Plans to demolish a large detached house and replace it with seven new dwellings have been refused by the Northern Planning Committee.
The property is situated on Adlington Road and is now surrounded by the new development of just over 200 homes.
The reason for the application is that "the clients feel that with the open aspects of the views now destroyed by the new estate make the property feel like a completely different place to live, as a family it isn't what they purchased the house for and can no longer sell it for the money that they have already spent on it as it is now a large house in the middle of a Jones Homes Estate."
The planning officer felt that the proposal represents an appropriate level of development which is located within a sustainable urban location and would not significantly or detrimentally impact the amenities of neighbouring occupiers.
However, the officer recommended the planning application for refusal on the grounds that "the loss of the protected Oak tree which is required in order to provide a safe access to the site would be unacceptable and contrary to policy SE5 of the Cheshire East Local Plan and saved policy DC9 of the Macclesfield Borough Local Plan. Significant weight is attached to this loss and would override any benefits of the proposal".
Wilmslow Town Council recommend the application for refusal on the grounds "of this being overdevelopment of the site and out-of- character with the area and streetscene. The Planning Committee also expressed concerns regarding traffic movements to and from the site on this dangerous corner."
The applicant has agreed to mitigate the loss by replacing the oak tree with nine trees which would be 5-6 metres high.
Speaking at the Northern Planning Committee the applicant's representative said "In the medium to longer term these trees would provide significant enhancement to the site and street scene. It is acknowledged in the short term that these trees will be smaller than the oak tree which exits, however any harm in the short term should be balanced against the acknowledgement benefits of the redevelopment of this site."
Some members were concerned that the planning officer was only recommending the application for refusal on the one ground - the loss of the protected Oak tree.
Cllr Ellie Brooks described the proposed development as substandard and went on to say "I think there are too many issues with the character, size of the plot, the lack of garages, lack of gardens, parking provision and overdevelopment of the site which is not characteristic of this locality."
Cllr Stewart Gardner commented "I am very worried that we are refusing this for probably the very softest of reasons. My experience with inspectors is that you can never tell which way they will jump. Where we have a matter of judgement, particularly over a single tree, you could very easily find an inspector saying actually I don't think that tree is worth much, they are putting some more in and that fine."
He added "The scheme in front of us is not good enough, it is poor quality. It bears little respect to Adlington Road and Cllr Brooks is right, that is where we should be looking for our layout proposition. If Adlington Road was a succession of cul-de-sacs a cul-de-sac would be perfectly acceptable. It isn't, it is new."
He continued "This is a poor design, it fails to recognise the character of the area and I think we should have an additional reason for refusal which says that it is overdevelopment."
After a lengthy debate the planning application was refused on the grounds that it is out of character with the area, represents overdevelopment of the site and would result in the loss of a protected oak tree. Nine members of Northern Planning Committee voted against the proposal, two voted in favour and one abstained.
Comments
Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below.
I echo your sentiments 100%
It's really good to see CE Northern Planning Committee standing up against inappropriate development in north Wilmslow. Thank you!
..........................
(2) Terry Roeves,
Sorry I'm probably being a bit thick but what does
" Decent vdsl2 speeds"
actually mean?
"Very-high-bit-rate Digital Subscriber Line........it determines the speed at which you can get your selfies onto Facebook :)
How many trees will Royal London be chopping down?
As a local resident (Lees Ln) I know the area well and have been apalled by CEC's decision to allow hundreds of houses to be built in the area. So now that we have all of those houses, the addition of 7 more won't be the straw that broke the camel's back.
Look at it from the owners point of view, they bought a house surrounded by beautiful green fields and now they are overlooked by an ugly, sprawling housing estate. It is definitely not what they envisaged when they bought it. You have to feel sorry for them and applaude their efforts to try and make some money and move on. After all the house has definitely suffered in value since the surrounding estate went up.
Yes, there is an oak tree to consider, but seriously - one tree, I ask you?
And before you ask - no, I don't know the owners at all.
Could not agree more. The time to object was when the estate which now surrounds this property was given planning permission. To say that this proposed development is out of character with the area is a comment which could only be made by someone who has not visited the area since the new houses were built.
It may be out of character with the opposite side of the road but it is entirely in character with the side of the road on which it sits.
I do accept that we need to develop land to give people the chance to acquire homes but I still find it difficult to understand why such density was allowed. The new houses are very close together.
However, they do seem to be selling so I may just be out of my time - I know I would be reluctant to buy at these prices to get a house where a visitor would have to park on the pavement - and I do note that many of the cul de sacs within the development do not have pavements.
I expect the current car parks at the sales offices will be built on as the final phase further emphasising the lack of space within the site boundaries.
I agree with your thoughts about this extra new housing proposal for Adlington Road.
I don't like to see good stock go under the bulldozer but I'm surprised this current application did'nt get approved given that it's now on the edge of a big housing estate. Maybe one less unit may have swung it ?
Of the big housing estate, surely, a better balance could've been struck there between providing homes and making money ?
The overall density agreed by Cheshire East has resulted in a development which feels ever so claustrophobic.
I appreciate that not everybody wants huge gardens but some of the plots are literally within feet of the pavement leaving little or no visitor parking and no privacy from neighbours.
With various house styles and finishes, I think that the overall effect is disappointing. It looks over-developed and the sad thing is, it's there now, forever.