180 homes and open space at Land at Crossings Road, Chapel-en-le-Frith

What was proposed

The application sought outline permission for up to 180 dwellings, public open space and associated works, with only access decided at this stage.

“Further to pre-application discussions the application seeks Outline planning permission with all matters reserved except access for up to 180 dwellings, public open space, and associated works.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site is about nine hectares of open agricultural land with trees, hedgerows, a watercourse and dry stone walls beyond Chapel-en-le-Frith’s built-up boundary.

“The site subject of this application comprises an area of open agricultural land that is characterised by trees, hedgerows and other natural landscape features including watercourse and low dry stone walls that comprises approximately 9ha situated at western fringes of Chapel-en- le-Frith, west of Crossings Road and south of Eccles Road.”

“The site shares its south-eastern boundary with the built-up area boundary of Chapel-en-le-Frith. A relatively recent housing development situated off Crossings Road lies in this location, with properties off Twayblade Crescent fronting the site.”

Officer report

Earlier applications

Earlier proposals for a barn conversion and a new dwelling on the site were refused, and an appeal against the dwelling refusal was dismissed.

“HPK/0001/6008 Proposed Barn to Dwelling (Refused)”

“HPK/2022/0245 Erection of a new residential dwelling, detached garage, works of hard and soft landscaping, new access and other works incidental to the proposals (Refused 18/01/2023)”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval subject to conditions and a legal agreement, accepting countryside, landscape and visual harm but finding that the benefits outweighed it.

“A Section 106 (Legal) Agreement will secure on site children’s play and recreational facilities, as well as green spaces and public open spaces, which in addition to securing sizeable financial contributions towards sport, leisure and recreational projects within the wider area, will make a substantial and positive contribution to the social objective of achieving sustainable development.”

“Based on the analysis undertaken above, Officers fully acknowledge that this development will result in moderate landscape and visual harm. However, Officers consider that this harm, on its own, does not significantly or demonstrably outweigh the very significant public benefits that come with the development.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Highways, flood risk, archaeology, ecology, Natural England and other consultees raised no objections subject to measures, while education and healthcare contributions were sought.

“DCC Policy – Financial Contributions sought in relation towards Secondary Education (£1,001,394.24) and SEND Places (£171,127.13)”

“DCC Highways – No Objection subject to conditions. Financial contributions sought in connection with Travel Plan and Monitoring:”

Officer report

What people said

Objections concerned countryside and landscape harm, traffic, drainage, infrastructure, ecology, heritage, housing need, consultation and pressure on local services.

“Lack of demonstrable need for housing in Chapel • Already too many houses in Chapel which are of low quality and fail to respect character of the High Peak • Chapel is overcrowded • Houses will not be for local people • Overdevelopment comparable to the scale of Chapel • Other housing estates in Dove Holes and Whaley Bridge remain unsold and proves that there is not the demand for new housing in this area for more housing • Only 30% of the properties are earmarked for…”

“Public services are already stretched and cannot accommodate additional residents that the development will generate • Cumulative impact of proposed development and stretched public services • Decline in public services and amenities in Chapel combined with increase in population means that the town cannot accommodate this scale of development • Lack of infrastructure to support the proposed development • Without investment in infrastructure the development is…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The committee heard from a parish councillor speaking for local residents in objection, the agent, and a highways authority representative.

The committee’s decision

The committee approved the application as set out in the report and delegated limited wording changes to the head of development services in consultation with the chair.

“That the application be approved as set out within the report; and…”

“That 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 Development Services be delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chair of the Committee, provided that the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.”

Minutes