Plans submitted for Marple Dale Care Home site

[Dave]

there should be a strict limit on what can be built and where.

There already is a strict limit on building - it’s called the green belt. So when a brownfield site becomes available it has to be built on - otherwise nothing gets built at all.  It’s a no brainer........

[Belly]

That presupposes the figures given are even remotely accurate  The government (successive governments in fact) are determined to do anything to please the building industry and that is what the target is about. It is the developers who are being selfish. Given the chance, they would build on every scrap of land in the country. A certain degree of development is needed, but there should be a strict limit on what can be built and where.

The house market hugely overheating should be evidence enough. Whilst the government target might be 300k per year they are not even getting close to that - i believe that the highest that they have managed recently is about 180k.

Whilst you in your existing house might be feeling that there is no housing problem, go tell that to those who desperately need a home but are being passed around 'temporary accomodation' or the vast majoiryt of young people who can only dream of having their own home. Average house prices are now 8 times average salary, mainly due to lack of supply. A ridiculous situation.

[Condate]

It's even more disappointing when people take such a selfish attitude.

There is a national shortage of housing - see: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7671/.  Government policy is to build at least 300,000 houses per year.  Given the policy of protecting the green belt, brownfield sites like this have got to be used.  This is billed as an 'upmarket development', so it won't directly benefit people who are trying to get on the housing ladder, but of course it will benefit such people indirectly, by releasing housing further down the ladder.

If we don't build housing on a site like this, where on earth will we build it?

That presupposes the figures given are even remotely accurate  The government (successive governments in fact) are determined to do anything to please the building industry and that is what the target is about. It is the developers who are being selfish. Given the chance, they would build on every scrap of land in the country. A certain degree of development is needed, but there should be a strict limit on what can be built and where.

[Dave]

it's disappointing when any new development is approved. Far too many houses have already been built in the area in recent years.

It's even more disappointing when people take such a selfish attitude.

There is a national shortage of housing - see: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7671/.  Government policy is to build at least 300,000 houses per year.  Given the policy of protecting the green belt, brownfield sites like this have got to be used.  This is billed as an 'upmarket development', so it won't directly benefit people who are trying to get on the housing ladder, but of course it will benefit such people indirectly, by releasing housing further down the ladder.

If we don't build housing on a site like this, where on earth will we build it? 

[Howard]

There you go Howard agreeing with me again. You'd better sit down you won't be feeling to good if you keep this up.

Well, @wheels, you can't be wrong ALL the time so it had to happen sooner or later

[corium]

In response to Condate's point my understanding is that at least two of the buildings to be demolished were effectively not salvageable - one was condemned structurally and the other needed strucutural alterations and a brand new lift to become usable and this was uneconomic. Even if every building had remained in use there was an awful lot of land there and sooner or later I suspect some would have been sold for housing.

[wheels]

Sounds like nimbyism to me.

There you go Howard agreeing with me again. You'd better sit down you won't be feeling to good if you keep this up.

[Condate]

Sounds like nimbyism to me.

I've never understood why that is considered a bad thing. I think we need more of it, not less. However, it seems that some people think differently.

[Howard]

Firstly, it's disappointing when any new development is approved. Far too many houses have already been built in the area in recent years.

Also, the area in question is very attractive and will be spoiled by the building of houses on in. If the existing buildings could not be reused, then the area could be used for much better purposes that building on it.

Sounds like nimbyism to me.

[wheels]

Firstly, it's disappointing when any new development is approved. Far too many houses have already been built in the area in recent years.

Also, the area in question is very attractive and will be spoiled by the building of houses on in. If the existing buildings could not be reused, then the area could be used for much better purposes that building on it.

Sounds like a typical "I've got my house in this nice area now pull up the drawbridge "

[andrewbowden]

Am I missing something here?  There were buildings there before.  Now there will be some different buildings.  The overall footprint of the site looks pretty much the same as it was before.  What's the problem?

[Condate]

Why?

Firstly, it's disappointing when any new development is approved. Far too many houses have already been built in the area in recent years.

Also, the area in question is very attractive and will be spoiled by the building of houses on in. If the existing buildings could not be reused, then the area could be used for much better purposes that building on it.

[jimblob]

Very disappointing that this ever got approval.

Why?

[Condate]

Very disappointing that this ever got approval. Sadly, it's not entirely down to the council, as they have so much pressure from the government unfortunately.

 

[admin]

Here is a press release received today concerning the homes being built at Marple Dale

Dear Sir/Madam

Seddon Homes have just broken ground on an exciting new development in your area and we wanted to share this with you should you be interested in covering this story.

Luxury new homes in Marple Dale

Building work has commenced on Aspenwood Grange, an exclusive development of 19 luxury homes at Marple Dale.

The prestigious development, constructed by Seddon Homes, will include 2 bedroom bungalows and 4 and 5 bedroom homes. The first of the properties have already been reserved off plan – with completion scheduled for the first homes in the second half of 2021.

Aspenwood Grange is the first Seddon development to be headed by new Construction Manager Neil Pizzey, who has worked with several five star-rated building companies in the region.

And he brings his extensive experience to this upmarket development, which showcases Seddon’s renowned build quality, energy saving features and inclusive fixtures and fittings.

All the homes have fully fitted kitchens, designed by top Siematic dealer Stuart Frazer with integrated Neff appliances. Bathrooms have Villeroy and Boch tiling and en suites feature contemporary rainfall showers and fully tiled shower cubicles.

Plot sizes are large, with turfed front and rear gardens, and the development is surrounded by mature trees and close to the River Goyt. The Aspenwood Grange site was chosen as the perfect location for families looking to put down roots and enjoy the benefits of a semi-rural lifestyle whilst still being within easy reach of Stockport and Manchester City Centre.

Warrington-based Seddon has developments in Cheshire, Lancashire, Staffordshire and Yorkshire. The family-owned company, known for its’ award-winning construction standards, plans to launch four new sites in the North West this year.