Democratic Services

Town Hall, Stockport SK1 3XE

Contact: Democratic Services on 0161 474 3216
Email: democratic.services@stockport.gov.uk

Area Governance
AGENDA
CHEADLE AREA COMMITTEE
Ladybridge Park Residents
Club,
Edenbridge Road,
Cheadle Hulme

Meeting: Tuesday, 11 August, 2015

Tea: 5.00 pm
Business: 6.00 pm
Introductions

1. MINUTES

(Pages 6 - 12)

To approve as a correct record and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 14 July 2015.
2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Councillors and officers to declare any interests which they have in any of the items on the
agenda for the meeting.
3. URGENT DECISIONS
To report any urgent action taken under the Constitution since the last meeting of the
Committee.
4. PROGRESS ON AREA COMMITTEE DECISIONS

(Pages 13 - 17)

To consider a report of the Democratic Services Manager.

The report provides an update on progress since the last meeting on decisions taken by
the Area Committee and details the current position on ward flexibility funding. The report
also includes the current position on the ward delegated budgets.
The Area Committee is recommended to note the report.
Officer contact: David Clee on 0161 474 3137 or email: david.clee@stockport.gov.uk

Web: www.stockport.gov.uk/democracy or scan the QR Code*

5. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
(i)

Chair's Announcements
To receive any announcements from the Chair about local community events or
issues.

(ii)

Public Question Time

Members of the public are invited to put questions to the Chair of the Area
Committee on any matters within the powers and duties of the Area Committee,
subject to the exclusions set out in the Code of Practice (Questions must be
submitted prior to the commencement of the meeting on the cards provided. These
are available the meeting. You can also submit via the Councils website at
www.stockport.gov.uk/publicquestions.

(iii)

Public Realm
The local Public Realm Officer will attend the meeting to provide an update on
matters raised at the last committee meetings. Councillors and Members of the
public are invited to raise issues affecting local environmental quality.

(iv)

Petitions
To receive petitions from members of the public and community groups.

(v)

Open Forum
In accordance with the Code of Practice no organisation has indicated that they
wished to address the Area Committee as part of the Open Forum arrangements.

(vi)

Ward Flexibility Funding

To consider any applications for Ward Flexibility Funding or to receive feedback
from organisations who have received funding.
Non-Executive Business

6. DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS

(Page 18)

To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration
(a) To consider the development applications where members of the public have
attended the meeting in order to speak or hear the Area Committees deliberations.
(b) To consider the remaining development applications.
(c) To consider consultations (if any) received by the Corporate Director for Place
Management and Regeneration on any planning issues relevant to the Cheadle area.
The following development applications will be considered by the Area Committee:-

(i)

DC057891 - 14 Lynton Vale Avenue, Gatley

(Pages 19 - 31)

Outline application including details of access and scale for the erection of single
dwelling in garden to the rear of 14 Lynton Vale Avenue (Amended Description)
The Area Committee is recommended to grant planning permission.
(ii)

DC58373 - Cross Keys Hotel, 10 Adswood Road, Cheadle Hulme (Pages 32 58)
Affordable housing scheme of 14 units comprising 4 number 3 bedroom 5 person
and 10 number 2 bedroom 4 person houses
The Area Committee is requested to recommend the Planning and Highways
Regulation Committee to grant planning permission.

(iii)

DC058609 - South Manchester Sports Club, St Ann's Road North, Heald

Green
(Pages 59 - 77)
Removal of existing 2 no. 7 a side short grass football pitches and replacement
with 3 no. 5 a side 3G pitches with associated floodlighting and fencing.
The Area Committee is recommended to grant planning permission.
Officer Contact: Jim Seymour on 0161 474 3656 or email:
jim.seymour@stockport.gov.uk

7. PLANNING APPEALS, ENFORCEMENT APPEALS AND NOTICES

(Pages 78 - 80)

To consider a report of the Deputy Chief Executive

The report summarises recent appeal decisions, current planning appeals and
enforcement activity within the area represented by the Cheadle Area Committee.
The Area Committee is recommended to note the report.
Officer contact: Joy Morton on 0161 474 3217 or email: joy.morton@stockport.gov.uk
8. REVIEW OF OUTCOMES TOUR MARCH 2015

(Pages 81 - 93)

To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Place Management & Regeneration.
The report outlines the findings of the review of outcomes tour undertaken on Friday 6th
March 2015.
The Area Committee is recommended to comment on and note the report.
Officer contact: Kevin Brooks on 474 4905 or email: kevin.brooks@stockport.gov.uk

Executive Business
9. PARK EVENT APPLICATION - BRUNTWOOD PARK (NORTH REGION BMX CLUB
CHAMPIONSHIP) ON 27 SEPTEMBER 2015
(Pages 94 - 97)
To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration
The report considers an application from Bruntwood Park BMX Club to host the North
Region BMX Club Championships on 27 September 2015.
The Area Committee is recommended to approve the application, subject to the
production of appropriate papers and event plans.
Officer Contact: Iain Bate on 0161 474 4421 or email: iain.bate@stockport.gov.uk
10. UNDERPASS AT STOCKPORT RAILWAY STATION
This item has been placed on the agenda at the request of the Chair
DATE OF NEXT MEETING
Tuesday, 29 September 2015

Eamonn Boylan
Chief Executive
Town Hall
Stockport
Monday, 3 August 2015

Any person wishing to photograph, film or audio-record a public meeting are requested to
inform Democratic Services in order that necessary arrangements can be made for the
meeting.
If you require a copy of the agenda or a particular report(s) by e mail or in large print,
Braille or audio, please contact the above person for further details. A minicom facility is
available on 0161 474 3128.
A loop system is available in the meeting rooms in the Town Hall. Please contact the Town
Hall Reception on 0161 474 3251 for further details.

* Smartphone users can download a QR reader application onto their phone for free. When they see a QR code they
can use the phones camera to scan it and are directed automatically to the related web information. The cost of using
a QR code is dependent on your mobile phone contract or pre-paid bundle. For further information on costs please
contact your mobile provider.

CHEADLE AREA COMMITTEE

Meeting: 14 July 2015
At: 6.00 pm
PRESENT
Councillor Peter Burns (Chair) in the chair; Councillor Adrian Nottingham (Vice-Chair);
Councillors Graham Greenhalgh, Keith Holloway, Sylvia Humphreys, John Pantall,
Paul Porgess, Iain Roberts and June Somekh.
1. MINUTES
The Minutes (copies of which had been circulated) of the meeting held on 9 June 2015
were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.
2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
No declarations of interest were made.
3. URGENT DECISIONS
No urgent decisions were reported.
4. PROGRESS ON AREA COMMITTEE DECISIONS
A representative of the Democratic Services Manager submitted a report (copies of which
had been circulated) updating the Area Committee on progress since the last meeting on
decisions taken by the Area Committee and the current position on Ward Flexibility
Funding. The report also included the current position on the ward delegated budgets.
RESOLVED That the report be noted.
5. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
(i)

Chair's Announcements

The Chair reported on the success of the recent summer festivals held in the Cheadle
area.
(ii)

Public Question Time

Members of the public were invited to submit questions on any matters within the powers
and duties of the Area Committee, subject to the exclusions set out in the Code of
Practice.
One question had been submitted in advance of the meeting by a member of the public
who was not present at the meeting. The Chair confirmed that, in accordance with the
Code of Practice, a written response would be provided to the questioner.

Cheadle Area Committee - 14 July 2015

(iii)

Public Realm

In the absence of the Public Realm Inspector, the Area Committee received a note on current public
realm issues within the area represented by the Area Committee.
With regard to annual Highway Safety Inspections, the Area Committee was advised of the
following information:Cheadle and Gatley Ward inspections were currently taking place on both sides of the road in the
vicinity of Styal Road and Park Road, and would then take place on Springfield Road and the
Lakes estate.
Cheadle Hulme North Ward inspections were currently taking place on on Twining Brook Road
then in the St. Davids Road area.
Heald Green Ward inspections were currently taking place on Oakdale Road and Eastleigh Road,
and would then take place on East Avenue and Branksome Drive.
With regard to the Public Realm Update, the Area Committee was advised that the Public Realm
Inspector had received 155 customer enquiries relating to blocked gullies, defects in the highway,
overgrown vegetation, graffiti and domestic waste being presented incorrectly. The Community
Payback scheme were scheduled to work across the area of the Area Committee during the week
commencing 20 July 2015 and a number of sites had been identified for litter clearance and/or
removal of vegetation.
The following comments were made/issues raised:

A van parked on Outwood Drive, Heald Green had meant that the parking
restrictions on Outwood Drive had been unable to be completed.
It was not always necessary for instances of overgrown vegetation to be reported
as certain areas were affected each year.
The police would take action against vehicles which were not licensed and insured,
not just abandoned vehicles.

RESOLVED That the report be noted.

(iv)

Petitions

No petitions were submitted.

(v)

Open Forum

In accordance with the Code of Practice, no organisation had indicated that they wished to
address the Area Committee as part of the Open Forum arrangements.
(vi)

Ward Flexibility Funding

There were no funding applications to consider.

Cheadle Area Committee - 14 July 2015

6. DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS
Development applications were submitted.
(NOTE: Full details of the decisions including conditions and reasons for granting or
refusing planning permission and imposing conditions are given in the schedule of plans.
The Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration is authorised to
determine conditions and reasons and they are not therefore referred to in committee
minutes unless the committee makes a specific decision on a condition or reason. In order
to reduce printing costs and preserve natural resources, the schedule of plans is not
reproduced within these minutes. A copy of the schedule of plans is available on the
councils website at www.stockport.gov.uk/planningdecisions. Copies of the schedule of
plans, or any part thereof, may be obtained from the Services to Place Directorate upon
payment of the Councils reasonable charges).
The Chair outlined the procedure approved by the Council for public speaking on planning
applications.
(i)

DC58710 - Bruntwood Hall, Bruntwood Park, Cheadle

In respect of plan no. 58710 for the refurbishment of Bruntwood Hall to create a 22 room
luxury hotel, with associated bars and restaurant areas, external terrace and spa at ground
floor and courtyard extension to create additional circulation space at Bruntwood Hall,
Bruntwood Park, Cheadle
a member of the public spoke against the application
and
a representative of the application spoke in support of the application
It was then
RESOLVED (1) That the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration
be authorised to determine the application, subject to the completion of the Section 106
Agreement and the relevant commuted sum arrangements.
(2) That the Area Committee requests that an informative be imposed advising the hotel
operator that all negotiations with regard to any land and property transactions must
protect the rights of park users and that the hotel business should operate in a manner
which is respectful of all other park users and existing businesses at all times.
(3) That the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration be requested to
investigate whether part of the store for grounds maintenance equipment could be reduced
in size through the use of barriers and the remaining area used for car parking for users of
the hotel.

Cheadle Area Committee - 14 July 2015

(ii)

DC056819 - 9 Rodmill Drive, Gatley

In respect of the erection of one detached dwelling (resubmission of application

DC053379) at 9 Rodmill Drive, Gatley
a member of the public spoke against the application
It was then
RESOLVED That planning permission be refused for the reasons detailed in the report.
(iii)

DC057948 - 22 Cranston Grove, Gatley

In respect of plan no. 57948 for a change of use to a separate dwelling at 22 Cranston
Grove, Gatley
a member of the public spoke against the application
and
a representative of the applicant spoke in support of the application
It was then
RESOLVED That temporary planning permission be granted for a period of one year.
(iv)

DC058745 - 12 Mill Lane, Cheadle Hulme

In respect of plan no. 58745 for proposed adaptations and extensions to an existing
detached dwelling at 12 Mill Lane, Cheadle Hulme
a representative of the applicant spoke in support of the application
It was then
RESOLVED That the Planning and Highways Regulation Committee be recommended
to grant planning permission.
7. PLANNING APPEALS, ENFORCEMENT APPEALS AND ENFORCEMENT NOTICES
A representative of the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration
submitted a report of the Deputy Chief Executive (copies of which had been circulated)
listing any outstanding or recently determined planning appeals and enforcements within
the area represented by the Cheadle Area Committee.
RESOLVED That the report be noted.

Cheadle Area Committee - 14 July 2015

8. ABNEY HALL PARK CAFE
A representative of the Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services submitted a
report (copies of which had been circulated) regarding the proposed granting of a lease of
the pavilion to allow Abney Project Community Interest Company (C.I.C.) to continue to
operate a tea room with ancillary retail sales in Abney Park.
RESOLVED (1) That the Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services be
advised that the Area Committee supports the proposal to grant a further lease to the
Abney Project C.I.C. for a term of one year to continue to operate a tea room with small
ancillary retail sales in Abney Park.
(2) That the operation be further monitored during this period to ensure it provides a
positive contribution to the visitor experience at Abney Park with the C.I.C fulfilling its
stated aims of contributing to the community and the C.I.C be advised to colloborate with
Cheadle Civic Society in this regard.
9. BARCHESTON ROAD AND BROADWAY, CHEADLE - NO WAITING AT ANY TIME
TRAFFIC REGULATION ORDER
A representative of the Democratic Services Manager submitted a report of the Corporate
Director for Place Management and Regeneration (copies of which had been circulated)
regarding the findings of an investigation into parking concerns at the junction of
Barcheston Road and Broadway, Cheadle.
RESOLVED (1) The Area Committee was minded to approve the following No Waiting At
Any Time Traffic Regulation Order on Barcheston Road and Broadway, Cheadle at an
approximate cost of 525 to be funded from the Area Committees Delegated Budget
(Cheadle and Gatley Ward allocation):Proposed No Waiting at Any Time
Broadway, Cheadle - south side, from a point 10m west of the westerly kerbline of
Barcheston Road to a point 10m east of the easterly kerb line on Barcheston Road.
Barcheston Road, Cheadle - both sides, from the southerly kerb line of Broadway for a
distance of 15m in a southerly direction.
(2) That approval be given to the statutory legal advertising of the Traffic Regulation Order
and, subject to no objections being received within twenty one days from the
advertisement date, the Order be made.
10. COMMUTED SUMS FOR PLAY
A representative of the Democratic Services Manager submitted a report of the Corporate
Director for Place Management and Regeneration (copies of which had been circulated)
inviting the Area Committee to consider proposals for the allocation of commuted sums
received from housing developers for play provision.

Cheadle Area Committee - 14 July 2015

RESOLVED (1) That the following commuted sums be allocated to the play areas
indicated: 10,795.12 from development no.1143 (DC 049456, Wentworth Gardens, Old Wool
Lane) for future play improvements at Bruntwood Park.
699.24 from development no.1150 (DC 054551, 2 Ashfield Road, Cheadle) for future
play improvements at Diamond Jubilee Play Area (Cheadle Recreation Ground)
167.31 from development no.1151 (DC 054737, 10 Old Rectory Gardens, Cheadle) for
future play improvements at Diamond Jubilee Play Area (Cheadle Recreation Ground).
334.62 from development no.1157 (DC 054954, 153 Styal Road, Heald Green) for
future play improvements at Gatley Recreation Ground.
-836.55 from development no.1168 (DC 054309, Land off Orchard Gardens, Gatley) for
future play improvements at Gatley Recreation Ground.
-836.55 from development no.1173 (DC 055115, 4 Grange Park Road, Cheadle) for
future play improvements at Bruntwood Park.
(2) That approval be given to the reallocation of 2,053.86 that had previously been
allocated to Brookfield Recreation Ground as follows:-213.45 from development no.835 (4-10 Chapel Road) for future play improvements at
Bruntwood Park.
-334.62 from development no.908 (22 High Street) for future play improvements at
Bruntwood Park.
-669.24 from development no.912 (Bulkley Road) for future play improvements at
Diamond Jubilee Play Area (Cheadle Recreation Ground).
-334.62 from development no.935 (Queen Street) for future play improvements at
Diamond Jubilee Play Area (Cheadle Recreation Ground)..
-501.93 from development no.968 (Brookfield Road) for future play improvements at
Bruntwood Park.
11. PARK EVENT APPLICATION - MAKERS' MARKETS IN CHEADLE GREEN ON 5
SEPTEMBER, 3 OCTOBER, 7 NOVEMBER 2015
A representative of the Democratic Services Manager submitted a report of the Corporate
Director for Place Management and Regeneration (copies of which had been circulated)
regarding an event application from Cheadle Civic Society to hold a Makers Market on
Cheadle Green on 5 September, 3 October and 7 November 2015.
RESOLVED That the application from Cheadle Civic Society to hold a Makers Market
on Cheadle Green on 5 September, 3 October and 7 November 2015 be approved,
subject to the production of appropriate papers and obtaining a Temporary Event Notice
and Street Collection Permit.

Cheadle Area Committee - 14 July 2015

12. PARK EVENT APPLICATION - 'BARK IN THE PARK' IN ABNEY PARK ON 20
SEPTEMBER 2015
A representative of the Democratic Services Manager submitted a report of the Corporate
Director for Place Management and Regeneration (copies of which had been circulated)
regarding an event application from Lisa Graham of Muttley Crew Dog Walking and Pet
Services to hold a Community Fun Day and dog show on 20 September 2015.
RESOLVED That the application from Lisa Graham of Muttley Crew Dog Walking and
Pet Services to hold a Community Fun Day and Dog Show on 20 September 2015 be
approved, subject to the production of appropriate papers and event plans, to include:- an agreed traffic/parking management plan
- that the organisers ensure all litter is removed from the event site
- that no roadside flyposting is undertaken to advertise the event.
The meeting closed at 7.58 pm

CHEADLE AREA COMMITTEE

Date: 11 August 2015

PROGRESS ON AREA COMMITTEE DECISIONS
Report of the Democratic Services Manager
WARD FLEXIBILITY FUNDING

The amounts available to be spent in 2015/16, incorporating the monies carried forward and a budget of 3,000 per ward for 2015/16, are
as follows:Cheadle and Gatley

Cheadle Hulme North

Funding awarded in
2014/15

Funding awarded in 2014/15

Chelwood Foodbank Plus

150

Cheadle Village
Partnership

500

Manchester Rugby Club

250

Heald Green

Funding awarded in 2014/15

Chelwood Foodbank Plus

250

Chelwood Foodbank Plus

Cheadle Village Partnership

500

St. Anns Road North Allotment 450

Association

Manchester Rugby Club

250

St Anns Road North

Allotment Association

50

St. Anns Road North

Allotment Association

450

Budget carried forward

11,095.30

Budget carried forward

5,404.25

All Hallows Church Youth

Group

452.92

Cheadle Golf Club

250
Cheadle Golf Club

250

100

Budget carried forward

13,549.60

Cheadle Golf Club

200

All Hallows Church Youth

Group

8,154.25

500

12, 892.38

16,349.60

Manchester Road,
Cheadle

MJ
11/03/2014

Cycle Links to
Gatley Station

MJ
23/09/14
Stanley Road,
Heald Green
AV
10/03/2015

OPERATIVE
DATE

COMMENTS
AWAITING
OPS. DATE

OBJECTIONS?
Y/N

ON ADVERT

WITH LEGAL

CALLED IN?
Y/N

SCHEME

WITH TRAFFIC
SERVICES

Appendix A - Resume Of Issues Progress Report

Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration submitted a

report seeking the comments of the Area Committee regarding the proposed
Manchester Road cycle route following the successful bid for funding from
the Department for Transport, via the Cycle City Ambition Grant. The cost of
the scheme was approximately 450,000 which would be included in the
2014/15 Highways Capital Programme. Scheme on site est 12 week
construction programme. Civil works substantially complete by end of
October, works over M60 bridge delayed due to Highways Agency request
for additional info.
Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration
submitted a report seeking the Area Committees comments regarding the proposed
cycle links to Gatley Railway Station following the successful bid for funding from
the Department for Transport via the Cycle City Ambition
Grant to provide cycle safety improvements on/off the highway within the Borough.
Scheme on site.
Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration outlining the
results of vehicle speed data obtained arising from an investigation into the
speed of vehicles using Stanley Road, Heald Green close to the entrance to
the Seashell Trust. Exec Cllr has approved, decision published. Poles and
electricity installed; VAS signs to be erected soon.

Councillor Lane,
Cheadle

Democratic Services Manager submitted a report regarding the findings of

an investigation into concerns regarding parking on residential roads
adjacent to a local clinic in the vicinity of Councillor Lane, Cheadle.
Operative from 1 September 2015.

AV
04/15
Church
Road/Stonepail
Road, Gatley

AV

Democratic Services Manager submitted a report of the Corporate Director

for Place Management and Regeneration regarding the outcome of an
investigation into parking at the junction of Church Road and Stonepail
Road, Gatley. On advert. Operative from 24th August 2015.

04/15
Argyll Road,
Cheadle
AV
06/15
Waldon Avene,
Cheadle
AV
06/15
Barcheston Road
and Broadway
Cheadle
EP
7/15

Democratic Services Manager submitted a report of the Corporate Director

for Place Management and Regeneration regarding the findings of an
investigation into parking concerns at the junction of Argyll Road and
Councillor Lane, Cheadle. On advert.
Democratic Services Manager submitted a report of the Corporate Director
for Place Management and Regeneration setting out the findings of a
consultation exercise and seeking approval to the introduction of a Traffic
Regulation Order on Waldon Avenue and Wilmslow Road, Cheadle. On
advert.
A representative of the Democratic Services Manager submitted a report of
the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration (copies of
which had been circulated) regarding the findings of an investigation into
parking concerns at the junction of Barcheston Road and Broadway,
Cheadle. Information sent to Legal to draft notices for advertising.

Cheadle Delegated Budget

Ward

Balance brought
forward from
2013/14)

Budget 2014/15

Total Available

Approved and
Estimated
Schemes

Available Balance

Cheadle and
Gatley

20,910

10,750

31,660

700

30,960

Cheadle Hulme
North

3,990

10,750

14,740

1,500

13,240

Heald Green

26,260

10,750

37,010

37,010

Total

51,160

32,250

83,410

2,200

81,210

Cheadle Committee
11 August 2015
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS
Report of the Corporate Director Place
Item 1: DC057891
SITE ADDRESS: 14 LYNTON VALE AVENUE, GATLEY, CHEADLE, SK8 4DF
PROPOSAL: Outline application including details of access and scale for the
erection of single dwelling in garden to the rear of 14 Lynton Vale
Avenue.(AMENDED DESCRIPTION)
Item 2: DC058373
SITE ADDRESS: CROSS KEYS HOTEL, 10 ADSWOOD ROAD, CHEADLE
HULME, CHEADLE, SK8 5QA.
PROPOSAL: Affordable Housing scheme of 14 units comprising 4 number 3
bedroom 5 person and 10 number 2 bedroom 4 person houses.
Item 3: DC058604
SITE ADDRESS: South Manchester Sports club, St Anns road North, Heald Green,
Stockport, SK8 4RZ
PROPOSAL: Removal of existing 2 no. 7 a side short grass football pitches and
replacement with 3 no. 5 a side 3G pitches with associated floodlighting and fencing.

INFORMATION
These applications need to be considered against the provisions of the Human
Rights Act 1998. Under Article 6, the applicants [and those third parties, including
local residents, who have made representations] have the right to a fair hearing and
to this end the Committee must give full consideration to their comments.
Article 8 and Protocol 1 Article 1 confer(s) a right of respect for a persons home,
other land and business assets. In taking account of all material considerations,
including Council policy as set out in the Unitary Development Plan, the Head of
Development and Control has concluded that some rights conferred by these Articles
on the applicant(s)/objectors/residents and other occupiers and owners of nearby
land that might be affected may be interfered with but that that interference is in
accordance with the law and justified by being in the public interest and on the basis
of the planning merits of the development proposal. He believes that any restriction
on these rights posed by approval of the application is proportionate to the wider
benefits of approval and that such a decision falls within the margin of discretion
afforded to the Council under the Town and Country Planning Acts.
This Copyright has been made by or with the authority of SMBC pursuant to section
47 of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 (the Act). Unless the Act
provides the prior permission of the copyright owner. (Copyright (Material Open to
Public Inspection) (Marking of Copies of Maps) Order 1989 (SI 1989/1099)

Application Reference:
Location:
Proposal:

DC/057891
14 LYNTON VALE AVENUE, GATLEY, CHEADLE, SK8
4DF
Outline application including details of access and scale
for the erection of single dwelling in garden to the rear of
14 Lynton Vale Avenue.(AMENDED DESCRIPTION)

Type of Application:

Outline Planning Permission

Registration Date:
Expiry Date:
Case Officer:

26/02/2015
23/04/2015
Jim Seymour

Applicant:
Agent :

C/O Bailey Dyson Int. Cons. Ltd

C/O Bailey Dyson Int. Cons. Ltd

COMMITTEE STATUS
Delegated application
DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT
Outline application with matters of (1) access and (2) scale submitted for the erection
of a single dwelling. Indicative details of siting and appearance are also included in
the application. The application site relates to the part side/part rear garden area of
no. 14 Lynton Vale Avenue. The proposed plot would be formed predominantly from
the large rear garden to the rear of number 14 Lynton Vale Drive but also including a
narrow slip of land from the side of the property.
In terms of access the site would be given an independent access point off the
turning head of Lynton Vale Avenue. A new driveway, turning facility and parking
space for two vehicles is identified on the plans in the north eastern corner of the
site.
In terms of layout the proposal the proposal identifies a building would be sited
towards the rear boundary with the main body of the house being 5.680 m from the
boundary. The property would extend across the majority of the width of the plot
leaving 1.790m to the eastern boundary and 2.260m to the west boundary. The
dwellings two storey frontage is separated by 22.570m from no. 14 Lynton Vale and
25.230m from no.12 Lynton Vale. The remaining area surrounding the dwelling
would be laid to garden apart from the north eastern corner which is dedicated to
access and parking.
In terms of scale the property is predominantly two storey with a pitched roof and
ridge height of 7.150m.

No 14 Lynton Vale would retain its own rear private garden separated from the new
access via a new fence/wall and its existing access arrangements from the frontage.
The application has been accompanied by an Arboricultural Report. This proposes
that 4 no.existing mature trees on site would be removed to facilitate the
development including a TPOed tree in the north eastern site corner. A replacement
mitigation tree planting plan has been submitted which identifies the layout and
positioning of 7 replacement trees. This does not constitute a landscaping
submission at outline stage but is needed to establish the principle of development at
the site.
SITE AND SURROUNDINGS
The application relates to land to the rear and side of no. 14 Lynton Vale Avenue and
currently forms the garden area to this property. The land is dimensions 527sqm in
area. The site is adjoined to the north by no. 14 and 12 Lynton Vale Avenue, to the
south east by no. 20 Lynton Vale Avenue, to the south by Gatley Hall and to the west
by a Tatton House. The land is relatively level and includes 4 large trees on site
including one near the proposed access point.
POLICY BACKGROUND
The application site is allocated within a Predominantly Residential Area, as defined
on the UDP Proposals Map. The following policies are therefore relevant :Saved UDP policies

EP1.10 : AIRCRAFT NOISE

L1.2 : CHILDRENS PLAY

Core Strategy DPD policies

CS1 : OVERARCHING PRINCIPLES : SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ADDRESSING INEQUALITIES AND CLIMATE CHANGES
SD-1 : CREATING SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES
SD-3 : DELIVERING THE ENERGY OPPORTUNITIES PLAN : NEW
DEVELOPMENT
SD-6 : ADAPTING TO THE IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE
CS2 : HOUSING PROVISION
CS3 : MIX OF HOUSING
CS4 : DISTRIBUTION OF HOUSING
H-1 : DESIGN OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
H-2 : HOUSING PHASING
CS8 : SAFEGUARDING AND IMPROVING THE ENVIRONMENT
SIE-1 : QUALITY PLACES
SIE-2 : PROVISION OF RECREATION AND AMENITY OPEN SPACE IN NEW
DEVELOPMENTS
SIE-3 : PROTECTING, SAFEGUARDING AND ENHANCING THE
ENVIRONMENT
CS9 : TRANSPORT AND DEVELOPMENT
T-1 : TRANSPORT AND DEVELOPMENT

T-2 : PARKING IN DEVELOPMENTS

T-3 : SAFETY AND CAPACITY ON THE HIGHWAY NETWORK

Supplementary Planning Guidance/Documents

RECREATIONAL OPEN SPACE PROVISION AND COMMUTED PAYMENTS

SPG
DESIGN OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SPD
SUSTAINABLE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SPD

National Planning Legislation

THE NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK (NPPF)
PLANNING HISTORY
DC056742 - Outline application for a single detached dwelling to the rear of 14
Lynton Vale Avenue, Gatley. Withdrawn 10/10/14.
NEIGHBOURS VIEWS
The occupiers of 11 nearby properties have been notified in writing of the proposal.
In total 5 letters of objection have been received on the following grounds:
1. The existing trees should be retained on site.
2. The access is not adequate.
3. The proposed access is not safe for pedestrians and vehicles.
4. The section of wall should not be removed its historic and forms part of Gatley
Hall and hence demolish historical features.
5. Ground level of site is higher than adjoining land which makes the impact worse
on neighbours.
6. The proposal is too close to other houses.
7. The proposal will take light form other properties.
8. The proposal is too close to number 20.
9. Any dwelling here should be single storey.
10. The proposal will be detrimental to the traditional village character of the area.
11. The plans are not accurate.
12. The proposal will not provide affordable housing.
13. The proposal will increase noise and disturbance to properties.
14. The proposal will increase traffic in the turning head and along Lynton Vale
Avenue
15. The proposal will negatively impact on family life for existing residents
16. The proposal will destroy a beautiful and peaceful green site.
17. The site is not previously developed land and shouldn't be built on.
18. The proposal contravenes development plan policy and the NPPF.
19. The proposal is overdevelopment.
20. The proposal will resulting in a loss of privacy and amenity for residents.
21. The proposal will generate noise, disturbance and problems during construction.
CONSULTEE RESPONSES

Highways Engineer: The site is situated in a sustainable location having regard to

the Council's assessment criteria and is considered appropriate for residential
development. A development of a single dwelling and associated traffic generation
will not adversely affect the safety and operation of Lynton Vale Avenue and I am
satisfied that an acceptable means of access can be provided. The detailed design
of the access is a matter for a planning condition, alongside conditions covering
driveway formation, parking and cycle parking.
Recommendation: No objections.
Tree Officer: The building footprints predominantly sits within the existing garden
area of the residential property. The development of the residential property shall
have a negative impact on many mature trees or high level specimen tree within the
property of the development or the neighbouring property.
The site design appears to be a high density for the small garden area which will
have a high demand/risk for future tree works and actionable nuisances from the
trees on the site and neighbouring sites and as such should have these issues
considered prior to approval at this level as several trees will either be lost or heavily
pruned losing the amenity levels of the trees.
The main residential access driveway will also require the removal of several
protected trees on site and whilst they are identified as low amenity or in decline the
TPO is there to protect trees in this location in perpetuity and as such this makes the
argument mute. The removal of the trees to create the access will drastically alter
the amenity and aesthetics of the area and open up views across the site at the
proposed new building. The site layout plan does not consider the orientation to
retain as many trees as possible although this is to off-set other planning
requirements thus making a conflict of issues and in fact its current position is the
worst orientation resulting in far too many trees being lost on this site. The Tree
survey report and layout plan previously showed a poor level of replacement
planting/off-setting which clearly goes against council policy to enhance the local
biodiversity with tree planting on all developments, following a further consultation
with the agents a new and improved landscaping has been submitted showing a
increase in design and tree numbers which subject to further alterations would off-set
and in fact enhance the site subject to conditions.
As such there are no arboriculture concerns for this application as long as the
conditions are made to require further information be submitted to allow a more
detailed landscaping design as well as a method statements for construction,
arboriculture impact assessment and additional root protection plans showing the
protection levels and increased replacement trees to off-set the tree loss on the site.
Housing Policy Officer: The development is of such a scale that there is no
requirement for any affordable housing provision.
The site is within 800m of Gatley Large Local Centre and therefore falls within the
first two spatial priority areas for housing location as set out in Policy CS4
(Distribution of Housing) of the Core Strategy.

However, the site appears to be mainly greenfield land currently used as garden land
for an adjacent residential property. Policy CS4 sets out a hierarchy for development
of urban greenfield sites. The first of these is accessible sites not designated as
open space, with the second the use of private residential gardens in accessible
urban locations where proposals respond to the character of the area and maintain
good standards of amenity and privacy for the occupants of existing housing. Given
the Councils continued position of housing under-supply urban greenfield sites need
to be considered as potential development sites, subject to the hierarchy and
sequential approach described in Policy CS4. There are very few sites in the first
level of that hierarchy and therefore garden sites which meet the requirements of
policy are currently acceptable sites for housing development. Consequently,
subject to assessment against other policies relating to design, amenity and privacy,
the proposal meets the requirements of Core Strategy Policy CS4, as well as adding
to the housing numbers and mix in line with Core Policies CS2 and CS3.
ANALYSIS
This outline application requires assessment in respect of the following matters:
1. Landuse
The application site is located within a Predominantly Residential Area as defined on
the UDP Proposals Map. The application site is greenfield land (used as garden
currently but is also allocated within one of the two main spatial priority areas for
residential development, as set out in Core Strategy DPD policy CS4, being within
800m of Gatley Large Local Centre. The site is therefore is acceptable in principle
for housing development and complies with Core Strategy Policy CS4 The proposal
would also add to the housing numbers and mix in the borough in line with the aims
and aspirations of Core Policies CS2 and CS3. (It should be noted that the Council
is currently in a position of housing under-supply, with 3.1 years worth of supply
against a requirement in national policy for 5 years plus a 5% buffer.)
2. Residential amenity
Although submitted in outline the application includes In terms of existing residents
the proposed new dwelling is sited to face approximately in a north (front) and south
(rear) direction and have the primary habitable room windows on the these front and
rear elevations respectively. Adjoining properties to the north have rear windows
facing the site but the proposal provides separation distances to comply with the
Councils standards consisting of >25m (window to window). The adjacent property
to the south east (20 Lynton Vale Avenue) has no habitable windows facing the site
or proposed dwelling and therefore there is no conflict with separation distances in
this respect either. In terms of mass and bulk it should be noted that the proposed
dwelling is 2 storey in height (max 7.15m to ridge) and is slightly lower than the
properties on the frontage of Lynton Vale Avenue. The proposal is sited relatively
close to boundaries to the south and west however 5.9m is retained to the rear
boundary where the proposal would face onto part of a large garden area belonging
to Gatley Hall. There is substantial mature screen vegetation in place in the control
of the neighbouring property along this boundary which offers protection from the
proposal. The proposal is therewill not be overbearing on adjacent properties in
terms of its overall scale and siting. The existing property at no. 14 would retain
adequate amenity space to the rear similar in amount to the the other properties

adjacent.
The proposal would introduce a residential property into this location with the
associated noise and disturbance. Whilst representing a change for adjoining
residents is a development of a single dwelling only and it would be difficult to argue
that the impact of the proposed dwelling proposal would worsen the current situation
to the extent where in terms of noise and disturbance a refusal of planning
permission could be substantiated.
New boundary treatments 2m high boundary treatments can be secured by planning
condition and this will secure the boundaries for existing residents and protect
amenity further. This includes the treatment of the new boundary formed between
the application site and no 14.
In terms of intended residents, given the above situation, the proposed dwelling is
not considered to be overlooked by existing property and will offer adequate privacy
in this regard for its occupants from the front or rear. The side elevations of the
proposed dwelling are blank at first floor level. This can be secured by planning
condition. There is therefore no overlooking issue in these directions. The proposal
includes rear and front garden area to serve the property which is capable of
beneficial use and in excess of the councils recommended amount of 75sqm per
unit.
The site lies within the noise contour area where aircraft noise is a relevant
consideration. However the standard condition to require and provide acceptable
sound attenuation could be added to any permission issued and this would
adequately deal with this amenity issue.
In summary there are no residential amenity issues for either existing or proposed
residents that either fail to meet the councils policies and guidelines or could not be
satisfied via the imposition of planning conditions and therefore the proposal is
acceptable in this respect in accordance with Core Strategy DPD policies H-1 and
SIE-1 and the Design of Residential Development SPD.
3. Design.
The proposed dwelling are sited in a position to the rear of the existing properties on
surrounding streets. In this sense the proposal represents a form of backland
"backland" development and as outlined in the relevant planning policy guidance and
the Councils SPD on the Design of Residential Development SPD such proposals
can cause problems in terms utility services, inadequate access, loss of privacy, loss
of spaciousness and a over-reduction in garden size. In turn this can lead to a
change in the character of an area and a unacceptably more cramped environment.
Relevant planning policy and guidance does not however rule out development in
backland locations and such sites can form a valuable form of housing land supply
as set out above in planning policy terms provided schemes maintain reasonable
garden size, maintain appropriate spacing between dwellings and are of appropriate
scale and massing. In particular building heights should be carefully considered and
the SPD identifies that building heights of a lower scale may be more appropriate
and less conspicuous in backland locations.

With the above in mind the following should be noted. The proposal should provide
adequate and safe access and servicing (too be confirmed upon receipt of the
highways engineers comments). The existing and proposed properties would be
provided with at least the minimum amount of beneficial residential amenity space
(>75sqm). Adequate separation is provided to comply with the Councils privacy
standards as outlined above. The scale and massing of the proposed new
properties is considered to be appropriate being slightly lower in height than the
prevailing dwelling height surrounding the site. Whilst the proposal will undoubtedly
change the appearance and character at the site and in turn the outlook from
neighbouring properties given the above range of compliance listed above it is not
considered that a refusal on poor design based on the backland nature of the site
could be sustained at planning appeal.
The final design and appearance of the proposal will be determined at reserved
matters stage however the indicative elevations incorporates a design and features
that are in keeping with the surrounding properties which are a mixture of ages and
designs. Materials of construction would be dealt with at reserved matters stage. On
this basis the proposal is considered to comply with all the development plan design
related policy and guidance listed above in accordance with Core Strategy DPD
policies H-1 and SIE-1 and the Design of Residential Development SPD. Given that
there would be partially limited remaining space for extensions at the site particularly
given the proximity of the building to boundaries at the rear and sides it is considered
appropriate to remove permitted development rights from the new property to allow
the Council to consider any subsequent extensions. This should be done as part of
any outline approval.
4. Access, highway safety and parking
The outline submission includes details of access. A new driveway is proposed to
the north east from Lynton Vale Drive. The comments of the Highway Engineer are
included above. It is not considered that the proposal will generate any highways
objections in terms of traffic generation, access or car parking for the development
that would provide reason to resist the proposal.
5. Trees
The proposal results in the loss of 4 mature trees including one TPOed tree in the
north eastern corner to allow for the new access to be created. This was initially a
significant concern based on the impact on amenity the tree loss would have
however a tree survey and replacement planting scheme has been submitted to
mitigate (7 trees to replace the original 4) for the loss and now achieves the support
of the Councils Arboricultural officer subject to final agreement of exact position and
species of trees. On this basis the application no longer raises objection from a tree
and amenity point of view and is considered to comply with the requirements of Core
Strategy SIE-3 in this regard.
5. Developer contributions
As a result of the Ministerial Statement of November 2014 and the associated
amendments to Government policy in the form of the National Planning Practice
Guidance (NPPG), due to the fact that the proposal is for development of ten or less

units, the Council can no longer require this application to make a contribution
towards open space. There is no requirement for any affordable housing provision
based on the number of units in the scheme being below the relevant threshold (5
units) for this part of the Borough.
6. Other issues
The proposal involves demolition of a section of brick wall to the side of no. 14 to
allow for the new access to be created. the brick wall in question was originally part
of Gatley Hall which is a listed building. Following investigation by the Councils
conservation officer it has however been established that the ownership of the wall
was transferred to the property at no.14 prior to the listing of the Hall and therefore it
is not listed as a curtilage structure to the Hall itself. There is therefore no need for
any duplicate Listed Building Consent application and there are no objections to the
removal of the wall from a conservation or listed building point of view. A condition
should be added no less to deal with the after treatment of the wall and to agree the
details of the new section of wall which would attach onto the original following
construction of the new access.
The site lies within the Manchester Airport Noise Zone. This location does not
preclude the site from new residential development, provided that an acceptable
level of protection for the proposed development from aircraft noise can be provided.
As such, subject to the imposition of a suitably worded planning condition to ensure
that this would be the case, the proposal is considered to comply with Saved UDP
policy EP1.10 and Core Strategy DPD policy SIE-3.
Although the proposal does not trigger the Council's carbon reduction targets,
statement on Energy/Sustainability has been submitted with the application. This
highlights the proposed energy efficiency measures that could be incorporated within
the proposed development in order to reduce energy consumption and assesses the
potential for the inclusion of available renewable and low and zero carbon
technologies within the proposed development indicating a willingness to make the
appropriate CO2 savings. Given this undertaking a condition can be added to
ensure that the proposal complies with the requirements of Core Strategy DPD
policy SD-3.
Permeable drainage will be required as part of the highways conditions for the
proposed parking areas which adequately deal with the requirements of policy SD-6.
This will help ensure in part that the existing proposal does not overload the existing
drainage system. Other drainage conditions can be added to ensure that the site is
adequately/appropriately drained so as not to add to any existing drainage or
flooding problems at the site or in the wider area.
In terms of contaminated land the former garden use of the site means there is low
risk of contamination however the standard informative can be used to safeguard
development.
SUMMARY
Grant

Do not scale this drawing (printed or electronic version).

Contractors must check all dimensions from site
This drawing is copyright and is for use on this site only. This drawing should be read in
conjunction with all relevant consultants drawings and specialist subcontractors / supply
chain drawings and specifications.
All works to be carried out in accordance with the latest British Standards / Codes of Practice
unless specifically directed otherwise in the specification.

Tree Planting and Staking

Responsibility for the reproduction of this drawing in paper form, or issued in electronic
format, lies with the recipient to check that all information has been replicated in full and is
correct when compared to the original paper or electronic image.
Graphical representations of equipment on this drawing have been co-ordinated, but are
approximations only. Please refer to the specifications and / or details for actual sizes and /
or specific contractor construction information.

KEY

1No. ACE CAL

Existing Trees

Proposed Tree Planting

Refer to Planting Schedule

Tree ties should be adjusted to allow the

tree to grow.

1No. PRU TIB hs

Grass and weed removed
1m around base to reduce
competition.

1No. ACE CAL

Proposed Grass Turf

Tree can be staked either side of the root

system to avoid excess movement during
establishment.
Stakes should be an appropriate size for the
tree planted

Proposed Ornamental
Hedge Planting
Refer to Planting Schedule

Tree should be planted at the

same level as it was in the
nursery.

1No. PRU TIB hs

Tree pit dug at least twice the

size of the root system, and
filled with good clean topsoil
to BS3882.

1No. PRU TIB hs

11m Tax bac Hedge
44No. plants @ 4/m

PlantSchedule
QTY

UNIT CODE

PLANTNAME

STOCK FORM GIRTH/HEIGHT

Trees
3 No. ACECAL
4 No. PRUTIBhs

1No. PRU TIB hs

1No. ACE CAL

QTY

UNIT CODE

Acercampestre'Elsrijk' RB
Prunusserrulatibetica RB

STD
STD

PLANTNAME

STOCK SIZE

Hedges
11 m TaxbacHedge Taxusbaccata
44 No. Plantsspaced@4/minasingleRow

RB

NotesandAbbreviations
FORM =
Shapeoftreeassuppliedbythenursery.
RB
=
Rootballed(balledandwrapped).
SIZE =
HeightorSpreadofjuvenileplant.
Std
=
(clearstem)Standard.
STOCK =
Rootcondition/protectionmethodegBareroot.
Refertospecificationforfurtherinformation.
Allplantstobecompletelyhardenedoff
SubstitutionstobeagreedwithLandscapeArchitect.

1416cm
1214cm

6080cm

25/06/15

Rev. Date.

PLANNING

MS

Description.

DL

Drawn Chk'd

21 Swan Street,Manchester, M4 5JJ.Tel. (0161) 312 3131

www.urbangreen-space.co.uk hello@urbangreen-space.co.uk
Client:

Bailey Dyson International

Consultants

Project:

14 Lyntonvale Avenue

Title:

Tree Planting Plan

Status:

Planning

Project:

Drawn:

Checked:

Scale
@A2

Date:

Approved:

10818

1:100

Drawing
No:

10818.L01

MS

25/06/15

DL
MK
Revision:

Application Reference:
Location:

Type of Application:

DC/058373
CROSS KEYS HOTEL, 10 ADSWOOD ROAD,
CHEADLE HULME, CHEADLE, SK8 5QA
Affordable Housing scheme of 14 units comprising 4
number 3 bedroom 5 person and 10 number 2
bedroom 4 person houses.
Full Planning Permission

Registration Date:
Expiry Date:
Case Officer:

17/04/2015
17/07/2015
Emma Curle

Proposal:

Applicant:
Agent :

Bowsall
Jennings Design Associates

COMMITTEE STATUS
Planning and Highways Regulation Committee - Departure to the Development Plan
DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT
The application seeks to redevelop the vacant bowling green to the rear of Bowling
Green public house for a residential development of 14 no. Houses. All 14 houses
will be affordable units provided by a Registered Provider. The applicant is in
advanced discussions with Stockport Homes. It is proposed that the units would be
offered at as affordable rent (80% of Market Rent) units.
The properties would be served by a new access road off Adswood Road. This
would adapt the existing easterly access point at the pub car park and provide a new
access serving the proposed dwellings and the pub car park. Visibility splays of 2m
x 70m would be provided in each direction. The existing westerly access point to
the pub car park would be closed off. A total of 18 parking spaces would be retained
for the pub.
As proposed the new access would initially runs close to the eastern site boundary
before turning into the centre of the site and culminating in a turning head. The
internal access road would be of shared surface design and construction.
The new dwellings are arranged around the above turning head. Two house types
are proposed with the 14 houses split into 10 no. 2 bedroom and 4 no. 3 bedroom
units. Each property is 2 storey with pitched roofs. The plans indicate a relatively
traditional design with porch detail to frontage. Materials of construction are red
brick work and concrete tile for the roof covering and upvc windows. Each property
is provided with 1 car parking space either to its frontage or within a communal area.
Each property has its own small rear garden area.
The layout includes for a landscape buffer along the eastern site boundary with the
access road and an acoustic barrier fence along the sites northern boundary with the

public house and its car park.

Several trees within the site on the eastern and southern boundary would be
removed to facilitate the development. Replacement tree and planting is proposed
as identified on the proposed landscaping plan to mitigate for the loss.
The application has been accompanied by the following supporting information:
1. Planning Policy Compliance Statement
2. Bowling Green and Sports Facility Assessment
3. Preliminary Risk Assessment (including Environmental database report)
4. Noise Assessment
5. Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey
6. Utility Plans pack
7. Energy Statement
8. Sustainability Checklist
9. Transport Statement
10. Design and Access Statement
11. Tree Survey report
12. Building for life Assessment
13. Secured by design application
14. Draft S106 agreement
15. Economic Viability Appraisal
SITE AND SURROUNDINGS
The application relates to the currently vacant/unused bowling green and existing car
park belonging to the Cross Keys public house on Adswood Road. The Cross Keys
public house is not part of the application site and would be retained as a public
house. The car park area lies immediately to the east of the public house and forms
part of the application site for access reasons. The car park currently has two
access points off Adswood Road. the bowling green lies to the rear of the public
house and car park at a lower level currently separated by a brick retaining wall. The
site is over grown having not been used as a bowling green for sometime. There are
numerous trees along the sites perimeter boundaries. The site is adjoined to all
other sides by residential properties. No 12 Adswood road lies to the east of the site
with a long rear garden adjoin the sites boundaries. Residential properties off
Alderdale Road lie to the south and Littlebrook Close to the south west and have
boundaries wit the site. No 8 Adswood road lies to the west of the pub and also has
a side boundary adjoining the site.
POLICY BACKGROUND
The application site is allocated within a Predominantly Residential Area, as defined
on the UDP Proposals Map. The following policies are therefore relevant :Saved UDP policies

EP1.10 - AIRCRAFT NOISE

L1.1 - LAND FOR ACTIVE RECREATION USE

L1.2 - CHILDRENS PLAY

UOS1.3 - PROTECTION OF LOCAL OPEN SPACE

Core Strategy DPD policies

CS1 : OVERARCHING PRINCIPLES : SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ADDRESSING INEQUALITIES AND CLIMATE CHANGES
SD-1 : CREATING SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES
SD-3 : DELIVERING THE ENERGY OPPORTUNITIES PLAN : NEW
DEVELOPMENT
SD-6 : ADAPTING TO THE IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE
CS2 : HOUSING PROVISION
CS3 : MIX OF HOUSING
CS4 : DISTRIBUTION OF HOUSING
H-1 : DESIGN OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
H-2 : HOUSING PHASING
CS8 : SAFEGUARDING AND IMPROVING THE ENVIRONMENT
SIE-1 : QUALITY PLACES
SIE-2 : PROVISION OF RECREATION AND AMENITY OPEN SPACE IN NEW
DEVELOPMENTS
SIE-3 : PROTECTING, SAFEGUARDING AND ENHANCING THE
ENVIRONMENT
CS9 : TRANSPORT AND DEVELOPMENT
T-1 : TRANSPORT AND DEVELOPMENT
T-2 : PARKING IN DEVELOPMENTS
T-3 : SAFETY AND CAPACITY ON THE HIGHWAY NETWORK

Supplementary Planning Guidance/Documents

RECREATIONAL OPEN SPACE PROVISION AND COMMUTED PAYMENTS

SPG
DESIGN OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SPD
SUSTAINABLE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SPD

National Planning Legislation

THE NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK (NPPF)
PLANNING HISTORY
No previous planning history.
NEIGHBOURS VIEWS
The application has been advertised on site and in the press as a Major
Development and as a Departure to the Unitary Development Plan. The occupiers
of 34 nearby properties have been notified in writing of the proposal.
In total 7 letters of objection have been received. The grounds of objection are
summarised as follows:

1. The development will overlook gardens and invade privacy.

2. The proposal will increase security risks to adjoining properties.
3. The proposal will result in loss of greenery at the site and spoil views and outlook
of neighbouring properties.
4. Having new rental properties in the area will bring the area down.
5. The development should include a play area for children.
6. The removal/reposition of bus stop should not be allowed and will cause highway
safety issues.
7. There have been many road traffic accidents and incidents in this immediate
locality and the proposal will only worsen these.
8. The bowling green can flood and by building houses on the site this will worsen
the situation for surrounding properties and increase the risk of flooding.
9. The drainage system at Alderdale Road/Littlebrook Close cannot cope with more
properties being connected to it. This should not be allowed.
10. The site is a wildlife haven now it overgrown and numerous species of wildlife
live on it. The proposal will ruin this.
11. The proposal will result in the loss of alot of valuable trees at the site.
12. The proposal will increase noise levels to properties to the rear of the site which
will be detrimental to residential amenity.
13. Construction will be a nuisance to neighbours.
14. The drainage plan seeks to cross land (no 25 Alderdale Road) in private
ownership and no consent has been given by owner to allow these works to take
place.
15. What impact will the proposal have on the culvert at the bottom of the site.
16. There has been no consultation by the developer with residents.
CONSULTEE RESPONSES
Planning Policy Officer (Housing):
The proposal is for 14 no. dwellings, 10 no. 2-bed units and 4 no. 3-bed units. The
site is located within the Predominantly Residential Area and partly on allocated local
open space.
In terms of the principle of housing in this location, a view will need to be taken in
respect of the proposed loss of local open space at the site. Notwithstanding that
matter, the site is not within the first two spatial priority areas for housing location as
set out in Policy CS4 (Distribution of Housing) of the Core Strategy. However, the
Council is currently in a position of housing under-supply with 3.1 years of supply
against a requirement in national policy for at least 5 years plus a buffer. In such
situations Policy H2 (Housing Phasing) of the Core Strategy allows for housing
development on sites which meet the Councils accessibility criteria. In this case the
site scores around 64/65, which exceeds the current minimum score of 34 for
houses. Consequently, subject to assessment against other relevant policies
including the loss of open space, the proposal meets the locational requirements of
Core Strategy Policies CS4 and H2, as well as adding to the housing numbers and
mix in line with Core Strategy Policies CS2 and CS3.
In terms of affordable housing the site lies within an area defined as a Hot for the

purposes of assessing affordable housing provision, however this is overridden by

the fact that the relevant policy (Affordable Housing - H3) requires any urban open
space to be released for housing should deliver at least 50% affordable housing.
Notwithstanding that matter, the provision of the units is described as affordable.
Although the means of delivering this is not included in the application, it appears
that funding for the site is coming from the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA)
and this means that the housing to be provided is Affordable Rent. The units are to
be delivered by a Registered Provider (RP) and affordable rent should be no more
than 80% of local market rent. This is not normally the means by which the Council
seeks to deliver affordable housing units that is usually done by splitting the
affordable units between social rent and shared ownership properties. In this case,
however, the use of affordable rent to deliver housing can be weighed against the
fact that all units are to be delivered in this way rather than the 50% required by
policy to be affordable housing, as referred to above.
It may be that the delivery of the housing through affordable rent is deemed to be a
relevant factor in determining the application. Should the application be approved
then it is advised that the delivery of the units be subject to a s.106 agreement in
order to ensure delivery of the units by an RP at a level which make such delivery
viable.
Planning Policy Officer (Open Space):
A commuted sum will be required to fund new formal provision to compensate for the
loss of the open space elsewhere in the borough (and not necessarily in the form of
a bowling green the borough-wide formal open space deficiency is in terms of such
space generically, not necessarily in terms of a specific type of formal provision the
suggested commuted sum below has been calculated based on a reasonable cost
of providing generic formal open space rather than of providing a bowling green. It is
based on the size of the LOS that is to be extinguished by the development , based
on the formal open space requirement per thousand population (1.7ha) and the
formulae set out within the Recreational Open Space Provision SPG the commuted
sum would be calculated as set out below;
The area of designated LOS equates to 1950 sqm based on the 1.7 ha standard this
could provide for 115 people.
The provision of the compensatory LOS would be calculated as 115 x
198.35 = 22810.25
The maintenance would be calculated as 115 x 17x 11.86 = 23186.30
Totalling 45,996.5
The commuted sum for the provision of open space to meet the needs of the
residents is 23,410.80
For the proposal to be compliant with the planning policy position regarding open
space, a s106 is required for the following;
a) To pay for play/formal open space to cater for the new residents of the scheme

(23,410.80 as set out in my response attached) - in order to be compliant with Dev

Man Policy SIE 2
b) To pay for the compensatory open space to replace the Bowling Green, which is
designated LOS - required in order to be compliant with UOS1.3,L1.1, CS8, para 74
of the NPPF
Environment Agency:
There are no constraints on the EA maps. No objections.
United Utilities:
No objection subject to the drainage strategy providing that drainage layout
submitted is adhered to.
Highways Engineer:
These comments are further to previous comments made on this application
following discussions held with the applicant and the subsequent amendments to the
original application proposals including the submission of a Road Safety Audit.
Access into the proposed development site is via the existing car park entrance
adjacent to 12 Adswood Road which will now be a shared access with the pub car
park. The result of this shared access will have the benefit of closing the car park
entrance directly adjacent to the Cross Keys which has the potential of reducing
accidents arising from junction proximity issues. It would also mean that the existing
bus stop can remain close to its current position and not raise visibility issues around
the closed access.
The shared junction does have the capacity to safely accommodate both
development and car park traffic. Additional supporting information supplied by the
applicant shows that the visibility splays at the junction are within expected
standards and that servicing vehicles can be safely accommodated within the
junction layout. The submitted Stage 1 Road Safety Audit has identified potential
issues with the junction and the amended design mitigates those potential road
safety issues.
The applicant has also amended the internal access road layout in line with Core
Strategy policies to ensure quality design and a safe environment. Examination of
the site's accessibility using the Council's accessibility model, which considers
accessibility in relation to employment, retail, schools, health centres, hospitals and
evening economy uses, concludes that the site is highly sustainable.
In conclusion the development will use an existing access which meets existing
design standards and has no capacity issues. The closure of direct access to
Adswood Road from the car park will have a beneficial impact on vehicle movements
in this area with a potential improvement to road safety. The amended internal road
layout meets this Councils criterion in terms of design and can be adopted by the
Council.

Therefore subject to the requested conditions being applied there are no sustainable
highways reasons to refuse this application.
Recommendation: No objection subject to conditions
Arboricultural Officer:
The proposed development will have a minimal negative impact on trees or hedges
located on site with the proposed new residential development being located within
the existing garden area/bowling green /hard standing. The sites front and rear
boundary has a poor level of vegetation and trees and as such there cannot be any
loss of trees on site as this will have a negative impact on amenity and biodiversity.
The proposed development should have only a minimal negative impact on the
existing trees within the curtilage with the majority of these poor specimens or low
amenity and therefore have a minimal impact on the biodiversity of the area. The
construction materials or vehicles potentially will not impact on the trees and as such
no temporary protective fencing should be required to be erected to make
contractors aware of the protective trees and limit access to these areas to prevent
compaction, accidental damage or spillage of chemicals on the root zones of all
trees in the site.
The main concern for this site is the potential damage during construction/deliveries,
and therefore protection/restrictions to the trees to the site as the trees are an
integral part of the tree scape therefore cannot be lost.
The trees offer a poor level of biodiversity/habitat benefit and as such they need
either retaining or replacing as any loss would be unacceptable as this would be
further increasing urban sprawl of Cheadle Hulme area.
In principle the scheme will have a negative impact on the trees in the area and
therefore is acceptable with protection and informative set for all construction traffic
and deliveries in relation to the trees on site and in the surrounding areas preventing
accidental damage. The scheme has a great opportunity to improve the biodiversity
and amenity of the area with a high specification landscaping scheme that will
enhance the local area and screen off the new development. This landscaping
scheme can be conditioned but the original layout plan does not offer a high level of
enhancement at that stage.
Nature Development Officer: Comments awaited.
Environmental Health (Contaminated Land): No objections. Please note that these
conditions should be applied as a phased approach, depending upon the outcome of
each subsequent condition i.e if the investigation carried out to satisfy CTM1
recommends further works then CTM2 should then be applied etc.

CTM 1
CTM 2
CTM 3
Con 1 Informative

LFG 1
LFG 3

Drainage Team:
Members are advised that following the late receipt of comments from the Drainage
Team, the applicant was advised of the need to address the comments only shortly
before the completion of this report. In summary the applicant has been requested to
:1. The designers need to submit a full drainage design drawing including
all levels, pipe sizes and gradients and manhole schedule with full
supporting calculations.
2. Subject to geological investigations and soakaway penetration tests
any new SW proposal to use SUDs infiltration principles where
feasible. The minimum of which should include permeable paving to
driveways, or using soft landscaped areas for water management.
3. The maximum run-off from the site be limited to 5 l/s being the
Greenfield equivalent run-off from a 1.0 Hectare undeveloped site.
(Actual site is only 0.34 Hectare).
4. The designers need to provide written evidence of UU acceptance of
any proposed drainage that connect and discharge into any the UU
public sewers.
5. The designers need to provide written evidence of riparian owner(s)
acceptance of any proposed drainage that crosses or connects direct
into the culvert watercourse.
6. All storm water run-off, up to and including the 30 year critical storm
event to be retained below ground and demonstrated with supporting
calculations / hydraulic modelling.
7. All storm water run-off up to and including the 100 year critical storm
event to be retained on site and demonstrated how the designers
intend to achieve this.
8. Finally any residual flood waters (greater than 100 year storm event)
should be directed away from the rear gardens of the houses in
Alderdale Road.
ANALYSIS
In assessing the application the following issues require detailed consideration;
1. Landuse
The application site has two allocations on the UDP Review Proposal Map. The
front section of the site relating to the proposed access point and pub car park is
Predominantly Residential Area. The rear section of site relating to the bowling
green in allocated as open space. The open space allocation makes up the majority
of the application site as apart from a small section of new road within the existing
car park the remainder of built development takes place on the open space. The
wider surrounding area is predominantly residential area.
Open space

The majority of the site falls within designated Local Open Space. The majority of
the designated LOS is also defined as a bowling green. The land that forms a border
around the Bowling Green also functions as LOS although it is not designated. The
site is therefore is protected by saved UDP Policies L1.1 (Land for Active
Recreation use), UOS1.3 (Protection of Local Open Space), Core Strategy Policy
CS8 (Safeguarding and Improving the Environment) and Paragraph 74 of the NPPF.
Paragraph 74 of the NPPF indicates:
'Existing open space, sports and recreational buildings and land, including playing
fields, should not be built on unless:
an assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown the open space,
buildings or land to be surplus to requirements; or
the loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by
equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location; or
the development is for alternative sports and recreational provision, the needs for
which clearly outweigh the loss.'
Core Strategy Policy CS8 states that Any development resulting in a loss of open
space within an area of relative high-levels of provision will be expected to offset that
loss by making improvements to existing open space or providing (at least)
equivalent new open space in a committee area of relative low provision so as to
help not exacerbate the under-supply situation that exists across the borough as a
whole. UDP Review Policy UOS 1.3 goes on to state that development within Local
Open Space will only be permitted where it would be replaced by open space of
equivalent or better quantity, quality, usefulness and attractiveness. Core Policy
CS8 allows for circumstances that outweigh the normal presumption to retain LOS
and one such presumption is affordable housing. This policy should however be
applied as a whole and it is important to note that policy CS8 requires the provision
of compensatory open space or that any loss in open space is offset by making
improvements to existing open space.
The proposal would clearly result in the complete loss of the area designated as
open space. The proposal would however deliver 100% affordable housing and
therefore in light of the evidenced need for significant numbers of affordable housing
within the borough, evidenced both by the Core Strategy as well as the Housing
needs assessments, it is considered that weight should be given in this respect
against the policy presumption to retain Local Open Space. Members will note that
officers have considered the matters carefully through the consideration of the
application and is considered that an appropriate position would be to seek an offsite contribution which is therefore an acceptable means of complying with policy
requirements and as outlined in the policy comments above a compensatory
payment of 45,996.5 would be the amount need to compensate for the loss of the
allocation. Provision of such an amount would therefore comply with policy.
However, in this respect no contributory payment is proposed by the applicant to
comply policy. A Viability Appraisal has been submitted with this application in which
identifies that the proposed development cannot afford to comply with this
requirement (The contents of the appraisal are discussed in more details below).

The proposal therefore does not comply with development plan open space policy
hence its Departure Status.
Housing Provision.
The site is not within the first two spatial priority areas for housing location as set out
in Policy CS4 (Distribution of Housing) of the Core Strategy. However, the Council is
currently in a position of housing under-supply with 3.1 years of supply against a
requirement in national policy for at least 5 years plus a buffer. In such situations
Policy H2 (Housing Phasing) of the Core Strategy allows for housing development
on sites which meet the Councils accessibility criteria. In this case the site scores
around 64/65, which exceeds the current minimum score of 34 for houses.
Consequently, subject to assessment against other relevant policies including the
loss of open space, the proposal meets the locational requirements of Core Strategy
Policies CS4 and H2, as well as adding to the housing numbers and mix in line with
Core Strategy Policies CS2 and CS3.
In terms of affordable housing the site lies within an area defined as a Hot for the
purposes of assessing affordable housing provision, however this is overridden by
the fact that the relevant policy (Affordable Housing - H3) requires any urban open
space to be released for housing should deliver at least 50% affordable housing.
Notwithstanding that matter, the provision of the units is described as affordable.
The units are to be delivered by a Registered Provider (RP) and affordable rent
should be no more than 80% of local market rent. This is not normally the means by
which the Council seeks to deliver affordable housing units that is usually done by
splitting the affordable units between social rent and shared ownership properties. In
this case, however, the use of affordable rent to deliver housing can be weighed
against the fact that all units are to be delivered in this way rather than the 50%
required by policy to be affordable housing, as referred to above.
It may be that the delivery of the housing through affordable rent is deemed to be a
relevant factor in determining the application. Should the application be approved
then it is advised that the delivery of the units be subject to a s.106 agreement in
order to ensure their delivery as affordable rent.
Predominantly residential area.
The front section of the site is within a predominantly residential area. This element
of the application would retain the existing car park albeit with altered access
arrangements with the remainder of the frontage providing the new access road and
link to Adswood Road and buffer strip to the adjacent residential property. The
development is residential and therefore raises no issues in terms in acceptability in
principle. The impact of the proposed development on residential amenity is
discussed in more detail below.
2. Residential amenity
In terms of existing residents the proposed new dwellings are sited to face in either a
east (front) and west (rear) direction or north (front) and south (rear)direction and
have the primary habitable room windows on the these front and rear elevations
respectively. Given the orientation of the proposed units to existing properties
separation distances are provided to comply with the Councils policies and

guidelines. It should be noted that there are rooms in the roof space of the new
dwellings. The proposal would introduce noise and disturbance into this currently
quiet, particularly given the bowling greens under use, location and hence light levels
and noise will be increased to the rear of the existing properties. However again
given the separation and orientation of existing dwellings to the proposed
development this should not generally be to an unacceptable level. The most
affected property would be no 12 Adswood Road which lies adjacent to the new
access road and pub car park entrance. This property would therefore experience a
significant increase in traffic noise and disturbance from the new occupiers of the 14
houses and users of the pub car park. A reasonable landscape buffer has however
been provided to this side of the access road and the landscape plan shows this will
be planted with heavy standard trees and other landscaping. A new reinforced
substantial boundary treatment should be provided along this boundary however to
add to proposed landscaping mitigation and this could be secured by planning
condition.
In terms of intended residents, given the above situation, the proposed dwelling is
not considered to be overlooked by existing property and will offer adequate privacy
in this regard for its occupants from properties outside the site. Within the site there
are some minor shortfalls in separation distances between two sets of plots however
these are very small (no more than 1.5m) and not considered to warrant major
concern. Acceptable levels of privacy and amenity are therefore considered to have
been provided. The proposal includes rear garden areas to serve each property.
These are small and in some instances below 50sqm the minimum standard the
Councils has for any housing type. However each plot has a garden has an area
capable of beneficial use. and it is considered unreasonable to resist the proposal on
this basis. The site lies within the noise contour area where aircraft noise is a
relevant consideration. However the standard condition to require and provide
acceptable sound attenuation could be added to any permission issued and this
would adequately deal with this amenity issue.
In summary there are no residential amenity issues for either existing or proposed
residents that either fail to meet the councils policies and guidelines or could not be
satisfied via the imposition of planning conditions and therefore the proposal is
acceptable in this respect in accordance with Core Strategy DPD policies H-1 and
SIE-1 and the Design of Residential Development SPD.
3. Design.
The proposed dwelling are sited in a position to the rear of the existing properties on
Adswood Road, Alderdale Road and Littlebrook Close. In this sense the proposal
represents "backland" development and as outlined in the relevant planning policy
guidance and the Councils SPD on the Design of Residential Development SPD
such proposals can cause problems in terms utility services, inadequate access, loss
of privacy and loss of spaciousness. In turn this can lead to a change in the
character of an area and a unacceptably more cramped environment. Relevant
planning policy and guidance does not however rule out development in backland
locations and such sites can form a valuable form of housing land supply as set out
above in planning policy terms provided schemes maintain reasonable garden size,
maintain appropriate spacing between dwellings and are of appropriate scale and
massing. In particular building heights should be carefully considered and the SPD

identifies that building heights of a lower scale may be more appropriate and less
conspicuous in backland locations.
With the above in mind the following should be noted. The proposal does provided
adequate and safe access and servicing. The existing and proposed properties
would be provided with beneficial residential amenity space. Adequate separation is
provided to comply with the Councils privacy standards as outlined above. The
scale and massing of the proposed new properties is also considered to be
appropriate being traditional two storey in height and sited at a lower ground level
than those on the frontage of Adswood Road du to ground level changes.. Whilst
the proposal will undoubtedly change the appearance and character at the site and
in turn the outlook from neighbouring properties given the above range of
compliance listed above it is not considered that a refusal on poor design based on
the backland nature of the site could be sustained at planning appeal.
The design of the proposal is relatively traditional in form and scale and incorporates
a design style and features that are in keeping with the surrounding properties.
Materials of construction are specified as red brick work, concrete tiling for the roof
covering and upvc windows none of which are the cause for any concern and can be
finally agreed via planning condition. On this basis the proposal is considered to
comply with all the development plan design related policy and guidance listed
above in accordance with Core Strategy DPD policies H-1 and SIE-1 and the Design
of Residential Development SPD. Given that there would be limited remaining space
for extensions at the site it is considered appropriate to remove permitted
development rights from the new property to allow the Council to consider any
subsequent extensions.
4. Access, highway safety and parking
The detailed comments of the Council Highway Engineer are contained within the
consultee responses section above. In summary there is no objection to the
proposal which now has an amended format to deal with earlier concerns that the
highway engineer raised. The development now has a single access point to serve
the proposed 14 new dwellings and 18 space pub car park. The other access at the
western end of the car park would be closed off removing conflict with the main
junction on Adswood Road in this location and 2m x 70m visibility splays will be
provided at the new access point. The revised details still require the repositioning
of the existing bus stop but this would no raise issue in visibility terms due to the
closure of the western car park access. Given the proposed infrastructure and level
of trip generation no objection is raised from the engineer in terms of the suitability of
the new access. In addition it is noted that adequate car parking and
turning/manouvering is provided within the site for service vehicles. The internal
road would be shared surface which is also acceptable to the engineer.
In view of the above, on the basis of the amended scheme, the previous concern
raised by the Highway Engineer have been overcome. As such, in the absence of
objections from the Highway Engineer and subject to conditional control, the
proposal is considered acceptable in terms of the issues of access, highway safety
and parking, in accordance with Core Strategy DAD policies SD-6, SIE-1, CS9, T-1,
T-2 and T-3.

5. Impact on trees/ecology
An arboricultural report and replacement landscaping scheme accompanies the
application. This shows that the removal of a several trees notably along the
eastern and southern site boundaries. The submission has been inspected by the
Council Arboricultural Officer. No objections are raised subject to further conditions
relating to retention of existing trees and provision of protected fencing. Replacement
tree planting and other landscape mitigation should be agreed by condition . In view
of the above the proposal is considered acceptable with regard to its impact on tree
on site and off site in accordance with Core Strategy DPD policies SIE-1 and SIE-3.
In respect of the wider ecology interests of the site the Councils Nature Development
Officer has been consulted. A phase one habitat survey has been produced as part
of the submission. Comments are awaited from the Nature Development Officer and
committee will be updated of these at the meeting.
5. Open Space Payments and viability.
The proposal will increase the population capacity at the site and therefore falls to be
considered under SIE-2 in respect of the provision of open space. The proposal
would generate a population capacity of persons and therefore generates the need
for commuted sum payment of 23,410.80 to be paid. In addition, as outlined above
in section 1, a payment of 45,996.50 is also required to compensate for the loss of
the bowling green open space. In the case of this application neither of these
payments are intended to be paid by the applicant and a Viability Appraisal has been
submitted to demonstrate that the requirement to make these payments would
render the scheme unviable therefore loosing the ability to bring the site forward as a
development and the provision of much needed affordable housing in the Borough.
The Viability Appraisal has been independently assessed by consultants at Carrilion
plc who, following negotiation on various matters, broadly concur with the appraisals
findings. On the basis of the figures submitted it is clear that the scheme is
extremely marginal and to deliver 14 affordable rent properties for transfer to a
Registered Provider stifles the end sales price at each unit to the extent where
normal sales profit is curtailed significantly for the overall development. In general
the appraisal does demonstrate there are significant viability issues at play here that
are, in part at least, generated by the specifics of the scheme i.e. the provision of
affordable housing. This brings about a difficult decision for the Council as to realise
the benefits of the proposal in terms of affordable housing provision the Council will
have to depart from adopted policy and offer a relaxation and net loss in open space
provision in the borough and the wider impact it would have on residents. This
dilemma is discussed further in the Summary section below.
6. Energy efficiency
The proposal triggers the Council's carbon reduction targets set out within policy
(SD-3). Core Strategy Policies CS1 and SD-3 seek to deliver sustainable
development concentrating on CO2 reduction through renewable energy and
sustainable construction in new development. A sustainability Checklist and Energy
Statement has been submitted with the application. The Energy Statement highlights
the proposed energy efficiency measures that could be incorporated within the
proposed development in order to reduce energy consumption and assesses the
potential for the inclusion of available renewable and low and zero carbon
technologies within the proposed development. In summary the submission
concludes that due to the lack of a nearby existing or proposed district heating

network the design promotes a high quality fabric lead approach that will exceed the
13% carbon dioxide emissions reductions compared to Building regulations , Part L.
On this basis the proposal is considered to comply with the energy emission
requirements of Core Strategy DPD policy SD-3.
7. Drainage
Policy SD-6 requires that drainage is properly considered in terms of all new
development with the overall aim of reducing surface water run off by 50% for all
new development through the use of SUDs. In this respect the proposal is
supported by a drainage strategy and this has been considered by the Lead Local
Flood Authority (LLFA). The Environment Agency and United Utilities have also
been consulted on the application and neither body objection to the proposal. The
LLFA however have some concerns about the scheme put forward and these have
been raised with the applicant. The applicant is in the process of dealing with these
matters and members will be update on the outcome of these negotiation and
compliance with Policy SD-6.
8. Contaminated Land
The application raises no objections in respect of Contaminated land. The standard
Phased approach to survey/mitigation should be utilised via planning condition for
contaminated land and landfill gas as recommended by the Environmental Health
Officer.
Summary
As outlined above the proposal is considered to provide an acceptable form of policy
compliant development in many respects. The proposal is acceptable in terms of
overall layout and design; its impact on existing residents amenity; provides
acceptable amenity for its intended residents and is served by a satisfactory set of
highways arrangements. The proposal is therefore capable of delivering a good
quality small housing development which will contribute positively to the boroughs
current low levels of housing land supply. The proposal also offers the added benefit
of delivering 100% affordable housing provision. It is important to note that this is
50% above what policy normally requires and would result in an additional 7
affordable units. It is also important to note however that all units would be offered
as Affordable Rent (which is set at 80% of market value rent) rather than the
Councils normal policy requirement for Social Rent (which is set at 60% of market
value rent). In summary the proposal therefore has affordable housing benefit in that
the borough would receive greater total number of units (14 as opposed to 7) but this
benefit is tempered to an extent by the tenure type as the units would not be as
affordable as they ideally could be. On a broader scale, and in addition to the above,
the weight of any affordable housing benefit has to be weighed against the cost of
the net loss of local open space (the allocation would be lost in its entirety with no
compensatory payment made) and the impact this has on the borough and its
residents and against there being no financial contribution to provide open space
facilities for the new residents as per normal policy requirements. The proposal is
therefore a departure from the development plan and requires the Council to deviate
significantly from development plan policy requirements if it is to grant planning
permission. Ultimately a decision has to be taken in terms of which issue the council
gives more importance at this point in time, either provision of much needed
affordable units or protection of its open space land which is short in supply across

the borough. The development plan does not include any basis upon which one
policy can be overcome by the delivery of a scheme which exceeds the requirements
of another.
In this case, it is however considered that significant weight should be applied to the
provision of affordable housing and as such on balance it is recommended that
planning permission should be granted.

PROVISIONAL - Subject to UU Approval

Cross Keys - STOCKPORT

KEY
Foul water sewer
Storm water sewer
Existing UU Storm water sewer
Existing UU Combined water sewer
Gully (150mm connection)

RG

Sewer easement

Site Boundary

60.

33

60.29

60.11

SP

IC
CL 60.31

Bin

Bol

KH2

60.37

60.

SP

60.35

60.24

SP

6
.3
60.40
60 37
.
60

59.35

60.31

.33

60

60.40

59.13

59.89
Ridge 69.27

59.96
59.90

58.95

62.68

62.71 62.71
59.97
Ridge 68.32

G 58.86

60.54

60.54

NO DEVIATION FROM THE DETAILS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING

IS ALLOWED WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION IN WRITING.
ALL DRAWINGS ARE TO BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH ALL
ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS AND SPECIALISTS DRAWINGS AND
THE SPECIFICATION.

60.64
60.64

THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INCORPORATE ALL THE

REQUIREMENTS OF THE PRE-TENDER STAGE HEALTH AND
SAFETY PLAN.

60.23

59
.9
9

Ridge 68.70

G 60.30

60.33
60.27

59.85
59.98

58.7
9

LP

60.13

60.27

LP

59.54
59.10

59.53

59.03

58.72

58.28

58.96

58.92

59.49

97
58.

G 59.43

59.47

58.25

58.35

58.34

58.38

58.25
3
57.9
57.88

58.49
58.44

THE LAYOUT OF DRAINAGE ON THIS DRAWING IS INDICATIVE

ONLY BOWSALL TO CONFIRM EXACT LOCATION OF
MANHOLES AND GULLIES.

S1

U.N.O. ALL DRAINAGE GOODS & FITTINGS TO BE:-

SIMILAR.

KH3

59.37

59.48

59.45

59.48
59.53

59.47

57.93

57.84

57.92

57.87

57.76

58.10

58.17

57.77

SIMILAR.
ALL COVERS AND RODDING ACCESS POINTS TO BE SEALED
AND SCREWED TIGHT.

59.35

57.80

58.45

59.16

57.79

ALL INTERNAL MANHOLE COVERS TO BE DOUBLE SEALED,

LOCKABLE AND RECESSED TO ACCEPT FLOOR FINISHES
WHERE APPLICABLE.

FFL 59.40

58.54

FFL 58.25

57.98

58
.44

58.43

58.43

COVER LEVELS ON THIS DRAWING ARE APPROXIMATE AND

INDICATIVE ONLY ARCHITECT TO CONFIRM COVER LEVELS TO
ALL MANHOLES AND GULLIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.

FFL 59.40

58.33

58.20

58.24

58.22

58.54

58.53

PROVIDE ADEQUATE PROTECTION TO MAINTAIN MINIMUM

COVER TO DRAINS DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD.

58.24

58.21

58.44

58.58

.57

58

59.82

59.51

RG

59.49

58.62
58.57

59.77

FFL 59.40

59.15

59.45

59.02

.7

58.93

58

58.5
3

58.4
3

58.45
58.24

7
.6
58

58.63
58.66

58.2
9

58
.74

58.81

58.64
58.61

11
59.
58.7
7

ROCKER PIPES TO BE PROVIDED AT ALL CONCRETE CASED

INTERFACES.

59.55

59.16

58.03

60.2

58.62

LP

59.84
59.91

59.68
59.78

59.67

.45

60.05
LP
59.52 59.52

60.37

59.79 59.89

60.04

59.21

58.81

Eave 66.31

59.04

Eave 61.57

60.26

G 60.12

59.92

60

MH
CL 58.85

59.90

59.33

59.17
Ridge 63.11

WHERE THE NEW SITE DRAINAGE CONNECTS IN TO EXISTING

MANHOLES IN CARRIAGEWAYS AND/OR EXISTING ADOPTED
SEWERS, THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL
LIAISON WITH THE RELEVANT STATUTORY UNDERTAKER AND
LOCAL AUTHORITY WITH REGARD TO ROAD CLOSURES,
TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT, PERMITS TO WORK, SUBMISSION OF
CONTRACTORS METHOD STATEMENTS AND RISK
ASSESSMENTS AND OTHER DOCUMENTATION AND
CORRESPONDENCE.

G 59.93

60.21

59.97

60.39

59.86
59.78
59.77

58.87

59.96

59.78

58.88

65
.9 9.9

59

59.94

59.87

58.86
58.98

58.75

THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CHECKING INVERT

LEVELS AND POSITIONS OF ALL EXISTING DRAINS, SEWERS,
INSPECTION CHAMBERS AND MANHOLES SHOWN ON THIS
DRAWING IMMEDIATELY ON SITE ESTABLISHMENT. ANY
DISCREPANCIES MUST BE REPORTED TO BOWSALL
IMMEDIATELY.

60.37

.0

60

58.93

58.44

60.51

RG

1
59.9

59.94

59.99

58.91

63
58.63 58.

60.41

60.09

60.38

59.25

RG

59.91

59.23

58.56

60.39

G 59.79

59.07

58.93

60.56

60.38

60.40

59.73

59.11

60.48

GAS

60.14

DO NOT SCALE FROM THIS DRAWING WORK TO FIGURED

DIMENSIONS ONLY.

G 60.35

60.34

60.
38
60.
39

Eave 64.85

CL 59.69
MH

LP

Bus Stop

60.51

60.01

60.25

60.32

60.41

GAS

SBX

60.19

60.25

.14
60 GAS

60.50

RS

60
.37

CATV

GENERAL NOTES
60.13

60.12

60
.0 9

TRL

59.69

59.70

60
60 .03
.0
7

60.12

MH
CL 60.12

MH
CL 60.08

59.99

60.02

48

59.91

60.32
60.
48

SV

59.90
59.91

60.00

59.87

MH
CL 59.98

IC
CL59.92
SBX

GAS

59.86
59.93

59.98

LP

59.86

59.95

59
.74
59
.74

59.75

1 5
9.
72
2 59
.7
7

59.7

59.7

59.85
59.95

IC
CL 59.93

Bol

59.79

G 59.85

SV

59.97

Bol

59.77
59.85

30

59.83

GAS
59.76

.85
59

.
60

59.73

59.74

59.72

.78

59

59.73
59.73

59.72

5
59.82 9.8

59.74

59.70

.74

59.74

59

59.7

58.20

SETTING OUT OF ALL INTERNAL GULLY/PLUMBING

CONNECTIONS TO BE CO-ORDINATED BETWEEN THE
SERVICE ENGINEERS AND THE ARCHITECT.

58.08

ALL INTERNAL GULLIES, PLUMBING CONNECTIONS, SOIL

STACKS, SVPS AND ALL OTHER CONNECTIONS OF FOUL AND
SURFACE WATER DRAINS TO BELOW GROUND TO BE FITTED
WITH ACCESSIBLE RODDING POINTS ABOVE SLAB LEVEL.

58.41

57.70 57.7

58.60

KH4

57.98

ALL SURFACE WATER PIPE CONNECTIONS TO BE 150mm

DIAMETER AT MINIMUM FALLS OF 1:100 UNLESS NOTED
OTHERWISE.

57.75
57.75
57

.9

57.98

S2

57.82

FFL 58.25

56.69

ALL FOUL CONNECTIONS TO BE 100mm DIAMETER AT

MINIMUM FALLS OF 1:40 UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.
57.73

57.96

57.79

56.85

56.68

57.73

ALL CONNECTIONS TO BE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH

STANDARD DETAIL DRAWINGS.

56.64

ALL PIPEWORK TO BE INSTALLED WITH SOFFITS LEVEL (E.G.

AT CHANGES IN PIPE SIZE) U.N.O.
ON COMPLETION OF DRAINAGE WORKS, THE NEW DRAINAGE
SYSTEM IS TO BE THOROUGHLY CLEANED AND A CCTV
SURVEY CARRIED OUT TO CONFIRM NO CONSTRUCTION
DEBRIS OR BLOCKAGES REMAIN.

58.39
57.58

S3

RG

RG

CONNECTIONS TO CARRIER DRAINS ARE TO BE 'Y'

JUNCTIONS.

56.55
57.66

ALL PRIVATE DRAINAGE IS TO COMPLY WITH BS EN 752 AND

BUILDING REGS. PART H.
PIPE GRADIENTS ARE INDICATIVE MINIMUMS.

57.54

KH4A

57.65

57.83

57
.6
4

57.80

57.49

KH5

57.65

2
58.9

FFL 57.95

SURFACE CHANNEL DRAINS TO BE ACO MULTIDRAIN OR

SIMILAR.

57.77
57.66

MANHOLES:

58.28
58.38

57.77

57.63

ALL PROPOSED NEW MANHOLES TO BE PRECAST RING

MANHOLES TYPE B UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. INTERNAL

FFL 58.30

FFL 58.20

ELSEWHERE UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. IC - DENOTES

POLYPROPYLENE INSPECTION CHAMBER BY 'HEPWORTH' OR
SIMILAR APPROVED INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDATIONS.

MANHOLE COVERS:
58.31

57.74

CARRIAGEWAYS GENERAL - EN124 CLASS D400

CARRIAGEWAYS WITHIN 0.5m OF KERB - EN124 CLASS C250
SLOW MOVING HGV [38t] - EN 124 CLASS B125 SLOW MOVING
GLV [10t] - EN 124 CLASS B125 SLOW MOVING PRIVATE CARS EN124 CLASS B125.

