Up to two homes at Caudebec, Congleton Road, Alderley Edge

What was proposed

The applicant sought permission in principle for up to two residential dwellings.

“The application proposals seek permission in principle for the development of up to two residential dwellings.”

Officer report

Site and surroundings

The site is 0.45 hectares of residential garden land in the Green Belt and open countryside, with access from Congleton Road.

“The site lies to the south of Alderley Edge and extends to 0.45 hectares of residential garden land fronting Congleton Road to the west.”

“The immediate area is characterised by a ribbon of development or residential development along Congleton Road. The site has existing access from Congleton Road via an existing gate. The site and its surrounds are washed over by a Green Belt designation and for the purposes of the Local Plan, the land is within the open countryside.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

An earlier permission-in-principle application for two dwellings was refused and its appeal was dismissed because the proposal was not considered infill.

“21/3276M: Permission in Principle application for construction of two dwellings – Refused 2 December 2021.”

“To summarise, the Inspector found that there was too much of a gap between the appeal site and further built form to the south, along Congleton Road, and as the appeal site was found to be at the end of a ribbon of development, the development would not be in ‘a small gap in an otherwise built-up frontage or a relatively small gap between existing buildings’ and would not be infill development.”

Officer report

Officers’ recommendation

Officers recommended approval because the site was considered grey belt and sustainable, and a residential scheme for up to two dwellings could be accommodated.

“The proposals are not considered to fall within the ‘limited infilling in villages’ exception to inappropriate development. In consideration of the exception within paragraph 155 of the NPPF, that relating to grey belt, it is accepted that the application site represents grey belt land, it is also considered that the application site falls in a sustainable location.”

“Given the statutory constraints of a permission in principle, it is considered that a residential scheme in principle (site location, the type and amount of development) could be provided on site.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

The parish council objected, while highways raised access concerns and environmental health, United Utilities and the Lead Local Flood Authority had no objections.

“Highways – No objections but raised concerns regarding the access.”

Officer report

Residents’ concerns

Two letters raised concerns about missing details, eligibility, traffic, noise, light, habitat, litter, environmental degradation and rural character.

“The application has been duly advertised by means of direct neighbour notification letters and site notice.”

“Two letters of representation have been received, and their comments can be summarised as follows: - • Lack of details • Not eligible to be a PIP • Increased Traffic and Highway Safety Concerns • Increased Noise Pollution • Increased Light Pollution • Loss and Destruction of Habitat • Increased Litter and Environmental Degradation • Impact on Rural Character…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The agent attended the meeting and spoke about the application.

Committee decision

The committee approved the application for the reasons set out in the officer report.

“That for the reasons set out in the report the application be APPROVED.”

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

Minutes