Macclesfield residential sites up for grabs
Cheshire East Council is looking to sign off a Local Development Order to allow several sites in Macclesfield town centre to come forward for residential redevelopment.
As part of a wider strategy for the town centre, the council is looking to put special planning measures in place to make it easier for developers to gain planning permission for residential projects.
This focusses on several sites in central Macclesfield, divided into two areas: Northside and Whalley Hayes.
All the sites are in differing ownership and some are being proposed as conversions, while others are currently derelict or undeveloped.
The Northside area is split into four plots; the former Magistrates’ Court; an adjacent plot on Beech Lane; an undeveloped site on the corner of Beech Lane and Hibel Road; and a building and surface car park at the end of Pearle Street.
Whalley Hayes has five sites, largely focussed around King Edward Street, Westminster Street, Little Street, and King Edward Road.
One is a surface car park on King Edward Road; another is a plot bordered by Churchill Way on the opposite side of Little Street to the Swan With Two Necks pub; and another is a plot split into two parts, incorporating surface parking and a number of industrial units along King Edward Street.
A plot behind Macclesfield Methodist Church, home to a schoolwear supplier, is also listed as one of the sites to be brought forward.
All of these sites are being put forward for residential redevelopment, although the majority of these will be smaller scale with heights on certain plots restricted to under three or four storeys. There is a split of townhouses and apartments being proposed.
One of the plots on Whalley Hayes could also be developed as a retail or commercial site under the LDO, which is to go before Cheshire East’s full council meeting next week. The council has been supported by eScape Urbanists on the LDO.
The strategic regeneration of the town centre moved forward late last year with a professional team of Cushman & Wakefield, Open, and WSP appointed to draw up plans for Macclesfield’s core.
Cheshire East identified the need for a five-year regeneration strategy for Macclesfield around 12 months ago with a report prepared by executive director of place Frank Jordan.
This report suggested expanding and improving public realm, re-purposing under-used buildings, and better promotion of the town’s heritage assets.
The sites identified at Northside
The Authority have had numerous opportunities to develop such sites but turned them down…..now they have paid consultants to rub their noses in mistakes/refusals that if permitted, way back, could have tidied up the town and saved applicants losses.
By APP llp
Good
By Stephen Hicks
I think Macclesfield needs a proper full or half ring road putting in before anymore houses are built in its area.
It’s ridiculous getting around Macclesfield at the present.
In the mornings and evening school rush hours you have residential back roads being used as the unofficial macc ring road.
The main roads such as Park lane, Oxford Road and London road become nothing more than huge car parks that from 7.45am to 9.40am inch along.
There would be fewer HGV’s in the town centre, less traffic which would not only mean safer town roads but less pollution.
Macclesfield needs a ring road now.
By Mr V Concerned
I lived here for 40 years and its a disGRACE now why should Wilmslow and Alderley Edge get the bling and footballers and we are left with ruined buildings and Iceland the council need to do things proper here !
By Betty Haithorpe
No.Kings are selling their site. Totally over developing.
By Kingston
Cheshire East aren’t fit to sell Big Issue never mind Real Estate
By Charles Dyas
Originally, the council owned Whalley Heyes car park was purchased by the former Macclesfield Borough Council as a site for 100 dwellings.( circa 1975-77). This was never developed due to changes in funding for council houses at the time. The site could still be developed for housing in the town centre . The slope of the site would allow for retention of parking under a deck supporting the residential above and with secondary retail/casual ding/commercial development on the periphery or, alternatively a more compact multi storey car park plus residential. The current plan seems to focus on group of smaller sites but misses the opportunity to make a significant impact in the way that was originally intended.
By Joe mattin