Holmes Chapel survey had high response rate

As Goostrey’s Neighbourhood Plan Questionnaire has been circulated you might be interested to review the results of the Holmes Chapel Neighbourhood plan questionnaire, and consider what further housing provisions in Goostrey are required, over and above that which will be provided in Holmes Chapel:- 

Holmes Chapel’s N’hood Plan responses.  e.g. responses point to too much traffic in the middle of the village and, if more housing is required, a wish for it to include more bungalows and affordable homes for people with a local connection.

Remember the Local Plan states that  “in the case of Goostrey development needs will be largely met by Holmes Chapel.”….

True, Goostrey will see further development, but do you think Goostrey needs further Site Allocations over and above the new 30+ houses at the ‘Woodlands’ development and the potential 119  houses at Shearbrook?  Remember since 2010, the settlement of Goostrey (which comprises Swettenham, Twemlow and Cranage) has already seen between 70-80 new houses since 2010 without these two developments.  Cheshire East previously advised that only 30 houses were required for Goostrey over the lifetime of the Neighbourhood Plan!  This has already been exceeded in only 5 years of the 30 year lifespan of the Local Plan.  How many more houses do you think Goostrey village needs?

Cheshire East have also indicated that there are currently no requirements to have any further Site Allocations in Goostrey village.  So we at LoveGoostrey don’t believe there is a need to be panicked into deciding on any Site Allocations at the present time. 

But do you think further Site Allocations are required ? Or do you think just small infill developments as seen prior to 2010 would be more appropriate?

Whatever your view, it is important to make it known: encourage everyone in your household to complete a questionnaire, or complete it online:-


Share and Enjoy !

0 0


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *