Post by: Peter on December 31, 2003, 11:47:35 AM
Post by: MCC Executive Committee on December 31, 2003, 01:16:36 PM
It might just be a red herring (again?)!
Post by: admin on June 13, 2008, 07:38:04 AM
Post by: CTCREP on June 26, 2008, 04:46:14 PM
Post by: Belly on June 29, 2008, 06:38:44 PM
Having visited the Exhibition I am particularly concerned about parking arrangements. If my memory is correct there are to be 90+ Apartments and 30+ Houses, with parking available for 122 residents and 20+ parking for businesses. We all know that currently the average car parking requirement for many dwellings is approaching over 2 per dwelling, thus it could be that 122+ extra vehicles will be parked on the neighboring roads. It is even worse than this for the house parking area is within a garage which many people prefer to use for storage rather than parking their cars, and some garages are for two cars, thus the available parking area within the complex could be less than 60. As a cyclist I also wonder what provision will be made for apartment owners to store there cycle, or windsurfers etc. for that matter. And what about children? Do we assume these aparments are only available to the elderly? If not, then there could be, say, 100 children with nowhere to play apart from Etherow Country Park which isn't suitable for unsupervised toddlers, or Brabyns Park across a very busy and now congested road. More thought needs to go into this before it is approved.
I don't believe for one moment that Stockport Council will permit a general housing development with less than one parking space per dwelling. Their own planning guidance would put a stop to that.
Likewise, the Council will also place planning conditions on the site to secure cycling provision in line with their planning standards.
I'm not sure the council has 'windsurfer' parking standards though!
I think that it would be worth waiting for the actual planning application to be lodged before passing too great a judgement.
Post by: Lisa Oldham on June 30, 2008, 04:10:11 PM
However agree need to see planning permission closely b4 coming to a conclusion.
If noone is willing to develop it in any other way then....
well its not the prettiest thing in the world at the mo is it?
Post by: Belly on June 30, 2008, 07:41:52 PM
If I remember rightly we tried arguing the parking issue during the Jolly sailor development. THey havent got 1 parking space per flat either..... think if its for the elderley theres different clauses that come into play.
However agree need to see planning permission closely b4 coming to a conclusion.
If noone is willing to develop it in any other way then....
well its not the prettiest thing in the world at the mo is it?
Parking for sheltered accomodation and / or specific retirement homes does indeed have different parking standards. And yes it is less than 1 space per dwelling. Which is generally fair enough as that type of development does generate a lot less traffic than normal residential dwellings.
Post by: amazon on March 25, 2009, 04:00:08 PM
Post by: amazon on July 02, 2009, 01:29:39 PM
planing application .DCO42236 THIS CAN BE VIEWED AT BREDBURY LIBRARY INFORMATION Letter to long to type all out .some of it includes 121 residential units commercial units boat house hydro/electric power generator .car parking etc . the plans can allso viewed on stockport website 5.7 days from today .2 july. any comments should be made in writing within the required time 15-7-2009 .Hope this info is helpfull to some of you .
Post by: admin on July 02, 2009, 01:47:50 PM
http://planning.stockport.gov.uk/PlanningData/AcolNetCGI.gov?ACTION=UNWRAP&RIPNAME=Root.PgeResultDetail&TheSystemkey=36566
I've sent an enquiry asking when the plans will be available on-line.
PS - I've also merged all the historic threads about Compstall Mill into this one.
Post by: amazon on July 02, 2009, 04:39:26 PM
Here's a link to the planning database but there are no plans or drawings to view at the moment:
http://planning.stockport.gov.uk/PlanningData/AcolNetCGI.gov?ACTION=UNWRAP&RIPNAME=Root.PgeResultDetail&TheSystemkey=36566
I've sent an enquiry asking when the plans will be available on-line.
PS - I've also merged all the historic threads about Compstall Mill into this one.
5to7 days from today for smbc website so it says on letter we have had today .
Post by: Tricky on July 03, 2009, 05:46:26 PM
http://interactive.stockport.gov.uk/edrms/onlinemvm/mvmedrms.asp?DCNumber=DC042235 (http://interactive.stockport.gov.uk/edrms/onlinemvm/mvmedrms.asp?DCNumber=DC042235)
Post by: Miss Marple on July 03, 2009, 06:16:27 PM
Post by: amazon on July 03, 2009, 08:19:10 PM
Post by: Tricky on July 05, 2009, 10:25:31 AM
Chadkirk mill was in a similar shape until investment a few years ago, now it's a clean and tidy place full of small businesses.