Eave 61.37
Ridge 64.18

FFL 57.95
57.50

57.60

57.42

6.0M SEWER
EASEMENT

57.90

57.76

57.40

57.65

57.42

57.65

57.69

57.75

57.70
57.72

57.81

57.73

57.75

57.62

57.35

57.52

57.41

57.63
57.59

57.23

57.33

57.81

SECTION 104
SECTION 98

UU STANDARD DETAILS
0000/259/W002 ver E - STANDARD DETAIL No.2 STANDARD PIPE BEDDING
DETAILS FOR RIGID PIPES

SECTION 104
SECTION 98

9.7M SEWER TO BE
REQUISITIONED

9.8M SEWER TO BE
REQUISITIONED

PE 1/2 - WASTEWATER ver A - STANDARD EMBEDMENTS FOR SEMI-RIGID AND FLEXIBLE

PIPES, EMBEDMENT CLASSES S1TO S5 AND CLASSES B1 AND B2
PE 3 - WASTEWATER ver A - STANDARD EMBEDMENTS FOR SEMI-RIGID AND FLEXIBLE
PIPES, EMBEDMENTS CLASSES D AND CONCRETE SURROUND
0000/259/W003 ver E - STANDARD DETAIL No.3 STANDARD PIPE BEDDING
DETAILS FOR RIGID PIPES
0000/259/W004 ver E - STANDARD DETAIL No.4 MANHOLE TYPE 1 - PIPES NOT
EXCEEDING 825mm DIAMETER (DEPTH TO BENCHING NOT EXCEEDING 6.0m)

57.61
57.44

57.26

57.38

57.38
57.14

CONNECTION TO BE
MADE BY UU ONTO
ROCKER PIPE

0000/256/W006 ver E - STANDARD DETAIL No.6 STANDARD MANHOLE ACCESSES

SECTION 98
SECTION 104

0000/254/W008 ver E - STANDARD DETAIL No.8 STANDARD SOLID STAINLESS STEEL

LADDER AND FIXINGS

0000/254/W102 rev E - TYPICAL CONNECTION DETAILS

MH3 - WASTEWATER ver A - MANHOLE 3 BRICK MANHOLE LESS THAN 1.350 TO
BENCHING

Eave 61.29
Ridge 64.18

BACK OF FOOTPATH
OF EXISTING TURNING
HEAD

Rev

Ridge 64.68

Date

Description

By

bowsall

EXACT LOCATION AND

DEPTH OF CULVERT
AND PUBLIC DRAIN TO
BE CONFIRMED ONSITE

0000/256/W005 ver E - STANDARD DETAIL No.5 MANHOLE TYPE 2 - PIPES 900mm

TO 1500mm DIAMETER (DEPTH TO BENCHING NOT EXCEEDING 6.0m)

0000/256/W101 rev E - TYPICAL INTERNAL BACKDROP TO MANHOLE

57.47

APPROX IL:55.51

Eave 61.78

0000/256/W100 ver E - TYPICAL EXTERNAL BACKDROP TO MANHOLE

57.97

57.93

57.71

57.44
57.41

57

57.88

57.43

57.72

.9

57.46

delivering affordable housing

SECTION 98
SECTION 104
Eave 61.77

Ridge 64.81

Client:

MH 4 - WASTEWATER ver A - MANHOLE 4 CIRCULAR PRE-CAST CONCRETE MANHOLE

LESS THAN 1.35m TO BENCHING
MH5 - WASREWATER ver A - MANHOLE 5 POLYPROPYLENE MANHOLE LESS THAN 1.0m
TO BENCHING
MH 6 - WASTEWATER ver A - RECTANGULAR PRE-CAST CONCRETE MANHOLE LESS THAN
1.35m TO BENCHING
MH 7 - WASTEWATER ver A - PRE-CAST CONCRETE INSPECTION CHAMBER
MH 8 - WASTEWATER ver A - DETAILS FOR BUILDING A MANHOLE ON A BRICK OVOID
SEWER (DEPTH TO BENCHING NOT TO EXCEEDING 6.0m)
BS 1 ver A - BRICK OVOID SEWER INVERT RENOVATION TYPICAL DETAIL OF
INVERT CASING

F2 - WASTEWATER ver A - TEMPORARY FENCE B

F3 - WASTEWATER ver A - TEMPORARY FENCE C
F4 - WASTEWATER ver A - POST AND RAIL FENCE
F13 - WASTEWATER ver A - TIMBER SINGLE FIELD GATE
F14 - WASTEWATER ver A - TIMBER STILE
R6 - WASTEWATER ver A - GULLY POT DETAILS

Project:

Scale:

@ original size

Drawn by:

Date:

Checked By:

APPROX IL:54.94

PS 6 - WASTEWATER ver A - FRENCH DRAIN

F1 - WASTEWATER ver A - TEMPORARY FENCE A

EXACT LOCATION
AND DEPTH OF
PUBLIC DRAIN TO BE
CONFIRMED ONSITE

PROPOSED POINT
OF CONNECTION
ONTO EXISTING
PUBLIC NETWORK
EXISTING SEWER

PROPOSED POINT OF
CONENCTION ONTO
EXISTING COMBINED
SYSTEM

Job Number

42

Description

5m

E030 Drainage Layout

10m
Scale 1:500

Rev

Application Reference:
Location:
Proposal:

DC/058609
South Manchester Sports club, St Anns road North,
Heald Green, Stockport, SK8 4RZ
Removal of existing 2 no. 7 a side short grass football
pitches and replacement with 3 no. 5 a side 3G pitches
with associated floodlighting and fencing.

Type of Application:

Full Planning Permission

Registration Date:
Expiry Date:
Case Officer:

27/05/2015
22/07/2015
Jim Seymour

Applicant:
Agent :

South Manchester Sports club

Neil Collins Homes Architects

COMMITTEE STATUS
Committee item - More than 4 letters of objection received.
DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT
The proposal seeks to remove 2 no. existing 7 aside short grass football pitches and
replacement with 3no. 5 a side 3G pitches.
The proposal includes the erection of 8 no. floodlight columns ( 4 per long side of the
pitch area). Each floodlight column would measure 12m in height, be made of steel
and have a RAL colour coated finish and anti-spill lighting fitting. The 4
columns/lighting units would also be fitted with rear overspill shields to reduce light
spillage in the direction of the nearest residential properties. The proposed new area
would be surrounded with weldmesh paladin fencing coloured green 3m in height.
The site will be drained as existing with replacement herringbone system installed
under the proposed pitches.
Hours of operation area specified as being from 4pm to 9pm Monday to Friday and
9am to 9pm on Saturday and Sunday. The facility is for use by existing club
members and intended to upgrade their current facilities as the short grass pitches
currently cannot be used during periods of bad weather or in the winter during early
evening when it is dark.
SITE AND SURROUNDINGS
The application relates to existing grassed pitch area within the existing South
Manchester Sports Club complex on the western site boundary. The site is enclosed
by existing fencing and matures trees and vegetation on the western boundary. The
main sports club lies to the south east with the Jewish School beyond. Cheadle
Royal business park lies further to the east. Residential properties lie on the
opposite side of St Anns Road North with a row of 6 no. properties between

Grasmere and Buttermere Roads facing the application site.

POLICY BACKGROUND
The application site is allocated as Local Open Space and part of Green Chain on
the UDP Review proposals map. The following policies are relevant:
UDP Review
CDH1.2 - Non Residential Development in Predominantly residential areas.
UOS1.3 - Protection of Local Open Space.
NE3.1 - Protection and Enhancement of green chains
Core Strategy DPD
CS8 - Safeguarding and improving the environment
SIE-1 - Quality Places
SIE-3 - Protecting, Safeguarding and enhancing the environment
CS9 - Transport and Development
T-1 - Transport and Development
T-3 - Safety and Capacity on the Highway Network
PLANNING HISTORY
No previous planning history.
NEIGHBOURS VIEWS
the occupiers of 88 nearby properties have been notified in writing of the proposal.
In total 5 letters of objection have been received on the following grounds:
1. The proposed floodlights will be intrusive.
2. The existing floodlights at the site are supposed to turned off at 9pm but never
are. This proposal will worsen the current situation.
3. There is not enough car parking at the site with lots of overspill car parking on
nearby roads and streets. This proposal will worsen the current situation.
4. The proposal will impact on trees.
5. The proposal will be out of character on a residential street.
6. During the winter there are no leaves on the trees and the proposal will be very
prominent.
7. The proposal will have an impact on wildlife value of the site.
8. The site is a source of noise and disturbance already. This proposal will worsen
the current situation.
9. More facilities means more people means more noise and disturbance
10. No provision for the collection of waste.
11. No extra car parking is provided.
12. The proposal will de-value residents properties.
13. The proposal will increase anti-social and inconsiderate behaviour.
14. No more trees should be removed.
CONSULTEE RESPONSES

Highways Engineer: This application is for the removal of two seven a side pitches
and the creation of three five a side pitches.
The only issue to consider is any potential impact on parking provision and increase
in traffic generation. From the application it would appear that there will only be a
minimal increase in the number of players attending this facility and no increase in
the number of staff working at with the sports club.
I would therefore say that there will be no detrimental impact on the highways
network should this development be approved and I raise no objection.
Recommendation: No objection
Policy Officer (Open Space): The existing pitches are designated as Local Open
Space on the Revised UDP Proposals Map. The proposal will not result in the loss of
land designated as LOS. The proposal involves changes to the LOS at the site via
the provision of line markings and floodlighting to provide a 3 no 5-a-side 3 G
pitches. The proposal will provide enhancements to the quality and function of the
LOS, thereby being consistent with the overall aims of the NPPF (paragraphs 72 and
74), UDP Review policy UOS1.3 (the proposal meets criterion I) and Core Strategy
policy CS8.
There is a narrow strip of land that runs along the western edge of the site which is
designated as a Green Chain according to the Revised UDP proposals map. The
development proposal should therefore be subject to Revised UDP Policy NE3.1
Protection and Enhancement of Green Chains.
This policy sets out that development which would detract from the wildlife or
recreational value of the Green Chains identified on the proposals will not be
permitted.
Sport England: As you are aware, Sport England raised an objection to the
application above under cover of a letter dated 14 July 2014. In brief, the proposal
has not been shown to accord with our playing field policy. However, further
information was sought to allow the scheme to be fully assessed.
Amended drawings have now been supplied. These show that the existing grass
pitches did not comply with FA recommended sizes for 7 v 7 play. They also show
an amended proposed layout that includes 2 no. 5v5 a side pitches for U7 and U8s,
and 1 no. 7v7 a side for U9s and U10s whose dimensions meet with those
recommended by the FA.
Additional information has also been supplied. The proposed surface type is to be a
Tiger Turf Football 60 XP Pro 3. This is a product that I understand has been tested
to the FIFA 1* standard. However, in order to allow competitive matches, the AGP
will need to be tested post installation and meet the requirements of the FA register.
Information supplied states that the proposed AGP will increase the capacity of the
site in terms of matches / play that can be accommodated. The existing site is

described as having 2 no very poor grass pitches, playable for only 16-20 weeks of
the year. The proposed AGP would be available for play for 52 weeks of the year.
All existing users of the grass pitches would be accommodated on the new pitches,
and the facility is described as having the support of the users. New and existing
clubs have expressed an interest in using the facility.
Taking all the above into account, there would be no apparent detriment as a result
of the loss of the area of natural turf, and benefits to sport from the scheme have
been identified. I am therefore satisfied that the proposal has been shown to meet
exception E5 of Sport Englands playing field policy. Subject to the following
condition being imposed on any grant of consent, Sport England wishes to withdraw
its objection to the application.
Before the artificial grass pitches hereby approved are brought into use, a
Maintenance Scheme for the facility including a maintenance schedule and a
measures to ensure the replacement of the surface of the artificial grass
pitches within a specified period of time shall be submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority [after consultation with Sport England].
The measures set out in the approved scheme shall be complied with in full,
with effect from commencement of use of the artificial grass pitches.
Reason: To ensure that the new facility remains fit for purpose. One of the
primary advantages of artificial grass pitches over natural turf is their ability to
allow for much greater levels of use. However, this benefit is dependent upon
appropriate maintenance.

I would also recommend that the applicant gives consideration to ensuring that the
scheme more closely accords with FA guidance:
By increasing the height of the ball retention fencing to 4.5m
By changing the pitch layout to one of those set out in The FA Guide to 3G
football turf pitch design principles and layouts
By ensuring that floodlighting achieves the relevant FA requirements - For full
size matches (FIFA Class II) a minimum maintained average illuminance of
200lux and uniformity (min/ave) >0.6, and / or for training and cross play a
minimum maintained average luminance of 120 lux.
By ensuring that the pitch is tested and approved to appear on The FA
Register
Please note that the absence of an objection to this planning application should in no
way be taken as an indication of support for any application for funding from Sport
England (or national governing bodies for sport) in relation to the proposal.
Nature Development Officer: I would recommend that an informative be attached
to any planning permission granted stating that no works should be carried out
during the bird nesting season (which is typically March-August inclusive) unless
it can be demonstrated that breeding birds are not present.
Part of the application site is designated as Green Chain. The presence of Green
Chain does not prohibit new development, as long as the key factor of the policy,

to avoid the impedance of wildlife movement, is avoided.

The lighting design incorporates some measures to reduce impacts (e.g.
disturbance to foraging bats) associated with light spillage. However, it is
important that impacts associated with light pollution are further mitigated for and
the integrity of the Green Chain and its functionality as a wildlife corridor is not
compromised. It is therefore recommended that a detailed planting scheme is
prepared and submitted for approval by the LPA. Planting should be incorporated
around the edge of the site to enhance the existing habitats present and mitigate
for the loss of designated Green Chain habitat. This will also further screen
against light spillage and minimise and mitigate for associated impacts on
wildlife. Species planting should be locally native and include species to attract
insects, thereby increasing foraging opportunities for bats. Suitable species
include hawthorn, hazel, oak, geulder rose, honeysuckle and dog rose.
ANALYSIS
The application requires assessment in respect of the following issues:
1. Landuse
The site is allocated as local open space in the UDP preview. Policy UOS1.3 seeks
to protect open space from inappropriate development. Development will be
permitted if it is clearly needed in connection with the outdoor recreational use of the
land and will enhance the overall quality of the Local Open Space. In particular the
policy specifies that there should be no net loss of open space resulting from
development.
In this respect it should be noted that the proposed floodlights are not essential to
allow the area of open space to function however they would enhance the ability of
the facility and open space to be used for extended periods into the early evening
particularly during the winter months when it is dark at these times. In this sense the
proposal will clearly enhance the overall quality of the open space allocation and
increase its usability. In addition the works will not result in a net loss of open space.
The proposal is therefore considered to comply with policy UOS1.3.
As the application relates to existing sports pitches Sport England are a statutory
consult on the proposal. Sport Englands standard policy is to oppose any planning
application which will result in the loss of playing pitch land unless it is satisfied that
the application meets with one or more of five specific exceptions.
Exception 1 Excess of provision
Exception 2 Ancillary development
Exception 3 Land incapable of forming part of a pitch
Exception 4 Replacement provision
Exception 5 Sports facilities
Sport England originally lodged objection to the proposal for not meeting any of the
exemptions. However following further information being submitted by the applicant
outlining the purpose of the application this objection has been lifted as will be noted
from the consultation response above.
It is noted that no existing pitches would be lost as a result of the proposed

development. The proposed development would provide enhanced and additional

facilities on the site that would improve the user/visitor experience and improve the
quality of the existing sports club facility. On this basis the proposal is not
considered to conflict with the relevant open space policies outlined above and will
fall within several exceptions (2, 4 and 5) of the above Sport England exceptions. As
such the principle of the development on Local Open Space/sports field is
considered acceptable and the proposal is considered to comply with relevant
development plan policy and national guidance.
The application site is located within a Green Chain and the comments of the
Council Nature Development Officer are provided above. It is not considered that the
proposed stand would detract from the function of the designated site, given the
current nature of the existing habitat (close mown amenity grassland). There is
limited potential for protected species to be impacted upon by the proposed
development. There is no requirement for any further ecological information to be
submitted with the application. As such, in the absence of objections from the
Council Nature Development Officer, the proposal is considered acceptable within
the Green Chain, in accordance with Saved UDP policy NE3.1 .
2. Green Chain Status
The application site is also allocated as forming part of a wider Green Chain
designation. Policy NE1.3 seeks to protect and enhance the quality of green chains
from both a wildlife and recreation point of view. Rather than preclude development
the proposal will permit development provided that it does not impede wildlife
movement or recreational use. As outlined above the recreational value of the
facility is high and supported in terms of open space policy. The comments of the
Nature Development Officer (above) identify that the habitats within the application
site currently offer limited value to wildlife and it is not considered that the proposed
development will significantly comprise the functionality of the Green Chain for
wildlife. On this basis the proposal is consider to comply with the Green Chain
designation and Policy NE1.3 and Core Strategy DPD policies CS8 and SIE-3.
Informative's should be applied as advised the nature development officer.
3. Impact on Residential Amenity
The site is located to the east of a Predominantly Residential Area. Residential
properties therefore lie on the opposite side of St Ann's Road North facing onto the
site. The impact of the proposed use should therefore be considered in respect of
residential amenity the main considerations being visual amenity, noise, light
spillage/pollution and hours of operation.
In terms of visual impact this is considered to minimal with the main considerations
being the perimeter fencing and the lighting units. The perimeter fencing will have a
low visual prominence being largely transparent being a colour coated weldmesh
design. There is already fencing on the site for the existing use/pitch facilities and
therefore the proposed fencing will not be a new or alien feature. The lighting
columns, although tall in some case, would be slender structures capable of being
painted an appropriate colour. In this respect the visual appearance and impact of
the relevant structures is considered to be minimal, at an acceptable level and not
problematic. In terms of visual impact this also considered to minimal with the main
considerations being the lighting columns and units. It should also be noted that

their is a mature hedge and tree line along the sites western boundary which
provides an effective visual screen particularly during the months when the
vegetation is in leaf. In this respect the visual appearance and impact of the lighting
columns and fencing is reduced further and is therefore considered to be minimal, at
an acceptable level and not problematic. Further landscaping/planting could be
introduced along this sensitive boundary and this can also be secured through
planning condition. This would increase screening for residents and enhance the
value of the site in terms of its Green Chain designation also.
In terms of light pollution/spillage the proposed floodlights are to be sited on both
sides of the proposed pitches and angled/directed to light straight onto these
facilities. The application has been accompanied by a detailed information in respect
of light spillage. The submission identifies that low spill lighting units with rear
shields have been chosen with the level of spillage clearly indicated on a light
contour plan. The light contour plan shows that light spill from the facility will not
affect any of the nearby properties on the opposite side of St Anns Road. In terms of
light pollution the submission identifies that there will not be a significant impacts on
residential amenity.
The hours of proposed use are from 4.00pm to 9.00pm Monday to Friday and 9am to
9pm on Saturday and Sunday. The proposal is intended to be used by the existing
sports club rather than for use by wider community groups. Clearly the proposal will
allow the enhanced use of the open space facility for the clubs members until later in
the evening at the times of the year when it is dark early with the associated noise
and disturbance. As identified above the site is overlooked to the west by
residential properties and noise and disturbance from the enhanced use the proposal
could occur. However it should be noted that these properties are located 30m to
the west. This is not an insignificant distance and the separation will provide some
protection from noise. In addition it should be noted that the site currently contains
pitches in this location and has other floodlight pitches on other parts of the complex
that operate to the same hours proposed here. Noise and activity from the site will
therefore not be a new or alien introduction to the locality. Despite the hours
proposed allowing use up to 9pm given the separation distance from dwellings and
existing use of the site it is not considered that noise and disturbance impact should
not be excessive. It is therefore considered reasonable to approve the proposed
hours of operation which should be controlled by planning condition.
4. Highways
The proposal will provide an improved open space facility for the sports club as
outlined above. The Highways Engineer has assessed the proposal and is satisfied
that the proposal will cater for existing users and staff rather than new and therefore
generate only limited new traffic. The existing car parking provision is considered
adequate to cater for demand.
5. Design
As outlined above the main proposed features are the lighting columns and fencing.
The design of the fencing columns is not considered problematic being relatively
standard for this type of development and coloured to reduce prominence. A
condition should be imposed to require the columns and fencing to be painted an
appropriate colour probably green. On this basis the proposal is considered to

comply with policies SIE1 and SIE3 of the LDF which seek to ensure good quality
design
6. Drainage
Policy SD-6 of the Core Strategy promotes the use of Sustainable Urban Drainage
system. The submission identifies that the majority of the development will be of
porous construction and will allow water to soak through the facilities to a new
system of herringbone drains to replace the existing. The site would therefore drain
in exactly the same way as existing ultimately draining to the existing watercourse at
the northern boundary drain down into the brook in the valley at the bottom of the
eastern boundary of our site that abuts Cheadle Royal Business Park. In summary
the proposal simply seeks a change in surfacing from grass to 3G. Both are porous
and there is no change to the existing drainage system or connections which gained
the relevant consent from other drainage bodies when the pitches were originally
constructed. On this basis the proposal is considered to be acceptable in not
contributing to flooding or overloading the existing sewer network and in compliance
with Policy SD-6. A condition to require the submitted scheme should be imposed.
SUMMARY
Grant

FLOODLIGHTING

CHALLENGER 1 AL5760

Benefits
Challenger 1 gives excellent light
control; reducing light overspill,
upward light and glare
Includes a double asymmetric
distribution with Flat Glass Technology
Designed for lighting outdoor
sports grounds and smaller sports
stadiums where obtrusive light
control is an essential requirement
The Challenger 1 floodlight contains a
factory fitted 2kW cut-out ignitor
which offers better protection for the
lamp and floodlight cabling

Technical Features
Body of high-pressure die cast
aluminium, first given a zinc chromate
substrate, then finished in RAL7035
light grey polyester powder coating for
optimum protection against harsh
environments

Fels Point Tennis Club, Ireland

66 www.abacuslighting.com

Narrow, medium and wide beam,

double asymmetric light distributions

Sealed to IP66; with silicone

rubber gasketing

Toughened front glass, secured within

an aluminium frame

Electrical connection box (IP66)

housing ignitor, located on the side
of the stirrup, fitted with 2 x GORE
membrane breathers

Double asymmetric reflector system of

high purity, polished and anodised
aluminium. Incorporating an internal
baffle to improve efficiency and
reduce glare
Galvanised steel stirrup, with
additional locking screws

Simple aiming using a separate aiming

device for accurate results
Breather management system
regulates air flow through the cable
hose and in/out through IP67
GORE membrane. This method
alleviates stress on the front glass

Lamp: Manufacturer Product Code

Lamp
Manufacturer

Lamp: Abacus
Product Code

Lampholder
Type

AL5761

Narrow

2kW: MHN-LA 2000W/842 & 956

Philips

LPP2000MHN-TD (842) &

LPP2000/D (956)

XWH UNP

AL5762

Medium

2kW: MHN-LA 2000W/842 & 956

Philips

LPP2000MHN-TD (842) &

LPP2000/D (956)

XWH UNP

AL5763

Wide

2kW: MHN-LA 2000W/842 & 956

Philips

LPP2000MHN-TD (842) &

LPP2000/D (956)

XWH UNP

AL5764

Narrow

2kW: HQI-TS 2000W/N/L K12S FS1

Osram

LPW2000M/LA

K12s-7

AL5765

Medium

2kW: HQI-TS 2000W/N/L K12S FS1

Osram

LPW2000M/LA

K12s-7

AL5766

Wide

2kW: HQI-TS 2000W/N/L K12S FS1

Osram

LPW2000M/LA

K12s-7

AL5767

Narrow

2kW: MH-TS 2000W/L/K12/45K

Venture

LPV2000M/LA

K12s-7

AL5768

Medium

2kW: MH-TS 2000W/L/K12/45K

Venture

LPV2000M/LA

K12s-7

AL5769

Wide

2kW: MH-TS 2000W/L/K12/45K

Venture

LPV2000M/LA

K12s-7

AL5770

Narrow

1kW: MHN-LA 1000W/842 & 956

Philips

LPP1000MHN-TD (842) &

LPP1000MHD-TD (956)

XWH UNP

AL5771

Medium

1kW: MHN-LA 1000W/842 & 956

Philips

LPP1000MHN-TD (842) &

LPP1000MHD-TD (956)

XWH UNP

AL5772

Wide

1kW: MHN-LA 1000W/842 & 956

Philips

LPP1000MHN-TD (842) &

LPP1000MHD-TD (956)

XWH UNP

AL5773

Narrow

2kW: MHN-FC2000/740

Philips

LPP2000MHN-FC

XW UNP

AL5774

Medium

2kW: MHN-FC2000/740

Philips

LPP2000MHN-FC

XW UNP

AL5775

Wide

2kW: MHN-FC2000/740

Philips

LPP2000MHN-FC

XW UNP

AL5776

Narrow

1kW: MHN-FC1000/740

Philips

LPP1000MHN-FC

XW UNP

AL5777

Medium

1kW: MHN-FC1000/740

Philips

LPP1000MHN-FC

XW UNP

AL5778

Wide

1kW: MHN-FC1000/740

Philips

LPP1000MHN-FC

XW UNP

AL5779

Narrow

2kW: MH-TS2000W/XL/K12/745

Venture

LPV2000MH-TS-XL

K12s-7

AL5780

Medium

2kW: MH-TS2000W/XL/K12/745

Venture

LPV2000MH-TS-XL

K12s-7

AL5781

Wide

2kW: MH-TS2000W/XL/K12/745

Venture

LPV2000MH-TS-XL

K12s-7

FLOODLIGHTING

Beam Type

Lamp references

HQI-TS
MH-TS

MHN-LA

MHN-FC

Lamp Manufacturer
& Lamp Ref.

Lamp
Wattage

Colour
Temp

RA:

Lamp Lumen
Output:
(Initial Im)

Lamp
Current:

Supply Voltage

Total
Circuit
Power:

Venture
MH-TS2000W/L/K12/4K

2kW

4500K

65

240,000 I.lm

10.3A

380/400/415V

2150W

MH-TS2000W/XL/K12/745

2kW

4500K

65

240,000 I.lm

10.3A

380/400/415V

2150W

Philips
MHN-LA2KW400V/842

2kW

4200K

80

220,000 I.lm

9.6A

380/400/415V

2105W

MHN-LA2KW400V/956

2kW

5600K

90

190,000 I.lm

10.3A

380/400/415V

2113W

MHN-LA1KW230V/842

1kW

4200K

80

100,000 I.lm

9.3A

230/240V

1040W

MHN-LA1KW230V/956

1kW

5600K

90

90,000 I.lm

10.1A

230/240V

1040W

MHN-FC2000W/740

2kW

4200K

60

210,000 I.lm

10.1A

380/400/415V

2032W

MHN-FC1000W/740

1kW

4100K

65

93,000 I.lm

10A

230/240V

1040W

Osram
HQI-TS2000WNL

2kW

4400K

65

230,000 I.lm

10.7A

380/400/415V

2180W

HQI-TS2000WDL

2kW

5400K

85

205,000 I.lm

10.3A

380/400/415V

2180W

Technical information may alter dependent on control gear used

Professional lighting systems to suit any project. Call 01623 518 333

67

Dimensions

Maintenance

Dimensions in mm
491

523

254
431
277

142
513

3 x 21mm

240
70

125
340

258

Weight: 20kg. Front wind area: @60

setting (Flat Glass) - 0.126m 70 max
setting (+10 elevation) - 0.135m
Side wind area: 0.108m

Mounting:
Stirrup mounted using M20 fixing
Stirrup adjustment +/- 140

Easy Maintenance:
Access to the lamp by means
of opening the rear door

Key features
Abacus Light Control
System

Double Asymmetric
Reflector

A combination of efficient lighting

design and careful floodlight design
has rewarded Abacus with an
international reputation for pioneering
high performance floodlighting
combined with effective control of
obtrusive light.

The double asymmetric reflector is

designed to ensure full flow of light
over the lit area from each floodlight.
With the main beam emitted from the
floodlight at an angle of 60 degrees
forward from the normal to the front
glass, it results in a flat appearance
(fig 1). The benefit is that less of the
reflector is visible to spectators and
onlookers, resulting in low glare to the
surrounding locality.

Specific to Challenger 1 the Abacus

Light Control System consists of a
series of complimentary measures to
effectively control light pollution.

fig.1

fig.2

Internal Baffle
The internal baffle re-directs upward
stray light back into the floodlight
beam, providing increased efficiency.
At angles above the beam the baffle
shields direct lamp glare (fig 3).
Produces sharp run back above high
peak resulting in greater overspill
containment and minimal intrusion to
adjacent areas bordering the
installation (fig 2).

fig.3
Lamp

60

Reduced
direct glare

1.

2.

3.

cd/k m

cd/k m

cd/k m

IPK

AL5764/AL5767
AL5765/AL5768
AL5766/AL5769
2kW HQI - TS / MH - TS 2kW HQI - TS / MH - TS 2kW HQI - TS / MH - TS
Narrow beam
Medium beam
Wide beam

68 www.abacuslighting.com

Baffle

FLOODLIGHTING
Emirates Golf Course, Dubai

England FA Academy

Professional lighting systems to suit any project. Call 01623 518 333

69

NOTES
1. FIRST ANGLE PROJECTION.

494

2. DIMENSION S SH OWN IN BRACKETS

TH US (25) ARE REF. D IMEN SIONS
ON LY.

151

3. REMOVE AL L BURR S & SHAR P

EDGES.
4. DO N OT SCALE IF IN DOUBT ASK.
5. WEL DING SYMBOLS ARE TO BS EN
24 063 & BS EN 225 53

21

6. ALL STANDAR DS & SPEC IFICATIONS

ARE TO BE TO THE LATEST
REVISIONS.
7. FILL ET WELDS TO BE TO WEL D
PROCEDU RE No. 031 W.
8. MATER IAL : 2mm THK ALUMINIUM.
9. FINISH: POWDER C OAT BLACK TO
RAL 90 05.

349

2mm THK
WHEN FIXING COWL TO LUMINAIRE,
REPLACE 4 No. M5x55 CAP-HEAD SCREWS
WITH 4 No. M5x70 (CAP005F). FIT 1 No. PENNY
WASHER (WA036F) & 1 No. SPRING WASHER
(WA021F) PER FIXING TO OUTER FACE
OF COWL & STACK 3 No. WASHERS (WA140F)
PER FIXING UNDERNEATH COWL TO CREATE
PRESSURE ON EXISTING SEALING WASHER.

109

33

ITEM No. BKT/A1722/U

WEIGHT: 1.4 Kg

WIND AREA OF SHIELD = 0.345m

82 `0.5

22

192 `0.5

B
A

452 `0.5

D
L.D.
C
L.D.
B
L.D.
A
L.D.
REV SIG

FOR PRESSING DETAIL,

SEE DXF TEMPLATE FILE.

10

(19)

n12

Copyright Strictly Reserved

R3

General tolerences unless

stated otherwise:-

2009
Patent No.
Reg. Design No.

L. DYE

Checked

Abacus Lighting Ltd.

Drawn

0mm-500mm-------- ` 1
501mm-1000mm--- ` 2
Above----------------- `

A. J. JENVEY

29/04/2009

15/7/14
14/3/11
02/6/09
01/5/09
DATE

A.B.
A.B.
A.B.
A.B.
CHD

Title

DETAIL OF 2mm THK REAR COWL

TO MOUNT TO CHALLENGER 1
FLOODLIGHTS.
Client

Not to scale
Date

DEFAULT RAL9005.
WINDAGE ADDED.
FOAM PADS REMOVED
CAP005F WAS 65LG
DESCRIPTION

Sales order No.

Drg. No.

STANDARD COMPONENT
2737/2/M

APPEAL DECISIONS, CURRENT PLANNING APPEALS AND ENFORCEMENTS

Report of the Deputy Chief Executive
1.

MATTER FOR CONSIDERATION

1.1

This report summarises recent appeal decisions, lists current planning appeals and dates for local inquiries and informal
hearings, progress upon authorised enforcement action set out by area committee.

2.

INFORMATION

2.1

The appeal decisions, details of current appeals and current enforcement action for each committee area are appended.

3.

RECOMMENDATION

3.1

That the report be noted.

BACKGROUND PAPERS
There are no background papers.
Anyone with enquiries relating to planning appeals should telephone Joy Morton on 474 3219
Anyone with enquiries relating to enforcement activity should contact Dave Westhead on 0161 474 3520

AGENDA ITEM

CHEADLE
PLANNING APPEALS
None Current
ENFORCEMENT APPEALS
CA/010825

Appeal Date Appeal Procedure

18/11/14 Written representations

Location

208 OUTWOOD ROAD, HEALD GREEN

Description

High Hedge Remedial appeal

Case Officer

Dave Westhead

Appeal Decision

Pending awaiting site visit

Appeal Decision Date

ENFORCEMENT NOTICES
Enforcement No.

CA/010342

Action

Serve Enforcement Notice

Location

2 MASSIE STREET, CHEADLE SK8 1BW

Description

Unauthorised installation of replacement windows in Conservation Area

Case Officer

Amanda Hopkins

Notice Served Date

15/08/2014

Compliance Date

13/03/2015 Not complied with, compliance date extended to 31/3/15. Prosecution pending.

Enforcement No.

CA/010825

Action

Serve High Hedge Remedial Notice

Location

208 OUTWOOD ROAD, HEALD GREEN

Description

High Hedge Remedial Notice

Case Officer

Dave Westhead

Notice Served Date

10/10/2014

Compliance Date

Pending Appeal

Enforcement No.

CA/11079

Action

Serve Enforcement Notice

Location

THE SANGAM, 202 WILMSLOW ROAD,HEALD GREEN

Description

Without the benefit of planning permission the positioning of a storage container in the car park

Case Officer

Dave Westhead

Notice Served Date

15/07/15

Compliance Date

12 August 2015

All Area Committees

Meeting: 10-13 August 2015

DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT
REVIEW OF OUTCOMES TOUR, MARCH 2015

Report of the Corporate Director for Place Management & Regeneration

1.

INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE OF REPORT

1.1 The purpose of this report is to outline the findings of the review of outcomes tour
undertaken on Friday 6th March 2015.
2.

BACKGROUND

2.2 For each site a written report on the planning issues was distributed and a Planning
Officer gave an oral presentation and answered questions. The participants viewed the
site and completed a questionnaire. The attached Appendix contains the questionnaire
results and a summary of individual comments from respondents.
3.

MAIN FINDINGS & COMMENTARY

3.1 All of the sites chosen represent recent forms of development, which were considered
under the adopted development plan and the National Planning Policy Framework
(NPPF). The sites raised a variety of issues, which had to be considered, assessed,
negotiated and balanced prior to a decision being made.
3.2 The sites visited were:

AGENDA ITEM

2.1 Each Area Committee nominated a recently completed development for review. The sites
are then inspected to review the effectiveness of the development management and
policy process, to identify good practice, areas for improvement and lessons for the
future. Each site was visited and inspected by a team of Members, Officers and guests
from Greater Manchester Police Design for Security Team and an Architectural Practice.

