Chapel Parish Council Views on the Re-Development

of the Federal Mogul site.

Some Councillors have submitted individual comments in response to the proposals, but the points that follow are an agreed collective response from the Parish Council.

All members of the Council were in favour of the re-development of the Federal Mogul site, as this could provide new residential and business starter units, as well as safeguarding the future of Federal Mogul.

The Parish Council’s overall response to the Core Strategy is that, where possible, industry should be re-located from the centre of town to the outskirts, leaving the vacated land to be used for housing, along with any infill sites.

The land on which Federal Mogul is situated is classified on the Town Plan as Industrial Land, of which there is an under-supply in the in the Central Area.

For this reason, the members believe that the majority of the land in the vacated areas of the Federal Mogul site should be used to build starter-units for businesses - demand for this type of development has been shown by take-up on the Bowden Industrial Estate. The Federal Mogul site has excellent links to the by-pass, resulting in minimal traffic needing to pass through the town; it also benefits from an existing entrance that can be used by heavy-goods vehicles.

A marked reduction in the amount of industrial land available in Chapel would have an adverse effect on those who will be living in the new housing developments as there will be fewer jobs available within the town. However, members are in favour of a mixed development on the site but they would like to see a greater allocation of industrial units on the site. Also, members would like to see proof that there is sufficient free Industrial Land in the Central Area before areas are re-classed as Residential Land.

If houses were to be built, Chapel would greatly benefit from an affordable housing scheme as the average annual income for the area is well below the national average and the current number of affordable houses is very limited.

Members suggest that the proposed housing plot on the site should be re-located to a position closer to Hayfield Road, in order to allow for the suitable location and reasonable retention of Industrial Land.

Councillors were not in favour of retail and leisure units being included in the development, but would like clarification of the proposals in this respect.

Currently, 14 existing retail units in the centre of town are empty, and adding new retail areas on the perimeter of the town would exacerbate this situation by taking further business away from the town centre.

Also, Chapel already benefits from a large Leisure Centre which can comfortably accommodate the needs of local people.

The land surrounding Stodhart Farm should not be developed as this would entail development on prominent rising ground that forms part of the green perimeter around the built-up area. Members feel strongly that development in Chapel should be confined to the valley floor in order to protect the context in which the town sits.  Members would also like to see protection of the entire line of beech trees that border Hayfield Road and form an important gateway feature at the northern entrance to the town. This could be achieved by using the existing entrance to the site.

Members are strongly opposed to the suggestion that Burrfields Road should become a cul-de-sac as this would result in Market Place traffic exiting by Church Brow. As a housing development on the Federal Mogul site would further exacerbate traffic problems on Hayfield Road, a traffic management scheme for Hayfield Road should be included in any plans.

To conclude, all members are in favour of a re-development of the site comprising a mixture of industrial and residential units, but they believe that the proposed leisure and retail units should be dismissed, to allow for sufficient industrial units, as this would be of most benefit to the town.

Councillors would like to see Federal Mogul address any remaining factors concerning noise, odour and chemical pollution before considering the juxtaposition of  industrial and residential areas.

Councillors would also like a guarantee that further changes to the classification of the land from Industrial to Residential would not take place on the site in the future.

Adoption of joint core strategy July 2013

The next meeting of the High Peak Borough Council  DPS Committee will be held on Wednesday December 1st at 6.30pm in the Octagon Lounge,
Pavilion Gardens, Buxton.

NOTE: Meeting above postponed
 

Please note that the meeting of Development Plan Select Committee due to be held this evening (1st Dec) has been postponed due to the adverse weather conditions.

 The meeting will now be held on Monday 6 December 2010 at 6.30 p.m. in the Board Room, Pavilion Gardens.

The Agenda includes reports on the revised timetable for the LDF (Core Strategy) and the IPS for Federal-Mogul.

Members of the public are entitled to attend

Core Strategy Update

Parish Council Chairman Mike Harrison had a meeting with Perry Wardle and Linda Baldry, of HPBC, on Wednesday October 20^th, 2010, to review progress on the Core Strategy and other matters.

The following is a brief synopsis of that meeting.

Evidence Base for future Housing targets in High Peak

The Government will produce a report in November 2010 detailing their housing projections based on forecast demographic changes, population growth, etc.