Post by: Belly on July 05, 2009, 07:06:50 PM
Sorry about that, I have just started a new topic before checking out if it was already on this site. My daughter lives in Compstall and has just received her letter today about the proposed development. She is concerned due to the amount of traffic she has to contend with everyday just trying to get to and from work. Before moving into Compstall she used to live on Compstall Rd and the volume of traffic coming past her cottage was unbelievable. She only lived there 3 years and in that time she had to contact the council twice to attend to the tarmac from the road that had come up over the pavement. She was advised by the council that it was caused by the volume of traffic that used that road. So a additional 121 houses with 2.2 cars will just make the situation worse. I have just emailed Andrew Stunall and asked him what he intends to do about this and will be asking local councillors to become actively involved before its to late. I am sure the Mill site is a conservation area or is that just if it does not get in the way of finances
Re: traffic. Whats your solution to this then. The site is a large industrial facility which the owners could, if they could find an end user, simply open up again on a much more intensive basis and therefore contribute a higher level of traffic and probably lots more HGV's.
Something must be done with the site and its not just an option to let the area continue to decline. I doubt 120 houses is really going to make any noticeable difference to the traffic levels if they are really that bad in the first place.
Post by: Miss Marple on July 05, 2009, 07:23:02 PM
Post by: Belly on July 06, 2009, 02:55:23 PM
;D I take it Belly you live in LA LA Land then not on Compstall or Stockport road :-\? The development at Strines is not finished so add that increased traffic to the one main road through Compstall and Marple and I will have to leave home for work even earlier than the hour I allow myself to get into Stockport town centre Mon - Fri. At this rate I will be leaving for work before I have arrived home. KEEP IT REAL !!!
I note that you ignore my question. What do you propose to be done with this large industrial site. It won't simply disappear into a hole in the ground and needs to be re-used.
Post by: Miss Marple on July 14, 2009, 10:06:34 PM
Post by: Dave on July 15, 2009, 10:17:22 AM
But what's the alternative? Certainly not restoring it as a 'Styal Mill' type visitor attraction - given the colossal upfront restoration costs, followed by the high running costs, anyone who suggests that this could 'bring in revenue for the local council' really is in la-la land! ;) Just ask the National Trust.....
The fact is that there is a shortage of housing. Planning restrictions on green belt land mean that suitable sites are extremely difficult to find. 'Brownfield' sites such as former mill buildings are therefore preferred. People have got to live somewhere. It's as simple as that.
The way to tackle traffic congestion is by improving public transport, not by leaving people homeless.
Post by: Rachael on July 15, 2009, 12:16:06 PM
;D I take it Belly you live in LA LA Land then not on Compstall or Stockport road :-\? The development at Strines is not finished so add that increased traffic to the one main road through Compstall and Marple and I will have to leave home for work even earlier than the hour I allow myself to get into Stockport town centre Mon - Fri. At this rate I will be leaving for work before I have arrived home. KEEP IT REAL !!!
I thought you said on another post on the boards that you worked in the Memorial park in Marple ?? :P
8) 8)
Post by: Miss Marple on July 16, 2009, 12:50:20 AM
Post by: Dave on July 16, 2009, 09:28:32 AM
I know about housing and there is not a lack of it!
I think most people would beg to differ, and certainly those of us who have grown up children who are looking to find a home and start a family know that there is a very serious shortage of affordable homes, even though prices have been falling recently, thank goodness. Some reports suggest that there are empty homes around, but these are almost entirely the city-centre apartments built as speculative buy-to-lets, which nobody wants to live in, and are overpriced and quite unsuitable for a young family.
The problem is that we are nimbys: we want our children to be able to find homes, but not in our backyards thank you!
Post by: Miss Marple on July 16, 2009, 02:32:03 PM
Post by: Dave on July 16, 2009, 03:49:13 PM
However, that is a completely separate issue. If under-occupied or unoccupied council houses can be freed up, they will rightly go to the most needy cases on the waiting list. That will do nothing at all for the people who are wanting to buy their own first homes. These are people who in most cases would not wish to rent a council house, and even if they did they would probably not be eligible for one. They simply want to buy a house, and they can't, because the demand for such homes outstrips the supply, which keeps the price too high. Hence the Compstall Mill proposals, which if they go ahead will provide much needed homes for our young families to buy.
Post by: Miss Marple on July 16, 2009, 05:57:49 PM
Post by: Dave on July 17, 2009, 09:25:52 AM
Post by: Tricky on July 17, 2009, 10:26:43 AM
I know of some who have already had considerable costs in relocating (when this plan originally was tabled) and of others who have just folded with the loss of jobs etc.
There will, of course, be more people working from there who lose their jobs/businesses because of these plans.
Post by: nbt on July 17, 2009, 06:39:04 PM
Quote
I beleive it's going to be a mixture of small 2/3 bed housing with a few bigger ones.
