Cheadle Area Committee Agenda 12th July 2016

Public Document Pack
Democratic Services
Town Hall, Stockport SK1 3XE
Contact: Democratic Services on 0161 474 3216
Email: democratic.services@stockport.gov.uk
Area Governance
AGENDA
CHEADLE AREA COMMITTEE
The Kingsway School,
Foxland Campus,
Foxland Road,
Gatley
Meeting: Tuesday, 12 July 2016

Tea: 5.00 pm
Business: 6.00 pm
Introductions
1. MINUTES
(Pages 6 - 12)
To approve as a correct record and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 7 June 2016.
2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Councillors and officers to declare any interests which they have in any of the items on the
agenda for the meeting.
3. PROGRESS ON AREA COMMITTEE DECISIONS
(Pages 13 - 20)
To consider a report of the Democratic Services Manager.

The report provides an update on progress since the last meeting on decisions taken by
the Area Committee and details the current position on ward flexibility funding. The report
also includes the current position on the ward delegated budgets.
The Area Committee is recommended to note the report.
Officer contact: David Clee on 0161 474 3137 or email: david.clee@stockport.gov.uk
4. URGENT DECISIONS
To report any urgent action taken under the Constitution since the last meeting of the
Committee.
Web: www.stockport.gov.uk/democracy or scan the QR Code*
5. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
(i)
Chair's Announcements
To receive any announcements from the Chair about local community events or
issues.
(ii)
Public Question Time

Members of the public are invited to put questions to the Chair of the Area
Committee on any matters within the powers and duties of the Area Committee,
subject to the exclusions set out in the Code of Practice (Questions must be
submitted prior to the commencement of the meeting on the cards provided. These
are available the meeting. You can also submit via the Councils website at
www.stockport.gov.uk/publicquestions.
(iii)
Public Realm
The local Public Realm Inspector will attend the meeting to provide an update on
matters raised at the last committee meetings. Councillors and Members of the
public are invited to raise issues affecting local environmental quality.
(iv)
Petitions
To receive petitions from members of the public and community groups.
(v)
Open Forum
In accordance with the Code of Practice no organisation has indicated that they
wished to address the Area Committee as part of the Open Forum arrangements.
(vi)
Ward Flexibility Funding - Gatley Village Partnership
(Pages 21 - 28)
To consider an application from Gatley Village Partnership towards the cost of a

Gatley Sports Day on 22 April 2017.
Non-Executive Business
6. DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS
(Page 29)
To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration
(a) To consider consultations (if any) received by the Corporate Director for Place
Management and Regeneration on any planning applications relevant to the Cheadle area.
The following development application will be considered by the Area Committee:(i)
DC061537 - Land at Barcheston Road, Cheadle
(Pages 30 - 60)
Provision of new tennis facilities to include two all-weather courts, pavilion building
and associated car parking and external lighting. Erection of 4 no. dwellings.
The Area Committee is recommended to grant planning permission, subject

to the conditions contained in the report.
Officer Contact: Daniel Hewitt on email: daniel.hewiitt@stockport.gov.uk
7. APPEAL DECISIONS, CURRENT PLANNING APPEALS AND ENFORCEMENTS
(Pages 61 - 63)
To consider a report of the Deputy Chief Executive
The report summarises recent appeal decisions, current planning appeals and
enforcement activity within the area represented by the Cheadle Area Committee.
The Area Committee is recommended to note the report.
Officer Contact: Joy Morton on 0161 474 3217 or email: joy.morton@stockport.gov.uk
8. ANNUAL REVIEW OF OUTCOMES TOUR 2016
(Page 64)
To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Place Management & Regeneration.
This report details a proposal to hold the Annual Review of Outcomes on Friday, 7 October
2016.
The Committee is recommended to give approval to the date for the Annual Review
and request that each Area Committee nominate a recently completed development
site to be included on the list of sites to be inspected on the Annual Review Tour.
Officer contact: Kevin Brooks on 0161 474 4905 or email: kevin.brooks@stockport.gov.uk
Executive Business
9. YORK CLOSE, CHEADLE
(Pages 65 - 68)
To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration
The report advises that Traffic Services have received a number of complaints that
vehicles still park at the junction of York Close and the Councillor Lane Service Road,
Cheadle even though there are parking restrictions for No Waiting At Any Time in place.
The Area Committee is requested to consider and comment on the proposals and
recommend that the Executive Councillor (Communities and Housing) approves the
installation of eight bollards on York Close, Cheadle at the junction with Councillor
Lane.
Officer Contact: Craig Peet on 0161 474 4813 or email: craig.peet@stockport.gov.uk
DATE OF NEXT MEETING
Tuesday, 9 August 2016
Eamonn Boylan
Chief Executive
Town Hall
Stockport
Monday, 4 July 2016
Any person wishing to photograph, film or audio-record a public meeting are requested to
inform Democratic Services in order that necessary arrangements can be made for the
meeting.
If you require a copy of the agenda or a particular report(s) by e mail or in large print,
Braille or audio, please contact the above person for further details. A minicom facility is
available on 0161 474 3128.
A loop system is available in the meeting rooms in the Town Hall. Please contact the Town
Hall Reception on 0161 474 3251 for further details.
* Smartphone users can download a QR reader application onto their phone for free. When they see a QR code they
can use the phones camera to scan it and are directed automatically to the related web information. The cost of using
a QR code is dependent on your mobile phone contract or pre-paid bundle. For further information on costs please
contact your mobile provider.
Agenda Item 1.
Meeting: 7 June 2016
At: 6.00 pm
PRESENT
Councillors Anna Charles-Jones, Graham Greenhalgh, Keith Holloway,
Sylvia Humphreys, Adrian Nottingham, John Pantall, Paul Porgess, Iain Roberts and
June Somekh.
1. ELECTION OF CHAIR
RESOLVED That Councillor Graham Greenhalgh be elected Chair of the Area
Committee for the period until the next Annual Council Meeting.
Councillor Graham Greenhalgh in the Chair
2. APPOINTMENT OF VICE-CHAIR
RESOLVED That Councillor Paul Porgess be appointed Vice-Chair of the Area
Committee for the period until the next Annual Council Meeting.
3. MINUTES
The Minutes (copies of which had been circulated) of the meeting held on 19 April 2016
were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.
4. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
No declarations of interest were made.
5. PROGRESS ON AREA COMMITTEE DECISIONS
A representative of the Democratic Services Manager submitted a report (copies of which
had been circulated) updating the Area Committee on progress since the last meeting on
decisions taken by the Area Committee and the current position on Ward Flexibility
Funding. The report also included the current position on the ward delegated budgets.
Members expressed concern about the delay in the implementation of the Traffic
Regulation Orders in the vicinity of Oak Tree Primary School, Cheadle Hulme.
RESOLVED That the report be noted.
6. URGENT DECISIONS
No urgent decisions were reported.
Page 6
Cheadle Area Committee - 7 June 2016

7. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
(i)
Chair's Announcements
The Chair highlighted the number of summer festivals which were taking place during the
next few weeks including the Heald Green Festival at Heald Green Village Hall on 25 June
2016 and the Gatley Festival between 25 June 2016 and 3 July 2016, culminating at
Gatley Hill House on 3 July 2016.
(ii)
Public Question Time
No public questions were submitted.

(iii)
Public Realm
A report was submitted (copies of which had been circulated) on public realm issues within
the area represented by the Cheadle Area Committee.
The following comments were made/issues raised:
fly tipping at York Close, Cheadle and The Cloisters, Cheadle needed to be
investigated.
the trees alongside Wilmslow Road, from Cheadle Road to The Griffin public house
on Etchells Road, Heald Green needed cutting back.