These projections will then be analysed by Derbyshire County Council together with a firm of external consultants and it is anticipated that their recommendations on future housing numbers, and any other related proposals, will emerge in January/February 2011.

Possible development site appraisal.

Following discussions that are currently taking place with Derbyshire Dales HPBC are now re-appraising all sites, both Brownfield and Greenfield, that have previously been considered, either for Housing or Employment, and are also adding new sites that have been identified since the last revue, and other sites such as those identified by Chapel Parish Council and other agencies in High Peak.

The vacant HPBC site in Chinley will be included in this exercise

Using the Strategic Housing Land Revue (SHLAR) 2008 as a base, HPBC officers will raise the threshold of the ‘filter’ used previously to produce a ‘Long List’ of possible development sites.

Further assessments will then be carried out for issues such as; flood risk, viability (e.g. contamination problems, etc.), infrastructure limitations (e.g. roads, schools, etc.)

This is all designed to lead to the production of a ‘Short List’ of sites and the production of 2 new maps, 1 detailing potential sites which have passed the various ‘filters’ and 1 detailing sites where constraints have been identified.

It is hoped to have these maps prepared and completed by March 2011.

Local Community consultation

In February and March of 2011 HPBC plan to arrange a series of meetings with organisations such as the Parish Council and other representatives of the community, such as local ward councillors.

At these meetings, which are designed to improve engagement with the local community, such matters as the benefits and challenges of any proposals to increase housing numbers will be discussed together with assessments of the short listed sites.

All this will lead to a further general public consultation which is scheduled to take place in mid 2011.

(In the meantime the 2005 Local Plan remains in force and will be used to determine future planning applications until further notice.)

Federal-Mogul

This site clearly has the potential to play an important and significant part in the possible sites available for development in the Central Area.

Federal-Mogul have recently submitted a response to HPBC setting out their comments on the proposed Interim Planning Statement (IPS) currently being prepared by HPBC who expect to be able to respond to F-M within a very short time.

All these issues will be brought to the next HPBC Development Plan Select committee for scrutiny on December 1^st, 2010.

Public Meeting – High Peak and Derbyshire Dales Joint Core Strategy

Held at Chapel-en-le-Frith Town Hall on Wednesday 15 September 2010

There were 200 people present in the room and approx 50 people listening outside through speakers.

The Chairman of Chapel-en-le-Frith Parish Council, Councillor M Harrison, who had called the Public Meeting, welcomed everyone to the meeting and introduced the speakers for the evening; Councillor Linda Baldry, Perry Wardle Head of Regeneration and Dai Larner Executive Director from High Peak Borough Council.

The Chairman opened the meeting and advised those present that the Parish Council had called the meeting due to confusion locally about the Core Strategy consultation and the concerns expressed by local residents about the effect the proposals will have on Chapel-en-le-Frith.  He stressed that nothing has been decided and that the Parish Council believes that there should be a master plan for Chapel

The number of consultation responses relating to Housing Proposals received by High Peak Borough Council from the original consultation were, 30 from Glossop, 29 from Buxton and 134 from Chapel-en-le-Frith together with a 288 signature petition

Councillor Linda Baldry – High Peak Borough Council member with responsibility for Development Planning.

Councillor Baldry thanked the Parish Council for organising evening and it was good to see so many people which underlined that there are local issues.

The consultation is not the end of the road and no decisions have been taken.  There will be a new opportunity to consult following the removal of the housing targets previously set out in the in Regional Spatial Strategy.

High Peak Borough Council intend to meet with Chapel Parish Council following this meeting and are keen to consult with the wider community.

Presentation from Perry Wardle Head of Regeneration at High Peak Borough Council

The Core Strategy document will guide what happens across High Peak in areas that are outside the Peak National Park and once approved will guide new development up to 2026.

High Peak Borough Council have the responsibility to prepare a Plan for the  Central Area of High Peak (Chapel-en-le-Frith, Dove Holes, Whaley Bridge, New Mills, Hayfield, Chinley and Buxworth),  and also Glossop  and Buxton.

The Plan will set out broadly what type of development is needed, how much is needed and where it should be located.

The Draft Plan is based on regional housing targets which required 6,000 new homes to be constructed in High Peak between 2006 and 2026.

The Draft Plan proposes:

-          development of 1,500 houses on Brownfield and Greenfield sites in the Central Area of High Peak, with a broad location identified to the south west of Chapel-en-le-Frith.

-          Support for growth in high tech employment and the provision of land for local businesses.

-          Protection of greenbelt

-          Support for tourism

-          Improvement of community services and protection of historic areas.

It is intended that the Plan will bring investment into the area and guide private development.

It is a long term view, so development will not be immediate.

Current proposals will be re-visited taking into the account the responses made at the consultation stages. 

The consultation process commenced in November 2007 with Shaping the Future , with further consultation in March 2009.

In June 2010 maps were produced with general locations and this fed into the Draft Plan, which is still evolving.

The housing targets cannot be accommodated on land that has been previously developed so there is a need to look at green field sites.  The area to the south west of Chapel-en-le-Frith has been identified for a large number of houses.

The Plan will look at the type of accommodation needed both commercial and residential. Taking into account future population, protecting the environment and the character of settlements, recognising the need to promote tourism and provide the right amount of community services.

Why Chapel-en-le-Frith as a focus for development?

The transport infrastructure around Glossop will not allow for large development at present.

The Greater Manchester housing market has to be considered as too many houses close to Greater Manchester will encourage people to move into High Peak and there needs to be a clear distinction between High Peak and Greater Manchester to prevent urban sprawl.

Both Glossop and the Central Area of High Peak have former industrial sites that are unused or sites with Mills that are no longer required by business and some of these areas will be able to take up housing numbers.

Greenbelt and SSI sites are protected and this then forces development into other locations.

The main comments received so far in consultation relating to Chapel-en-le-Frith are:

Proposals for Chapel are not appropriate.

Roads can’t cope with additional traffic

Major drainage problems

A large increase in housing would make Chapel a dormitory town with people going out to work and shop

The development of Greenfield sites should be a last resort

There needs to be affordable housing for young and old to be able to stay in the community.

Chapel taking more than its fair share of houses

If new development is too much and not sensitive it will damage the character of the town.

Some residents expressed concern that some proposals submitted by land owners that are so detailed that a deal must have already been done.

High Peak Borough Council had 22 representations from developers or land owners and some have submitted land proposals to convince the Council that they have plans that are deliverable.  This does not mean that these developments will happen.

Of the 22 representations 7 were in Glossop, 8 in the Central Area and 7 in Buxton.  These representations are not planning applications, but submissions from developers who are trying to build a case for the submission of future planning applications.  These representations will be assessed and public will be re-consulted.

The new Government abolished the requirement for 6,000 new homes and the decision now rests with High Peak Borough Council.

The Council has a duty to make sure that there is a 5 year supply of housing sites available.  If this is not the case the Council leaves itself open to appeals to a Planning Inspector on planning applications that are declined, with the Inspector being able to over rule the Council.

High Peak Borough Council will look at infrastructure in conjunction with setting new targets.

All those who have made comments during the consultation process will get a response in due course.

Questions from the floor

Q How long ago was land on Long Lane and Crossing Road sold to a developer?

A Do not know that land has been sold.

Q How does the figure of 6,000 new homes compare with previous plan and what would be the impact on plans if Glossop transport problems were addressed so could more homes could go there?

A  The numbers proposed are broadly in line with previous development trends.  The numbers were set as part of the East Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy.  High Peak Borough Council has constantly questioned need for 6,000 properties and made representations that the figure was too high for High Peak to accommodate.  The Regional  Plan has been abolished by the current Government. 

The issues with Glossop are not only transport related but also the proximity of Greater Manchester.

Q  I came along to object to the 350 houses to be built around Chapel High School.

A  There have been communication difficulties. Leaflets circulated locally by residents were not based fully on facts.  There are no planning applications to date for land around the High School or to build on land at the High School.

Q  Where and when exactly will land to the south west of Chapel be developed.

A  There will be no immediate development as the consultation process is not completed.

The Parish Council wants a master plan for Chapel and Brownfield sites to be used first as part of a plan to see how the targets can be accommodated to protect Greenfield sites. The current draft plan indicates, taking everything into account, the area to the south west of Chapel is an area that is better than other areas in Chapel which would include rising land.

