Four detached homes at 45 Cheadle Road, Cheadle Hulme, Stockport

What was proposed

The application proposed demolishing the bungalow and building four detached homes, with access, parking and landscaping.

“PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing bungalow and erection of 4 no. dwellings with associated access and landscaping…”

“The application seeks planning permission for the demolition of the existing single storey dwelling and the erection of 4no. detached dwellings with associated access and landscaping. It is proposed that the development would be laid out one detached dwelling at the front of the site (‘Plot 1’) and 3no. detached dwellings to the rear (‘Plots 2 – 4’).”

Officer report

The site

The site is a residential plot occupied by a single-storey home, with protected trees nearby and a low flood risk.

“The site is located within a Predominantly Residential Area and is bound by residential development to all sides. The site is to the north-eastern side of Cheadle Road and is currently occupied by a detached single storey dwelling with accommodation in the roof space, and associated garden space. The site measures approximately 0.13ha in area.”

“The proposed development is not within or affected by a Conservation Area, however there are two legally protected trees to the north-western site boundary with Irwin Court (Tree Preservation Order reference 408W T1 Whitebeam, and T2 Yew).”

Officer report

Why officers supported it

Officers considered the homes suitable in principle and found no significant harm to character, neighbours or highway safety, subject to controls.

“The scale, layout and design of the proposed development is considered acceptable, and the details submitted indicate that the development proposed can be accommodated on the site without resulting in significant harm to the character and appearance of the area, nor amenities of the neighbouring occupiers. In this respect the proposal is in compliance with policies CS4, H1, CS8, SIE1 and SIE3 of the Core Strategy.”

“Further, it is considered that the proposed development would not result in significant adverse impacts upon highway safety as a result of traffic generation, and, subject to conditions, the proposed access and parking layout is considered to be safe and practical to use in accordance with the Councils standards, in accordance with Core Strategy policies CS9, T1, T2 and T3.”

Officer report

Consultations and objections

Highways and other consultees raised no objections subject to conditions, while residents objected to traffic, density, privacy, drainage and other impacts.

“- Insufficient space for bins - Overlooking and loss of privacy - Loss of light - Noise and disturbance due to the scale of development and associated vehicle movements - Loss of green space - Concerns regarding drainage and flooding - Loss of light associated with an existing boundary hedge - Concerns regarding surface water run-off - Difficult to judge the size of the buildings as no measurements are available - Impacts on a service strip serving a neighbouring property…”

“No objections, subject to conditions. Consider that the principle of residential development on this site is acceptable noting the relative accessibility of the site and the area of land that is available for redevelopment. Traffic generation associated with four dwellings is not significant and would not have an unacceptable impact on overall highway operation and safety.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A local resident spoke against the application, while the applicant’s representative spoke in favour and answered members’ questions.

Members’ debate

Members questioned the service strip, highways, parking, density and conditions, and discussed concerns about safety and overlooking.

“Members raised queries relating to the service strip and United Utilities comments, parking and highways impacts, housing density, and queries relating to conditions and informatives, to which the Planning Officer responded.”

“Members debated the application and sought clarifications, to which the Planning Officer responded. Concerns were expressed relating to highways safety, overlooking of properties, and the service strip, albeit it was acknowledged that the issue relating to the service strip was not a planning matter.”

Officer report

The decision

Planning permission was granted subject to conditions and completion of a Section 106 agreement.

“RESOLVED – That planning permission be granted subject to the imposition of conditions and the completion of a Section 106 Agreement.”

Minutes