Cheshire East Council has decided not to grant consent for a previously refused planning application for a 60-bed care facility in Wilmslow.
As reported on wilmslow.co.uk last week, New Care resubmitted their plans to demolish two houses at 51 to 53 Handforth Road and replace them with a 3 storey care home - calling on the Council to grant consent at the earliest possible opportunity in light of the current coronavirus pandemic, rather than waiting months for the appeal process.
However, Cheshire East Council has confirmed today (Monday, 6th April) that they have declined to determine the above application because there have been no significant changes and the development is the same as they has previously refused.
The Case Officer's report stated "The proposal is the same as that which was refused. The agent's reason for the resubmission relates to the current Coronavirus pandemic which they state has resulted in the bed spaces within the recent completions of other New Care developments, having been taken up in their entirety by the NHS to assist with the ongoing crisis, and that as the pressure increases on the health care system more such facilities will urgently be required.
"They also state that even when the Coronavirus is under control there will be a need for more care home places to deal with the longer-term implications.
"This submission does not address the previous reason for refusal in any respect and it is considered that there has been no significant change in the relevant considerations of planning policy since the decision on the previous application which is now before the Planning Inspectorate to decide. Therefore it is recommended that under Section 70A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 the LPA should decline to determine this application."
The controversial plans were refused by the Northern Planning Committee for the second time in January 2020 on the grounds that "the proposal would lead to the overdevelopment of the site due to its inappropriate scale, mass and bulk - detrimentally impacting the character and appearance of the area, and there are no material considerations deemed to outweigh that harm."
Comments
Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below.
Thank you CEC officers.
Why don't they offer some community support, such as meals etc for the home-restricted elderly?
The northern planning committee are hiding behind a non issue and their arguments are not sustainable in a court of law. The plans have been revised to address all major concerns but the committee is irrational in its behaviour by refusing it twice. They might as well sack the planners and make their own decisions. Good Luck to New Care I say.
You've merely copied / pasted a (shameless) comment you made in response to the original article a week ago.
I'm curious to know why the only issue of interest to you on wilmslow.co.uk appears to be the development of this Care Home.
Who gives you the right to call my previous comment “shameless”? Secondly it is none of your business what my interest is and my comments are as important as yours. It’s people like you who just try to ram your views on others and cannot tolerate another rational view. I happen to support this development because I have seen first hand what new care homes offer to families. Most of you commenting don’t even live on the road and you keep harping on about opposing it. Try doing some proper research on the proposal instead of being emotive about it. CEC are having to defend the indefensible and they really need to bring into line their northern planning committee as it has become a liability by playing macho to their few nimbyist audience like you but does not cut mustard with the majority of constituents who want fair planning decisions balanced with addressing surrounding neighbours concerns. Planning decisions should be made on sound legal grounds that can hold in a court of law and not on personal bias of a few councillors holding sway over their fellow committee members.
Do you have any vested interest? I note you have been asked that question before and not answered. Companies house is also enlightening. Good idea to tell us roughly where you live so we can decide if this has anything to do with you.
Thank you.
Judging by your observations, there would be no development on any land that you are a neighbour of no matter what the arguments. Ultimately it will be for the professionals planners to decide based on fact and planning law, not emotion. I too followed the same meeting and it was a lot of this and that. As far as I am aware the developer put in three applications all discussed fully with planners and were only formally submitted after the senior planners were satisfied of all aspects. That is also normal practice. The committee keeps changing the goal posts which is pretty unprofessional. The latest reason for refusal is not parking as you allude, its mass and scale which is very subjective. Anyway in my opinion the benefits of the care home would far outweigh any downside.
I am surmising how that anger manifested itself, so here’s my take on it....
Are you angry, because the developers, or their agents called you and said, bad news Adeeba. Your fussy neighbours decided they don’t want to live next to a three storey commercial building, which would cause misery, noise and light pollution 365/24/7. Would you believe, they say they want the peaceful enjoyment of their homes and sadly the planning committee followed their own rules and agreed with them and refused our appeal. I am sorry, but we need to cut our losses and pull out. Unfortunately that pot of gold we offered for your house, will not be happening now. I am sure you understand. You can still sell your house, now that planning permission for our over development, seems unlikely, but I would doubt if anyone will offer the same amount, we were prepared to pay.
There is some good news, you could always remain in your house, I dare say the neighbours will eventually forgive and forget you said, this development would not cause a nuisance or disrupt their lives. However, it may take a while. Hopefully, in time, we can all forget about this stressful time in our lives and you can stop dreaming about the pot of gold that was cruelly grasped from your fingers at the last minute. However, should you decide you cannot remain in that lovely area, can I suggest, that as you are happy to live beside a nursing home, you follow our other developments. For some reason, the neighbours always want to sell their houses and you could pick up a bargain.
