Inside new-build estate where EVERY one of 263 homes faces demolition

Inside the new-build estate where EVERY one of the 263 homes faces demolition due to planning blunder

• The properties in Crewe, Cheshire, were built on potentially contaminated land as residents feel like ‘pawns’
• Residents are left with the worry that they will potentially be unable to sell or re-mortgage their homes
• Have you faced a similar property nightmare?  Email [email protected]

Residents of a new housing estate say they are living in ‘a state of turmoil’ over claims their properties may be worthless and could be torn down – because they may have been built without proper planning permission.

Homeowners living on the 263-home Coppenhall Place development in Crewe say they are raging that their properties are built on potentially contaminated land, leaving them potentially unable to sell or re-mortgage their homes.

The row means there is currently no planning consent in place for the 263-home Coppenhall Place development on a former Bombardier train factory site in Crewe, Cheshire.

Residents now claim that they feel like ‘pawns’ in the middle of the bust-up over residues of asbestos, lead, cyanide and arsenic beneath the land their homes stand on, even though council officials admit there is no danger to human health.

They have accused Cheshire East Council of using the dispute as a way of trying to get developer Countryside Partnerships to pay over more money for community facilities in the area.

Homeowners living on the 263-home Coppenhall Place development in Crewe say they are raging that their properties are built on potentially contaminated land

This news means that this may be leaving homeowners potentially unable to sell or re-mortgage their homes

Residents now claim that they feel like ‘pawns’ in the middle of the bust-up over residues of asbestos, lead, cyanide and arsenic beneath the land their homes stand on

One pensioner living on the estate who asked not to be named said: ‘We think the council is conducting a witch hunt against the developer.

‘The houses were built with planning permission, and now the council says that they do not have permission. We are worried that it will devalue our property. It could be worthless if it is not sorted out.’

Countryside Partnerships was originally given planning consent in December 2018 to build the 239 three and four bedroom houses and 24 flats on the 17 acre brownfield site.

But Covid and other delays meant building work was not completed within a three-year time limit with contractors still tarmacking some paths and roads on the estate this week.

The developer had to apply again for planning permission, even though most houses have already been sold with only some three-bedroom semis available, priced at £229,995.

Council officials have since questioned the level of contamination checks carried out before and during construction work which were a requirement of the original consent.

Countryside Partnerships and its consultants have insisted that proper assessments were carried out and had confirmed there was no health risk at the site.

But local councillors have accused the developer of putting ‘profit before compliance’ and want further investigation before granting a new planning consent for the site.

David Andrews, 50, (pictured) who lives with partner Laura Curtis, 37, on the development said: ‘We were thinking of moving somewhere more expensive next year, but it might not be possible if this doesn’t resolve itself’

The row means there is currently no planning consent in place for the 263-home Coppenhall Place development on a former Bombardier train factory site in Crewe, Cheshire

Countryside Partnerships was originally given planning consent in December 2018 to build the 239 three and four bedroom houses and 24 flats on the 17 acre brownfield site

Councillors had been expected to rubber-stamp the new planning application at a meeting last week, but instead deferred their decision until a later date.

Residents say their local ward councillor has since told them that he is ’99 per cent certain’ that there is no contamination on the land, and that the application should be granted soon.

But apprentice radiographer Tamzin Caiger, 35, who lives on the estate with her wife Rachel, 36, and their eight-year-old son, said: ‘It is really upsetting. I feel like we don’t really know what is going on.

‘We moved here in July 2021 and had a two year fixed rate mortgage deal which is due to renew this July.

‘We are currently paying £700 a month and have applied for new fixed rate deal costing £1,000 a month from next July due to interest rates having gone up.

‘But it has not gone through yet and we are worried that it will be affected by our house technically not having planning permission at the moment.

‘Nobody seems to know at the moment what will happen. I am not massively stressed because I don’t think it will come to anything.

‘But if not sorted, it could potentially mean we have to go on a variable rate of £1,400 a month with our current provider.’

Countryside Partnerships and its consultants have insisted that proper assessments were carried out and had confirmed there was no health risk at the site

Covid and other delays meant building work was not completed within a three-year time limit with contractors still tarmacking some paths and roads on the estate this week

Residents say their local ward councillor has since told them that he is ’99 per cent certain’ that there is no contamination on the land, and that the application should be granted soon

Car finance company manager David Andrews, 50, who lives with partner Laura Curtis, 37, on the development, said: ‘My father mentioned to me that it used to be a Bombardier train factory here when we placed our deposit.

‘He said that we should make sure that all the clear up work was done on the site. We got assurances from the sales agent that it had all been done.

‘We used a conveyancing solicitor recommended by the developer, and they said that as far as they were aware, the developer had fulfilled their obligations with the council.

‘Now this has all suddenly blown up, and we have been told our homes don’t have planning permission.