(iv)
Petitions
(a) Brook Road, Cheadle Residential Parking Scheme
Councillor Keith Holloway submitted a petition containing nine signatures from the
residents of 15-25 Brook Road, Cheadle requesting that the Council investigates the need
for a residential parking scheme on Brook Road, Cheadle.
RESOLVED That the petition be referred to the Corporate Director for Place
Management and Regeneration for investigation.
(b) Charlotte Street, Cheadle Residential Parking Scheme
Councillor Iain Roberts submitted a petition containing eleven signatures from the
residents of Charlotte Street, Cheadle requesting that the Council investigates the need for
a residential parking scheme on Charlotte Street, Cheadle.
RESOLVED That the petition be referred to the Corporate Director for Place
Management and Regeneration for investigation.
Page 7

8. OPEN FORUM - NEIGHBOURHOOD MANAGEMENT ACTION PLANS 2016/17
A representative of the Chief Executive, Stockport Homes Ltd, submitted a report (copies
of which had been circulated) providing an update on progress in the delivery of the
Neighbourhood Action Plan and seeking comments on progress to date and for any future
actions in the 2016-2017 plan.
The following comments were made/issues raised: the staircases in a number of blocks of flats in the Cheadle Hulme North Ward were
in a poor condition.
how Stockport Homes worked in partnership with other social landlords such as
Mossbank Homes and the Johnnie Johnson Housing Trust and the extent to which
the Neighbourhood Plans were discussed with them. The Area Committee
favoured a joint action plan with the other social housing providers and the
adoption of a holistic approach from all the providers of social housing in the area.
Stockport Homes carried out work with the providers of accessible transport
services to try and assist customers in being able to attend events.
Stockport Homes should investigate whether it was possible to have communal
access to Sky television for those residents in blocks of flats.
9. WARD FLEXIBILITY FUNDING - ST ANN'S ROAD NORTH ALLOTMENT
ASSOCIATION
Mr Robert Broughton from the St. Anns Road North Allotment Association attended the
Area Committee to answer questions from Members in relation to an application for Ward
Flexibility Funding for the purchase of a wood chipper to help dispose of wood cuttings
ecologically.
RESOLVED That the Democratic Services Manager be recommended to make a grant
of 699 for the purchase of a wood chipper, to be funded from the Ward Flexibility Funding
allocations as follows:Cheadle and Gatley Ward - 188
Cheadle Hulme North Ward - 183
Heald Green Ward - 328.
(i)
Ward Flexibility Funding - St Ann's Lourdes Group
Mrs Martina Riley from the St. Anns Lourdes Group attended the Area Committee to
answer questions from Members in relation to an application for Ward Flexibility Funding
towards the cost of a pilgrimage to Lourdes where they care for sick and elderly people.
RESOLVED (1) That the Democratic Services Manager be recommended to make a
grant of 500 towards the cost of a pilgrimage to Lourdes, to be funded from the Ward
Flexibility Funding allocations as follows:Cheadle and Gatley Ward - 250
Page 8

Cheadle Hulme North Ward - 250
(2) That the group be requested to report back to the Area Committee on the use of the
monies for the pilgrimage.
10. DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS
Development applications were submitted.
(NOTE: Full details of the decisions including conditions and reasons for granting or
refusing planning permission and imposing conditions are given in the schedule of plans.
The Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration is authorised to
determine conditions and reasons and they are not therefore referred to in committee
minutes unless the committee makes a specific decision on a condition or reason. In order
to reduce printing costs and preserve natural resources, the schedule of plans is not
reproduced within these minutes. A copy of the schedule of plans is available on the
councils website at www.stockport.gov.uk/planningdecisions. Copies of the schedule of
plans, or any part thereof, may be obtained from the Services to Place Directorate upon
payment of the Councils reasonable charges).
(i)
DC/061294 - 116 Styal Road, Gatley
In respect of plan no. 61294 for a proposed new raised roof and roof dormers; single
storey rear extension to existing dormer bungalow and new garage at 116 Styal Road,
Gatley, it was
RESOLVED That the Planning and Highways Regulation Committee be recommended
to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions contained in the report.
11. CHECKLIST FOR THE VALIDATION OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS
A representative of the Democratic Services Manager submitted a report of the Corporate
Director for Place Management and Regeneration (copies of which had been circulated)
seeking the Area Committee comments on the proposed re-adoption of the Councils
Application Validation Checklist (AVC) for the validation of planning applications and the
supporting document Explanatory Notes for the National and Local Information
Requirements for the Validation of Planning Applications.
The Area Committee debated the requirement for applicants on occasions to provide a
contaminated land survey and a foul drainage assessment, and how to ensure that these
were provided to the requisite standard. A representative of the Corporate Director for
Place Management and Regeneration advised that within the validation checklist there
would be a Phase 1 contaminated land assessment with which the Planning Department
would consult the Environmental Health Department and may lead to a planning condition
being recommended. There was also a dedicated drainage team within the Council with
the expertise to comment on such proposals. The Environment Agency and United Utilities
would also be consulted.
Page 9

12. APPEAL DECISIONS. CURRENT PLANNING APPEALS AND ENFORCEMENTS
A representative of the Democratic Services Manager submitted a report of the Deputy
Chief Executive (copies of which had been circulated) listing any outstanding or recently
determined planning appeals and enforcements within the area represented by the
Cheadle Area Committee.
13. BROOKFIELD PARK SHIERS FAMILY TRUST ANNUAL REPORT 2015/16
A representative of the Borough Treasurer submitted a report (copies of which had been
circulated) advising the Area Committee of the financial standing of the Brookfield Park
Shiers Family Trust, indicating the amount of money available for distribution to
organisations and providing commentary on the relevant performance of investment funds.
The Area Committee, acting in its capacity as Trustee for the Brookfield Park Shiers
Family Trust, considered a report which advised Members of the financial standing of the
Trust and sought their approval to formally adopt the Financial Accounts of the Trust for
the year ending 31 March 2016.
RESOLVED (1) That the contents of the report be noted.
(2)That the Financial Accounts of the Brookfield Park Shiers Family Trust for the year
ending 31 March 2016, included as Appendix One to the report, be adopted.
(3) That the Area Committees previous decision to reserve 25,000 from the Trust
towards addressing the effect of loneliness amongst elderly residents and the
consequential effect on their health be reaffirmed.
(4) That a distribution of the Trust be made in accordance with this decision and that the
application process be now commenced.
(5)That the current investment policy of the Trust be retained.
14. CHEADLE AREA COMMITTEE COMMUTED SUMS FOR PLAY
A representative of the Democratic Services Manager submitted a report of the Corporate
Director for Place Management and Regeneration (copies of which had been circulated)
detailing commuted sums received by the Council from housing developers towards the
cost of play provision and setting out the criteria that must be used in allocating sums for
play provision.
RESOLVED That the following allocation of commuted sums for the Cheadle area be
approved:
Page 10
The use of 669.24 from development no. 1140 (land to the rear of 209 Finney
Lane) for future improvements to Rose Vale Play Area.
The use of 669.24 from development no. 1193 (land adjacent to 96 Brookfield
Road) for future improvements at Bruntwood Park.
The use of 669.24 from development no. 1201 (168 Kingsway) for future play area
improvements at Gatley Recreation Ground.
The use of 167.31 from development no. 1206 (DC059365, Cheadle Electrical
Services, 64 High Street) for future play improvements at Diamond Jubilee Play
Area.
The use of 669.24 from development no. 1211 (DC056355, 4 Grange Park Road)
for future play improvements at Bruntwood Park.
The use of 3,011.18 from development no. 1222 (DC059584, 75-109 Silverdale
Road) for future play improvements at Bruntwood Park.
The use of 669.24 from development no. 1225 (DC047387, 3 Stones Hill Cottage,
Gatley) for Gatley Recreation Ground.
The use of 1,003.86 from development no. 1227 (DC46824, 3 Ashfield Road.
Cheadle) for future play improvements at Diamond Jubilee Play Area.
The use of 669.24 from development no. 1235 (DC061055, 1 Lomond) for future
play improvements at Rose Vale Play Area.
The use of 501.93 from development no. 1241 (DC061248, 22 Cranston Grove)
for future play improvements at Gatley Recreation Ground.
15. HIGHWAYS AND TRAFFIC WARD SPOKESPERSONS

A representative of the Democratic Services Manager submitted a report (copies of which
had been circulated) inviting the Area Committee to nominate Ward Spokespersons with
whom the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration could consult on
highway maintenance and traffic management matters, and the expenditure of the Ward
Delegated Budget up to 300.
RESOLVED That the following councillors be appointed as Ward Spokespersons for
highway and traffic management issues for 2016/17:Cheadle and Gatley Ward
Councillor Keith Holloway
Cheadle Hulme North Ward
Councillor Paul Porgess
Heald Green Ward
Councillor Sylvia Humphreys
16. PATH ADJACENT TO 16 PARSONAGE WAY, CHEADLE
A representative of the Democratic Services Manager reported that this item had been
placed on the agenda at the request of Councillor Paul Porgess.
Councillor Porgess reported that the footpath adjacent to 16 Parsonage Way, Cheadle
lead to shops and was being used by young people skateboarding. There had been
reports of a collision with a pedestrian user causing injury. The issue had been
Page 11

investigated and the installation of bollards had been proposed as a possible solution to
the problem.
RESOLVED That the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration be
requested to expedite this issue.
17. INSTALLATION OF BOLLARDS ADJACENT TO 228 STOCKPORT ROAD,
CHEADLE
placed on the agenda at the request of Councillor Paul Porgess.
Councillor Porgess reported that 228 Stockport Road was a takeaway and people were
parking on the double yellow lines, sometimes on the pavement, causing an obstruction
and difficulties with the collection of waste bins and emergency vehicles accessing
properties. It had been proposed that bollards be installed on the pavement as a possible
solution to the problem.
RESOLVED That the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration be
requested to expedite this issue.
18. TRAVELLERS ON COUNCIL LAND BETWEEN COUNCILLOR LANE AND PARK
ROAD, CHEADLE
(NOTE: The Chair was of the opinion that this item, although not included on the agenda
for the meeting, should be considered as a matter of urgency in accordance with Section
100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972 to prevent undue delay in the consideration
of the matter).
placed on the agenda at the request of Councillor John Pantall.
Councillor Pantall reported that there had been an unauthorised encampment on land
adjacent to the playing field near to Park Road Stadium, Cheadle. The procedure to
recover the land had begun. The site had been the subject of a previous incursion
following which site security had been improved. An investigation was ongoing following
reports that the gate had been unlocked prior to the incursion.
The meeting closed at 7.31 pm
Page 12
Date: 12 July 2016

