New homes plan refused to protect character of Bollin Valley


Planning permission has been refused for a development of four houses within the Green Belt and an Area of Special County Value at Wilmslow Park South.

The proposal was for two detached and two semi-detached houses - three of which would be accessed from Fulmards Close one house was to have access from Wilmslow Park South.

Cheshire East Council refused permission on the grounds that due to the scale and layout the proposal would create a cramped development which would have a detrimental impact on the character of the area. In addition, it would cause a threat to the continued health of protected trees that provide a significant contribution to the landscape character of the Bollin Valley.

Wilmslow Town Council's Planning Committee recommend refusal of this application on the grounds that the development is too large in scale and will adversely affect the character of the Bollin Valley. They also felt the application offered inadequate parking and access for the proposed development.

Objections were also received from 15 local residents who raised concerns about the maintaining the rural nature of the Bollin Valley; overdevelopment of the plot. impact on highway safety; overshadowing of a neighbouring bungalow and it was out of keeping.

Planning permission was granted by Macclesfield Borough Council in 2008 for the demolition of the existing dwelling and erection of three apartments with undercroft parking. Planning permission was subsequently quashed by the High Court in 2009, however, the site was cleared with the removal of the former dwelling and is currently overgrown.



Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below.

Jon Newell
Friday 16th February 2018 at 4:25 pm
An interesting decision - and one with which I wholeheartedly agree.

While I am not against redevelopment per se, the redevelopments have to be in sympathy with the area. We have to accept that Wilmslow ow Park is a special place and worth preserving. Redevelopments of a density such as proposed are, quite simply, outside the ability of the road running through the park to cope.

I stress that I am NOT a resident of Wilmslow Park but I do walk through the park on an almost daily basis.

This decision must apply equally to the application in respect of Blackwood (17/3115M). According to the Cheshire East web site, this application is currently "under appeal".

If density is an issue in the case in the article, the proposed Blackwood development must be rejected. Whoever thought the Blackwood site was capable of supporting six houses each with 4 or 5 bedrooms is completely misguided - and it seems that those responsible agree.

Let us hope that common sense prevails and we are not left with the site of a demolished house where one of Wilmslow's finest houses used to stand!

The rejection decision reported on in the article leaves us with another problem. The original developer - who I think went into an Insolvency process shortly after the existing property was demolished - appears to have used the site for the storage of building materials. These have been there so long,exposed to the elements, that they can only be useless.

Is there not a way that the fences be removed, the site tidied up and made available as part of the Wilmslow Park public amenity? - I do know this is wishful thinking but something needs to be done.
Friday 16th February 2018 at 6:17 pm
This is the correct decision in my view. The road up Fulmards Close is very narrow and the parking arrangements for all these houses was quite ridiculous. The site was planted at the back with new trees to protect the Bollin Valley and this application would put them at risk. This site is also the one with the leading case on bat roosts which went to the Court of Appeal I believe.

It would be wonderful if this site could be bought by the Bollin Valley Trust, with a farmhouse and permanent home for the award winning Longhorn.
Ryan Dance
Friday 16th February 2018 at 7:57 pm
the site needs redeveloping. Perhaps the developer should build a single 10,000 sq foot development to maintain the character of the area! Not sure what that is given the mixture of housing on this road. Next door but one has been for sale for a number of years for £2.5m. Alternatively...the site will sit empty. The developer will continue to hold the site...Land prices appreciate..demand for housing grows. The developer wins and the site will be developed.
Roger Bagguley
Friday 16th February 2018 at 7:57 pm
Absolutely the right decision for all the right reasons. For too long owners of this plot have put forward plans for developments that would blight the immediate area totally ignoring the purpose of the Wilmslow Three Parks Planning Guidelines. It is fair to say this document has been ignored by planners for too long allowing the park to become a hotch potch of mixed developments totally out of character with the original houses with their large gardens giving an open aspect. Thus, like Jon, we at RoW hope that the rot is now stopped and that the similarly Blackwood appeal will be turned down. The emerging WNP policies on housing will seek to have any further developments in the park to be totally in keeping with the original parkland scene as is the purpose of the Three Parks Planning Document.
Lynne Oversby
Friday 16th February 2018 at 10:49 pm
Shame Cheshire East didn't think the same about the 174 houses they've given permission for at Little Stanneylands, also part of The Bollin Valley with its own unsuitable road and access point. Double standards for different parts of Wilmslow it seems
Marc Staples
Sunday 18th February 2018 at 1:11 pm
I agree with you Lynne maybe its too near one of our local councillors house and they will be adversely effected ! Is there a list of where our LOCAL councillors live available anywhere because I am sure if you put the addresses on a local map you would see why certain developments are approved and others not in my opinion.
Jim Griffith
Wednesday 21st February 2018 at 5:07 pm
So Mr Bagguley, we will continue to have the eyesore of years of the boarded up land instead of houses. But then I am one of those Wilmslow Park residents who does not live in an 'original house with a large garden giving an open aspect'. As I am spoiling the view who cares what I think.
Jon Armstrong
Wednesday 21st February 2018 at 6:47 pm
Hardly anyone in Wilmslow Park lives in an "original house"... almost all of them have been built in what used to be the land and gardens around the few original houses, which were built in the days when families had servants and gardeners to run them and large plots of land weren't nearly as expensive now.

Of course, those who have benefited from these changes usually want to keep those benefits to themselves.
Maria Quin
Wednesday 21st February 2018 at 10:19 pm
Marc Staples - you took the words from my mouth (but probably more eloquently)! It was the first thing that came to mind and I think knowledge of where Cheshire East Councillors live locally would make interesting reading in relation to some hotly opposed but nevertheless authorised planning applications!
Barbara Scott
Thursday 22nd February 2018 at 8:19 am
So they refused permission, access and parking given as a reason. Why didn't they look at New Street with that reason in mind. Parking is a nightmare, they now want permission for another house on the site. Residents living on New Street do not have resident parking, so anyone can park on the street, this should be addressed by the council (wearing rose tinted glasses). They should concentrate on the condition of the roads e.g. POTHOLES.