74-bed care home at Sparth House, Rochdale

What was proposed

The application proposed demolishing the existing house and building a four-storey care home with 74 bedrooms, access, parking and landscaping.

“The proposal is to demolish the existing dwellinghouse and to redevelop the site with a 74-bedroom four-storey residential care home. The building would occupy most of the plot, with parking provided to the front and north side of the building, with small outdoor spaces at the rear and south-west side.”

“Viewed from the front (onto Manchester Road), the building would be characterised by two main three-storey volumes, each with two dual-pitched roofs, with a slightly recessed volume between. The front elevation of the building would be characterised by a dense pattern of windows serving bedrooms. The rear portion of the building would be simpler in form, with a mansard roof at third floor height.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site was a detached house on Manchester Road, beside homes and a bowling club, with protected trees along its southern boundary.

“The existing site comprises a single two-storey detached house, with a parking area at the front and a long garden to the rear, located on the A58 Manchester Road, a key route into Rochdale town centre. The site is accessed directly off Manchester Road. The house is bounded at the north and south by dwellings, comprising a pair of semi-detached houses at the north, two terraces on Manchester Road and on Sparthfield Avenue to the south.”

Officer report

Earlier advice and committee history

Pre-application advice accepted the principle but raised concerns about neighbours, design and trees; the application was later deferred for further consideration.

“In terms of strategic policies of the Core Strategy, the site is located within the more southerly ‘Manchester Fringe’ (policy SP2) half of the borough, and within the Rochdale Township (policy SP3/R). Pre-application advice (ref PREAPP/00006/23) was sought by the applicant in 2023, which in summary advised that the principle of the proposed development would be acceptable in this location.”

“Members declined to determine the application on this basis and decided to defer the application to allow the applicant to give further consideration to these concerns. Subsequently, additional information has been submitted by the applicant as follows:”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the care home would meet identified care needs in a sustainable location, although its harms were substantial.

“The proposed development would provide much-needed care facilities on a previously developed brownfield site in a highly sustainable location. The proposed care home development would be beneficial in terms of meeting the borough’s needs for care provision as well as in terms of housing delivery.”

“The scheme would comprise a purpose-designed care home carefully developed, with the input of the Council’s Adult Social Care staff, to meet specific care needs, which are identified as being in particular demand in the borough.”

Officer report

Main harms identified

Officers identified harm from the building’s scale, overbearing effects on neighbours, loss of mature trees and effects on local character.

“The scheme would result in harm to the character of the local area due to the loss of substantial and prominent mature trees, which it is considered would not be adequately substituted for by proposed replacement tree planting. It is also considered likely that the scheme would result in harm to the appearance and longevity of protected trees on neighbouring land.”

“The proposed development would also result in harm to the character and appearance of the local area due to the design characteristics of the care home building, largely resulting from its overall scale and height, massing, and density, compared to these characteristics of existing buildings in the surrounding area. Whilst the architectural character of the building would be sympathetic to established characteristics of the local area (including in terms…”

Officer report

Public comments

Objectors raised concerns about parking, traffic, pollution, design, biodiversity, privacy, disturbance, trees and construction, while supporters cited community care needs.

“The objections received are summarised below. Principle of development Unsuitable location for dementia care due to traffic noise, dementia patients need a calm and quiet location Traffic and pollution Not enough parking, will cause and exacerbate parking problems on local streets. Additional traffic will cause air pollution Character and Appearance Disproportionate design to surrounding houses, will dominate the streetscape Ecology…”

“The facility is vital for the well-being of community members of Rochdale Central Mosque, considering the unique cultural context of South Asian families, within which placing family members in care homes is often surrounded by stigma. The proposal would provide a solution which respects cultural values while meeting the practical requirements of care for our elders.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The committee heard from two objectors, a councillor and the agent after the principal planning officer introduced the report.

The vote

Members voted six in favour of approval, three against and one abstention.

“It was MOVED and SECONDED that the application be approved.”

“On being put to the vote, SIX VOTES were cast IN FAVOUR of approval, THREE VOTES were cast AGAINST and there was ONE ABSTENTION.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee granted full planning permission subject to the conditions set out in the officer report.

“DECISION: That full planning permission be GRANTED subject to the conditions set out in the report.”

Minutes