Q  Why do we need to build so many houses in Chapel – 150 already on market so who will buy them?

A Important questions – will feed into the review of numbers.  Need to recognise we have an ageing population and an increasing number of people living alone for different reasons.  If no increase in population there will still be a need for housing as people are living longer and alone.  Will take these factors into account when deciding numbers.

Average wage in HP less that £25,000 which make it hard to get a mortgage so affordable housing needs to be addressed.

Q  At the September meeting of the Development Plan Select Committee a ‘Chapel Vision’ plan was requested.  Glossop and Buxton residents have had public meetings and workshops to help formulate their comments.  Bearing in mind the enormous impact on Chapel should they not be afforded the same by forming a Chapel Vision Group.

A Glossop and Buxton groups are town centre led and facing development pressures and need clear view on how they move forward.  Commercial development needs to be done in the right way to preserve the town centres.   The groups in Buxton and Glossop are led by the private sector with the Council being asked to comment.

The Parish Councils submission recommended a ‘Vision group’ for Chapel but how that will come about is still to be decided.

Q What is the revised timetable for the Plan given the Government changes and will it ultimately replace the Local Plan.

A It will replace the Local Plan and 2011 is the best guess at present for a revised timetable.

Q Current Local Plan Policy H1 prevents development on Greenfield sites – other than identified areas.  If the plan goes ahead as it stands would land to the area south west of Chapel be an identified area?

A The site allocations document will be the plan that will decide areas that will take different types of development. 

Q  When the by-pass was being considered the area around Chapel was greenbelt, why has this changed?

A Greenbelt policy has not changed over the last 20 years. Not aware that there was ever greenbelt in vicinity of Chapel.  There can be a  confusion with Greenfield land .  Greenbelt prevents urban sprawl.  There is no current  intention to change Greenbelt in High Peak.

Q  Infrastructure in Chapel is a problem as there is only one road to accommodate an increased number of cars, therefore the infrastructure needs to be looked at before any houses.

A  As part of determining revised figures the infrastructure restraints need to be taken seriously as they will have an impact on housing numbers.  High Peak Borough Council will liaise with all interested bodies in formulating the plan to ensure that any proposals are deliverable.

Q  There is Greenbelt around Chapel and the draft plan objectives are to protect and enhance the character, appearance and setting of the town. Why has this not been applied to Chapel in relation to the Greenfield sites selected to build on. 

A  The Council do take these things into account and the Council Growth Options Consultation proposed two areas for development.  One to the south east of Chapel and one to south west.   Due to rising land in the south east of the town the potential impact would be much greater than areas to the south west.  The area to south west of Chapel  is not  the only area in High Peak to take housing allocations as 1,000 properties are proposed for Harpur Hill.

Q The Sustainability appraisal report indicates that New Mills is more sustainable so why was this not considered. 

A  It is a technical document that imputs into the Plan process.

Q  There has been poor communication with people getting the wrong end of the stick and individual leaflets giving incorrect information.

A  The Council recognise that there is an issue about communication. The consultation process was advertised in the local press, High Peak Radio and in the Connect magazine, which is delivered to every household in High Peak.

Q  Brownfield sites should be the 1st choice, Greenfield sites the 2nd choice and school playing field should be a last choice.

A  There are no proposals to build on school playing fields.

Q  Will private houses be compulsory purchased to facilitate larger developments.

A  This is not something that High Peak Borough Council would support.

Q  Could the existing 1,000 empty homes  go towards the target?

A  There are about 500 empty houses in High Peak at present. High Peak Borough Council will not look to compulsory purchase empty houses, but they do have powers to bring empty and derelict houses back into use.  The 2009 affordable housing survey  identified 49 empty properties in Chapel.

Q How do we know that all Brownfield land has been considered before Greenfield sites  

A The Strategic housing land availability land assessment  has to produce a list of sites.  All sites on the list will be considered and anyone can submit an area to list for consideration. 

Q  Industrial  legacy sites would include Dorma.  Do plans include how those sites can be developed.

A  The Parish Council has identified  a number of Brownfield sites that could be developed including the Dorma site.

Q  Why not build on sites near Glossop not included in draft plan.

A  There needs to be a clear urban definition

Q  Chapel has a new school – how can it be justified to build on school fields?