PROGRESS ON AREA COMMITTEE DECISIONS
Report of the Democratic Services Manager
GATLEY RECREATION GROUND PAVILION - FORMER GATLEY PAVILION

(Minute 14 of the meeting of the Area Committee held on 29 September 2015)
During the marketing period fourteen parties expressed an interest and viewed the property. Three bids were received, all of which
were from food outlet operators. Following an evaluation of the bids, negotiations are being progressed with a Mr Rashidi to lease
the premises to operate a food outlet to be known as Piccolino in the Park.
Agenda Item 3.
Page 13
Page 14
WARD FLEXIBILITY FUNDING

The amounts available to be spent in 2016/17, incorporating the monies carried forward and a budget of 3,000 per ward for
2016/17, are as follows:Cheadle and Gatley
Cheadle Hulme North
Funding awarded in
2015/16
Funding awarded in 2015/16
Cheadle Golf Club
250
All Hallows Church Youth

Group
Heald Green
Funding awarded in 2015/16
452.92
Gatley Village Partnership
400
Cheadle Golf Club
250
Cheadle Village
Partnership
500
All Hallows Church Youth

Group
500
Cheadle Village Hall
600
Cheadle Village Partnership
500
Walter Stansby Memorial

Park
1000
Cheadle Village Hall
400
2nd Cheadle Scout Group
650
1000
The Its OK Club
500
5th Cheadle Hulme Scouting

Group and First Steps
Orrishmere Charity PreSchool
Budget Carried Forward
4,504.25
Cheadle Golf Club
200
100
Budget carried forward
16,249.60
Plus budget of 3,000 for

2016/17
19,249.60
St. Anns Road North Allotment 328

Association
250
The Its OK Club
500
188
Budget Carried Forward
10,242.38
13,242.38
250
Plus budget of 3,000 for

2016/17
All Hallows Church
1,000
St. Anns Road North

Allotment Association
183
St Anns Lourdes Group
250
Plus budget of 3,000 for 7,504.25

2016/17
St. Anns Road North
Allotment Association
St. Anns Lourdes Group
7,066.25
11, 809.38
19,249.60
Page 15
Page 16
Manchester Road,
Cheadle
MJ
11/03/2014
Oak Tree Primary

School, Queens
Road, Cheadle
Hulme
OPERATIVE
DATE
COMMENTS
AWAITING
OPS. DATE
OBJECTIONS?
Y/N
ON ADVERT
WITH LEGAL
CALLED IN?
Y/N
SCHEME
WITH TRAFFIC
SERVICES
Appendix A - Resume Of Issues Progress Report
Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration submitted a

report seeking the comments of the Area Committee regarding the
proposed Manchester Road cycle route following the successful bid for
funding from the Department for Transport, via the Cycle City Ambition
Grant. The cost of the scheme was approximately 450,000 which would
be included in the 2014/15 Highways Capital Programme. Scheme on
site est 12 week construction programme. Civil works substantially
complete by end of October, works over M60 bridge delayed due to
Highways Agency request for additional info. Works over the M60 bridge
to commence in February. On-going
Objection report to be submitted to Dec AC. Additional TROs to be
submitted to the Feb AC. Additional TROs report to be submitted. On
advert
EPS
29/09/2015
Carrs Road,
Cheadle
Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration outlining

the results of an investigation into parking concerns in the vicinity of
Carrs Road, Cheadle. Operative from 2nd May 2016

This scheme is now operative but issues with residents of Carrs
Avenue
EPS
10/11/2015
Woodthorpe Drive,
Cheadle Hulme
Petition for the investigation into the need for a residents parking
scheme to be introduced. Criteria not met, Ward Spokesperson has
been informed. Awaiting feedback from Ward Members as to way
forwards as Woodthorpe Drive does not meet the criteria for the
introduction of a Residents Parking Scheme.
EPS/CP
15/12/2015
Styal Road, Gatley
Vehicle Activated Speed (VAS) sign. Works order has been placed
The scheme is now complete.
A petition was submitted containing twenty signatures requesting that

the Council investigate the need for a Residents Parking Scheme on
Greenbank Road, Gatley.
AV
16/02/2016
Greenbank Road,
Gatley
CP
19/4/2016
Orchard Gardens /
Longley Lane,
Gatley
CP
9/02/2016
RESOLVED That the petition be referred to the Corporate Director for

Place Management and Regeneration for investigation
Investigation works / surveys to begin. Awaiting information from
Cllr Greenhalgh for exact details of issues as the road does not
meet the criteria for a Residents Parking Scheme
Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration submitted a

report to seek approval for introducing a TRO for No Waiting At Any
Time restriction around the junction, as it had been cited that vehicles at
this location were causing a narrowing of the carriageway which on
occasions prevents access for larger vehicles such as refuge vehicles.
Currently with Ward Spokes regarding Manchester CC fee
No objections to the legal advertising and the works order has been
placed for the road markings Once complete a date can be agreed
Page 17
Page 18
for Order to be operative.

Queens Road,
Cheadle Hulme
CP
9/2/2016
A representative of the Democratic Services submitted a report of the

Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration (copies of
which had been circulated) setting out objections received to a proposed
restriction of waiting Traffic Regulation Order at Queens Road, Cheadle
Hulme.
RESOLVED That, notwithstanding the objections received to the
proposed Restriction of Waiting Traffic Rergulation Order at Queens
Road, Cheadle Hulme, the Order be made as advertised.
Lining as been installed, but awaiting signs to be installed prior to
the order being sealed.
Brook Road,
Gatley
CP
24/5/2016
Councillor Keith Holloway submitted a petition containing nine signatures

from the residents of 15-25 Brook Road, Cheadle requesting that the
Council investigates the need for a residential parking scheme on Brook
Road, Cheadle.
Place Management and Regeneration for investigation.
Investigation works / surveys to begin.
Charlotte
Street,Cheadle
CP
7/6/2016
Councillor Iain Roberts submitted a petition containing eleven signatures

from the residents of Charlotte Street, Cheadle requesting that the
Council investigates the need for a residential parking scheme on
Charlotte Street, Cheadle.
Place Management and Regeneration for investigation.
Investigation works / surveys to begin.
APPENDIX B Schemes Currently Under Investigation

Request to Investigate
Brook Road, Cheadle - On Brook Road, Cheadle opposite the junction with Hall Street there is a gate to a back alley that runs
behind the Lime Grove houses. Cars park right in front of the gate which can prevent residents from getting their wheelie bins out
for collection. If the yellow line on Brook Road could be extended by 2m or so it would ensure there was proper access to the gate
and to the rear of the Lime Grove properties.
Hawthorn Rd / Burnside / Cedar, Gatley Look at junction protection (Double Yellow Lines ) around the junction
Wood Street, Cheadle - Dangerous parking along wood street blocking entrances. Investigate the introduction of parking
restrictions. ( Consultation letters being sent out week commencing Monday 27th June 2016 on proposals)
Brook Road, Cheadle - On Brook Road, Cheadle opposite the junction with Hall Street there is a gate to a back alley that runs
behind the Lime Grove houses. Cars park right in front of the gate which can prevent residents from getting their wheelie bins out
for collection. If the yellow line on Brook Road could be extended by 2m or so it would ensure there was proper access to the gate
and to the rear of the Lime Grove properties.
Grange Park Road / Wilmslow Road, Cheadle Look at introducing junction protection (Double Yellow Lines) around junction
Kingsway Junction Look at amending the road markings to allow three proper lanes on approach to junction from Torkington
Road.(Gatley side)
Page 19
Page 20
Cheadle Area Committee Delegated Budget

Ward
Balance brought
forward from
2015/16)
Budget 2016/17
Total Available
Approved and
Estimated
Schemes
Available Balance
Cheadle and
Gatley
26,060
10,750
36,810
660
36,150
Cheadle Hulme
North
12,970
10,750
23,720
23,720
Heald Green
37,010
10,750
47,760
22,500
25,260
Total
76,040
32,250
108,290
23,160
85,130
Agenda Item 5.(vi)
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Agenda Item 6.
Cheadle Committee
12 July 2016
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS
Report of the Chief Executive
Item 1: DC/061537
SITE ADDRESS: LAND AT BARCHESTON ROAD, CHEADLE, STOCKPORT, SK8 1LJ
PROPOSAL: Provision of new tennis facilities to include two all-weather courts, pavilion
building and associated car parking and external lighting. Erection of 4 no. dwellings
INFORMATION
These applications need to be considered against the provisions of the Human Rights Act
1998. Under Article 6, the applicants [and those third parties, including local residents, who
have made representations] have the right to a fair hearing and to this end the Committee must
give full consideration to their comments.
Article 8 and Protocol 1 Article 1 confer(s) a right of respect for a persons home, other land and
business assets. In taking account of all material considerations, including Council policy as set
out in the Unitary Development Plan, the Head of Development and Control has concluded that
some rights conferred by these Articles on the applicant(s)/objectors/residents and other
occupiers and owners of nearby land that might be affected may be interfered with but that that
interference is in accordance with the law and justified by being in the public interest and on the
basis of the planning merits of the development proposal. He believes that any restriction on
these rights posed by approval of the application is proportionate to the wider benefits of
approval and that such a decision falls within the margin of discretion afforded to the Council
under the Town and Country Planning Acts.
This Copyright has been made by or with the authority of SMBC pursuant to section 47 of the
Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 (the Act). Unless the Act provides the prior
permission of the copyright owner. (Copyright (Material Open to Public Inspection) (Marking of
Copies of Maps) Order 1989 (SI 1989/1099)
Page 29
Agenda Item 6.(i)
Application Reference:
Location:
Proposal:
DC/061537
LAND AT BARCHESTON ROAD, CHEADLE,
STOCKPORT, SK8 1LJ
Provision of new tennis facilities to include two
all-weather courts, pavilion building and associated car
parking and external lighting. Erection of 4 no. dwellings
Type of Application:
Full Planning Permission
Registration Date:
Expiry Date:
Case Officer:
04/04/2016
30/05/2016
Daniel Hewitt
Applicant:
Agent :
Henderson Homes (UK) Ltd

Emery Planning Partnership Ltd
COMMITTEE STATUS
Cheadle Area Committee decision (called up by Councillor Keith Holloway and more than 4
letters of objection were received within 21 days of notification)
DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT
The proposed development comprises:
the erection of four, three storey, four bedroom dwellings set in two pairs of semi-detached
houses in the southernmost area of the site;
the creation of two floodlit all weather tennis courts set enclosed by ball-stop fencing;
the erection of a single storey pavilion building with a hipped roof providing users with
changing facilities, a small club room incorporating covered and open viewing terraces; and
10 off-street parking spaces running parallel to a new access road from Barcheston Road
(including two disabled parking spaces) to serve the tennis club.
The proposed buildings would be brick built with red facing bricks, dark grey UPVC windows,
hardwood (veneer) front doors and slate roofs.
The development would require a number of existing trees to be felled that conflict with
development whilst the submitted tree assessment recommends the removal of others for good
arboricultural practice reasons. No trees on the application site are protected.
The applicant has submitted the following documents in support of their proposals:
Page 30
Drawings and plans

Planning and Open Space Statement
Arboricultural Implications Assessment
Energy Statement
Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey
Design and Access Statement
SITE AND SURROUNDINGS

The application site lies at the end of Barcheston Road in the Cheadle area of the Borough.
The application site has an area of 0.43 hectares and formerly accommodated the Broadway
Tennis Club prior to its demise over ten years ago due to problems with vandalism and fire
damage. Formerly the site accommodated 3 shale courts and a pavilion building but is now
lies vacant, derelict, unkempt, overgrown and is secured by temporary fencing preventing its
use.
Barcheston Road is a suburban street linking to Broadway in a predominantly residential area.
It functions as a cul-de-sac as there is no vehicular through access to Turnfield Road or any
other street to the south although a public footpath (a definitive public right of way) runs
alongside the sites southern and western boundary. Houses to the east and southeast are
separated from the application site by Bruntwood Hall Brook (a 'main river') that runs alongside
the eastern boundary of the site.
Existing trees cover the site particularly along the site's boundaries none of which are
protected. The application site is designated as an area of Local Open Space in the Unitary
Development Plan and immediately adjoins a 'Green Chain' designation on its south eastern
boundary.
Finally, it should be noted that the application site is identified in the Council's Strategic Housing
Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) as having the potential to accommodate up to nine
houses in the long term although this should not influence the outcome of this application.
POLICY BACKGROUND
The site is allocated as Local Open Space (Policy UOS1.3 Protection of Local Open Space) on
the Proposals Map of the Review UDP and lies immediately adjacent to land designated as a
Green Chain (Policy NE3.1 Protection and Enhancement of Green Chains)
The following policies are relevant:
Saved Policies of the adopted Stockport Unitary Development Plan Review
UOS1.3 Protection of Local Open Space
L1.1 Land for Active Recreation
NE3.1 Protection and Enhancement of Green Chain
EP1.7 Development and Flood Risk
EP1.10 Aircraft Noise
MW1.5 Control of Waste from Development
Page 31
Stockport Core Strategy DPD

CS8 Safeguarding and improving the environment
SD6 Adapting to the Impacts of Climate Change
CS2 Housing Provision
CS3 Mix of Housing
CS4 Distribution of Housing
H1 Design of Residential Development
H2 Housing Phasing
SIE1 Quality Places
SIE2 Provision of Recreation and Amenity Open Space in New Development
SIE3 Protecting Safeguarding and Enhancing the Environment
CS9 Transport and Development
CS10 An effective and sustainable transport network
T1 Transport and Development
T-2 Parking in Developments
T-3 Safety and Capacity on the Highway Network
Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD) and Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG)
Design of Residential Development SPD
Recreational Open Space Provision and Commuted Payments SPG
Sustainable Design and Construction SPD
Sustainable Transport SPD
Transport and Highways in Residential Areas SPD
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)
Planning Practice Guidance
PLANNING HISTORY
None relevant.
NEIGHBOURS VIEWS
The application was publicised as a 'departure from the development plan':
a site notice was posted at the entrance to the site on Barcheston Road on 04 May 2016;
a notice was published in the Stockport Express dated 11 May 2016.
In addition, 30 notification letters were sent to neighbouring residents on 04 May 2016.