‘We are not sure how this affects our buildings insurance if we have a building or structural issue.

‘It is an issue for anyone wanting to sell their home. There is a couple around the corner who have been looking to move for a while, but who is going to want to buy here at the moment?

‘We were thinking of moving somewhere more expensive next year, but it might not be possible if this doesn’t resolve itself.

‘Of course, if it is not sorted out, and the houses have to come down, what will happen to us? Will Countryside support us and put us in a similar sized house in the area.

‘It is a shame because it is a really good neighbourhood here. We had a street party for the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee and we may do the same for the King’s coronation. Everybody looks out for everybody else.’

Retired social worker Monica Chu (pictured), one of many residents on the estate to come from Hong Kong, said: ‘I am wondering why this talk about contamination has come up now’

Due to building delays, the developer had to apply again for planning permission, even though most houses have already been sold

Cleaning company director David Simcox, 43, who lives on the estate with his husband, said residents had been speaking of their ‘anger’ on a community WhatsApp group.

He said: ‘There are 162 residents on the WhatsApp group and everyone is concerned. We are all worried about this issue creating the wrong impression about the development.’

Mr Simcox released a statement on behalf of fellow residents in the WhatsApp group, saying they felt ‘let down’ by the council decision to defer granting the new planning consent.

It added: ‘We have been visited by our local councillor, Anthony Critchley, who stated that the council has conducted thorough checks and is 99% certain that the land is not contaminated.

‘We believe that the planning was deferred due to the council’s desire for extra funding for public services, rather than any genuine concern over contaminated land.

‘As residents, we are extremely disappointed with both Countryside for failing to complete the necessary checks after conducting the work and the council for failing to enforce action before they began building.

‘The decision has left us in a state of turmoil, and to date, we have had no contact or reassurance from either party. We hold them both accountable for the predicament we are all now in.

‘We are also upset and distressed by the negative and false media publicity stating that we are living on potentially contaminated land. This has the potential to devalue our homes due to the bad publicity.’

A 23-year-old technology consultant called Mitch (pictured with his dog Ghost) bought his three bedroom semi-detached house on the site for just over £200,000 two-years-ago

E3P also addressed the council’s concerns about how ‘asbestos impacted soils’ had been handled during excavation works on the site

The statement said residents were confident that the ‘the truth’ would show there was no contamination of the land, and that the issue was down to ‘a political row’ between the developer and the council.

It added: ‘This has brought our close community together even more… We urge both Countryside and Cheshire East Council to work together to resolve this matter as soon as possible, and to ensure that our community is not adversely affected by their actions.

‘In addition, we want to emphasise that we are taking steps towards a resolution and making sure our community has a voice in this matter.

‘We believe that transparency is crucial, and we are committed to ensuring that all parties involved are held accountable for their actions. We remain optimistic that a satisfactory resolution will be reached.’

Planning documents reveal that council officials had raised concerns about ‘a number of identified soil contamination hotspots’ that ‘had not been addressed in the validation reports’ for the new estate.

Environmental consultancy firm E3P, acting on behalf of the developer, addressed the issue in reports submitted to the council in recent days.

It said ‘hotspots’ of areas potentially contaminated with substances such as arsenic, cyanide and lead were under hardstanding plots which would break any ‘potential exposure pathway’ and presented ‘no unacceptable risk to human health.’

E3P also addressed the council’s concerns about how ‘asbestos impacted soils’ had been handled during excavation works on the site, saying it was now able to provide records of ‘asbestos monitoring’.

Planning documents reveal that Cheshire East Council officers did not believe the housing estate posed a risk to ‘human health’, but wanted their own findings to be ‘peer reviewed’

Pictured: A drone view of the new Coppenhall Place housing estate in Crewe, Cheshire, which has been left without planning consent

Its reports added that hardstandings at hotspots represented ‘an adequate barrier’ for any traces of asbestos.

The consultants added that soil vapour monitoring ‘did not identify any unacceptable residual risk to human health’ on the site from naphthalene, a hydrocarbon found in crude oil and tar.

Reports also found that soil and subsoil brought on to the site contained only small amounts of ‘anthropogenic constituent’ residues which were of ‘no consequence’.

Council officials had questioned an apparent delay of 18 days in between taking samples from the site and getting them tested in a laboratory which could have lead to traces of contaminants disappearing.

But E3P claimed in its correspondence that there had actually been no delay in getting the tests done. It said confusion had arisen due to the same date of the start of tests in 2020 being mistakenly put on all test sample jars to create a ‘chain of custody’.

Planning documents reveal that Cheshire East Council officers did not believe the housing estate posed a risk to ‘human health’, but wanted their own findings to be ‘peer reviewed’.

They recommended approval of the retrospective planning application by the council’s Strategic Planning Board, saying it provided a good range of housing,

But councillors last week unanimously voted to defer consideration of the application, pending a peer review and an ‘updated open book viability assessment’.

