cheshire East, as highway authority, is satisfied with them, and with a single point of access for emergency vehicles. The scheme would not harm highway safety, the inspector concluded, and on his site visit he did observe several vehicles travelling slightly over the limit.

Residents also raised the seasonal pond near the proposed entrance, which floods and causes problems for neighbours. The inspector accepted the developer’s explanation that this is caused by unattenuated surface water runoff and a blocked culvert, and that the water will be drained and attenuated on site.

What the developer has to pay for

A section 106 agreement has been signed by the council, the developer and the landowner. It commits the scheme to:

  • affordable housing at 45% overall, with the tenure mix fixed
  • open space, with a management scheme
  • a highways contribution including money towards a new circular bus service
  • a pedestrian and cycle link through to Abbey Road, over third party land
  • a recreation and sports contribution earmarked for Macclesfield Leisure Centre
  • an education contribution
  • a rights of way contribution towards a footpath and cycleway to Riverside Park
  • an allotment contribution, on site or off
  • healthcare provisions earmarked for Waters Green Medical Centre

Residents questioned how vague some of these are. The inspector said that for an outline scheme a formula-based approach is “entirely normal”, because the number and size of the homes is not yet fixed.

Conditions worth knowing about

Thirty conditions are attached. Among them:

  • an electric vehicle charging point for every home with an off-road parking space
  • an Ancient Woodland Impact Assessment before the layout is settled
  • a minimum 10 metre undeveloped buffer alongside watercourses
  • nest and roost features for house sparrows, swifts and bats, and gaps in garden fences for hedgehogs
  • external lighting designed to Bat Conservation Trust guidance, aiming for no more than 1 lux of spill onto hedgerows, trees and watercourses
  • a construction management plan covering lorry routing, working hours and a named contact for neighbours
  • a biodiversity gain plan approved before any work starts

What it means for you

Nothing is being built yet. This is outline permission, so the layout, scale, appearance and landscaping all come back as a reserved matters application, and that is the next chance to comment. Watch for it on the council’s planning pages; our Macclesfield planning news page tracks what is coming up.

If you live on or near Prestbury Road, the fixed points are the access junction and the 45% affordable share. Neither changes at reserved matters. What is still open is where the houses sit, how tall they are, what they look like, and the timing of the Abbey Road and Riverside Park links.

The wider point is one that will decide other Macclesfield fields too. While Cheshire East’s housing land supply sits below five years and its Local Plan Strategy predates the 2024 Framework, the balance at appeal tilts towards development. The inspector noted there is no likelihood of a new plan in the short term.

Appeal documents can be inspected via Cheshire East planning application 398509.

Sources