To date 12 representations have been received comprising 7 objections and 5 comments.
The 7 objections received are summarised below:
A resident of 41 Barcheston Road objects to the development on the following grounds:
there is a covenant on the land requiring it to remain as tennis courts and no houses should
be built on it.
flood lighting would directly affect their property and would be intrusive in their back garden
Page 32
the condition of the highway in Barcheston Road is in a very poor condition and construction
traffic would have a detrimental effect on it - if planning permission is granted would its
repair be guaranteed?
the traffic impacts of the development
The residents of 43 Barcheston Road object to the development and the building of dwellings
on the land. They go on a ask a number of questions and make comments summarised as
follows:
They understand that the land is left to the local community for use as a tennis club so why
are houses now proposed?
They understand that a minimum of three courts are required to establish an official tennis
club.
Who will profit from the development and where will residual revenue go?
What are the ongoing maintenance arrangements for the court and the club?
What security measures are being incorporated to prevent unauthorised access at night?
The proposed use of floodlights until 10pm is an unacceptable disturbance due to the
proximity of their home.
The highway on Barcheston Road is in a poor condition and this would be made worse by
the development - are there plans to improve the road?
Is sufficient car parking being provided as on-street parking is already an issue outside their
home.
Numerous applications by residents to join the previous club were rejected. Due to
construction related disruption, will free or reduced rate membership be offered to local
residents?
Since the closure of the previous club, the land has been left untouched and vegetation has
damaged boundary fencing - will it be replaced?
A resident of 40 Barcheston Road objects to the development on the following grounds:
the road is already congested with parked cars and the development will make it worse there was an application for a dwelling on land to the rear of No. 44 that was refused on
traffic grounds
the old tennis court is a haven for wildlife which we should be encouraging not destroying
the old club belonged to its members - do the applicants have the right to build on it?
The residents of 42 Barcheston Road strongly object to the proposed development on grounds
summarised as follows:
traffic impacts and parking concerns due in part to the site's location at the end of the
cul-de-sac
noise from courts that are scheduled to open until 10pm
Overshadowing and light pollution from the proposed floodlights
High density development on Barcheston Road that will harm the area's character and
culture
Construction traffic impacts on the public highway which is already in need of repair
A resident of 47 Barcheston Road states that a number of concerns arise from the application
summarised as follows:
Page 33
The site has become an eyesore since it was abandoned in 2000 and although residents
approached the club to see what could be done they received no response
The land was left to the local community not private interests
What assurances are there that the future tennis courts will be maintained and not left to
become derelict again
The existing road surface is in a very poor condition which also makes it noisy and the
proposed development will make this worse
A resident of 26 Broadway objects to the development on the grounds that he does not believe
that the applicants/landowners have the right to change the use of any part of this land from
recreational use as a covenant states that the land was given to the community by a benefactor
for recreational use and the development would result in a breach of covenant.
A resident of 4 Barcheston Road, near its junction with Broadway, has objected to the
development solely on traffic generation and highway safety grounds. He argues that speed
bumps or traffic measures are required on Barcheston Road to address existing speeding
problems along its length and to mitigate the impact of the additional traffic generated by the
development itself. He states that he does not object to the principle of the development
proposed itself but does object given the absence of traffic calming measures.
The five comments received are summarised below:
The residents of 20 Barcheston Road are generally supportive of the proposals but question
whether there is too much on-site parking provided and its potential to attract problems with
anti-social behaviour. They also indicate that the site is question "was gifted to the residents
for recreational activities" and question how it was sold to a private developer without their
knowledge.
A resident of 11 Barcheston Road asks who would the tennis courts be for and whether a new
club is proposed. They go on to state that ex-members of the club have not all been notified
and 3 courts would be a requirement to enter any tennis league or competition.
The residents of 12 The Downs that backs onto the application site, raise a number of concerns
that they would like to see resolved before planning permission is granted, summarised as
follows:
they seeks reassurance that they will not be overlooked or their privacy adversely affected
fencing should be erected to enclose the rear gardens for security and privacy reasons and
be of a design sympathetic to the woodland environment in which it would be located
they are concerned about the loss of Tree 4 as identified in the submitted Arboricultural
Method Statement on loss of privacy grounds and ownership grounds
the proposed three storey houses will be out of keeping with properties in the area due to
their height and lead to a loss of privacy
they believe the tennis club could become create noise and light pollution problems and its
impacts should be minimised
the courts and club should be an affordable and accessible amenity for residents affected by
the facility
the development will lead to the enclosure of the public footpath on its south western
Page 34
boundary and it should be ensured that public safety is not compromised as a result given
its use by school children amongst others.
A resident of 3 Barcheston Road states that the development must be considered in
conjunction with traffic calming measures.
A resident of 13 Barcheston Road states that they do not object to the application, the raise
concerns about the impact of the stream that runs adjacent to the development stating that it is
in fact a 'main river' and frequently floods after heavy rain. They go on state that since the
Environment Agency improved the culvert under Daylesford Road, the incidences of flooding
have reduced but flooding still occurs into their garden. When in flood the stream is
dangerous, smelly and leaves mud, debris and rubbish to be cleared up. They are keen to
ensure that the development does not make this problem worse due to the increased run off
that will result.
CONSULTEE RESPONSES
Sport England - Commenting as a non-statutory consultee, they state that they have contacted
the Lawn Tennis Association (LTA) for their views on the proposal who have confirmed the
following:
The site is currently derelict. The club have consulted with the County Tennis Association
and discussed the issues relating to the development of the club. Brining this site back into
tennis use is welcomed and we support the proposals.
We have been consulted on the design of the site and would like confirmation from the
contractors that the specification of courts and lights is as per the LTA specification.
Sport England notes that in the planning statement that the courts will be in accordance with
LTA standards, Sport England also notes that the tennis elements would be completed prior to
the first occupation of the new houses which will fund the delivery of the tennis courts and
support the reformation of the Broadway Tennis Club.
Sport England, therefore, considers this proposal addresses and identified need for this type of
facility and has the potential to be of benefit to the development of tennis. We would wish to
see this accorded an appropriate weight in the decision that is reached on this application.
In conclusion, they state that they do not wish to raise any objection to the application on the
grounds that it will help achieve their stated planning strategic objective 3:
Provide new facilities to meet demand: We seek to ensure that communities have access to
sufficient high quality sports facilities that are fit for purpose. Using evidence and advocacy, we
help to guide investment into new facilities and the expansion of existing ones to meet new
demands that cannot be met by existing provision.
SMBC Planning Policy - The proposal is for the provision of new tennis facilities to include two
all-weather courts, a pavilion building and associated car parking and external lighting, 4 no.
dwellings would be erected on the southern part of the application site. The site is on the
grounds of the former Broadway Tennis Club, off Barcheston road, Cheadle.
The proposal in an area of designated Local Open Space according to the UDP proposals map.
Page 35
Broadway Tennis club formerly had three tennis courts and a pavilion. The proposal involves
the loss of approximately 1050sq m of allocated Local Open Space including one tennis court.
The proposal is therefore subject to revised UDP Policy UOS 1.3 (Protection of Local Open
Space), Core Policy CS8 (Safeguarding and Improving the Environment), UDP Review Policy
L1.1 Land for Active Recreation and Paragraph 74 of the NPPF.
Paragraph 74 of the NPPF indicates:
'Existing open space, sports and recreational buildings and land, including playing fields, should
not be built on unless:
an assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown the open space, buildings or
land to be surplus to requirements; or
the loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by equivalent or better
provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location; or
the development is for alternative sports and recreational provision, the needs for which
clearly outweigh the loss.'
The courts and pavilion building were the subject of vandalism and fire-damage around ten
years ago and the site has long since been cleared, the land has remained derelict ever since.
The primary purpose of this planning application is to facilitate the reformation of the Broadway
Tennis Club and to secure its long-term future. The surfacing for the new tennis courts would
be all-weather and laid out to Lawn Tennis Association (LTA) standards in terms of size and
quality. Sport England sought the views of the (LTA) and the LTA have confirmed that they
welcome the site being brought back into tennis use.
The Sport, Recreation and Open Space 2005 study provides context/background for the
'standard' adopted in the Development Plan. The Development plan adopts the Fields in Trust/
NPFA 6 acre minimum standard; (formal 1.7 ha per 1000 pop). Against that standard the
Cheadle Committee area has 2.12ha per 1000 population, a surplus of 0.42ha per 1000 pop.
The minor loss of open space at the site would have negligible impact on the amount of formal
space in
Cheadle.
The quantity of Tennis courts in Cheadle was recorded as being at the average level for the
borough, the quality ranging from 58 -65% in the study. Broadway tennis club was however not
referenced as being assessed as part of the Open space study. The development would
therefore be contributing two tennis courts to LTA standard. It is also acknowledged that the
erection of the dwellings will help fund the reformation of Broadway tennis club. It is
considered therefore that the proposal would be compliant with the third bullet from paragraph
74 of the NPPF because it is providing two good quality courts with essential facilities.
Core Strategy Policy CS8 states that development which does not safeguard the permanence
and integrity of an area of Local Open Space will be allowed in situations where improvements
are made to promote the participation in the use of recreation facilities. It is considered that the
proposal adheres to this policy because the proposal is providing two tennis courts, thereby
addressing an identified need.
UDP Review Policy UOS 1.3 Protection of Local Open Space goes on to state that
development within Local Open Space will be permitted where it would be enhancing the
Page 36
overall quality of Local Open Space provision in the area.

UDP Review Policy L1.1 Land for Active Recreation relates to sports grounds and land last
used for active recreation , the policy does not allow for its loss except where development
would provide sufficient benefit to sport and recreation to outweigh the loss, which is clearly
demonstrated in this case.
In summary, the applicant has clearly demonstrated that the proposal will be bringing the
Broadway tennis club into use thereby enhancing the recreational provision in the area. The
proposal is therefore incompliance with the policy position in relation open space thereby
satisfying paragraph 74 of the NPPF, Core Strategy Policy CS8 and Stockport UDP Review
Policies L1.1 and UOS1.3 Strategy.
Suggested Conditions
It is recommended that a condition is attached to the decision notice, (in the event planning
permission is granted) in order to ensure that the proposed new tennis facilities would be
completed prior to the first occupation of the proposed new houses. Confirmation is also
required to illustrate that the specification of the courts and lights is per LTA standard.
Commuted Sums to serve the Open Space needs of the schemes residents
The policy requirements of Dev Man Policy SIE-2 from the Core Strategy and the Recreational
Open Space Provision SPG indicate that small new residential development schemes will be
required to contribute towards the provision of open space for formal and casual recreation and
children's play in locations which are accessible to the future occupants. Owing to the recent
changes in the Planning Practice Guidance, contributions are not to be sought from
developments of 10-units or less. Consequently offsite open space contributions would not be
required in this instance.
Environment Agency - No objection in principle but note that Brunt wood Hall Brook (a 'main
river') runs alongside the eastern boundary of the site and that a permit may be required from
them for works or structures within 8 metres of the top of the bank.
SMBC Arboricultural Officer Conservation Area Designations
The proposed development is not within or affected by a Conservation Area.
Legally Protected Trees
There is legally protected tree within this site or affected by this development (Cheadle &
Gatley DUD No.47 Barcheston Road, Cheadle 1970).
Invasive Species
There were no signs of any invasive species during the site inspection therefore no control
measures are required.
Stockports Core Strategy DPD
CS 8 Biodiversity and Nature Conservation
SIE-1 Development Management
SIE-3 Protecting, Safeguarding and enhancing the Environment
Stockports Unitary Development Plan (Retained Policy)
Page 37
NE1.1 SITES OF SPECIAL NATURE CONSERVATION IMPORTANCE

NE1.2 SITES OF NATURE CONSERVATION IMPORTANCE
NE3.1 PROTECTION AND ENHANCEMENT OF GREEN CHAINS
Recommendations:
The proposed development will potentially have a negative impact on trees located on site with
the proposed new tennis courts, pavilion and new dwellings construction and
encroachment/potential damage from machinery working in close proximity of the trees within
the site. The sites front and rear boundary has a fair level of vegetation and trees and as such
there cannot be any loss of trees on site as this will have a negative impact on amenity and
biodiversity without the submission of an enhanced landscaping scheme to off-set and increase
the tree loss of the site.
The proposed development would potentially have a negative impact on the existing trees with
a proposal for construction works in close proximity of existing trees on site. The construction
materials or vehicles may impact on the trees and as such an advisory should be required to be
given to make contractors aware of the protective trees and the installation of protective fencing
to limit access to these areas to prevent compaction in accordance with the submitted root
protection plan, accidental damage or spillage of chemicals on the root zones of all trees in the
whole of the property, if this is conditioned and complied with then the tennis courts, pavilion
and residential dwellings would still have a negative impact on the site and surrounding
environment, but would limit the tree loss and as long as a detailed landscaping scheme is
submitted to show replacement and enhancement of the tree cover for the area.
The main concern for this site is the proposed level of impact on the existing trees especially to
G6 as from the layout plan and the street scene plan it looks like it could clearly move away
from G6 to give a better distance from the proposed retained trees and reduce the impact on
the root systems of these trees. In addition accidental damage from contractors parking,
storage and deliveries to the existing trees therefore the need for an advisory notices to be
issued to contractors to prevent any compaction, damage to trees and grass verges in the area
and proximity to the protected/retained trees within and neighbouring the site which potentially
will have a negative impact on the trees root systems, as the trees are an integral part of the
tree scape for the residential estate and therefore cannot be lost.
Further consideration also needs to be given to potential planting with native species such as
Holly and Yew for evergreen screening and Oaks, Limes and Hawthorns to be considered
along with enhancement opportunities through new trees and more appropriate species needs
to be considered to fit the local environment and enhance the site as well as the biodiversity of
the area.
The trees offer a high level of biodiversity/habitat benefit and as such they need retaining as the
loss would be unacceptable as this would be further increasing urban sprawl of Cheadle area.
In principle the scheme will have a negative impact on the trees in the area and so will
require the submission of a landscaping scheme to show the replacement and
enhancement of the tree scape, the conditioning of the root protection area and require the
advisory notice to be issued to contractors making them aware of the protected trees and
restricted areas. These documents can be conditioned as they will just confirm the limited
level of impact on the protected trees on site, then this will resolve any tree related issues.
Page 38
The following conditions are required if the scheme is approved:

No existing tree within the site shall be cut down, topped, lopped, uprooted, willfully
damaged or willfully destroyed without the prior written approval of the local planning
authority, with the exception of those indicated otherwise on the approved plan. Any
hedgerows, woody plants or shrubbery removed without such consent or dying or being
severely damaged or being seriously diseased, within 5 years of the development
commencing, shall be replaced within the next planting season with trees of such size and
species as may be approved in writing by the local planning authority.
No development shall take place until all existing trees on the site except those shown to be
removed on the approved plans, have been fenced off in accordance with BS 5837:2012
"Trees in relation to construction - Recommendations". The fencing shall be retained during
the period of construction and no work, excavation, tipping or stacking of materials shall
take place within any such fence during the construction period.
No development shall take place until details of all proposed tree planting, including the
intended dates of planting, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local
planning authority. All tree planting shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details
prior to the development being brought into use.
SMBC Environmental Health (Contamination) - Recommends the following condition(s) to be
applied on a phased basis:
No development shall take place until an investigation and risk assessment into contamination
at the site, in accordance with a scheme to be approved in writing by the local planning
authority, has been carried out. The investigation and risk assessment shall include
recommendations for remedial action and the development shall not be occupied until these
recommendations have been implemented.
The report submitted with the application has identified potentially unacceptable risks from
contamination and further investigation is required to ensure that these risks to the future users
of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters,
property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely
without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other off site receptors in accordance
with Policy EP1.5, "Development on or near Contaminated Sites", of the Stockport Unitary
Development Plan Review.
No development shall take place until a detailed remediation scheme to bring the site to a
condition suitable for the specified use by removing unacceptable risks to human health,
buildings and other property and the natural and historical environment has been submitted to
and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme to be submitted shall
specify but not be limited to :(i) the proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria
(ii) all remedial works to be undertaken including the quantities of materials to be removed from
and imported to the development site.
(iii) the proposals for sourcing and testing all materials imported to the site including testing
Page 39
schedules, sampling frequencies and actual and allowable contaminant concentrations (as
determined by appropriate risk assessment in accordance with the document "Model
Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination" (CLR11)).
Reason
To ensure that any unacceptable risks from contamination to the future users of the land and
neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and
ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without
unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other off site receptors in accordance with
Policy EP1.5, "Development on or near Contaminated Sites", of the Stockport Unitary
The development shall not be occupied until the approved remediation scheme required to be
submitted by Condition [XXXX] has been carried out. Within [XXXX] months of completion of
remediation measures, a validation report assessing the effectiveness of the remediation
carried shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The report
shall specify any further remediation measures necessary and indicate how and when these
measures will be undertaken.
Reason
To ensure that any unacceptable risks from contamination to the future users of the land and
neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and
ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without
unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other off site receptors in accordance with
Policy EP1.5, "Development on or near Contaminated Sites", of the Stockport Unitary
INFORMATIVE
Any investigation or risk assessment which seeks to establish the presence or otherwise of
contamination on or close to the site of a proposed development should be carried out in
accordance with current legislation and guidance.
SMBC Environmental Health (Pollution Prevention) - The proposed development is for a
mixed use residential/leisure activity. The applicant wants develop the site for 4 residential
properties along with 2 tennis courts, pavilion and flood lighting, with the hours of use on the
pavilion and courts from 08.00-22.00. I do not object to this development in principle however
there are a number of details that will need to be assessed.
From assessment of the documentation supplied, there has been no noise or lighting report
undertaken to assess the impact of the noise and lighting from the proposed tennis courts upon
the proposed residential properties and residential properties that are already in situ. Noise
from the introduction of the car park will also need to be assessed.
Internal noise levels for residential should meet BS8223-2014;
living rooms Resting