A  This is not a proposal that the Borough Council has put forward.  It is not current policy to build on playing fields.

Hugh Barton who produced the local leaflet stated that the purpose of leaflet was to inform local residents as he had only heard half way through the consultation about the proposals. It set out to say no more than have your say and come tonight.  He added that he looks forward to enhanced communication.

Chapel Parish Council called this meeting and set the date. The date was set after  the first part of the consultation was completed.

Q  Are the council disclaiming that the plans on the reverse of Mr Barton’s leaflet and the response from Barratt Developments are on Borough Council website along with details of discussions with Derbyshire County Council to acquire the playing fields on Long Lane.  Will council say that they will never allow building on the playing fields of the school.

A  The plans and proposal by Barratt Developments has no status and is only a submission to the consultation.  The comments attributed to Derbyshire County Council are standard enquiry comments.  The Borough Council is trying to be transparent and invited comments from all interested parties. 

Q In 2004  there was an objection to a planning application to the south west of Long Lane and it was reported in the local press  that High Peak Borough Council  said that Long Lane  formed a natural boundary. 

A  Due to imposed targets alternative sites have to be looked at.

Q  Can the Federal Mogul site accommodate some of the houses?

A The council is currently waiting for a planning statement to be approved on the Federal Mogul site.

Q  Is there capacity at the school to take the extra numbers?

A Capacity of school is a fair point – the High school is 41 over subscribed this year.

Q The High School is a PFI school so can land at the school be sold. 

A  The school governors have no knowledge of the sale of any land.

Q Water  from STWA comes from Ladybower by pipeline.  Who would pay for a new pipeline if there was future development?

A  The developer.

Q There is an Industrial estate near to the  bypass so could established businesses in the middle of Chapel be encouraged to move to this site to release Brownfield land?

A  The Parish Council agree and have submitted a list of Brownfield sites and this is something that a Chapel Vision Group should consider.

Brownfield land is still required for industry but modern industries need smaller amounts of land.  There is a need to balance  the right amount of industry for modern living between housing and industry.

Q  Eric Pickles announced that the Government are going to pay the council tax on every new house that is built, will this effect the judgement when making decisions on the number of new houses.

A  The Council are aware of the announcement but do not have all the details yet but will look at them responsibly.

The Chairman closed the meeting by stating that nothing has been decided and that this is  the start of a new consultation process following new guidelines for the setting of housing targets.

The Parish Council will be working on behalf of the community and intend to have big voice to achieve  a community which is fit to live and work in and not be desecrated.

Response to assumptions in the Draft Plan about Chapel-en-le-Frith.

On page 89 of the draft plan, Chapel-en-le-Frith is described as: “surrounded by relatively flat countryside and has correspondingly fewer constraints on newer developments”. In our view, this is a misleading and inaccurate description. It should be pointed out that Chapel-en-le-Frith is surrounded by rising land and that this rising land should be protected from development. It is important that the green swathe of land visible from the land in the ownership of the National Trust, at Eccles Pike, is protected. Any future developments should be confined to vacant plots on the valley floor within an established and identified boundary, outside which development should not be allowed now or in the future.  The Parish Council has consistently opposed development on rising ground.

Infrastructure

Up to 530 new houses could potentially increase the population of the town by up to 20%. This would put a severe strain on an infrastructure that is already stretched, particularly in terms of traffic congestion on High Street, Market Street and Long Lane.   

-          Will new transport services need to be created and will the road network need to be upgraded? 

-          Car Parks at Chapel-en-le-Frith and Chinley stations are already at capacity.

-          Local Schools have limited capacity to increase their numbers on roll – Chapel High School has already reached its Standard Number.

-          Will the current healthcare services be able to cope with the increase in population?

-          Where will the new employment opportunities be located?

-          There is an urgent need to analyse the current infrastructure and the capacity of the town to cope with a large increase in population. 

What investigations have High Peak Borough Council made  in regard to traffic, schools, medical care, shopping, employment, rail and bus access when carrying out their assessment for, not only the 500 houses on one site in Chapel-en-le-Frith  Parish, but also the 250 houses on SHLAA sites and 300-459 houses on Industrial Legacy sites and the 100-230 small-scale urban extensions. Many of the foregoing might be in the Chapel-en-le-Frith Parish area but no mention has been made of exactly where they might be sited even though the HPBC were able to identify a major site for Chapel-en-le-Frith.