Residential development at the former Peaches building, Wellington Street, Stockport

Residential development at the former North Area College site, Buckingham Road,
Heaton Moor
Residential development at the former CherryTree PH site, Compstall Road, Romiley
Residential development at the former Peacefield School site, Cross Lane, Marple
Care Home development at a former Depot on Torkington Road, Hazel Grove
Dwelling on land to rear of 3 Hill Top Avenue, Cheadle Hulme
Smithy Croft Extra Care Home on Finney Lane, Heald Green

3.3 The sites chosen reflect the mix, type and scale of recent development undertaken within
the Borough and give a good base for consideration of Planning Policy and Practice
when assessing applications and completed and operational sites.
3.4 The choice of developments demonstrates that the existing policy base has provided a
comprehensive framework to achieving acceptable standards. It is nevertheless
important to review the effectiveness of the decision making process and lessons learnt
through the Review of Outcomes Tour can be used for this purpose in the consideration

of development proposals, drafting and reviewing Planning Policy as well as

Supplementary Planning Documents.
3.5 Delegates were asked to score each development overall in terms of the quality of
development achieved with 0 being poor and 10 being excellent. On this basis the
average scores are as listed below:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)

Peaches Building: 8.3

Buckingham Road: 7.2
CherryTree PH site: 7.3
Peacefield School site: 7.4
Torkington Road: 8.4
Hill Top Avenue: 6.3
Mallard Court: 7.7

3.6 It can be seen from the scoring that there is a differential in opinion and ratings between
the various developments visited. This is synonymous with Development Management
practice and individual perceptions of completed development and provides a useful
indication of where lessons can be learnt by the Council when considering future
development proposals.
3.7 There are always issues that arise within the development management process and
which require a flexible and balanced approach by the Council to enable and assist the
delivery of high quality development in the Borough.
3.8 This approach is illustrated in the redevelopment on the former Peacefield School site.
The development resulted in the loss of a small area of Local Open Space (circa 40sq.m)
and whilst this is contrary to policy it was considered that such a loss would enable the
delivery of much needed affordable housing for rent. The development is completed,
occupied and providing affordable housing to a number of families, in summary a
successful decision where the major community and social benefit from granting the
permission outweighed the concern from loss of a relatively small area of LOS and
departure from Planning Policy.
3.9 A similar balanced approach was taken at the Hilltop Avenue site where a modern
contemporary design approach was taken to build a property situated in a Conservation
Area using Passivhaus principles, a softer material palette and produce a simple (Design
Officers words) yet elegant dwelling. The property brought mixed reviews and it isnt
unreasonable to suggest that this site drew a lot of negative comment and constructive
criticism. It was nevertheless considered by Officers to be a fitting response to a sensitive
context and the outcome clearly complies with the provisions of the design related
policies of Stockports Core Strategy and other guidance documents.
3.10 When considering design quality, it is essential to not just look at the aesthetics of a
development. Design embraces, amongst other things, the function and use of the
building and site, its relationship to its surroundings, development infrastructure and
accessibility and sustainability matters. No aspect is any more important with each
requiring detailed consideration and weighting to ensure a quality decision is made.
3.11 Guidance documents came under further scrutiny with the visit to Buckingham Road.
Residential layouts are now required to have regard to design guidance in the form of
Manual for Streets (MfS) which focuses on delivering an environment and mixed purpose
for space rather than just facilitate access through road space. This is further endorsed

by Council Policy which requires innovative design and regard to Homezone type
layouts. The Buckingham Road site took account of some of the principles of MfS, for
example a mix of traditional and informal road space, but is was felt by the significant
majority that the layout does not fully embrace the principles and could have gone
further. Whilst the Highway Engineer had concerns at application stage and felt the
layout could be greatly improved it was acknowledged that the layout was not sufficiently
removed from Policy so as to justify a refusal. There is always a difficult balance to strike
between guidance and Policy and issues can become very subjective.
3.12 At the Smithy Croft site the removal of 15 trees of which one was protected, was required
to facilitate the form of development now occupying the site. The majority of
respondents were of the view that the landscaping scheme which had been implemented
provided compensation for the loss of trees. The decision to remove trees had arisen
when considering the application and it was accepted by Officers and Committee that this
would be necessary to ensure a viable development.
3.13 The Peaches site was met positively by the majority of reviewers. This site lies in a
Conservation area so design and historic issues were prominent in determination and
ensured delivery of a sensitive and well-designed development. Officers have been
involved in discussion for many years to bring forward development and this has now
been realised with a quality shared ownership scheme. The lack of open space within the
site and the argument presented to avoid any financial contribution being made in the
first instance was accepted by Committee to facilitate development. The appended S106
is carefully worded to ensure clawback of any appropriate sums should the scheme
prove to be more viable than initially predicted.
3.14 It is considered that the Peaches site is an example of good planning practice where a
number of issues are carefully considered and balanced to achieve a satisfactory and
positive outcome. Officers fully embraced the need to work positively and proactively with
the developers to seek a successful solution.
3.15 Various concerns were raised with the integration of public facilities within the Smithy
Croft development. It was felt by some that these have indirectly influenced the way the
site operates and impacted on parking demand. The counter argument is that this
provision was integral to allow for residents of the scheme to feel part of the wider
community therefore delivering better integration.
3.16 The tour gave an overview of the issues that are prevalent with Development
Management. Very rarely are two sites the same and regularly different issues arise for
those involved in discussion and determination. In addition, it is also important to
recognise that these schemes often raise very different concerns from local residents.
Pragmatism is forefront in mind sets and developers continue to be encouraged to
discuss their proposals with Officers at an early stage in order to influence design
positively and enhance the quality of the outcome. This approach is a key principle of
effective Development Management practice at its best as it enables discussion with all
relevant parties before a design is produced and submitted as a planning application.
Developers continue to be strongly encouraged to undertake community engagement in
advance of submission to enable them to consider and potentially amend any design in
reaction to community concerns and feeling.

4.

CONCLUSIONS

4.1 Overall the tour demonstrated the value of the existing policies, the importance of the
Development Management process and the attention to detail given by the Council.
Whilst there may be areas for improvement, the general standard of achievement is good
and the service continues to facilitate regeneration, new housing and other beneficial
development, whilst protecting and enhancing the environment in accordance with Core
Strategy DPD Policies.
4.2 The continued encouragement to developers to undertake pre-application discussion in
the spirit of Development Management will help to influence the final design solution
before the application is submitted.
5.3 A summary of the questionnaires is attached at appendix 1.
5.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The Area Committee is recommended to comment on and note the report.

BACKGROUND PAPERS
1.
2.
3.

The planning applications for the sites inspected.

The development reports for each of the sites visited.
The questionnaires for the 7 development sites inspected.

Anyone wishing to inspect the above background papers or requiring further information
should contact Kevin Brookes on telephone number 474-4905 or alternatively email
kevin.brooks@stockport.gov.uk

Appendix 1
ANNUAL REVIEW OF OUTCOMES TOUR MARCH 2015
QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY RESULTS [SUMMARY]
This provides a summary of the completed responses returned by the delegates
attending the Tour. An average of 24 written responses was received for each site.
The questionnaires were tailored to suit the specific issues the completed developments
raised. In all cases however delegates were asked for an overall view of each
development so that a broad comparison of views could be gauged across all the
schemes inspected.
Whilst some questions required a simple yes or no response others required more
detailed comments. Several delegates made similar detailed responses and these have
been recorded, and occasionally differences of opinion emerged and these can be seen
also.

-1-

Page left intentionally blank

-2-

FORMER PEACHES BUILDING, 67 WELLINGTON STREET, STOCKPORT

Apartment development
Has the
extension to the
Clarkes building
been delivered
sensitively to the
overall
development?

Is the development of
a high quality in terms
of design and does it
respect the special
character of the
conservation area?

Does the reduced

level of overall
amenity space
compromise the
development in any
way?

Overall Score
0=poor
10=excellent

80% said yes, 96% said yes, 4% 12% said yes, 88% Average score= 8.3
20% said no
said no
said no
Specific comments included:
Building well restored
Sensitive renovation
Sympathetic to Conservation Area
Amenity space well done
Dislike of metal bridge
Geometrically sharp building clashes with surroundings
Good use of materials
Shop window disappointing, should be obscure glazed
Peaceful atmosphere
Quality apartments, good use of space
Lacks heating within corridor spaces
Ample amenity space for Town Centre location
Outdoor space well differentiated

-3-

FORMER STOCKPORT COLLEGE CAMPUS, BUCKINGHAM ROAD, HEATON

MOOR
Residential development
Do you think the
development sufficiently
embraces the design
principles of Manual for
streets?

Do you think the design of

the proposed dwellings is
appropriate for this site?

Are the
affordable
houses well
integrated
into the
development?

Overall
Score
0=poor
10=excellent

23% said yes, 48% said 61% think the relationship is 54% said yes, Average
no and 29% are uncertain successful,
35%
have 46% said no
score = 7.2
pre-completion
reservations, 4% think the
relationship unsuccessful
Specific comments included:
Good mix of house types
Paviors well utilised
Palette of materials good
Affordable houses featureless
Affordable too close to rail line
Road space should be more informal
Various heights to buildings is good design
Positive streetscene
Traditional road layout unnecessary
More innovation to road design would be welcomed
Disappointed with siting of properties
Affordable properties should be integrated and better spread throughout development
Concern on street parking could prove prominent and a problem
Garages small
Attractive development
Should prove child friendly infrastructure
Roadspace too dominant

-4-

FORMER CHERRYTREE PH SITE, COMPSTALL ROAD, ROMILEY

Residential development
Is the use of contemporary
design/materials for the flats
a success in respect of
design and reflecting the
character of the area?

Is the height of the flats at the

junction of Compstall Road
and Cherry Tree Lane
appropriate for the locality?

Overall Score
0=poor
10=excellent

70% said yes, 30% said no

78% said yes, 22% said no

Average score = 7.3

Specific comments included:

Building well sited on corner
Individual design with character
Height is not dominating
Excellent split of private and social occupancy
Lack of a lift is disappointing
Views well from CherryTree Lane but disappointing from Compstall Road
Material palette could be better
Too functional in appearance
Too high and bulky development
Flats could have been set back further into plot
Appearance needs to weather
Big improvement on previous site buildings
Poor quality landscaping and amenity space
Plastic materials bad choice

-5-

FORMER PEACEFIELD PRIMARY SCHOOL SITE, CROSS LANE, MARPLE

Residential development
Do you think that
Design and
Materials of the
development are
acceptable in the
location?
76% said
24% said no

What are your opinions of

the overall scale, height,
bulk and massing of the
development in relation to
the adjacent buildings
and the overall character
of the street scene?

Do you feel that the

loss of Local Open
Space was justified
and the new boundary
acceptable?

yes, 80%
made
positive 96% said yes
comments, 20% raised
concerns

Specific comments included:

Materials embrace the area
Bin stores should be better screened
Mix of dwellings poor
Contrasting but tasteful
Appropriate scale and character
Well landscaped in places, other areas poor
More trees would improve scheme
Boundary treatment good
Good mix of materials
Development quality compensates for loss of Open Space
Build line could have been stepped
People friendly and spacious feel
Glass above doors looks out of place

-6-

Overall
score
0=poor
10=excellent

Average
score =7.4

FORMER DEPOT, TORKINGTON ROAD, HAZEL GROVE

Residential Care Home development
Do you consider
the scale, design
and choice of
materials for the
new build
element respects
the character and
appearance of
the locally listed
buildings?

Do
you
think
the
relationship of the new
build scheme with the
Secret Garden dominates/
detracts
from
the
tranquillity of the garden?
If so do you consider this
would
be
overcome
through the maturing of the
planting?

Do you think the right

balance of external
hard and soft
landscaping within the
site has been achieved
so as not to detract
from the character of
the locally listed
buildings and to ensure
a pleasant living
environment for
residents?

100% said yes

64%
think
not,
the 88% said yes, 12% said Average
significant majority think no
score = 8.4
the planting helps soften
the impact

Specific comments included:

Impressive development
Tranquil garden area
Good design and material choice
Well laid out open space
Good separation around site
Not overdeveloped
Plenty of natural surveillance, but not too overlooked in garden
Brick colour should be darker
Expansive and hard/brash parking area
Planting good and will improve with time
Courtyard well laid out
Planting needs more colour

-7-

Overall
scores
0=poor
10=excellent

LAND TO THE REAR OF 3 HILLTOP AVENUE, CHEADLE HULME

Detached dwelling
Whilst
contemporary
designs may be
used, where
appropriate, in
historically and
architecturally
sensitive areas,
in this instance
is the design a
fitting response
to its context?

Does the
development
respect the
spacious
quality of the
locality?

Does the size

of the
dwelling in
relation to the
plot ensure
that the leafy
quality of the
locality is
maintained?

The use of
timber at first
floor level was
selected to
reduce the
visual impact
of the dwelling
from Swann
Lane and
complement
the green and
leafy setting,
how successful
is this?

Does the
development
constitute a
quality design
outcome?

48% said yes, 54%

said 79%
said 48%
think 64% said
48% said no yes,
46% yes,
21% successful,
yes, 36%
and 4% are said no
said no
28%
think said no
unsure
unsuccessful
and 24% think
too early to
comment
Specific comments included:
Contemporary design good but does not site well within area
Needs to weather and let landscaping grow
Respectful contrast
Design should be encouraged elsewhere
Material choice unsuccessful
Visual impact limited due to tight plot size
Should be more glass
Poor streetscene appearance
Disjointed design
Screening will improve with maturity
Inappropriate development in this location
Approaches not very well over looked
Building too large for plot size
Unique building
Good example of Eco development

-8-

Overall
score
0=poor
10=excellent

Average
score = 7

FORMER MALLARD COURT SITE, FINNEY LANE, HEALD GREEN

Extra Care Home development
Do you feel that
the retention and
protection of
existing trees on
site and the
landscaping
scheme provided
compensate for
the agreed loss
of trees from the
site?

Do you feel that there is an

acceptable/appropriate level
of parking provided to serve
the development?

Noting the siting of

the development in
relation to
neighbouring
residential properties,
do you feel that the
removal of balconies
from the scheme and
the requirement for
obscure glazing is
justified in order to
protect residential
amenity?

Overall
score
0=poor
10=excellent

70% said yes, 70% said yes, 26% said no 57% said yes, 30% Average
13% said no and and 4% are uncertain
said no and 13% are score = 7.7
17 are unsure
unsure
Specific comments included:
Dislike of metal columns
Too close to adjoining properties
Varying opinions on parking provision
Some discomfort with ancillary services
Not best quality design
Open facilities to public helps integrate residents
Good density of development
Good example of this form of development
Industrial appearance at entrance

-9-

STOCKPORT COUNCIL
EXECUTIVE REPORT SUMMARY SHEET
Subject: Bruntwood Park (North Region BMX Club Championships) - 27 September
2015
Report to: (a) Cheadle Area Committee
2015

Date: Tuesday, 11 August

Report of: (b) Corporate Director for Place Management & Regeneration

Forward Plan

NO / YES (Please circle)

General Exception

Special Urgency

(Tick box)

AGENDA ITEM

Key Decision: (c)

Summary:
This is a major event in the national BMX calendar. To be handed the opportunity to host
this fixture reflects the success of Bruntwood BMX Club who help manage the site in
partnership with the Council, and how highly regarded the Bruntwood track is held within
the BMX community. Some 400 riders and spectators are expected to attend from across
the Northern Region. Adequate parking and traffic management will therefore be essential.
The Club will put in a place a plan similar to the one that operated successfully for the
opening of the track in April last year. Measures will include additional parking spaces at
Lady Barn School and marshalling at key points both inside and around the park perimeter
to ensure the free flow of traffic and access for emergency vehicles. A raffle and charity
collection will be held for which permits will be applied for.
Recommendation(s):
The Greenspace Team recommends that the application is granted subject to the
production of appropriate papers and event plans.
Relevant Scrutiny Committee (if decision called in): (d)
Environment & Economy Scrutiny Committee
Background Papers (if report for publication): (e)
There are none.
Contact person for accessing
background papers and discussing the report
Urgent Business: (f)

Officer: Iain Bate

Tel: Tel: 0161 474 4421

YES / NO (please circle)

Certification (if applicable)

This report should be considered as urgent business and the decision exempted from
call-in for the following reason(s):
The written consent of Councillor
and the Chief Executive/Monitoring
Officer/Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services for the decision to be
treated as urgent business was obtained on
/will be obtained before
the decision is implemented.

Event 100111 - Bruntwood Park - 27/09/2015

Location of the event (*)
Area of the event (*)
Name of event (*)
Organisation (*)
Title (*)
Forename (*)
Surname (*)
Address 1 (*)
Address 2
Address 3
Town (*)
Postcode (*)
Preferred Contact number (*)
Alternative Contact number
Your Email Address (*)
Have you read our online event information
pack? (*)
Applicant Type (*)
Would you like the Council to consider providing
insurance cover for either part of the event or
the full event? (*)
Is the event (*)
Date (*)
Start time (hh:mm) (*)
End time (hh:mm) (*)
Access
Date (*)
Time (hh:mm) (*)
Vacate
Date (*)
Time (hh:mm) (*)
Will a registered charity benefit from the event?
(*)
Park Funday
Community Group Event
Charity Event
Religious Event
Carnival
Music festival
Sponsored Walk
Orienteering
Accompanied walk
Educational programme
Forest School
Car show
Art activities
Family occasion

Bruntwood Park
BMX Track
North Region BMX Club Championships
Bruntwood Park BMX Club
Mrs
Sarah
Yates
5 Kelsall Drive
Timperley
Altrincham
WA15 7XE
07548679136
01619807247
secretary@bpbmxclub.org.uk
Yes
Friends of the Park or/and Voluntary group
Yes

One day
27/09/2015
08:00
18:00
27/09/2015
07:00
27/09/2015
20:00
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No

Sports activity / tournament / coaching

Picnic
Cross country / fun run (potential fee)
Market / Car Boot Sale
Bonfire / firework Display
Fun Fair
TV /Filming (potential fee)
Circus (potential fee)
Other
Will there be any first aid provision on the day?
(*)
Please give full details (*)
How many people in total are expected to take
part in the event including the organisers,
participants and spectators? (*)
Do you have a Traffic Management Plan? (*)
Will vehicles be brought onsite during the event?
(*)
Number of small sized vehicles (bikes, cars etc.)
Number of medium sized vehicles (caravans,
campers van etc.)
Number of large sized vehicles (lorries, trailers
etc.)
Will all vehicles remain onsite for the duration
specified? (*)
Raffle
Gambling
Collections for a charity
Sale of alcohol
Music event
Theatre performance
Market stalls
Car boot sale
Provision of any food
Hot food & Drinks
Ice cream Van
Market stalls selling food both packed and
unpacked
Cake Stall
BBQ
Animals
Face painters
Sports coaching and competitive sports
Street entertainers
Re-enactment group
Toilets
Stage; Mobile (Trailer)
Stage; Constructed
Lighting rigs

Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Qualified first aid team supplied by North Region
BMX plus club volunteer first aiders
250+

Not yet
Yes
100
100

Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
No

Temporary structures
Inflatables (e.g. bouncy castles)
Marquees
Bonfires
Fireworks / pyrotechnics
Fairground rides
PA equipment
Motor cycles
Motorised procession
Start time (hh:mm) (*)
End time (hh:mm) (*)
Will the event be open to the general public? (*)
Will an entry change be applied? (*)
Will you be charging for parking (*)
Please give full details (*)

No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
09:00
18:00
Yes
No
Yes
Charge of 2 to go direct to the club

Highway directional signs? (*)

Banners / Posters? (*)

Yes
Yes