Stockport unveils draft local plan, keeps Green Belt pledge

Imagine the message it would send to other Councils if Stockport, the home town and former employer of the now Deputy PM and Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, was allowed to pass a plan that under-delivered on the *mandatory* housing targets.

If you want less housing, shrink the population. Have less kids: oh you are doing. And stop immigration. Oh, is is goin to make things and serve us? My kids are going to Uni to be managers. sit at a desk, and talk posh blabber. So we need migrants to do the work. Well, at least have no kids.

Seems keeping councillors bums on seats wins out again over meeting the needs for homes and jobs. I cannot see any future plan inquiry ending well for the council. But then that’s the point – put the blame on someone else.

Good, stay strong Stockport

Anonymous 11.34am you do know that Stockport is controlled by the Lib Dems and the Deputy PM is a Labour Politian?

Anonymous 12.18pm – I’m not sure that the earlier comment says what you’re reading it as saying – but for clarity, in case you’re not aware, Angela Raynor used to be an employee of Stockport Council. She was born, grew up and lived there until relatively recently.

This looks very performative, and lets hope Rayner hands them their ass, not just for coming up short, but also for the idea you can add density in the middle and somehow this won’t create tremendous pressure on the suburbs as 20/30 somethings living Manchester-lite in central Stockport later want more space and to start families. It’s also unseemly to have Metrolink extended to places that won’t do the right thing on housing.

Pure politics… this has no chance of being adopted.

As I recall Stockport’s has a deficit of developable land so how they are going to meet housing targets using only brownfield land is beyond me. Pulling out of the GMSF was a big mistake and any Lib Dem councilor in Stockport that tells you otherwise is pulling the wool over your eyes.

Thank you to Stockport council for causing Stopfordian’s rent and living costs to increase simply because they are not strong enough to stand up to a few NIMBYs.

How many thousands of local residents are now going to be paying higher rents and living costs due to this? Really hope the Labour government makes an example out of them.

looks like officers are bending over backwards to try and deliver options that would prevent Stockport from succumbing to “planning by appeal”. The alternatives suggested look sensible and pragmatic.

Time for the new Government to show it means business and immediately intervene with the likes of Stockport and Wirral.

I would give those housing numbers a zero percentage chance of being agreed at public inquiry. Taking on board the new government’s likely commitment to LPAs meeting their housing requirements, I do wonder if Stockport are simply looking for the government to impose housing allocations on them, rather than having the courage to build the houses the country and Stockport needs?

Legal challenge incoming…

As someone else has alluded to, it will result in changes being enforced by the Planning Inspectorate at the end of the Plan examination stage, at which point the local councillors can cry “we did our best but the mean government are forcing this on us”. It’s exactly what is playing out in Wirral right now, who started their Plan preparation over 6 years ago. That’s six years of further rent increases, families stuck in substandard housing, young adults priced out of the communities they grew up in, etc. All because local politicians refuse to do the right thing and allow for the right types of housing to be built in the places it is needed.

Ironic if they go for Option 2 on Employment Land having rejected the Bredbury site against their officers recommendation approx. 3 years ago!
Stockport needs this release, if it is to remain competitive with its peers, as it’s existing Employment Land suppply is simply not fit for purpose..

Agree with Rich X. Can’t have all the homes in the form of apartments. We need more decedent family housing in Stockport as well.

How can it be right that sites appear in documents like this with no prior notice to the landowners, especially when they are working farmland ?

If these plans go through, the newly-elected Lisa Smart MP (Hazel Grove) is in an untenable position given her previous well-known views on the subject.

If they’re allowed to build in High Lane you wouldn’t see any greenery until Cheshire East, that’s full stretch from Heaton Chapel to Disley built up along with all extra traffic which is already at a constant standstill.

Ashton road, bents lane, Stockport road,
All in bredbury cannot cope with anymore traffic,
But who cares about the people who already live there,

@July 12, 2024 at 2:04 pm By realist
There’s really only 2 grounds for legal challenge. 1 is if a council fails to follow due legal process. 2 is if a council makes a decision that is so unreasonable that no reasonably minded person would make it. All they’ve done is publish something in advance of making a decision on whether to consult on it. No court is going to be interested in a legal challenge of any of it at this point. Even if there was some legal error the courts would probably let the plan-making process follow its course to conclusion – they’d probably only entertain judicial procedings at the end of the process if the council adopted the plan when they really shouldn’t.

Gatley golf club was refused despite a recommendation to approve and the scheme providing 300 homes with half affordable…..go figure…!!

Affordable housing is based upon a minimum income of 30.000 per year. Would you still need a deposit? How much would that be. What would be the monthly rent .? and , who is going to build these properties .

Stockport will be emboldened by what’s gone on at Oldham this week. With a hung council, the Liberal Democrats and Conservatives have been rattling their chains and sabres at the latest council meeting, demanding that the council approach the government with a request to pull out of the PfE scheme, even though the previous council had earlier this year approved the scheme as amended by the inspectors. They want to produce their own scheme, discard all development plans for the greenbelt and concentrate everything onto brownfield sites and any existing land earmarked for development. Guess what? – the remaining Labour councillors have agreed to support a proposal to form an action committee of councillors to look into the idea and draw up a plan of action. So it looks like Oldham will bail out of PfE if they are allowed to. Having witnessed similar backward looking, erratic behaviour of Oldham councils over the last 50 years, I would strongly advise any builder, developer or investor not to get involved or risk their money in any way or waste their time on anything to do with Oldham. The story is broken in the Oldham Times, so it should only be a matter of time before it appears on this site.

What a cop-out. Zero chance of success at Examination against compulsory targets, a waste of everyone’s time and my money (as a Stockport resident). Are they actually serious?

Why can’t we use use Pear Mill and the massive milll in Marple?

Looks like they will probably be ordered to change it with the new government reinstating the original housing targets.

Stockport has a population density of about 580 per square kilometer, Edinburgh has one of over 1800. Perhaps Stockport could learn something from that? People need green space too.

“Politics” is what the Yanks say; not understaning that “Politics” is the art of organizing society. Playing “party politics” is what the Stockport Lib-Dems do; manipulating the democratic system for Party purposes rather than community benefit.

You mention High Lane. Where are people going to go for a Drs, Schools and more importantly hospital and jobs.i live Windlehurst Road it’s like a motorway in the morning due to the by pass. No more house thank you. Spend the money on cleaning up high Lane it’s disgusting.

Oh dear. Not complying with the deputy PM won’t get favours will it?

I’m from Stockport and for as long as I can remember I’ve heard it all before 40yrs still nothing happened if anything more housing has been knocked down to dust and just left for years so I’m not that enthusiastic about the planning and building of new housing. My son was to offerton High school left many years ago ingact got a family of his own and still nothing been built on the cleared ground. Won’t be holding my breath

Whichever option is chosen, the districts of Romiley, Bredbury, Marple and High Lane will cease to function without a proper road and rail infrastructure. The bypass needs to be completed.

Do strategic open spaces get the same protection as green belt. Will the Lib Dem Council continue to oppose the proposed housing development at Gatley Golf Cub be protected by the Council