Dining
Sleeping
Page 40
07.00-23.00 35dB
07.00-23.00 40dB
07.00-23.00 35dB 23.00-07.00 30 dB
The noise report should also identify if there will be further mitigation with regards to the tennis
court i.e. acoustic fence surrounding the perimeter etc.
The applicant does not show the impact of the flood lighting upon the proposed residential
development and residential that is already in situ. A lighting assessment should be
undertaken to make sure that lighting levels do cause a light nuisance to the proposed
residential. The area that the site is situated in is classes as;
Environmental zone 3
Sky Glow 15%
Lighting into windows 10 lux
Source intensity 5
Building Luminance 10
I know that the lighting for the tennis courts will go off at 10pm however during the winter
months when it starts to get dark at 4pm if the levels are not set correctly then we could be
dealing a nuisance investigation.
Recommended conditions:
No development shall commence until a report is undertaken by a suitably qualified person to
address the impact of noise on the dwelling. This shall be carried out in accordance with
BS8233-2014 that has first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority and any mitigation measures recommended in the approved report shall be carried
out before the development is first occupied.
No external lighting shall be installed on site until plans showing the type of light appliance, the
height and position of fitting, illumination levels and light spillage have been submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The lighting approved shall be installed and
shall be maintained in accordance with the approved details.
SMBC Highway Engineer - The site is situated in an accessible location having regard to the
Councils assessment criteria and is considered appropriate for residential development. With
respect to the tennis courts proposal this will bring back an historic but redundant use which I
consider acceptable in principle. Further to my consultation dated 1 June, a revised drawing
has been received and I can advise this has overcome my initial expressions of concern with
the layout. The means of access and roadway to serve the development are now acceptable in
terms of design and fit for purpose. A shared surface driveway will be constructed and this
should afford a safe environment for all users, adequate parking is proposed for the Tennis
Courts and the residential element and there is sufficient manoeuvring space within the site for
refuse and delivery sized vehicles. In conclusion I raise no objections.
Relevant conditions and informatives:
No development shall take place until detail drawings of the means of site access, closure of
the existing site access including full footway reinstatement, visibility splay provision and
access road construction details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local
planning authority. No part of the development shall be occupied or brought into use until the
means of access and access road have been completed in accordance with the approved
drawings and are available for use. The visibility splays formed shall thereafter be kept clear of
Page 41
any structure, object, plant or tree exceeding 600mm in height at all times thereafter.
Reason: To ensure that the development will have an appropriately designed access and
access road so that it can be safely accessed by pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles in
accordance with Policies SIE-1 Quality Places, CS9 Transport and Development, T-1
Transport and Development and T-3 Safety and Capacity on the Highway Network of the
Stockport Core Strategy DPD.
No development shall take place until details of the construction, surfacing, drainage, marking,
signage and any illumination of all areas of car parking within the approved development have
been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. No part of the
development shall be occupied or brought into use until the car parking facilities have been
provided in accordance with the approved drawings and are available for use. The car parking
facilities shall thereafter be retained and shall remain available for use.
Reason: To ensure that adequate parking facilities are provided and that they are appropriately
located and are of a safe and practical design, in accordance with Policies SD-6 Adapting to
the impacts of climate change, SIE-1 Quality Places, T-1 Transport and Development, T-2
Parking in Developments and T-3 Safety and Capacity on the Highway Network of the
Stockport Core Strategy DPD.
No development shall take place until details of a covered and secure cycle store for a
minimum of 2 cycles to serve the tennis court use have been submitted to and approved in
writing by the local planning authority. The use shall not commence until the facilities have been
provided in accordance with the approved details. The facilities shall then be retained and shall
remain available for use at all times thereafter.
Reason: To ensure that safe and practical cycle parking facilities are provided so as to ensure
that the site is fully accessible by all modes of transport in accordance with Policies CS9
Transport and Development, T-1 Transport and Development and T-3 Safety and Capacity
on the Highway Network of the Stockport Core Strategy DPD.
No development shall take place until details of a long-stay covered and secure cycle parking
facility to be provided for each of the approved dwellings have been submitted to and approved
in writing by the local planning authority. No dwelling shall be occupied until its facility has been
provided in accordance with the approved details and the facilities shall then be retained and
shall remain available for use at all times thereafter.
Reason: To ensure that safe and practical cycle parking facilities are provided so as to ensure
that the site is fully accessible by all modes of transport in accordance with Policies CS9
Transport and Development, T-1 Transport and Development and T-3 Safety and Capacity
on the Highway Network of the Stockport Core Strategy DPD.
Informative:
The applicants attention is drawn to the need to seek approval under the Highways Act 1980
from the Highways Maintenance Section (telephone 0161 217 6111) regarding the construction
of the site access and reinstatement of the footway prior to works commencing on site.
SMBC Nature Development Officer - The site is located between Barcheston Road and
Cringle Drive, Cheadle. Full access to the site was not possible as the site was fenced off,
however the majority of it could be viewed from the public footpath. The proposals for the
site include the erection of 4 new dwellings, along with two all-weather sports/tennis courts,
car parking and flood lighting design.
Page 42
Nature Conservation Designations

The site has no nature conservation designations, legal or otherwise. It is however directly
adjacent to the steam and woodland that is designated as Green Chain. While there is
unlikely to be a direct impact of the proposals on the designated land, there is potential for
indirect impacts, such as the flood lighting of the sports pitches, on the function of the Green
Chain.
Legally Protected Species
An ecological survey was undertaken in November 2015 by a suitable experienced ecologist.
The site is dominated by dense scrub, with some areas of neutral grassland and individual
trees. The individual trees on the site were inspected for bat roost potential, but no cavities
could be observed from the ground. The mature sycamore on the site is covered in ivy which
offers bat roost potential. The trees and scrub also provide suitable nesting habitat for birds.
The nests of all wild birds are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981 (as
amended).
No other protected species or signs of protected species were observed.
Invasive Species
No invasive species were recorded within the ecology report, and I did not note any during my
site visit.
LDF Core Strategy
Core Policy CS8 Safeguarding and Improving the Environment - Refer to paragraph 3.286,
3.296
DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT POLICY SIE-3 - Refer to paragraph 3.345, 3.346, 3.347,
3.361, 3.362, 3.363, 3.364, 3.365, 3.366, 3.367, 3.369
Stockports Unitary Development Plan (Retained Policy) - Refer to policy NE3.1
Recommendations:
The scheme involves the loss of a number of trees and scrub habitat, with no indication that
this will be compensated for within the landscaping scheme. The ecology report makes
reference to there being scope to include planting within gardens and the wider site. In line
with this and paragraphs 3.347, 3.366 and 3.367 of the Core Strategy, a compensatory
landscape/tree planting plan should be submitted to the LPA and should contain appropriate
locally native species.
Felling of any of the mature trees should be undertaken following a Reasonable Avoidance
Method Statement, as outlined in the ecology report, and work should cease immediately if
bats, evidence of bats, or potential bat roost features are identified within the trees. The
tree report indicates that ivy should be removed from one of the sycamore trees on the site.
Unless there is a strong justification, the ivy should be retained. It has been identified as
having bat roost potential and provides a valuable wildlife resource. If it is required for
removal, further ecological survey work may be required, prior to determination of the
application.
A method statement to avoid any negative impact on the Green Chain should be submitted
to the LPA for approval. This should contain information on measures to avoid light
pollution
into
the
Green
Chain
(in
line
with
http://www.bats.org.uk/pages/bats_and_lighting.html), and to protect the woodland
Page 43
edge/retained trees and the watercourse.

No tree removal or vegetation clearance should be undertaken in the bird nesting season
(March August inclusive) unless otherwise approved in writing by the LPA. As the scrub
lost on the site with result in the loss of bird nesting habitat, compensatory nest boxes
should be provided. Details of these can be included in the landscape plan.
United Utilities - No objection providing conditions are attached to any planning permission
requiring:
foul and surface water to be drained on separate systems;

