Having won care home appeal, plans revised to increase number of bedrooms

Screen Shot 2020-11-19 at 14.48.17

Having won their appeal in August 2020 to enable a new care home to be built in Wilmslow, revised plans have now been submitted to increase the number of bedrooms.

New Care Projects secured permission, via their appeal, to demolish two four bedroomed houses in large plots at 51 to 53 Handforth Road and replace them with a 60 bedroom 3 storey care home.

The Altrincham based company originally submitted a planning application in March 2018 to demolish the two detached houses and replace them with an 83 bedroom three-storey care home. However, due to some objections from the local community a decision was not forthcoming and New Care submitted an amended scheme for a 65 bedroom care home with a revised site entrance position as well as 26 car parking spaces.

However, the second scheme was met with strong opposition with 84 letters of objection received and was refused by the Northern Planning Committee in April 2019. New Care appealed against the decison to refuse the second scheme but this was dismissed due to the visual harm to the street scene and harm to the character and appearance of the area.

The application was then amended in the light of the Inspectors comments to comprise a 60 bed care home with 25 car parking spaces. The controversial plans were refused by the Northern Planning Committee for the second time in January 2020, after being deferred by them in December 2019.

New Care Projects subsequently lodged a second appeal, which was allowed in August and planning permission was granted to enable a new 60 bedroom care home to be built at 51 to 53 Handforth Road.

However, after a two and a half year battle to secure planning permission, the company has now decided to amend the plans to increase the number of bedrooms to 63 with 25 car parking spaces. The facility will employ 47 full time and 32 part time members of staff, operating on shift patterns.

New Care


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

Simon Hughes
Tuesday 24th November 2020 at 6:41 pm
I don’t agree with them being granted permission to build the care home in the first place but now to go back and try and increase the number of beds really shows disregard to the new neighbours. New Care should be focusing on winning people over and become part of the community rather than adding insult to injury.
David Smith
Wednesday 25th November 2020 at 4:56 pm
They are just extracting the urine out of the local residents and all the planning processes.Whose town and living environment is it?
Bill Bennett
Wednesday 25th November 2020 at 5:14 pm
You would have to wonder what induced one planning officer to grant the appeal for this unwanted home, particularly when the site has insufficient parking spaces, according to the council own rules. I believe the person who granted the appeal, has never visited the site and he/she has disregarded many many objections, from local people and also disregarded, the planning committee decisions and the health centres objections .The latter saying they could not cope with so many additional patients.
Furthermore, Cheshire East have conducted a needs survey and found there are many vacancies in existing homes. In light of so many objections. At least two permissions refusals, that combined with many vacancies in existing homes and the fact the plans for this home, not meeting planning requirements. has me and others, wondering why any planning inspector overturned the planning refusals. Perhaps this requires a public inquiry to determine why the planning officer granted permission.
Gina Thompson
Wednesday 25th November 2020 at 6:27 pm
Bill Bennett l quite agree, it reminds me of earlier this year our government said they would break international law to disregard an agreement they had signed months earlier.
Marcia McGrail
Wednesday 25th November 2020 at 7:43 pm
[sigh] - so it isn't just children who play on the old truism that if you want a pony, ask for a kitten first and work your way up [heavier sigh].
So. Whose got the backbone of a kipper?
Pete Taylor
Wednesday 25th November 2020 at 8:48 pm
@Bill Bennett worthy of an entry on Private Eye's "Rotten Boroughs" page but I understand they are somewhat overwhelmed at the moment. ;-)

I'm sort of at a loss to know who these Planning Officers work for. Is it the Council Tax payers (us)? Is it the Councillors (our representatives)? Or is it the Developers?

It seems to be Planning Officers versus the people who live here (we pay their wages) and OUR elected representatives, who, since the clear-out of former (allegedly) corrupt Macc Boro Councillors and the legacy CEC toadys are now long gone.

So; why does this continue?
David Smith
Wednesday 25th November 2020 at 9:22 pm
Quite agree Pete. Why is it always reported that 'The planning Officer' or 'The Northern Planning Committee' etc. I would like to know NAMES, what experience and qualifications they have, who employs them and where these anonymous individuals can be contacted. I would have thought that to be SEEN to be acting totally unscrupulously and above board without favour or prejudice they would have to be KNOWN. They are representing US and tinkering with the places where we spend our lives and care about - unlike they who - seemingly by the decisions they make - might not live anywhere and perhaps don't even exist. Now there's a thought. Who's pulling their strings then?
Toni Fox
Wednesday 25th November 2020 at 10:15 pm
Hello All,

There is no right of appeal against the Decision made by the Government appointed Planning Inspectors to approve the Care Home, which as has already been stated, was refused planning permission by the Northern Planning Committee at Cheshire East Council.

MP Esther McVey asked the Secretary of State to review the Decision. Kelly Tolhurst MP and Minister for Rough Sleeping and Housing responded on his behalf saying

"I am afraid that as the decision has already been made in this case the Secretary of State does not have the opportunity to call it in...and the outcome of this application is now final."

In summary elected Cheshire East Councillors refused planning permission - it was Government appointed officials who over rode that Decision.

Unfortunately this is one case in many where the Government overrides Local Authority Decisions in its drive to BUILD, BUILD, BUILD....


Councillor Toni Fox
Independent - Residents of Wilmslow
Dean Row Ward, Wilmslow
Simon Rodrigues
Thursday 26th November 2020 at 7:55 am
47 full time staff and 25 car parking spaces numbers dont add up application should never of been granted very obvious
Pete Taylor
Thursday 26th November 2020 at 9:21 am
Thanks for explaining Toni; sounds like the system is broken. So much for localism.
John Harries
Thursday 26th November 2020 at 9:54 am
It's a disgrace and shameful that a Government official can so easily override local requirements and the overwhelming wishes of residents and local authority. I'm personally obliged to Cllr. Fox's summary so that we can all take off our indignation faces!
The developer does no have the whip hand here. Permission may now exist for a care home to be built but it is for the local authority, not government, to decide if any changes can be made. There are still regulations to be met for vehicle access, regulatory parking ratios per resident and/or visitor, staff etc., emergency vehicle access and fire regulations. Outline planning may and should be rigidly (and fairly) applied through the local authority - this they can do.
Mo Jamil
Wednesday 23rd December 2020 at 6:32 pm
The same old nimbyists posting again and again. What does this tell you? Perhaps the overwhelming silent majority support this development or don't care much about it.
Cllr Fox is an anti development councillor who is living in cloud cuckoo land and doesnt care two hoots about the elderly in the local population or any regard to the local economy or planning law. Most commentators on here fail to understand basics of planning law and are too quick to criticise planning officers and CEC, forgetting that their primary job role is to ensure that planning applications meet the councils planning strategy and national planning regulations, and not to let a few vocal nimbyists have disproportionate influence over planning laws. The inspector ruled against the planning committee decision because it could not be justified under planning law and in a court of law it would have been indefensible. This northern planning committee is made up of too many anti development members who are too easily swayed by the likes of a few nimbyists instead of doing their job in an impartial manner. Time to vote them out in the next local elections.