Community leaders have hit out at council bosses after they signed off plans to allow hundreds of homes to built on the greenbelt.

Council bosses have approved the proposals which are contained in the Local Plan which will now have to go before the planning inspectorate for final approval.

Representatives from communities around the town turned out at meetings on the plan, which will dictate where new housing and infrastructure can be built until 2030 and beyond.

The plan sets out proposals to allow 300 homes to be built on green belt land in south-west Macclesfield now and more after 2030.

One hundred and fifty homes could be built at Gaw End Lane and the plan also allows for 250 homes to be built at the Fence Avenue site owned by King’s School, although the boundary has changed.

But the decision came after objection from community leaders. At a strategic planning board meeting, Coun Carolyn Andrew, Macclesfield West and Ivy, said: “When I saw the desecration of the green belt I was horrified.

“I know we are required to identify safeguarded land to meet long term development needs but we should aim for all brownfield sites to be developed before any green belt.” Peter Yates, Sutton resident and former chief planning officer, told the meeting most of the objections made during a recent consultation were over the Macclesfield green belt.

He said: “Cheshire East has decided to roll back the green belt in north Cheshire at all costs.” Eileen Furr, representing the Land East of Fence Avenue group, said the group sees no need to roll back the green belt.

Coun Ken Edwards, who represents Macclesfield Central ward, backed making land available for development in the south-west, but said he backed the campaign against the Fence Avenue plans.

He said that he was unhappy that there would be less green belt land made available for development after 2030 in the south west of Macclesfield, but he added: “Macclesfield needs to grow. If land in the south Macclesfield is released we could have some decent connectivity in this area.”

Coun Brendan Murphy proposed removing sites from the plan at the meeting, each time seconded by coun David Brickhill – but members refused to back the proposals.

Adrian Fisher, chief planning officer, said the it was the right time to review the green belt and that sites have been considered on their merits.

Coun David Brown, deputy leader of the council, said:  “A finalised plan is our best protection against unwanted unplanned development.”