12 affordable apartments at Land Off Moss Lane, Macclesfield

What was proposed

The application sought outline permission for 12 affordable apartments, with access considered and layout, appearance, scale and landscaping reserved.

“The proposed development description is ‘Outline planning application for a residential development comprising 12 no. affordable apartments with associated works (access to be considered and all other matters reserved)’.”

“The site covers a 0.34ha. A new access into the site is proposed to the north-western corner providing access and egress onto Moss Lane. The access would allow dual flow onto the highway with associated pavements either side connecting into existing highway infrastructure. Access is the only matter sought for approval as part of this outline application.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The undeveloped triangular site lies within Macclesfield’s settlement boundary, between residential areas, and is designated protected open space within the South Macclesfield Development Area.

“The application site comprises a triangular shaped portion of the South Macclesfield Development Area (SMDA) which at present is not developed. The site is positioned within Macclesfield Principal Town settlement boundary between 2no. established residential areas on Moss Lane. The site is allocated as a Greenway/protected open space. The site forms part of the LPS13 allocation in the CELPS.”

Officer report

Earlier applications and appeal

An earlier 18-apartment scheme was refused and its appeal dismissed because of concerns about local character and overdevelopment.

“A larger residential development for 18no. apartments was previously refused by the Northern Planning Committee (20/4065M) for the following reasons: 1. Loss of protected open space/greenway; 2. detrimental impacts on local character and design due to overdevelopment; 3. insufficient information concerning impacts on a TPO and 4. insufficient flood risk information.”

“The subsequent appeal was dismissed by the Planning Inspectorate due to concerns on impacts on local character and overall design due to overdevelopment and overly prominent development on a highly visible site, upholding reason for refusal 2.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers considered the reduced scheme acceptable and recommended approval because earlier concerns had been addressed, subject to conditions and a legal agreement.

“The proposed development is for a reduced scale of development compared to the appeal scheme, which is considered to be acceptable. Whilst indicative plans have been submitted, only access is being considered at this outline stage with layout, appearance, scale and landscaping reserved for subsequent approval.”

“It is considered that the proposals are compliant with local and national planning policies and guidance and that the concerns raised with the previously refused scheme and dismissed appeal have been addressed. It is therefore recommended that the application is approved subject to conditions and a S106 agreement to secure the affordable housing and open space requirements.”

Officer report

What residents said

Residents and community groups objected over protected open space, peat, biodiversity, flooding, highways, parking, design, trees and impacts on neighbours.

“- The development would result in the loss of, damage to or development on irreplaceable peat land which is said to be between 0.4-1m thick on the site. Central Government’s Peat Strategy for England defines any deposit exceeding 0.4m thickness, therefore it is deep. There is no or little consideration as to how peat removed from the site will be handled and too little information on the amount of Peat on the site, which is irreplaceable.”

“Highways impacts, safety and parking: - The development would result in detrimental impacts on local highways network and parking due to additional traffic and parking demands generated by the proposals, in an area with existing immediate issues with queuing traffic (Congleton Road). - The development does not provide sufficient levels of on-site parking for residents and visitors.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The ward member, a neighbouring ward councillor and the agent spoke about the application; the neighbouring ward councillor took no part in the vote.

The committee’s decision

The committee approved the application subject to a legal agreement securing affordable homes, open space and related contributions, together with planning conditions.

“That for the reasons set out in the report the application be APPROVED, subject to a S106 agreement: -”

“S106 Amount Trigger 12no. affordable homes affordable/social rent On site provision exceeding policy requirements Prior to occupation Open Space Provision of open space and management arrangements Contributions towards offsite provision – as set out in Developer Contributions SPD”

Minutes