They argued that they weren’t prepared to risk the health of families already living there by signing it off without being sure about the risks of any contamination.

Councillors last week unanimously voted to defer consideration of the application, pending a peer review and an ‘updated open book viability assessment’

A 23-year-old technology consultant called Mitch who bought his three bedroom semi-detached house on the site for just over £200,000 two-years-ago, said: ‘I never knew anything about contamination when I moved in.

‘It is a bit of a worry because we don’t know what is happening. My salary has gone up dramatically in the last couple of years, so my partner and I were thinking about moving to the Cheshire countryside.

‘But these issues have put a stop to that for now. It is reassuring that they are saying there is no health risk to humans. But I just want it to be sorted out.’

Retired social worker Monica Chu, one of many residents on the estate to come from Hong Kong, said: ‘I am wondering why this talk about contamination has come up now. Why didn’t the council check everything before?

‘The council gave permission for the whole estate to be built, so they should have kept an eye on what was happening. The had a responsibility to check. We pay our council tax, and they have no problem about taking our money.’

Another resident from Hong Kong who only gave his name as Andy, 56, said: ‘We are not very clear about what is happening. We own our house and of course, I am worried that it will affect the value.’

Svetlana Suruceanu, 33, from Moldova who lives on the estate with her lorry driver husband Sergiu, 37, and their 11-year-old daughter, said: ‘It’s just a crazy situation.

Residents accused Cheshire East Council of using the dispute as a way of getting developer Countryside Partnerships to pay over more money for community facilities in the area

Pictured: A view of the new Coppenhall Place housing estate in Crewe, Cheshire

‘Countryside says everything is safe and there is no contamination, but we just don’t know where we stand. We just want it sorted out so we can live a peaceful life and chill.’

Postman Cosmin Vranceanu, 38, from Romania said: ‘Nobody is saying that the soil is polluted. I am 100 per cent certain that the land is clean.

‘I just think that the council is trying to hold the developers to ransom to try and get something out of them.

‘They haven’t actually said that anything is contaminated. But I am just concerned about the uncertainty. Why didn’t the council check before?’

Sofia Marinuc, 35, who is also from Moldova, said: ‘Lots of people are discussing this – but nobody has come up with a solution.

‘When I brought my brand new house, I thought all the documents were OK. Then all of a sudden, we hear there is an issue with the planning permission.’

University academic Dr Marshal Padenga who bought his four bedroom detached house on the site in December 2020 for £250,000, said he had been arguing with the developers about the build quality and design of his home.

Postman Cosmin Vranceanu (pictured), 38, from Romania said: ‘Nobody is saying that the soil is polluted. I am 100 per cent certain that the land is clean’

He said the doors of his downstairs toilet and a walk-in kitchen cupboard were poorly designed and positioned, meaning they caused an obstruction when opened.

Dr Padenga said: ‘There are various design issues, like no fan extractors in the bathroom or en-suite. It means I have to keep the bathroom door open to avoid mould if I have a shower.

‘I am not really surprised to hear about the issues with the tests for contaminated land because it is consistent with the issues that I have been complaining about.’

Cheshire East councillor David Marren argued at the council’s Strategic Planning Board meeting that Countryside had ‘put profit before compliance and assurance’.

Knutsford councillor Stewart Gardiner added: ‘They (Countryside) knew full well that they were required to undertake work relating to the discharge of that [contaminated land] condition before one brick was laid and yet they chose not to do it. That’s not overlooking, that’s not forgetfulness, that is active breach.’

He also criticised the way the council’s planners had dealt with the matter, saying: ‘They should have been served with a breach notice at that time.

‘We, as a council, have failed the people who live in this location; we, as a council, have failed the people who have purchased those houses. There is no way that they (Countryside) should be able to just carry on regardless.’

Knutsford councillor Stewart Gardiner added: ‘They (Countryside) knew full well that they were required to undertake work relating to the discharge of that [contaminated land] condition before one brick was laid’

Cheshire East councillor David Marren argued at the council’s Strategic Planning Board meeting that Countryside had ‘put profit before compliance and assurance’

A Countryside Partnerships spokesperson said: ‘We have been aware of the outstanding planning condition and have consulted and been working with both council officers and the Environmental Protection department to address it, submitting a retrospective planning application that was recommended for approval.

‘Our priority is to resolve this issue for our residents and customers. We acknowledge the Planning Committee’s comments and will work with all necessary bodies with a view to achieving full planning approval for this site as quickly as possible.’

Countryside Partnerships chief executive Iain McPherson announced in January that it had parted company with its chief executive Iain McPherson ‘by mutual agreement’ after its revenue had dropped by a third.

A spokesperson for Cheshire East Council said she was unable to comment further.

Source: Read Full Article