Have a lovely Easter Weekend.
Unfortunately, the previous Conservative planning committees made a total mockery of this important function by rubber stamping anything that came before them. No more though.
Councillors from all across the north of the borough sit on the committee, so to say that local opinion in Wilmslow unduly sways the decision of say a Labour councillor for Macclesfield or a Conservative one for Prestbury is also highly irrational. They look at the merits and the arguments that are made both for and against the development and vote accordingly.
However, if the committee’s decision is unjust, then an appeal is heard by a fully independent Planning Inspector. In this case they rejected New Care’s initial appeal and concluded “I have found that the appeal proposal would cause harm to the character and appearance of the area. Due to the permanence of the building, this harm would be significant and lasting. This would conflict with the relevant requirements of Policies SD2 and SE1 of the CELPS and weighs heavily against the proposal…Nor is there any substantive evidence that there is an overriding need for care home provision that would warrant the harm that would be caused.”
Ultimately, theirs is the only opinion that counts.
Others are entitled to disagree with them and the Northern Planning Committee and can keep their motives for doing so private if they wish. Likewise, I am also entitled to view their undue secrecy with suspicion and conclude they don’t care what harm this development causes as they are bitter from seeing their fast buck go up in smoke.
Cllr Mark Goldsmith
Wilmslow West & Chorley
You keep accusing me of some vested sinister plot just because I have a different view to yours and that you will ‘decide’ whether my comments are valid. Let me be clear, I do not have a financial interest in this proposal and I worked close by in a not for profit organisation and I attended a local school. In any case who do you do you think you are by levelling accusations? I can be living anywhere, and have any motive to comment. It’s for readers to consider my comments if they are valid or not about the conduct of the committee and on the merits of the case. You are of course within your rights to disagree, but why are you and others who oppose it afraid of anyone else making comments on this forum. Do you have a monopoly on free speech and opinion? You and the majority commentating here do not even live on the road and are not directly affected by this development so should that make you less qualified to comment on this matter.
I suspect you missed my previous comment.
I strongly disagree with your statement “you have no vested interest” living in one of the houses that would be demolished, to build this monstrosity, could only be described as a vested interest.
Your annoyance here, is the fact that you thought you would sell your house at a premium and now that has been snatched away from you. You really don’t give a dam about the neighbours, your only thought was profit. I cannot begin to tell you how delighted I am, that your alliance with this devious developer has not succeeded. I am sure I speak for all of your neighbours.
“...Cheshire East's Local Plan means we are in real danger of losing many of the green fields around Wilmslow. “
Ironic is it not that you are quoted above as wanting to protect the green belt from development but then refuse a proposal which is on a brownfield site large enough and private enough to take a relatively small care home, a proposal that was reduced from 85 bed to 60 bed and revised several times to address concerns on the behest of your planning officers and all relevant technical experts. You then hide behind mass and scale for refusing it when the building is only c40% including parking and the rest is landscaped. People are entitled to read from your bullish attitude and remarks about previous planning committee members that you want to set an example of your “toughness” and anti development credentials.
In a post C-19 world I believe more development and economic growth will be crucial and regions need to play their part in supporting it. As a local Cllr you are supposed to represent a balanced view taking into account all perspectives not just the few who are lobbying you.
Re your other comments trying to discredit me..I have already answered in another post.
https://bit.ly/3c7trJT
Thank you for your sarcasm. As you clearly cannot argue on the merits of this case you resort to personal attacks. I certainly have no financial interest in this nor do I live in any of the properties and you can speculate as much as you like. It seems by your logic ‘owners’ or anyone living in properties proposed for development cannot comment on a proposal that affects their property but someone like you who does not live on the road and is not affected by the development can do so? Your patronising remarks about representing the feelings of residents on the road when you do not live on the road yourself is bizarre. I also detect a bit of jealousy from you about the owners potential “gold/windfall”. Perhaps you could approach them for a slice, in return for dropping your opposition, it may help to expand your business.
Although, I do not need to justify myself to you, I have worked close by in a social care context where I have looked after people with disabilities or people who are unable to live on their own as they are vulnerable, hence why I feel there is a great need for care homes and other supportive measures. I also attended local school for many years and am familiar with the area. I am entitled to my opinion on the matter just as much as you and will not be silenced with personal attacks.
At the end of the day, it doesn’t really matter to me about the result but how it was arrived at. So far this process and the planning committee’s conduct in this case has been far from convincing, in my opinion.
Happy Easter to you too.
This word "development" sounds good doesn't it, but it's a word which mostly stands for any unscrupulous method to greedily take land and spoil it for future generations for short term greed.
I hope, somehow, we can continue to stop these onslaughts by people who don't care a stuff about the quality, the environment, and the long term preservation of our small, embattled town.