Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors T Dean, J Smith and F Wilson.

Councillor L Braithwaite attended as a substitute for Councillor Wilson and Councillor S Edgar attended as a substitute for Councillor Dean.

To provide an opportunity for Members and Officers to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests, other registerable interests, and non-registerable interests in any item on the agenda and for Members to declare if they have a pre-determination in respect of any item on the agenda.

In the interests of openness Councillor D Jefferey declared that Councillor J Newell and Mr S Redgard two of the public speakers on application 23/0657M are known to him and that he had received a telephone call from a supporter for application 23/0657M, who had been directed to him from the applicant, McCarthy and Stone Retirement Lifestyles Ltd, but that he had not discussed or pre-determined the application.

Councillor D Jefferay declared on behalf of the Committee, that additional information relating to application 23/0657M had been received from Mr S Redgard, one of the public speakers on this item.

To approve the Minutes of the meeting held on 21^st August 2024 as a correct record.

That the minutes of the previous meeting held on 21^st August 2024 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

A total period of 5 minutes is allocated for each of the planning applications for the following:

·         Ward Councillors who are not members of the Planning Committee

·         The relevant Town/Parish Council

A period of 3 minutes is allocated for each of the planning applications for the following individuals/groups:

• Members who are not members of the planning committee and are not the Ward Member
• Objectors
• Supporters
• Applicants

That the public speaking procedure be noted.

To consider the above planning application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Councillor Mick Warren (Ward Member), Mr J Harness (Objector) and Mr C Jones (Agent) attended the meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED:

That for the reasons set out in the report the application be REFUSED for the following reasons: 

1. Due to the size, scale, bulk, siting and orientation of the proposed development it results in the overdevelopment of a heavily constrained site. The three-storey form, singular large massing and volume is considered to be visually prominent and overbearing in the wider area from Jodrell Street, Pearson Street and Swettenham Street vistas in particular in comparison to that insitu. The built form including hard-landscaping to external amenity space ratio does not reflect themes of similar residential developments in the area, nor the quantum of built development proposed and future needs of occupants, visitors and staff regarding provision of adequately proportioned and well-positioned, on-site external amenity space. The mitigatory 3.5m timber screening for external plant to the north of the site would be prominent and unsightly and be detrimental to the character of the site and immediate area visible from Swettenham Street and Goodall Street. Dues to the scale of the development it fails to provide for 1no. ambulance/drop-off/pick-up bay to serve the development which includes specialist care for all ages including the elderly/older persons. The development is considered to be contrary to policies and guidance SD1, SD2, SE1, SE2 and SE4 of the Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy 2017, GEN1, ENV5, HOU2, HOU10 and INF3 of the Site Allocations and Development Policies Document 2022, the Cheshire East Design Guide SPD and Housing SPD.

2. The development is considered to result in overbearing impacts and loss of  privacy to rear habitable rooms and external amenity/garden areas of existing properties on Swettenham Street and Pearson Street due to the three-storey scale, siting and orientation of the proposed new building. The development is considered to be contrary to policies and guidance: SE12 of the Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy 2017, ENV15, HOU2, HOU10, HOU12 and HOU13 of the Site Allocations and Development Policies Document 2022 and the Cheshire East Design Guide SPD.

3. There is insufficient information to ascertain the impact of the development on off-site trees. The proposals are considered to be contrary to policies SD1, SD2 and SE5 of Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy 2017 and ENV6 of the Site Allocations and Development Policies Document 2022.

In the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add Conditions and/or Informatives or reasons for approval prior to the decision being issued, the Head of Planning has delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chair of the Northern Planning Committee, provided that the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.

During consideration of this item Councillor Mannion declared that he was a member of the Cheshire Fire and Rescue Service and that he had followed the Grenfell Tower  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

To consider the above planning application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(Councillor Mark Goldsmith (Ward Member), Councillor Jon Newell (on behalf of Wilmslow Town Council), Mr Stuart Redgard (Objector) and Chris Butt (Agent) attended the meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED:

That contrary to Officers’ recommendation, for approval, the application be REFUSED as the proposals would not comply with policy SC5 due to the lack of the provision of on-site affordable housing.

In the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add Conditions and/or Informatives or reasons for approval prior to the decision being issued, the Head of Planning has delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chair of the Northern Planning Committee, provided that the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.

The Committee adjourned for a short break.

To consider the above planning application.

Consideration was given to the above application.

(A statement was read out of behalf of Councillor Craig Browne (Ward Member) who was unable to attend the meeting and Councillor Vince Fogharty (on behalf of Alderley Edge Parish Council) and Brian Spencer (Applicant) attended the meeting and spoke in respect of the application).

RESOLVED:

That for the reasons set out in the report the application be APPROVED subject to the completion of a S106 Agreement to secure the following:

• A financial contribution of £95,241.44 for the provision of play and amenity (POS), outdoor sports (ROS), allotments and green infrastructure (GI);

• A financial contribution of £246,500 be spent towards the provision of off-site affordable housing.

And the following conditions:

1.             3-year Time Limit

2.             Development in accord with approved plans

3.             Material samples to be submitted

4.             Construction Management Plan (highways) to be submitted

5.             Method statement required for construction of car park (trees)

6.             Submission of existing and proposed levels 

7.             Bird nesting season avoidance

8.             Biodiversity enhancement scheme to be submitted

9.             Materials to be stored on pallets for the protection of hedgehogs

10.          Landscaping scheme to be submitted

11.          Landscaping details and maintenance to be submitted

12.          Boundary treatment plan to be submitted

13.          Drainage scheme to be submitted prior to commencement

14.          Contamination risk assessments to be submitted

15.          Verification and remediation (contamination) to be submitted 

16.          Testing of soil to be imported

17.          Reporting of unexpected contamination

18.          Details of 10% energy efficiency/generation to be submitted

In the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add Conditions and/or Informatives or reasons for approval prior to the decision being issued, the Head of Planning has delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chair of the Northern Planning Committee, provided that the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.

Councillor Mannion asked that the applicant provide assurance to the Committee, that the road surface of Horseshoe Lane will be maintained.