Housing Targets

The housing targets for High Peak which form the basis of the Core Strategy document were set by the Regional Development Agency as part of the Regional Spatial Strategy.  It is expected that the Regional Spatial Strategy will be withdrawn as the Regional Development Agency is to be abolished and new guidelines are presently awaited. In view of this, we would advocate that any changes in policy regarding targets need to be fully evidenced and locally led.

In abolishing the Regional Development Agency, which decided how many houses should be built by 2026 in High Peak, the new Government has said that local authorities are now free to set their own housing growth targets.

At present, this means the HPBC Local Plan 2005 is still the primary source of guidance for new development in High Peak.

We would want to see what current evidence there is to support the case for building substantially more than 500 new homes in Chapel en le Frith over the next 15 years.

The last Housing Needs Survey was carried out in 2008 and a report, entitled ‘Peak Sub Region Housing Market Assessment, prepared by DTZ for HPBC & DDDC, was issued in December 2008. The findings of this report may no longer be valid and a further assessment may be necessary.

Wouldn’t it be better for a complete study of Chapel en le Frith to be undertaken to identify sites that could be developed around Chapel-en-le-Frith?

Potential In-fill and Brownfield Sites identified by the Parish Council 

The potential for development on ex-industrial sites, for example the Dorma site in Whitehough, should be fully investigated.  This site has poor access for industrial use and is more suited to residential development.

 The following In-fill sites, including sites that have previously been identified by the Parish Council and do not appear in the Strategy document, should be carefully examined and given priority over any green field development. 

Extract from a previous consultation on in-fill sites:-

We much prefer to have ‘in-fill’, and the sites listed below are either ‘Brownfield’, current industrial sites or ‘infill’ within existing residential areas or on the level land adjacent to Long Lane.

1.         Thornell Close, off Moss view Road.

            SK06209 80390

            Two small sites below Warmbrook Barn.

2.         Beresford Road, situated between Beresford Ave.& Homestead Way, opposite  64 – small    plot.

            SK 06394 80651

3.         Warmbrook Road, opposite Lower Eaves View.

            SK 06189 80390 - site bordering Warmbrook Road as far as the line of

           trees on the South side.  

4.         Warmbrook Road.

            Small site –may be in HPBC ownership.

            SK 06069 80355

5.         Long Lane.

A. At the junction of Long Lane and to the south of Station Road, with development on the northern part of this site terminating at the Midland line railway embankment, and on the southern part of the site being kept to the flat areas of the land.

            SK 05609 79800

            B. At junction of Long Lane and to the North of Station Road and to      the east of the railway embankment, large field site.

            SK 05434 80085                    

6.         Site adjacent to Bywaters/Hayfield Park Estate.

            SK 06039 80890

7.         We accept that it may be necessary for development to take place on sites currently designated as Greenfield, but only when the capacity of sites identified by the Parish Council has been examined and the evidence to support the housing targets has been established.

In addition, the Affordable Housing Survey (2009) identified 46 empty properties in Chapel-en-le-Frith, which should be investigated.

Strategic Planning

Attempts to meet the provision for the Central Area could become an opportunity to re-locate and re-organise the distribution of industrial sites in the town, so that residential, commercial and industrial areas become separated and more clearly defined.

We have identified several suitable sites for housing in Chapel-en-le-Frith, listed below; which have not been included in the Strategy document, all references are British National Grid.

“Brownfield” sites are identified by BD.

The sites defined as BD – M - are those which it is hoped that the present occupiers may consider moving to more suitable industrial areas, adjacent to the A6 bypass on the edge of the town, so reducing the need for heavy lorries to pass through the town centre.

1.         Hayfield Road East – currently occupied by Bowers Coaches. BD - M

            SK 06279 80936

2.         Hayfield Road East  - currently occupied by Chapel Garage/Bowers.   Coaches. BD - M

            SK 06199 80933

3.        Yard area, previously occupied by ATS and now by FR Somerset    Haulage.

BD –M Between Manchester Road and the railway bridge and on the east of Long Lane, with access also to Manchester Road.

SK 05289 80395.

