29th August 2025
How it looked one year ago –
The controversy over the condition of the Padden Brook site has escalated, with campaigners accusing Stockport Council of failing to use its legal powers to deal with what they describe as a long-term environmental blight.
In a direct challenge to the council’s Monitoring Officer, Vicki Bates, local campaigner Sheila Oliver questioned why a Section 215 notice has not been issued. Mrs Oliver pointed to the site’s “graffiti-covered, derelict butty van” and “accumulated debris” as evidence that the land has clearly fallen below acceptable standards.
She told the Romiley Gazette:
“Accumulated rubbish, fly-tipping, and a derelict van are exactly the kind of conditions Section 215 was designed to tackle. The law says these powers should be used when land or property is visibly neglected to a degree that drags down the neighbourhood — and this site ticks every box.”
Section 215 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 gives local planning authorities the power to require landowners to clean up land or buildings when their state harms the amenity of the area. Campaigners argue that the law is clear, but that the council is refusing to use it.
In her official response, Mrs Bates stated that enforcement officers had visited the site “on multiple occasions” but concluded that the legal test had not been met. She stressed that the council “regularly uses Section 215 where circumstances dictate, but service is not warranted in this case.”
Residents say this refusal has only fuelled anger. Campaigners now warn that the council is gaining “quite a reputation” for inaction, and have pledged to keep pressing for enforcement.
The row raises wider questions about how Stockport Council interprets its discretionary powers, and whether communities have any real recourse when they believe their environment is being neglected.
