New bid for airport car park
PLANS for an 800-space car park for Manchester Airport would help areas of Macclesfield that have poor public transport to the holiday hub, a meeting heard.
But at a Cheshire East Council northern planning committee members also challenged airport bosses to prove the car park - which would be in the borough’s green belt - was really needed.
A planning application bidding to get permission for a site at Moss Lane, Styal, has been submitted and is similar to one refused by the then Macclesfield Borough Council in 2006.
This time round members voted to defer the proposals, saying a fuller explanation of why the new park was needed should be given.
It was also said suitable alternative sites should be looked at.
Councillor Andrew Gregory, for Sutton, said: “For me it is a disappointment that given this council’s commitment to [tackling] climate change that we are in a position where we are looking like considering granting an application that will result in loss of green belt and more use of cars.
“I went for a walk in that area last Sunday and you are just struck by how important that whole area is around Styal and the massive impact and encroachment the airport has on that area.”
Coun Brian Puddicombe, for Macclesfield South, admitted there are a lack of public transport links to the airport from his ward - meaning he relies on the car when going on holiday.
“If there was a train option from Macclesfield I would almost certainly take it,” he added.
Andrew Murray, representing the airport, told councillors that the scheme is ‘wholly in line with policy’ - and it would be built on the last piece of the airport’s operational area in Cheshire East.
“It is pertinent that there have been no local objections to this application,” he added.
“This is largely in part due to the constant dialogue that we have with those local communities.”
The airport wants the new car park to reduce the number of ‘kiss and fly’ and taxi passenger drop-offs - which currently make up 52 per cent of passenger journeys to the airport.
It is claimed a recent reduction in third-party parking provision and a lack of 24-hour public transport links meant that the new car parking facility was needed.
The 2006 refusal was given for eight reasons - including the suggestion that the car park would encourage more people to drive to and from the airport, rather than use public transport.