4.         Midland Road - Old Coal Yard site. BD - M

            SK 05444 80915

5.         Old Park Road/rear of the Town Hall/ Sunday School Lane. BD and BD - M

            SK 05874 80745

            Very suitable area for development for sheltered accommodation / affordable housing.

6.         Lomas Distribution site (formerly Sam Longson Ltd) off Sheffield Road.

            SK 06364 80930

Town End and Miry Meadow areas need to have Development Plans prepared and agreed. The Federal-Mogul site re-development may provide housing sites and the HPBC Council office site in Chinley may also offer further housing sites.  

All these sites are sustainable and allow small additional development to take place without fundamentally affecting the character of the town. They would provide an opportunity to in-fill, using predominantly Brownfield sites. Surely this is better than one huge new estate on the edge of town which will not be integrated and which would fundamentally affect the town.

Until the capacity of these sites has been identified and compared with the updated housing targets for the Central Area, we cannot begin to determine the residual demand that will have to be met.

We would support small-scale development in Dove Holes proportionate to its size and commensurate with its range of services and facilities.

To attract small business we would strongly advocate the need for High Speed Broadband.

Environmental Impact

An Environmental Impact Study should be commissioned, together with confirmation that the proposed sites in the strategy conform with the Code for Sustainable Development, as it is anticipated that Code level 6 will be a requirement by 2012.

Affordable Housing 

There is a proven need for Affordable Housing in the Parish and houses currently on the market ‘For Sale’ are not affordable by a large percentage of the local population.  Any future development should include housing that is affordable.

The Affordable Housing Study carried out in late 2009, and report issued in early 2010, determined that there was a current need of at least 150 new affordable houses in Chapel.

 What is affordable?

Currently the lowest property price in Chapel is over £100k, and the average nearer £150k. The average salary in the Central Area is less that £20k pa. Mortgage lenders are now restricting new mortgage advances to 3.5 times earnings and a minimum of 25% deposit. Consequently, this makes the majority of properties currently on the market unaffordable by a large percentage of the local population.

We need more affordable properties, as well as some general market housing, and also some ‘executive homes’ if new businesses are to be established in the area.

A dialogue needs to take place with Housing Associations and other agencies involved in housing provision, funding and the building of new domestic properties.

Sites for affordable housing off Ashbourne Lane have been mentioned.

Vision for the Future

A locally-led, overall vision is needed for Chapel-en-le-Frith and Dove Holes.

We want to be treated equally to residents in Glossop and Buxton. We don’t want to be the ‘poor relation’ when forward planning takes place.

The current proposals will have a profound effect on the Central Area of High Peak, and on Chapel en le Frith in particular. We need to ensure that the future of Chapel en le Frith is decided and/or influenced by residents living in Chapel Parish  who will be directly affected by any of the changes.

A Chapel Vision Committee should be formed to develop a Design and Place Making Strategy for Chapel-en-le-Frith and Dove Holes which will protect their unique identity, distinctiveness and historic character.

We want to be involved with, and take the lead on, discussions about where new housing developments should take place and the changes to infrastructure required to sustain them.

A new housing market assessment should be carried out to identify demand in Chapel-en-le-Frith Parish from now to 2026. This report should include details of what type of property will be needed. Particular reference to be made to affordability and the best solutions to this major problem.  We cannot proceed without satisfactory and comprehensive evidence to determine future housing targets.

The present consultation document refers to ‘Vision Plans’ for both Glossopdale and Buxton. The ‘Glossop Vision’ organisation already exists.

On June 16 and June 30, Glossop residents were invited to public meetings/workshops arranged by HPBC to have their say on how they would like their town to develop. The sessions were led by design consultants Gillespie’s, who will translate the workshop ideas into a planning document that will eventually go to the Council for adoption as formal planning guidance.

A recent Press Release by the HPBC Executive Member for Regeneration stated ‘…any future development should reflect the ways in which local people want to see it grow,…’ and added ‘ The vision has to come from the people who live or work in Glossop, as they understand the place better than anyone’.

A similar approach is being proposed for Buxton, with the ‘Buxton Vision’ recently being formed.

Surely the residents of Chapel deserve to be treated the same. A ‘Chapel Vision’ organisation should be formed to allow the Parish Council, together with local residents, to express their opinions.

14 July 2010