My guess is that the "small 2 bed" houses will be around the £240k mark, and will be snapped up by people who know the developers and sold on for a profit. not exactly "affordable". I don;t see how building houses can solve the problem of house *prices*: in this country we seem to have an obsession with owning property, courtesy of that nice lady Mrs Thatcher probalby. If you look at europe the ownership vs rental figures a fre more skewed towards rental than in the UK, people live at home / rent for longer and save a massive deposit - as I understand it, you *MUST* have a 25% deposit to get a mortgage in france. How well would that go down here where even people with nojobs have the right to get a mortgage?!
Post by: Dave on July 18, 2009, 10:34:04 AM
I don;t see how building houses can solve the problem of house *prices*
Have a look at this:
http://www.mortgageguideuk.co.uk/blog/uk-housing-market/why-there-is-a-housing-shortage-in-the-uk/
It's simply a matter of supply and demand. Government figures indicate that the UK needs to build about 240,000 houses per year just to keep up with the demand for new homes. At the moment we are only building about half that number. As any economist will tell you, the law of supply and demand means that when demand for anything exceeds the supply, the price goes up. This is why even in the current recession, house prices are still artificially high - they were over 5 times average household income in 2008. They have fallen quite a bit since then, but have some way to go before they get back to the level of 3.3 times average income which they were in 2003.
Whether the Compstall Mill development will be 'starter homes' or not is not the only issue: even if they are not, increasing the supply of new homes should eventually help to make them more affordable.
Post by: CTCREP on July 29, 2009, 02:59:38 PM
Post by: amazon on July 29, 2009, 04:20:04 PM
Having received the recent proposal letter I decided to visit Bredbury Library expecting to see a similar display as was on offer the last time. I was shown about an 18 inch cube box full of documents. First question is, if that is all the room it needed why wasn't it situated in the Etherow Park Visitor Centre, perhaps is was because of the limited opening times. OK. I tried to read some of the documents, my own criticism of the scheme is that there is insufficient car parking now we are in the era when the majority of families have at least two cars. If they don't have cars and perhaps have motor bikes or even only pedal cycles - many families with children will probably have three or four of these - where will they put them, and what about prams etc. There is no storage space, or even if there is most garages will be used as storage space partly due to them being too small to accept today's cars and so they will have to find somewhere else to park their cars - on neighbouring roads I assume, or will they simply park them anywhere and no doubt block access for the - probably - very large delivery vehicles that are used nowadays. The company appears to be out of touch with today's society, we must hope the Council is more aware of how people live. I said I tried to read some of the documents, well I couldn't because in the Company's desire to appear to be up to date they have used printing that fades in as you look down the page, which means you can't read the first part of the information. I think our best hope for this scheme, the principle of which I would support, is that it fades away and a more enlightened company comes up with a more practical proposal.LIKE WHAT .
Post by: Belly on July 31, 2009, 08:50:02 AM
Having received the recent proposal letter I decided to visit Bredbury Library expecting to see a similar display as was on offer the last time. I was shown about an 18 inch cube box full of documents. First question is, if that is all the room it needed why wasn't it situated in the Etherow Park Visitor Centre, perhaps is was because of the limited opening times. OK. I tried to read some of the documents, my own criticism of the scheme is that there is insufficient car parking now we are in the era when the majority of families have at least two cars. If they don't have cars and perhaps have motor bikes or even only pedal cycles - many families with children will probably have three or four of these - where will they put them, and what about prams etc. There is no storage space, or even if there is most garages will be used as storage space partly due to them being too small to accept today's cars and so they will have to find somewhere else to park their cars - on neighbouring roads I assume, or will they simply park them anywhere and no doubt block access for the - probably - very large delivery vehicles that are used nowadays. The company appears to be out of touch with today's society, we must hope the Council is more aware of how people live. I said I tried to read some of the documents, well I couldn't because in the Company's desire to appear to be up to date they have used printing that fades in as you look down the page, which means you can't read the first part of the information. I think our best hope for this scheme, the principle of which I would support, is that it fades away and a more enlightened company comes up with a more practical proposal.
As a CTCrep I would have thought that you would be aware that council's and developers have to work to maximum car parking supply standards above which they are not allowed to go. Whilst we can debate the merits of this government policy for a long time (believe me I have) the enforced restriction of car parking supply is supposed to encourage residents to utilise walking, cycling and public transport.
Even if the developer wanted to (and I'm sure that they wouldn't, they will undoutedly want to provide the maximum number of units on the site) the prospect of 3 or 4 car parking spaces per dwelling is simply never going to happen as it is forbidden by national planning policy!
Post by: nbt on July 31, 2009, 06:59:22 PM
edit: here's the link
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/essex/7948673.stm
Don't know what came of it
Post by: Tricky on November 05, 2009, 02:23:12 PM
Stockport Council have resolved to approve the planning application for the redevelopment of Compstall Mill.
I understand that the planning consent is proposed to be valid for five years and that Ask Property Developments do not currently have definite plans to commence on site.