cheadle area committee 3rd february 2015

8/9/2019 Cheadle Area Committee 3rd February 2015

1/114

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

CHEADLE AREA COMMITTEE

Meeting: Tuesday, 3 February, 2015Tea: 5.00 pm

Ladybridge Park ResidentsClub,Edenbridge Road,Cheadle Hulme

Business: 6.00 pm

Introductions

1. MINUTES (Pages 7 - 12)

To approve as a correct record and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 9 December

2014.

2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillors and officers to declare any interests which they have in any of the items on theagenda for the meeting.

3. URGENT DECISIONS

To report any urgent action taken under the Constitution since the last meeting of theCommittee.

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 bythe Area Committee and details the current position on ward flexibility funding. The reportalso 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: [email protected]

Democratic Services

Town Hall, Stockport SK1 3XE

Contact: Democratic Services on 0161 474 3216

Email: [email protected]

Area Governance

AGENDA

Public Document Pack
http://www.stockport.gov.uk/democracymailto:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.stockport.gov.uk/democracy


2/114

5. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

(i) Chair's Announcements

To receive any announcements from the Chair about local community events orissues.

(ii) Public Question Time

Members of the public are invited to put questions to the Chair of the AreaCommittee 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 besubmitted prior to the commencement of the meeting on the cards provided. Theseare available the meeting. You can also submit via the Councils website atwww.stockport.gov.uk/publicquestions.

(iii) Public Realm

The Public Realm Officer will attend the meeting to provide an update on mattersraised at the last committee meetings. Councillors and Members of the public areinvited 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 theywished to address the Area Committee as part of the Open Forum arrangements.

(vi) Ward Flexibility Funding - Manchester Rugby Club (Pages 18 - 22)

To consider an application from Manchester Rugby Club towards the cost of avertidrainer.

Non-Executive Business

6. DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS (Pages 23 - 25)

To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration

(a) To consider the development applications where members of the public haveattended 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 PlaceManagement and Regeneration on any planning issues relevant to the Cheadle area.

The following development applications will be considered by the Area Committee:-


3/114

(i) DC053876 - 9 Rosewood Gardens, Gatley (Pages 26 - 41)

Erection of 2 no. dwellings

The Area Committee is requested to recommend the Planning and HighwaysRegulation Committee to grant planning permission.

(ii) DC054943 - Pymgate House Rest Home, 149 Styal Road, Heald Green,Cheadle (Pages 42 - 65)

Conversion of existing residential care home into five apartments with accessimprovements from Styal Road and construction of one single storey dwelling withassociated access from Pymgate Lane (Outline Planning Application)


(iii) DC056097 - Ladybridge Farm, Ladybridge Road, CHeadle Hulme (Pages 66 -84)

Conversion of alteration of existing buildings to form four dwellings (Full PlanningApplication)

The Area Committee is requested to recommend the Planning and Highways

Regulation Committee to grant planning permission.

(iv) DC056935 - 3 Oak Road, Cheadle (Pages 85 - 90)

Erection of a two storey, three bedroomed dwelling


Officer Contact: Jim Seymour on 0161 474 3656 or email:[email protected]

7. APPEAL DECISIONS, CURRENT PLANNING APPEALS AND ENFORCEMENTS(Pages 91 - 93)

To consider a report of the Deputy Chief Executive

The report summarises recent appeal decisions, current planning appeals andenforcement 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:[email protected]
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


4/114

Executive Business

8. BROOKFIELD PARK SHIERS FAMILY TRUST UPDATE AS AT 31 DECEMBER2014 (Pages 94 - 97)

To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services

To consider an update on the financial standing of the Brookfield Park Shiers Family Trustas at 31 December 2014, the amount of money for distribution to organisations and therelevant performance of investment funds.

The Area Committee is requested to:-

Note the contents of the report;

Decide upon the policy that they wish to adopt in respect of the distribution ofthe Trust; and

Advise as to the investment policy that they wish to follow.

Officer Contact: Paula McDonald on 0161 474 4708 or email:[email protected]

9. WALDON AVENUE, CHEADLE - TRAFFIC REGULATION ORDER (Pages 98 - 102)


To report considers the outcome of an investigation with regard t parked vehicles causingaccess problems on Waldon Avenue, Cheadle, the findings of a consultation exercise andseeks approval for the introduction of a Traffic Regulation Order.

The Area Committee is requested to recommend the Executive Councillor(Communities and Sustainability) to approve the Traffic Regulation Order set out inthe report.

Officer Contact: Andrew Varey on 0161 474 4809 or email:[email protected]

10. BACK MASSIE STREET, CHEADLE - NO WAITING AT ANY TIME TRAFFICREGULATION ORDER (Pages 103 - 107)


The report sets out the results of an investigation into concerns with regard to parkedvehicles on the adopted section of Back Massie Street, Cheadle.

The Area Committee is recommended to approve the statutory legal advertising of aproposed No Waiting At Any Time Traffic Regulation Order on a section of BackMassie Street, Cheadle and, subject to no objections being received within thestatutory period, the Order be made.

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


5/114

11. CLIFTON DRIVE AREA, GATLEY - 20MPH MOVING TRAFFIC REGULATIONORDER (Pages 108 - 112)


The report sets out the findings of a consultation exercise into the need for a reduced

speed limit on Clifton Drive, Gatley and its surrounding roads and seeks approval for theintroduction of a Moving Traffic Regulation Order.

The Area Committee is requested to approve the introduction of a Moving TrafficRegulation Order for a 20mph Speed Limit in the Clifton Drive Area, Gatley.


12. PARKING ON CARRS ROAD, CHEADLE

This item has been placed on the agenda at the request of the Chair.

13. NOMINATION OF AUTHORITY SCHOOL GOVERNORS (Pages 113 - 114)

To consider a report of the Corporate Director for People

The Area Committee is recommended to approve the reappointment of Mrs BMurray-Robb to the Governing Body of Etchells Primary School.

Officer Contact: Pam Dunham on 07800 617940 or email: [email protected]

DATES FOR FUTURE MEETINGS

Tuesday 10 March 2015Tuesday 14 April 2015Tuesday 9 June 2015

Eamonn Boylan Chief Executive

Town HallStockportMonday, 26 January 2015
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


6/114

Any person wishing to photograph, film or audio-record a public meeting are requested toinform Democratic Services in order that necessary arrangements can be made for themeeting.

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 isavailable on 0161 474 3128.

A loop system is available in the meeting rooms in the Town Hall. Please contact the TownHall 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.


7/114

CHEADLE AREA COMMITTEE

Meeting: 9 December 2014At: 6.00 pm

PRESENT

Councillor June Somekh (Chair) in the chair; Councillor Peter Burns (Vice-Chair);Councillors Keith Holloway, Sylvia Humphreys, Pam King, John Pantall, Paul Porgessand Iain Roberts.

1. MINUTES

The Minutes (copies of which had been circulated) of the meeting held on 9 December2014 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 whichhad been circulated) updating the Area Committee on progress since the last meeting ondecisions taken by the Area Committee and the current position on Ward FlexibilityFunding.

RESOLVED That the report be noted.

5. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

(i) Chair's Announcements

The Chair reported that the Cheadle Hulme Christmas Market held on 6 and 7 December2014 had been a successful event. In addition, she reported that monthly police surgerieswould be held on 18 December 2014, 15 January 2015 and 12 February 2015 between6.00pm and 7.00pm at the Ladybridge Park Residents Club, Edenbridge Road, CheadleHulme.

(ii) Public Question Time

No public questions were submitted.

Page 7

Agenda Item 1.


8/114

Cheadle Area Committee - 9 December 2014

(iii) Public Realm

David Wilson (Public Realm Inspector) attended the meeting to report on current issuesand to answer questions from Councillors and members of the public in relation to publicrealm issues within the area represented by the Cheadle Area Committee.

The following comments were made/issues raised:-

Concern was expressed about the effect on the grass verges on Oakmere Road,Cheadle Hulme. caused by construction traffic travelling to the nearby developmentsite.

Concern was expressed about repair and reinstatement work to the verge andfootway which was necessary following the development at Smithy Croft, HealdGreen.

Concern was expressed about graffiti on the railway bridge near Rose Vale Park,Heald Green and the skateboard ramp in Gatley Recreation Ground.

The responsibility of the owners of takeaway premises for the removal of litter whichwas left in the immediate vicinity to their premises was highlighted.

RESOLVED That David Wilson be thanked for his attendance.

6. PERMIT PARKING SCHEME - WARREN AVENUE, CHEADLE

A representative of the Democratic Services Manager submitted a report of the CorporateDirector for Place Management and Regeneration (copies of which had been circulated)setting out the findings of an investigation into the need for the introduction of a Traffic

Regulation Order for Permit Holder Only Parking following the submission of a petition tothe Area Committee by residents who lived there.

RESOLVED (Six for, one against) That the Area Committee be minded to approve themaking of the following Traffic Regulation Order for Permit Holders Only Parking, subjectto the outcome of the statutory consultation, at an approximate cost of 1,150 to be fundedfrom the Parking Revenue Budget:-

Proposed Permit Holders Parking Only: Monday Saturday 8.00am 6.00pm

Warren Avenue, Cheadle - both sides from a point 30 metres south east of the south

easterly kerb line of Gatley Road for the remainder of its adopted length in a southeasterly then north easterly direction.

7. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT (CONTINUED)

(i) Petitions

No petitions were submitted.

(ii) Open Forum

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

Page 8


9/114


(iii) Ward Flexibility Funding

There were no funding applications to consider.

Non-Executive Business

8. DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS

Development applications were submitted.

(NOTE: Full details of the decisions including conditions and reasons for granting orrefusing planning permission and imposing conditions are given in the schedule of plans.The Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration is authorised todetermine conditions and reasons and they are not therefore referred to in committeeminutes unless the committee makes a specific decision on a condition or reason. In orderto 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 thecouncils website at www.stockport.gov.uk/planningdecisions. Copies of the schedule ofplans, or any part thereof, may be obtained from the Services to Place Directorate uponpayment of the Councils reasonable charges).

A representative of the Democratic Services Manager outlined the procedure approved bythe Council for public speaking on planning applications.

(i) DC056291 - Cheadle Heath Sports Club, Norbreck Avenue, Cheadle

In respect of plan no. 56291 for the erection of a 50 seat premier grandstand with awheelchair cut out at Cheadle Heath Sports Club, Norbreck Avenue, Cheadle,

a representative of the applicant spoke in support of the application.

It was then

RESOLVED That planning permission be granted, subject to the conditions contained inthe report.

(ii) DC056810 - 173 Stanley Road, Heald Green

In respect of plan no. 56810 for a two storey rear extension, two and single storey rearextensions, first floor extension to side and other alterations including hip to gable change,front gables, porch and boundary wall and gate at 173 Stanley Road, Heald Green,

a representative of the applicant spoke in support of the application.

It was then

RESOLVED That the Planning and Highways Regulation Committee be recommendedto grant planning permission, subject to the conditions contained in the report and the

removal of permitted development rights.

Page 9


10/114


9. APPEAL DECISIONS AND CURRENT PLANNING APPEALS REPORT

A representative of the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regenerationsubmitted 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.

10. REVIEW OF OUTCOMES TOUR 2014/15

A representative of the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regenerationsubmitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) detailing a proposal to hold theAnnual Review of Outcomes Tour on 6 March 2015 and requesting the Area Committee tosubmit a recommendation for a completed development site within the Cheadle area to beincluded on the list of sites to be inspected by the Tour delegates. In addition, the Area

Committee was also asked to provide nominations for delegates to attend.RESOLVED (1) That the Annual Review of Outcomes Tour be requested to inspect thedevelopment at the former Mallard Court, Finney Lane, Heald Green Extra Care Home.

(2) That Councillors Peter Burns, Pam King and June Somekh be nominated to attend theTour.

11. MILL LANE, OFF LADYBRIDGE ROAD, CHEADLE HULME - DERELICT LAND

A representative of the Democratic Services Manager reported that this item had beenplaced on the agenda at the request of Councillor John Pantall. A report regardingpotential future uses for the site had previously been considered by the Area Committee atits meeting held on 16 June 2009.

Councillor Pantall reported on the history of the site in the vicinity of Mill Lane, offLadybridge Road, Cheadle Hulme which was in private ownership. A planning applicationin respect of a restaurant and associated works in 2008 had been refused planningpermission as it was contrary to the Councils policy for control of development in theGreen Belt. The previous garden centre use had been considered by the Council to be nolonger lawful since the main building which would be necessary to the business had been

demolished. Consequently the future use of the site could only be considered with regardto the limited range of land uses considered appropriate in the Green Belt.

RESOLVED (1) That the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regenerationbe requested to approach the landowner to try and ascertain if he had any future plans forthe land off Mill Lane, Cheadle Hulme.

(2) That Members be advised of progress with these investigations at the meeting of theArea Committee on 10 March 2015.

Page 10


11/114


12. SEMMMS ROAD SCHEMES/POYNTON RELIEF ROAD CONSULTATION UPDATEREPORT

A representative of the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regenerationsubmitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) updating the Area Committee on

progress with delivering the various phases of the SEMMMS (South East Manchester MultiModal Strategy) Road schemes, namely the (i) A6 to Manchester Airport Relief Road (ii)Poynton Relief Road and (iii) A6 to M60 Relief Road.Members welcomed the report and the update with progress on the schemes.

RESOLVED (1) That the report be noted.

(2) That Councillor Peter Burns be nominated on behalf of the Area Committee toparticipate in the proposed SEMMMS Members Liaison Forum.

13. PARLIAMENTARY AND LOCAL ELECTIONS - MAY 2015 - POLLING STATIONS

A representative of the Democratic Services Manager submitted a report of the DeputyChief Executive (copies of which had been circulated) detailing a proposal to change thepolling place for polling district AA from the Cheadle Library Community Room, AshfieldRoad, Cheadle to Trinity Methodist/United Reformed Church, Massie Street, Cheadle.

RESOLVED That the Deputy Chief Executive be informed that the Area Committeesupports the proposal for the change of polling place to Trinity Methodist/United ReformedChurch, Massie Street, Cheadle for polling district AA.

14. LAND AT BROOKFIELD ROAD, CHEADLE

A representative of the Democratic Services Manager submitted a report of the CorporateDirector for Corporate and Support Services (copies of which had been circulated) settingout a request by the owner of the land, as shown on the plan attached to the report, topurchase it.

RESOLVED That the Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services be advisedthat the Area Committee supports the proposal.

15. REINSTATEMENT OF THE FOOTPATH AND GRASS VERGE ON SMITHY CROFT,OFF FINNEY LANE, HEALD GREEN

A representative of the Democratic Services Manager reported that this item had beenplaced on the agenda at the request of Councillor Sylvia Humphreys, but had previouslybeen discussed under item 5 (iii) on the agenda Community Engagement Public Realmfor this meeting. (Minute 5 (iii) refers).

16. NOMINATION OF AUTHORITY SCHOOL GOVERNORS

A representative of the Democratic Services Manager submitted a report (copies of which

had been circulated) requesting the Area Committee to provide a nomination for theAuthority Governor vacancy at Bolshaw Primary School.

Page 11


12/114


RESOLVED That the report be noted.

The meeting closed at 7.24 pm

Page 12


13/114

CHEADLE AREA COMMITTEE Date: 3 February 2015

PROGRESS ON AREA COMMITTEE DECISIONS

Report of the Democratic Services Manager

WARD FLEXIBILITY FUNDING

The amounts available to be spent in 2014/15, incorporating the monies carried forward and a budget of 3,000 per ward for 2014/15, areas follows:-

Cheadle and Gatley Cheadle Hulme North Heald Green

Funding awarded in2012/13:-

Gatley Shop Local Day

Cheadle and Gatley U3A


Solutions SK cuttingback the tree on thepathway between

Marchbank Drive andKingsway, Cheadle

St Anns Road NorthAllotment Association

St. Marys Parish Church,on behalf of the Cheadle

300

255

288

333

1000


Oak Meadow Focus Group

Cheadle and Gatley U3A

Cheadle Hulme Garden andAllotment Association


First Steps Orrishmere PreSchool

St. Anns Road NorthAllotment Association

Manchester Rugby Club

1,000

255

420

1,000

193

100

No funding awarded in2012/13

Funding awarded in 2013/14

St Anns Road North AllotmentAssociation


Chelwood Foodbank Plus

474

100

Pa

e13

A

endaItem4.


14/114

Christmas Planning Group

Manchester Rugby ClubUnder 15s

Gatley Village Partnership

Funding awarded in2014/15


Cheadle VillagePartnership

100

100

150

500

Under 15s



Cheadle Village Partnership

250

500

6,104.25 11,395.30 13,999.60

Pa

e14


15/114

Appendix A - Resume Of Issues Progress Report

SCHEME

CALLEDIN?

Y/N

WITHTR

AFFIC

SERVICES

WITHLE

GAL

ONADV

ERT

OBJECTIONS?

Y/N

AWAIT

ING

OPS.D

ATE

OPERA

TIVE

DAT

E

COMMENTS

4 Proposed Cycleute

09/13

A representative of the Corporate Director for Place Management andRegeneration submitted a report seeking comments regarding the proposed

A34 cycle route, following the successful bid for funding from theDepartment for Transport. Works continuing on site, funding to be reviewedbefore entering Manchester. Funding has now been reviewed and it hasbeen determined not to enter Manchester. Manchester City Council to seekfunding for the continuation of the scheme. Directional signs to be put onhold. Directional signs are in design

nchester Road,eadle

03/2014

Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration submitted areport seeking the comments of the Area Committee regarding the proposedManchester Road cycle route following the successful bid for funding fromthe Department for Transport, via the Cycle City Ambition Grant. The cost ofthe scheme was approximately 450,000 which would be included in the2014/15 Highways Capital Programme. Scheme on site est 12 weekconstruction programme. Civil works substantially complete by end ofOctober, works over M60 bridge delayed due to Highways Agency requestfor additional info.

Pa

e15


16/114

Cycle Links toGatley Station

MJ

23/09/14

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 currently with Highway Design

Councillor Lane,Road SafetyImprovements

GK & NE

23/09/14

Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration

submitted a report setting out proposals to improve the levels of safety and reducethe potential risk for road traffic incidents in the vicinity of

the puffin crossing on Councillor Lane. Currently with Highway Design

Pendlebury Road,Gatley

AV

04/11/2014

Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration regarding the findings

of an investigation into the need for a Limited Waiting Parking Bay on Pendlebury

Road, Gatley. Scheme to be operative from 06/03/2015

Bulkeley Road,Cheadle

AV

04/11/2014

Corporate Director for Place Management and regarding the findings of an

investigation into removing an existing on-street disabled parking bay currently

fronting 7 Bulkeley Road, Cheadle. Scheme to be operative from 06/03/2015

Cheadle Delegated Budget

Pa

e16


17/114

Ward Balance broughtforward from

2013/14)

Budget 2014/15

Total Available

Approved andEstimatedSchemes

Available Balance

Cheadle andGatley

17,795 10,750 28,545 4,385 24,160

Cheadle HulmeNorth

-5,140 10,750 5,610 1,520 4,090

Heald Green 54,920 10,750 65,670 34,835 30,835

Total 67,575 32,250 99,825 40,740 59,085

Pa

e17


18/114

Area Flexibility Grant FundAPPLICATION FORM

Please ensure that ALLboxes on this form are completed. You must also include alladditional information that is requested.

(This Application Form must also be signed & dated)

1. Name of Organisation/Group/Project:

Manchester rugby club)

2. Organisation/Individual Address

Manchester Rugby ClubGrove ParkGrove LaneCheadle Hulme

SK8 7NB

3. Main Contact Details (for correspondence)

Title: Mr.

Name: Neil James

Role: Coach and rugby grounds representative

Address:Post code:

Telephone:

Mobile Phone:

E-mail:

4. Please describe the main activities of your organisation/group. Manchester rugby club provides facilities and sport for a wide age range starting at approx 5 yrs old up to adult rugbyunion. The club doesn't have any paid staff working on the provision of rugby - all coaches at all age groups arevolunteers and there is an active coaching coordinator program to ensure that coaching is delivered to a high standard.The only paid person is the groundsman and it is for the grounds that we are applying for this funding - we would like topurchase a vertidrainer. Our rugby grounds are notoriously wet during the winter months especially and we have starteda program to raise funds to purchase a vertidrainer. The vertidrainer allows us to airate the playing areas thereby

allowing rain water to escape from the surface quicker than if the ground isn't vertidrained. During the winter months wehave to frequently cancel both matches and training , especially for the younger age groups , because the pitches arewaterlogged. We can get the pitches vertidrained by a contractor but this is very expensive and we cannot afford to havethis done as frequently as is necessary to allow full and proper drainage of the playing areas- cost of a contractor tovertidrain one pitch is approx 280 , we have 4 main pitches and also surrounding mini and junior pitches - total costapprox 1100 per vertidrain session. We are therefore looking to purchase our own second hand vertidrainer.

Page 18

Agenda Item 5.(vi)


19/114

5. Which Ward(s) are you applying to?(You may tick more than 1 box)

Bramhall North X Heald Green

Bramhall South

Bredbury & Woodley

X Heatons North

Heatons South

Bredbury Green & Romiley

Brinnington & Central

Manor

Marple North

Cheadle & Gatley

Cheadle Hulme North

X

X

Marple South

Offerton

Cheadle Hulme South

Davenport & Cale Green

X Reddish North

Reddish South

Hazel Grove X Stepping Hill

Edgeley & Cheadle Heath X

7. What is the status of your organisation? (Please Tick)

A New Group Voluntary Organisation

A Registered Charity

No.______________

Company Limited by Guarantee

No.______________

Applying for Charitable Status Unregistered Association

Friendly SocietyOther (Please specify)

Sports clubX

Housing Association

6. When was your organisation/group established?Month Year 1861 we are the oldest rugby club in britain

Are there any restrictions on membership? If yes please give details:

No Restrictions

Page 19


20/114

8. Does your organisation have the following policies and procedures in place? Ifyou are awarded a grant you will be required to send copies of all relevantdocuments as part of the grant agreement.

A governance/management committee

A Constitution/governing document/set of rulesX

An Equal Opportunities Policy X

A Child Protection Policy (where necessary) X

A Health and Safety Public liability X

10. Who will benefit from this grant (e.g. local residents, young people, olderpeople): - how?

Approx 300 young children and approx 120 adults who all participate in rugby at the weekends- all local to the club and area

How Many Stockport residents will benefit? Numerous see above

Are there any restrictions on who will benefit from the funding? If yes please give details:

No restrictions.

9. Information about the Project/Activity (What are you hoping to achieve?)We are applying for funding to put towards the purchase of a vertidrainer. vertidraining is

an important part of our grounds maintainance program and we currently do not own oneof our own and have to hire contractors to perform this task for us. The costs associatedwith the contractor hire are significant (see above ) and we cannot afford to hire them on aregular basis to perform this job. If we had our own machine we could vertidrain thegrounds more frequently which would then render the playing areas in better condition foruse by the whole of the playing community at the club. Grounds advice and maintenanceinformation states that playing areas should be vertidrained regularly (every 4-6 weeks) inorder to maintain the playing surface, we currently have a contractor perform this job forus twice per year, having our own machine would allow us to do the job more frequentlythus preventing waterlogged pitches. We are looking to buy a second hand vertidrainer asnew machines cost upwards of 20,000, we have recently identified one or 2 machines

that would be suitable at a cost of approx 8000. We need to buy a model that can beused with the tractor we have at the club as the larger models wouldn't be compatible as

Page 20


21/114

11. Breakdown of costs for your project/activity example second hand vertidrainerhere this is what we would like to buy probably not still available now but otherswill come up for sale

Charterhouse 7416 Verti-drain

2004 machine, working width of 1.6 metres, fitted with hollow tines, 3 speed gearbox,Max working depth of 14, Lighter than a 7516 so can be fitted to a smaller tractor.weight 810kgs.

Very Good Condition

6,500.00 plus vat

12. If the amount you are applying for covers only part of the project/activity:How much will the project/activity cost in total? 8000.00

How much funding do you require from us? 1000. (Normally a maximumof 1000)

How do you intend to fund any shortfall?

See section 13 below

14. If the Application is successful, please state who you would like the cheque

made payable to: Manchester Rugby Club

13. What other sources of income have you applied for or raised so far in relation tothis project?

1)Rugby Committee have agreed to give 3000Monthly draw - 1000Manchester Airport community fund grant up to 3000 - pending

Page 21


22/114

Declaration

I am authorised to make this application on behalf of the aboveorganisation

I certify that the information contained in this application is correct

If the information changes in any way I will inform the Head of AreaGovernance accordingly.

I give permission for the Head of Area Governance to contact myorganisation and/or myself by phone, mail or e-mail with informationabout its activities and funding opportunities.

I/ we agree (if required) to attend an Area Committee meeting toexplain how the proposal will improve the environmental, economic orsocial wellbeing of the area and to answer any questions.

Our details can be used for promotional purposes should this requestbe successful

I/We will use this grant for the proposed project/activities stated in ourapplication.

I/we will not use the grant for any other purpose prior to contacting the

Head of Area Governance in order to seek authorisation.

I/we will provide appropriate proof of expenditure to the Head of AreaGovernance, within 12 months from the Grant being made.

I/we will highlight the support of the Area Committee in recent publicitymaterial.

I/we agree to providing information to assist in the future monitoring ofthe effectiveness of the funding including reporting back to the AreaCommittee on how the grant has been spent and what difference it has

made.

Print your name:Neil James

Signature:

Date: / /

Page 22


23/114

Cheadle Area Committee

3 February 2015

Report of the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS

TEM 1SITE ADDRESS:9 ROSEWOOD GARDENS, GATLEY, STOCKPORT, SK8 4GR

PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF 2 no. DWELLINGS

TEM 2

SITE ADDRESS: PYMGATE HOUSE REST HOME,149STYAL ROAD, HEALD GREEN, CHEADLE, SK8 3TG

PROPOSAL:Conversion of existing residential care home into five apartments with accessmprovements from Styal Road and construction of one single storey dwelling with associatedaccess from Pymgate Lane (Outline Planning Application)

TEM 3SITE ADDRESS:LADYBRIDGE FARM, LADYBRIDGE ROAD, CHEADLE HULME,STOCKPORT, SK8 5NZ

PROPOSAL:Conversion of alteration of existing buildings to form four dwellings (Full PlanningApplication)

TEM 4SITE ADDRESS: 3 OAK ROAD, CHEADLE, SK8 1ED

PROPOSAL: Erection of a two storey, three bedroomed dwelling

NFORMATION

These applications need to be considered against the provisions of the Human Rights Act1998. Under Article 6, the applicants [and those third parties, including local residents, whohave made representations] have the right to a fair hearing and to this end the Committee mustgive full consideration to their comments.

Article 8 and Protocol 1 Article 1 confer(s) a right of respect for a persons home, other land andbusiness assets. In taking account of all material considerations, including Council policy as setout in the Unitary Development Plan, the Head of Development and Control has concluded thatsome rights conferred by these Articles on the applicant(s)/objectors/residents and otheroccupiers and owners of nearby land that might be affected may be interfered with but that that

nterference is in accordance with the law and justified by being in the public interest and on thebasis of the planning merits of the development proposal. He believes that any restriction on

Page 23

Agenda Item 6.


24/114

these rights posed by approval of the application is proportionate to the wider benefits ofapproval and that such a decision falls within the margin of discretion afforded to the Councilunder the Town and Country Planning Acts.

This Copyright has been made by or with the authority of SMBC pursuant to section 47 of theCopyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 (the Act). Unless the Act provides the priorpermission of the copyright owner. (Copyright (Material Open to Public Inspection) (Marking ofCopies of Maps) Order 1989 (SI 1989/1099)

Page 24


25/114Page 25


26/114

Application Reference: DC/053876

Location: 9 ROSEWOOD GARDENS, GATLEY, STOCKPORT,SK8 4GR

Proposal: Erection of 2 no. dwellings

Type of Application: Full Planning Permission

Registration Date: 20/02/2014Expiry Date: 17/04/2014

Case Officer: Mark Burgess

Applicant: MRH DesignAgent :

COMMITTEE STATUS

Planning and Highways Regulation Committee - Departure from Development Plan.

On the 28th November 2014, Brandon Lewis, the Minister of State for Communities and LocalGovernment announced changes to government policy in respect of planning obligations(Section 106 agreements or unilateral undertakings). This results in an amendment to theNational Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) as follows :-

Contributions for affordable housing and tariff style planning obligations should not besought from development of ten units or less and which have a maximum combined grossfloorspace of no more than 1000 square metres.

Tariff style contributions are defined as planning obligations contributing to pooled funding

pots intended to provide common types of infrastructure.

Authorities can still seek obligations for site specific infrastructure such as, for example,improving road access and the provision of adequate street lighting, where this isappropriate to make a site acceptable in planning terms.

Therefore in respect of this planning application, based on the above change in Governmentpolicy, the Council cannot seek contributions towards open space, as required by saved UDPpolicy L1.2 and Core Strategy DPD policy SIE-2. As such, the Council can no longer requirethis application to make a contribution to open space under the provision of saved UDP policyL1.2 and Core Strategy DPD policy SIE-2. However, as these policies remain part of theadopted Development Plan, the proposal should be considered as a departure from theadopted Development Plan.

Page 26

Agenda Item 6.(i)


27/114

DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Full planning permission is sought for the erection of two residential dwellings in a semi-detached block on an area of land to the South of an existing residential dwelling at Number 9

Rosewood Gardens.

The proposed development would have an overall width of 11.7 metres, a maximum length of11.5 metres and a maximum height of 9.0 metres. The proposed dwellings would be of gableroof design with a gable fronted feature. The materials of external construction are specified asbrick for the external walls and tiles for the roof. Internally, each dwelling would comprise anentrance lobby, cloakroom, hall, dayroom, eating/family room and kitchen at ground floor leveland three bedrooms (one with en-suite) and a bathroom at first floor level.

Vehicular access would be gained from Rosewood Gardens to the West of the proposeddwellings and off-road parking is proposed to the front to serve each dwelling. Garden areas

are proposed to the rear (East) of the proposed dwellings.

The proposal has been amended since its original submission in order to address issues raisedby the Council Design Officer.

Details of the design and siting of the proposed development are attached to the report.

SITE AND SURROUNDINGS

The application site comprises an area of unused land to the South of Number 9 RosewoodGardens and is located at the head of Rosewood Gardens cul-de-sac.

To the North of the site is the existing end terraced two storey residential dwelling at Number 9Rosewood Gardens. Adjoining the site to the East are detached residential bungalows onDingle Grove. The site is adjoined to the South by a detached residential bungalow at Number86 Altrincham Road and three residential dwellinghouses on Longley Lane. To the West of thesite is an end terraced two storey residential dwelling at Number 10 Rosewood Gardens.

POLICY BACKGROUND

The Statutory Development plan for Stockport comprises policies set out in the Stockport Core

Strategy Development Plan Document (Core Strategy DPD), adopted in March 2011 andpolicies set out in the Stockport Unitary Development Review (Saved UDP) which have beensaved by direction under paragraph 1 (3) of Schedule 8 to the Planning and CompulsoryPurchase Act 2004.

The application site is allocated within a Predominantly Residential Area, as defined on theUDP Proposals Map. The following policies are therefore relevant :-

Saved UDP policies

L1.2 : CHILDRENS PLAY

Core Strategy DPD policies

Page 27


28/114

CS1 : OVERARCHING PRINCIPLES : SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT - ADDRESSINGINEQUALITIES 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 NEWDEVELOPMENTS

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

DC010989 : Construction of detached triple garage (Land adjacent to 9 and 10 RosewoodGardens) : Granted - 12/05/03.

DC004814 : Erection of 3 no. dwellings (273 Longley Lane) : Granted - 13/01/02.

J.74508 : Erection of three dwellinghouses (Amendment to Block D) and revision to accessroad (273 Longley Lane) : Refused - 07/02/00.

J.71874 : Demolition of 273 and erection of 5 No. dwellings in two blocks and retention ofvehicular access from Longley Lane (271 and 273 Longley Lane) : Granted - 15/06/99.

J.69802 : Demolition of 273 Longley Lane, erection of 6 dwellings and retention of vehicularaccess from Longley Lane (271 and 273 Longley Lane) : Refused - 30/09/98 : AppealDismissed - 03/02/99.

Page 28


29/114

J.63209 : Demolition of existing dwellings, erection of ten dwellings with car parking andconstruction of new access road (271 and 273 Longley Lane) : Granted - 24/04/96.

NEIGHBOURS VIEWS

The owners/occupiers of surrounding properties have been notified in writing of the application.2 letters of objection have been received from the owners/occupiers of Number 86 AltrinchamRoad and Number 12 Rosewood Gardens. The main causes for concern are summarisedbelow :-

Design and siting

The site is a small piece of left over land after the development in the area 15 years ago. Itwas not large enough for 2 additional houses then and still isn't;

To place two 3 bedroomed houses on the plot is overcrowding;

The dark, 1.0 metre alley will have to be shared and arrangements made for discreetstorage of waste at both houses. Access to the rear of the house on the boundary will bejust 80cms, not sufficiently wide for a wheely bin.

mpact on amenity

A 30 foot gable end, sited 80 cms from the boundary will massively intrude and have anegative impact on the ambience enjoyed from the lounge, conservatory, kitchen andgarden of Number 86 Altrincham Road and will impact on the value of the property;

The submitted location plan and block plan do not show the conservatory at Number 86Altrincham Road which has existed for about 40 years;

Cannot see how the proposed plan would improve the outlook of Number 86 AltrinchamRoad;

Number 9 Rosewood Gardens will have their garden size reduced and the sun to the reartotally obliterated;

Loss of afternoon and evening sunlight to Number 9 Rosewood Gardens. A blank, brick, 30foot wall will transform visibility from a facing landing window at Number 9 RosewoodGardens;

Planning permission has previously been granted for garages at the site. The plot is toosmall and too close to boundaries for the proposed development. It would be ideal for agarage development or possibly a modest bungalow which would not dominate aspect;

The proposal shows no consideration for the wellbeing of other residents in the area;

Highways and parking

The plan states that 4 new parking spaces would be established. The site is currently usedfor the parking of 5 cars. If the parking situation shifts as a result of the development,residents will find it increasingly difficult to get access to their properties (cars parking on thepavement and blocking driveways) and would have to park in other areas away from theirhomes. The addition of 4 further cars would significantly affect access to the estate roadswhich will become cluttered with cars which previously parked on the development site.

Although there would be 2 parking spaces for each of the proposed houses, visitor parking

would cause a problem. When cars park on the corner it is difficult to gain access to housesand drives due to the angle of the road and the road being narrow. This situation would

Page 29


30/114

need addressing before the houses should be built.

There have been parking disputes in the road resulting in arguments in the street andthreats of violence which has led to residents moving out;

There are bollards in place at the end of Rosewood Gardens, however they were built wideapart allowing cars to drive through. This has been reported to the Council but no action has

been taken.

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

Design Officer

Comments of 13/03/14

The proposal involves the development of a pair of semis on open land (containing trees) asthe head of the cul-de-sac. Although I have no objection in principle to the development of thissite for additional houses, other than having concerns about impact on established trees (which

the Arb. Officer will comment upon), I am unconvinced that the size of dwellings proposed canbe accommodated on the site as the site plan, floor plans and location plan do not accuratelyreflect one another. We need accurate plans to be able to make a proper assessment of thescheme, so it is essential that these are provided.

n terms of the site layout proposed, the building frontage should ideally align with the existingterrace. In terms of the appearance of the dwellings, I appreciate that this is based on theexisting neighbouring. However, the positioning of the soldier course at lintel level between

ground and 1stfloor makes the property read as top heavy, as does the 1stfloor front elevationbeing a Juliette balcony window that is larger in scale than the windows below, so it

recommended that these areas are reconsidered so that the front elevation is better balanced.Also, the windows within the gables to the front are offset and small in scale. The gable are themain feature of the front elevation so they need to be well animated, which I do not consider tobe the case.

To conclude, without accurate plans and resolution of the design issues raised above, I viewthat a positive recommendation cannot be supported. I welcome the submission of revisedplans.


view that the amendments made overcome issues raised in respect of the previoussubmission, and would raise no objection subject to the imposition of appropriate design-relatedconditions (i.e. materials, boundary treatment, hard & soft landscape, plant), which I would behappy to provide should the application be recommended for approval. My only concern relatesto the scale of the block plan, which I believe is 1:200 rather than 1:250, as indicated on theplan. This needs to be rectified prior to determination of the application.


The revised plans provided yesterday address my concerns regarding the scale of the plansprovided.

Highway Engineer

Page 30


31/114

The site is situated in an accessible location having regard to the Council's assessment criteriaand is considered appropriate in principle for housing development. The adjoining highwaynetwork and means of access are acceptable and I raise no concerns with the proposal.

Recommendation :No objections.

No development shall take place until details of the drainage and surfacing of the approveddriveway areas have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planningauthority. The dwellings shall not be occupied until the areas have been constructed inaccordance with the approved drawings. The driveway areas shall then be retained andremain available for use for parking at all times thereafter.

Reason: To ensure that adequate and useable parking facilities are provided in accordancewith Polices SD-6 Adapting to the impacts of climate change, SIE-1 Quality Places, T-1Transport and Development, and T-3 Safety and Capacity on the Highway Network of the

Stockport Core Strategy DPD.

No development shall take place until details of a long-stay covered and secure cycleparking facility to be provided for the each dwelling has been submitted to and approved inwriting by the local planning authority. The dwelling shall not be occupied until its facility hasbeen provided in accordance with the approved details and the facility shall then be retainedand shall remain available for use at all times thereafter.

Reason: To ensure that safe and practical cycle parking facilities are provided so as to ensurethat the site is fully accessible by all modes of transport in accordance with Policies CS9

Transport and Development, T-1 Transport and Development and T-3 Safety and Capacityon the Highway Network of the Stockport Core Strategy DPD and the cycle parking facilitiesare appropriately designed and located in accordance with Policies SIE-1 Quality Places andT-3 Safety and Capacity on the Highway Network of the Stockport Core Strategy DPD.

Arboricultural Officer

The proposed development site is located within the grounds of the green area nearresidential property site predominantly on the old hard standing. The plot is comprisedargely of former hard standing and informal gardens.

The proposed development is not within a Conservation Area.

There are no legally protected trees within this site or affected by this development.

There were no signs of any invasive species during the site inspection therefore no controlmeasures are required.

The construction site footprint predominantly sits within the hard standing and informal groundsof the site and the proposed new developments will not impact on any trees of merit. A full treesurvey has not been supplied as part of the planning application to show the condition andamenity levels of the existing trees and where applicable which trees could be retained to

ncrease the amenity levels of the site with retained mature trees.

Page 31


32/114

The removal of the trees will lessen the screening of the development and reduce the overallcanopy spread of the site which is against current policy and as such a detailed landscapingscheme is required to off-set the loss.

n principle the design will not have a negative impact on the trees on site and within

neighbouring properties, therefore it could be accepted in its current format with some improvedandscaping design, the landscaping scheme will need to be altered to increase the number oftrees, Take care with the proposed siting of the trees and the species of the trees to offer somediversity in the species and improved biodiversity the trees offer increasing wildlife benefits toan ever increasing urban area.

There is a need to increase the number of trees to improve the greening and screening of thedevelopment along the boundary with Gatley Road properties through the site.

The following conditions would be relevant to any planning application relating to the site;

Condition Tree 1

No existing tree within the site shall be cut down, topped, lopped, uprooted, willfullydamaged or willfully destroyed without the prior written approval of the local planningauthority, with the exception of those indicated otherwise on the approved plan. Anyhedgerows, woody plants or shrubbery removed without such consent or dying or beingseverely damaged or being seriously diseased, within 5 years of the developmentcommencing, shall be replaced within the next planting season with trees of such size andspecies as may be approved in writing by the local planning authority.

Condition Tree 2

No development shall take place until all existing trees on the site except those shown to beremoved on the approved plans, have been fenced off in accordance with BS 5837:2012"Trees in relation to construction - Recommendations". The fencing shall be retained duringthe period of construction and no work, excavation, tipping or stacking of materials shalltake place within any such fence during the construction period.

Condition Tree 3

No development shall take place until details of all proposed tree planting, including the

intended dates of planting, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the localplanning authority. All tree planting shall be carried out in accordance with the approveddetails prior to the development being brought into use.

Environment Team

The proposed development is on a site which is approximately 220m from a former landfill site.

have no objections to the proposed development provided that the following conditions andnformative note are added to the decision notice:

Please note that LFG conditions should be applied as a phased approach, depending upon theoutcome of each subsequent condition i.e. if the investigation carried out to satisfy LFG1

Page 32


33/114


34/114

The land may contain landfill gas migrated from adjacent landfill(s) and it may be necessary toundertake remedial measures in order to comply with Policy SIE-3 Protecting, Safeguardingand Enhancing the Environment of the Stockport Core Strategy DPD.

LFG3

The development shall not be occupied/brought into use until the approved gas protectionscheme works have been implemented and a verification report for the works and all issuesrelating to the approved gas protection measures at the site has been submitted to andapproved in writing by the local planning authority.

The verification report shall provide an accurate and permanent record of the gas protectionmeasures installed and the protection standard achieved to support compliance with theapproved method statement objectives and criteria. It shall confirm if any further protectionmeasures are necessary and indicate how and when these measures will be undertaken. Thereport must also address whether ongoing post installation management measures are required

to maintain and monitor the effectiveness of the gas protection works and how these will bemplemented in a monitoring and maintenance plan.

Reason

The land may contain landfill gas migrated from adjacent landfill(s) and it may be necessary toundertake remedial measures in order to comply with Policy SIE-3 Protecting, Safeguardingand Enhancing the Environment of the Stockport Core Strategy DPD.

CON 2 INFORMATIVE

Should contamination be suspected, found or be caused at any time when carrying out thedevelopment that was not previously identified, the local planning authority should be notifiedmmediately and development affected or potentially affected by the contamination should stopand an investigation and/or risk assessment and/or remediation carried out to establish themost appropriate course of action.Failure to stop and notify may render the Developer/Owner liable for the costs of anynvestigation and remedial works under Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

United Utilities

With reference to the above planning application, United Utilities wishes to draw attention to thefollowing as a means to facilitate sustainable development within the region.

Drainage Comments

n accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Building Regulations, the siteshould be drained on a separate system with foul water draining to the public sewer andsurface water draining in the most sustainable way.

Building Regulations H3 clearly outlines the hierarchy to be investigated by the developer whenconsidering a surface water drainage strategy. We would ask the developer to consider the

following drainage options in the following order of priority:

Page 34


35/114

a) an adequate soak away or some other adequate infiltration system, (approval must beobtained from local authority/building control/Environment Agency); or, where that is notreasonably practical

b) a watercourse (approval must be obtained from the riparian owner/land drainage

authority/Environment Agency); or, where that is not reasonably practicable

c) a sewer (approval must be obtained from United Utilities)

To reduce the volume of surface water draining from the site we would promote the use ofpermeable paving on all driveways and other hard-standing areas including footpaths andparking areas.

Drainage Conditions

United Utilities will have no objection to the proposal and therefore request no conditions are

attached to any approval.

Any further information regarding Developer Services and Planning please visit our website athttp://www.unitedutilities.com/builders-developers.aspx

Water Comments

A separate metered supply to each unit will be required at the applicant's expense and allnternal pipe work must comply with current water supply (water fittings) regulations 1999.

Should this planning application be approved, the applicant should contact our ServiceEnquiries on 0845 746 2200 regarding connection to the water mains or public sewers.

General comments

t is the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate the exact relationship between any UnitedUtilities' assets and the proposed development. United Utilities offer a fully supported mappingservice and we recommend the applicant contact our Property Searches Team on 0870 7510101 to obtain maps of the site.

Due to the public sewer transfer, not all sewers are currently shown on the statutory sewer

records, if a sewer is discovered during construction; please contact a Building Control Body todiscuss the matter further.

ANALYSIS

Policy principle

The application site is located within a Predominantly Residential Area, as defined on the UDPProposals Map. It is noted that the site is not located within one of the two main spatial priorityareas for residential development as set out in Core Strategy DPD policy CS4. However, theborough is currently in a position of housing under-supply, with around 4.1 years of supply

against a requirement in national policy of 5 years plus a variable buffer. In thesecircumstances, Core Strategy DPD policy H-2 allows for residential development on sites that

Page 35


36/114

meet the relevant accessibility criteria through a method of scoring. It is noted that the siteachieves an accessibility score of 52 which exceeds the current minimum accessibility score of34 required for new housing. The site is considered to consist of Greenfield land, within anaccessible and sustainable location. The use of accessible urban sites that are not designatedas open space or considered to be areas of open space with amenity value, are second

sequentially in terms of acceptable Greenfield sites.

n view of the above, the principle of residential development at the site is consideredacceptable, in accordance with Core Strategy DPD policies CS2, CS4 and H-2.

Design and siting

The detailed comments of the Council Design Officer are contained within the consulteeresponses section above.

Although no concerns have been raised by the Design Officer in terms of the principle of the

development of the site for additional houses, issues were raised to the scheme as originallysubmitted in terms of the accuracy of the submitted plans, the proposed building line and theappearance of the proposed dwellings. In order to address the concerns of the Design Officer,amended plans have been submitted. It is noted that the amended proposal would now respectthe footprint, building line, design, scale and height of the adjacent properties and the DesignOfficer has confirmed that previous concerns have been overcome. Although the proposedprivate amenity space (61 square metres to serve Unit 1 and 58 square metres to serve Unit 2)would be below the recommended standard of 75 square metres, the proposed private amenityspace is consistent with the private amenity space provided to serve existing properties in thevicinity of the site. Control over materials of external construction, boundary treatment, hard andsoft landscaping and external plant would be exercised by way of pre-commencement planningcondition.

n view of the above, on the basis of the submitted amended scheme, in the absence ofobjections from the Design Officer and subject to conditional control, it is considered that thetwo dwellings proposed can successfully be accommodated on the site without detriment to thecharacter of the street scene or the visual amenity of the area, in accordance with CoreStrategy DPD policies H-1 and SIE-1 and the Design of Residential Development SPD.

mpact on residential amenity

The proposal has been assessed in terms of its potential impact on the residential amenity ofthe surrounding properties. The house at Number 9 Rosewood Gardens to the North of the sitehas non-habitable room windows in the side elevation facing the application site and theproposed development would have minimal projection beyond the original, principal, habitableroom windows in the front and rear elevations of this property, therefore no impact. Theproposed development would be sited 12.8 metres from the side elevation containing non-habitable room windows of the house at Number 10 Rosewood Gardens to the West of the site,n accordance with the adopted required separation distance of 12.0 metres. The proposedwindows in the rear elevation of the development would be sited 33.0 metres from the original,principal, habitable room windows in the rear elevations of the detached bungalows on DingleGrove to the East of the site, in accordance with the adopted required separation distance of

25.0 metres.

Page 36


37/114

The application site is adjoined to the South by a detached bungalow at Number 86 AltrinchamRoad. This property has an existing single storey side/rear extension, an existing single storeyrear conservatory extension and has original, principal, habitable room windows in the rearelevation facing the application site. The siting of the proposed development in proximity to theboundary with this property and the objection raised from this property on the grounds of loss of

amenity are noted. However, the proposed development would be sited 15.0 metres from theoriginal, principal, habitable room windows in the rear elevation of this property which is inaccordance with the adopted required separation distance of 12.0 metres. As such,notwithstanding the objection raised, Members are advised that a refusal on the grounds of lossof amenity to this property would not be sustainable at appeal. In order to prevent overlookingand loss of privacy to this property, it is considered necessary to remove permitteddevelopment rights for windows in the Southern side elevation of the development facing thisproperty by condition.

n view of the above, the proposal is considered to comply with relevant adopted minimumseparation and privacy standards and therefore it is considered that the proposal would not

unduly impact on the residential amenity of the surrounding properties by reason ofovershadowing, over-dominance, visual intrusion, loss of outlook, overlooking or loss of privacy,n accordance with Core Strategy DPD policies H-1 and SIE-1 and the Design of ResidentialDevelopment SPD.

Access, highway safety and parking

The detailed comments of the Council Highway Engineer are contained within the consulteeresponses section above.

No concerns are raised to the proposal from the Highway Engineer. It is noted that theapplication site is located in an accessible area having regard to the Councils assessmentcriteria and is considered appropriate in principle for housing development. The adjoininghighway network and means of access are considered acceptable. It is recommended thatconditions are imposed relating to drainage and surfacing of the proposed driveway areas andprovision of cycle parking facilities.

n view of the above, in the absence of objections from the Highway Engineer and subject toconditional control, the proposal is considered acceptable with regard to the issues of access,highway safety and parking, in accordance with Core Strategy DPD policies SD-6, SIE-1, CS9,T-1, T-2 and T-3.

mpact on trees

The detailed comments of the Council Arboricultural Officer are contained within the consulteeresponses section above.

t is noted that the site is not located within a Conservation Area and there are no legallyprotected trees within the site or that would be affected by the proposed development. Althougha full tree survey has not been submitted as part of the application, the Arboricultural Officerconsiders that the proposal would not have a negative impact on any trees of merit. Althoughthe proposal would result in the removal of trees, a detailed landscaping scheme would off-set

this loss.

Page 37


38/114


39/114


40/114Page 40


41/114Page 41


42/114


43/114

housing or open space under the provision of saved UDP policy L1.2 and Core Strategy DPDpolicies H-3 SIE-2. However, as these policies remain part of the adopted Development Plan,the proposal should be considered as a departure from the adopted Development Plan.

DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Outline planning permission is sought for the conversion of the existing residential care home atPymgate House to form 5 no. residential apartments and the erection of 1 no. new buildresidential within the Eastern curtilage of the site. The outline application seeks permission forayout and access, with details of appearance, scale and landscaping reserved for futureconsideration. The existing vehicular access to Pymgate House from Styal Road to the SouthWest would be retained and amended and a new access to serve the proposed new buildresidential unit is proposed from Pymgate Lane to the South East.

The existing Pymgate House residential care home no longer complies with current standardsand it is considered to be both unfeasible and financially prohibitive to make the necessary

changes. The property has been marketed for a considerable length of time without securing abuyer and it is stated that the building is unsuitable for conversion to commercial premises dueto its location.

The proposal has been amended since its original submission in order to overcome issuesraised by the Council Conservation Officer, Highway Engineer and Arboricultural Officer.

Details of the proposal are attached to the report.

SITE AND SURROUNDINGS

Pymgate House is a traditional two storey building of predominantly red brick construction witha slate roof. Built in the late 1700's/early 1800's, the building has been used as a residentialcare home for elderly people since 1986. The building is sited centrally within the site and isocated within a large landscaped curtilage to the East and West, with associated hard surfacedaccess road and parking area. Vehicular access to the site is provide from Styal Road to theSouth West.

Adjoining the site to the North is Pymgate Lodge Hotel and detached residential bungalows atNumber 145 Styal Road and Numbers 5 and 7 Pymgate Lane. Beyond the vehicular access toNumbers 5 and 7 Pymgate Lane to the East of the site is a residential bungalow at Number 8

Motcombe Grove. The site is adjoined to the South by a pedestrian footpath known as PymgateLane with a detached bungalow at Number 152 Styal Road and a detached dormer bungalowat Number 2 Motcombe Road beyond. To the West of the site is Styal Road with residentialproperties beyond.

POLICY BACKGROUND

The Statutory Development plan for Stockport comprises policies set out in the Stockport CoreStrategy Development Plan Document (Core Strategy DPD), adopted in March 2011 andpolicies set out in the Stockport Unitary Development Review (Saved UDP) which have beensaved by direction under paragraph 1 (3) of Schedule 8 to the Planning and Compulsory

Purchase Act 2004.

Page 43


44/114

The application site is allocated within the Predominantly Residential Area and ManchesterAirport Aircraft Noise Zone, as defined on the UDP Proposals Map. The site has an entry on theHistoric Environment Record (HER) and is subject to a Tree Preservation Order (TPO). Thefollowing policies are therefore relevant in consideration of the application :-

Saved UDP policies

EP1.10 : AIRCRAFT NOISE

L1.2 : CHILDRENS PLAY

Core Strategy DPD policies

CS1 : OVERARCHING PRINCIPLES : SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT - ADDRESSINGINEQUALITIES AND CLIMATE CHANGE

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

CS4 : DISTRIBUTION OF HOUSING

H-1 : DESIGN OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT

H-2 : HOUSING PHASING

H-3 : AFFORDABLE HOUSING

CS8 : SAFEGUARDING AND IMPROVING THE ENVIRONMENT

SIE-1 : QUALITY PLACES

SIE-2 : PROVISION OF RECREATION AND AMENITY OPEN SPACE IN NEWDEVELOPMENTS

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

DESIGN OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SPD

RECREATIONAL OPEN SPACE PROVISION AND COMMUTED PAYMENTS SPG

National Planning Legislation

THE NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK (NPPF).

PLANNING HISTORY

DC052713 : Demolition of existing residential care home and construction of 6 dwellings(Outline application) : Withdrawn - 03/02/14.

J.37302 : Single storey extension to rest home : Granted - 13/11/86.

J.35070 : Insertion of additional dormer window and change of use to rest home for 6

Page 44


45/114

residents : Granted - 03/02/85.

J.33485 : Rest Home for elderly (5 residents) : Granted - 02/05/85.

NEIGHBOURS VIEWS

The owners/occupiers of surrounding properties have been notified in writing of the application.4 letters of objection have been received from the owners/occupiers of Numbers 5 PymgateLane, 7 Pymgate Lane, 10 Motcombe Grove and Number 151 Styal Road. The main causes forconcern are summarised below :-

Design and siting

The submitted plans do not identify if the proposed house would be two storey or not. It isassumed that it would be two storey;

It is inappropriate to build a four bedroom detached property of this size in a locationsurrounded by single storey bungalows. The proposed detached house would be out ofkeeping with the area and would not fit in with its surroundings;

The application states that there are houses built in the area on spare land. This is thereason why we need to stop building any more in a small area and high density of houses.

mpact on amenity

A building of the size proposed would dominate and overshadow neighbours, would spoilthe view and would result in overlooking and loss of privacy to gardens and windows. Thismay affect property values.

Access and highway safety

The access point from Styal Road should be revised as it is on a dangerous bend;

The new site access to the proposed detached dwelling would be a potential hazard topedestrians and road users. The proposed new access would cross a public footpath whichis used by parents and children as their route to school. The proposed access on the bendof Pymgate Lane would cause a problem as cars take the corner fast;

The proposed new access would be too close to the driveway of Numbers 5 and 7 PymgateLane and would cause access issues to these properties.

mpact on trees

Not sure how they can fit a house and access road here as there are so many trees;

Trees will be removed. Although is was suggested that there would be no impact on wildlife,there are birds and squirrels in the area;

There is a large Scotch Pine tree close to the boundary. If the roots are damaged it mayaffect the stability of the tree causing it to fall.

Is the existing conifer hedge along the back of the property and the drive for Number 5 and7 Pymgate Lane going to be removed?

Other issues

Page 45


46/114

A similar proposal was previously refused planning permission;

Potential problems with the telephone wire to Numbers 5 and 7 Pymgate Lane as there is atelegraph pole on the corner.

Residents leave their bins to the side of the drive to Numbers 5 and 7 Pymgate Lane whichis the only place where there is enough space. If the properties on Styal Road were to do

the same there would not be enough space; Which way would the property face?

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

Conservation Officer


The site has an entry on the HER, and is highly likely to be included in the Cheadle Local Listwhen the review of this is completed; Im not sure if the application meets the requirement forconsulting GMAAS but have copied them in on this advice. The HER entry records:

149 Styal Road (Pymgate House) is an 18th-century house of 2 storeys and 3 bays. Built ontomuch older house with stone slate roof. Pimgate is documented in 1722. The tithe map of1841 shows a group of 3 large buildings as one parcel indicating this is probably a farm. Themap sequence seems to suggest that some of the outbuildings may survive as elements in thesurrounding properties.

t is pleasing to see that the application provides for retention of the existing building. However,the proposed new detached dwelling within the rear garden, less than 14m from the existing

building raises concerns.

Despite one of the concerns with the previous withdrawn application being the lack of anassessment of heritage significance, this is still not provided in accordance with the NPPF. TheDesign & Access Statement includes very brief statements identifying the building as a heritageasset, but there is no assessment of the contribution that the setting of the building makes to itssignificance, or any evidence that the Historic Environment Record has been consulted otherthan to provide the entry. No map regression is included and the assessment of the site historys vague at best. Viewing the historic maps, it can be seen that since the mid C19 at least, thesite comprised the area now bounded by Yew Tree Grove to the North, and to the East the rearof the properties on Motcombe Grove. The farm house to the front of the site has been

converted, and into the rest of the site have been introduced 6 new dwellings, all of which arebungalows. The setting of the building has therefore been significantly reduced to the north,and further erosion of this to the east is undesirable. At present in the SE corner of the site theboundaries are more or less the original ones, allowing the building to be appreciated withinsomething approaching its original garden setting.

There is no information in the application that explains why the new dwelling is required, and nomechanism proposed by which its granting could ensure the continued viable use of the historicbuilding as suggested in the statement. Its impact would actually be harmful to the outlook fromthe existing property, as well as reducing the space in which it can be appreciated andexperienced the rear boundary will be only just over 3m from the rear wall, compared with

31m at present. These harmful impacts could have an adverse effect on the viability of thehistoric building rather than boosting it.

Page 46


47/114


48/114


49/114


50/114


51/114


52/114

and mature trees within the property of the development as well as the trees within closeproximity of the site.

The main concerns of the development are;

Unit 6 which appears to have the access point within close proximity of not right up against theprotected oak tree which will not be acceptable without prior seeing a full detailed constructionmethod statement before this could be considered at all.

Units 1,2,3,4 & 5 which seem to be located within the existing building and as such have nompact on the existing trees, except for the proposed car parking area which is proposed to beplaced within the root/canopy area of the mature cedar which is unacceptable for severalreasons, firstly these style of trees drop needs and would be a constant issue/nuisance for theowners but wouldnt be a reason for pruning therefore causing a conflict and secondly thempact the construction and long term compaction/potential spillage from parked cars would bepotentially damaging to the tree and as such cannot accept this in this location.

Consideration will also need not be given to the use-ability of the garden spaces for theseapartments as the area has a high tree cover and could make the sites impractical for gardenuse, future applications for tree removal would not be considered favourable at any stagefollowing occupation of the site, especially with the requirement for tree replacements to off-setthe tree loss proposed.

A full root protection zone plan has been submitted and conditioned for adherence to protect allproposed retained trees prior to any works commencing on site to protect the retained treesbefore and during any demolition and construction phase of the development which will need tobe conditioned.

The application makes reference to no replacement tree planting due to the retention of themature trees on site but nothing is shown on the plans, therefore we cannot comment on theproposal and as such cannot look favourably on this application. The landscaping design willneed to be submitted for comments prior to any works commencing on site to show the level oftree planting and consider the potential of some tree removal with new improved tree plantingso balance the usability of the site with tree retention and new tree planting to enhance anddiversify the age range of the site. The tree retention and planting on the site is vital to off-setthe loss already on site and the proposed tree loss to accommodate the development as wellas improving the sites amenity and aesthetics and as acting to screen the development further.

The landscaping scheme will also need to be conditioned.

The level of amenity these trees offers is high due to the proximity to the main road and publicaccess via the lane adjacent the site and as such the retention of these trees is vital for thegreen chain and biodiversity of the urban area.

The following conditions would be required if the above issues are resolved;

Condition Tree 1

No existing tree within the site shall be cut down, topped, lopped, uprooted, willfully damaged or

willfully destroyed without the prior written approval of the local planning authority, with theexception of those indicated otherwise on the approved plan. Any hedgerows, woody plants or

Page 52


53/114

shrubbery removed without such consent or dying or being severely damaged or beingseriously diseased, within 5 years of the development commencing, shall be replaced within thenext planting season with trees of such size and species as may be approved in writing by theocal planning authority.

Condition Tree 2

No development shall take place until all existing trees on the site except those shown to beremoved on the approved plans, have been fenced off in accordance with BS 5837:2012 "Treesn relation to construction - Recommendations". The fencing shall be retained during the periodof construction and no work, excavation; tipping or stacking of materials shall take place withinany such fence during the construction period.

Condition Tree 3

No development shall take place until details of all proposed tree planting, including the

ntended dates of planting, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the localplanning authority. All tree planting shall be carried out in accordance with the approved detailsprior to the development being brought into use.


will accept the proposals to agree to conditions for a method statement for constructionmethods and for the landscaping scheme to off-set the loss.

am however concerned that they wish to change the wording of Condition 1 to only includeprotected trees, as this would suggest they intend to remove further trees which are not subjectto the TPO and so would need clarification on this matter before changing any wording?

Finally I am still very concerned over the formalising of the car parking under the mostprominent tree in the site, as whilst no damage has occurred so far this is no reassurance thatonce formalised the vehicles wont cause damage or chemical spillage to a level detrimental tothe health of the tree. I dont see why the car parking cannot be put either side of the drive priorto the tree and unit 5?


New car park layout is much better and as per my comments so I am happy with the proposalas tree loss is minimal and existing trees retained will still give a considerable tree-scape.These will be protected in accordance with the rpa.

Nature Development Officer


The site is located on Styal Road, Cheadle and currently consists of buildings includingPymgate House an outbuilding and shed. The application proposed conversion of theexisting property for residential use and construction of a new house within the grounds.

The site has no nature conservation designations, legal or otherwise. It is approximately

Page 53


54/114

15m from the Site of Biological Importance Pond and meadow at Heald Green and 55mfrom the golf course which is designated as Green Chain. However given the distancesnvolved, the work proposed and barriers between the protected sites, I do not envisagenegative impacts of the proposed work on the designated areas.

An ecological appraisal was undertaken in December 2013. This identified the need toconsider protected species, including bats, great crested newts, nesting birds and badgersas part of the appraisal. Great crested newts and all species of bats, and their roosts, areprotected under Section 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and TheConservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010. The latter implements the CouncilDirective 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora.They are included in Schedule 2 of the Regulations as European Protected Species ofanimals (EPS).Under the Regulations it is an offence to:

1)