the submission and written approval of a surface water drainage scheme based on the
hierarchy of drainage options in the NPPF (i.e. a SUDS first approach) with evidence of an
assessment of site conditions; and
the submission and written approval of a sustainable drainage management and
maintenance scheme for the lifetime of the development
SMBC Lead Local Flood Authority 1. The applicant has not provided a drainage strategy or drainage proposal for the site and
have not considered a SUDS approach to Surface Water drainage. The LLFA are therefore
unable to fully assess the application for compliance to the planning requirement. A
Drainage Strategy (to include SUDS hierarchy considerations and infiltration testing) and
drainage design proposal for the development will be required. The preferred LLFA SUDS
drainage strategy for the site would be infiltration to ground.
2. From the online aerial mapping of Cheadle the existing site would appear to be
predominantly derelict and greenfield. We would not anticipate any existing SW run-off from
the current site to public sewer. The LLFA will therefore require post development surface
water run-off to be restricted to greenfield run-off of a maximum 5 l/s should a infiltration
SUDS strategy prove non-viable. Substantial flow attenuation storage will be required for
any drainage strategy and the options for installing this may be limited on a site so close to
the watercourse. The relative topographical levels of the site and watercourse are not
known and the mitigation of uplift of any storage volumes by groundwater buoyancy should
be considered in any storage proposals.
3. Foul Water discharge from the redeveloped site must be separate from the SW and
discharge to a suitable public foul sewer possibly the one in Barcheston Road and subject to
UU approval. The developer will need to consult with UU and make an application for
discharge of the foul drainage.
4. The eastern boundary of the site is a EA classified main river tributary of Micker Brook. If
site infiltration tests are shown not to support infiltration to ground, all surface water run-off
from the redeveloped site is to drain direct to the watercourse via a new single outfall. The
developer will need to consult and correspond with the EA for an application and licence to
discharge to the watercourse and obtain approval of the SUDS discharge proposal. The EA
should be able to provide river flood levels. This to be used by the designers to determine
the site will not be at risk of flooding and design a sustainable drainage solution for the site.
5. The applicant has not provided a copy of a topographical survey of the site. A topographical
survey plan will be required and should include banking details (and levels to both sides of
the watercourse) and water levels of the watercourse.
6. The EA flood maps for planning show the site is within a low risk Flood Zone 1. The site
therefore appears to be at low risk of flooding from the adjacent watercourse. However, the
Page 44
site is at medium risk of flooding from surface water. It should be noted the site is underlain
by a Major Aquifer High Groundwater Vulnerability Zone. Careful consideration of the
preferred LLFA SUDS strategy of infiltration to soakaway will be needed by the designers.
7. An intrusive ground investigation with supporting borehole logs to include the determination
of any potential ground contamination is required, together with infiltration testing to
determine the use of infiltration to ground drainage strategy is viable or not as part of the
drainage strategy SUDS hierarchy considerations.
The LLFA do not see there will be an issue to successfully drain this site but before planning
permission should be granted the LLFA will require a drainage strategy, infiltration testing
results and feasibility report, and the issues set out above satisfactorily resolved. Until we have
a working drainage strategy for the site the LLFA recommendation is to defer planning
permission.
ANALYSIS
Departure from the development plan?
It should be noted from the outset that although the application was advertised a 'departure
from the development plan' at the start of the application process, further investigation and
assessment indicated that the proposed development did in fact accord with the provisions of
the development plan - see below for further details.
Proposed change of use and partial loss of allocated Local Open Space
The proposed development will result in the partial loss of land allocated as Local Open Space
by UDP policy UOS1.3. That policy states that:
"Within areas of Local Open Space development will not be permitted unless:
(i) It is clearly needed in connection with the outdoor recreational use of the land or is otherwise
appropriate to the maintenance of the open nature of the land, and it would clearly enhance the
overall quality of Local Open Space provision in the area; or
(ii) It can be demonstrated that there is an adequate provision of open space in the local
area and that the loss of the site would not be detrimental to the well being of the local
community or the amenities of the area [my emphasis ]; or
(iii) the open space that would be lost as a result of the proposed development would be
replaced by open space of equivalent or better quantity, quality, usefulness, and attractiveness,
in a location at least as accessible to current and potential users."
UDP Policy L1.1 is also relevant and states:
"The Council will seek to achieve an overall minimum standard for the Borough of 2.4 hectares
per thousand population for active recreation.
Proposals which involve the loss of public or private sports grounds or other land currently or
last used for active recreation will not be permitted except where the proposed development
would provide facilities of sufficient benefit to sport and recreation to outweigh the loss
[my emphasis]"
Page 45
Stockport's Core Strategy also includes policies governing the loss of local open space and as
a more recent expression of the Council's policy in this area should be afforded more weight in
decision making. Policy CS8 states:
"In general terms development that does not safeguard the permanence and integrity of areas
of Strategic and Local Open Space will not be allowed. There may, however, be situations in
which other factors determine that the need to continue to protect existing assets are
outweighed by the interests of achieving sustainable communities, in particular with regards to
delivering mixed communities, meeting wider leisure needs, improving participation in the use
of recreation facilities and improving parks. In such situations the objective of achieving
sustainable communities may be best served by the development of limited areas of open
space. Such development must be designed to meet a high standard of sustainability and pay
high regard to the local environment.
In addition there may be circumstances where satisfying overriding community needs such as
affordable/social housing may justify loss of open space. The Council's Sport, Recreation and
Open Space Study audits the current level of supply against relevant assessments of demand.
Also relevant is the nationally recognised Fields in Trust "6 Acre" standard which consultation
confirms is an appropriate minimum standard to be applied to the borough. Such circumstances
will only be considered acceptable where the study identifies a relative higher provision of
recreational open space within an Area Committee area compared to other Area Committee
areas in the borough. Any development resulting in a loss of open space within an area of
relative high-levels of provision will be expected to off-set that loss by making
improvements to existing open space or [my emphasis ] providing (at least) equivalent new
open space in a Committee area of relative low provision so as to help not exacerbate the
under-supply situation that exists across the borough as a whole."
Although the proposed development would result in the partial loss of designated local open
space it is clear from the comments of the Council's Open Space Planning Policy Officers that
the Cheadle area is the only area of the Borough that enjoys a surplus of open space provision
when the Council's adopted Fields in Trust "6 Acre" standard is applied (see above). Given
this 'surplus' position, the clear support of Sport England and the Lawn Tennis Association (see
above) for the qualitative improvements being offered and the clear benefits the scheme will
bring to improving the use and amount of open space available to local residents by returning a
currently derelict and inaccessible area of local open space to active use, the proposed
development is considered to satisfy criterion (ii) of policy UOS1.3 and the requirements of
development plan policies L1.1 and CS8. At the same time, the proposed development will
make a small but nonetheless valuable contribution to meeting the Borough's currently unmet
housing needs by providing additional family housing in a sustainable location in accordance
with Core Strategy policy H-2 - a brownfield site with an accessibility score just short of 50.
Despite the development being in compliance with these development plan policies, as
Stockport does not currently have a 5 year housing land supply (last assessed as equating to a
4.2 year supply in April 2015), Paragraph 49 of the NPPF applies and states that:
"Housing applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of
sustainable development. Relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered
up-to-date if the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable
housing sites."
Page 46
Following the recent decision of the Court of Appeal - Suffolk District Council v Hopkins Homes
Ltd & SSCLG and Richborough Estates Partnership LLP v Cheshire East Borough Council &
SSCLG 2016 - local open space allocations and policies are considered "relevant policies for
the supply of housing" and therefore are out of date. In this scenario, the application should be
determined in accordance with the presumption in favour of sustainable development required
by the NPPF in paragraph 14:
"For decision-taking this means:
approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay;
and
where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date,
granting permission unless:
any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits,
when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or
specific policies in this Framework indicate development should be restricted."
Paragraph 74 of the NPPF sets out a restrictive policy that seeks to protect open space, sports
and recreational buildings and land such as the application site from built development unless
one of three exceptions apply:
"Existing open space, sports and recreational buildings and land, including playing fields,
should not be built on unless:
an assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown the open space, buildings
or land to be surplus to requirements; or
the loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by equivalent or
better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location; or
the development is for alternative sports and recreational provision, the needs for
which clearly outweigh the loss [my emphasis ]."
In this instance the third exception is considered to apply for the reasons cited above i.e. the
qualitative gains being offered and the return of the site to active recreational use outweigh the
quantitative loss of designated local open space that would arise given the current 'surplus' of
open space in the Cheadle area.
Importantly, despite it being a private members club the applicant has stated in their supporting
Planning Statement that the new facilities would be made available for use by local primary and
secondary schools, community groups and for tuition purposes. This is considered a
significant public benefit that weighs in favour of the proposals.
The principle of the development is therefore supported subject to detailed matters being found
to be in accordance with the development plan and the NPPF and conditions being attached to
any approval to ensure that the qualitative improvements proposed are delivered. It is
considered necessary to apply conditions requiring the proposed courts and pavilion to be
Page 47
completed in full and made available for use prior to the first occupation of the dwellinghouses
and that the courts and floodlights are built to Lawn Tennis Association standards.
Ecology, trees, green infrastructure and landscaping
The application was accompanied by an Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey (ecology report)
which found no evidence of invasive species or protected species on the site although it did
note its potential to support nesting birds. The survey has been assessed by the Council's
Nature Conservation Officer who identifies no barrier to development providing adequate
safeguards are in place to:
deliver suitable mitigation in respect of replacement tree cover and planting;

tree felling to be undertaken in accordance with the precautionary reasonable avoidance
measures set out in the ecology report
safeguard the integrity of the adjacent Green Chain designation by minimising light pollution
and minimising impacts on the woodland edge and the adjacent watercourse
no tree removal or vegetation clearance during the bird nesting season and the provision of
the bird nest boxes within the site.
Conditions are recommended to ensure the sites ecological value is conserved and enhanced
in accordance with the NPPF and development plan policies.
Finally, it should be noted that the ivy covered tree that has bat roost potential lies within the
site and is marked for retention The Arboricultural Implications Assessment submitted in
support of the application identifies the species as a co-dominant mature Sycamore showing
early signs of bleeding canker and recommends that the Ivy be removed. There is currently no
evidence that bats are roosting in the tree and therefore harm to bats cannot be assumed, it is
therefore considered appropriate to add an informative to any consent recommending that the
ivy be retained rather than requiring it by condition and warning the developer of their ongoing
legal responsibilities regarding the impact of development and tree works on protected species.
Additional safeguards are provided by conditions requiring compliance with the
recommendations and mitigation measures contained within the submitted Habitat Survey.
A neighbouring residents has requested the retention of Tree 4 - an over mature Ash
immediately to the south of the application site that has suffered from large limb failure, is
showing evidence of extensive stem decay and is recommended to be felled. As a category U
tree good arboricultural practice indicates that the tree should be removed and the submitted
Arboricultural Implications Assessment suggests it has a lifespan of between 0-10 years.
Although not legally protected, Tree 4 lies outside the application site and it may not be
possible for T4 to be felled by the developer if it is not within their ownership. No further
specific action is recommended other than the imposition of a tree replacement condition that
would help ensure that replacement trees are planted around the site boundaries where breaks
in the riparian canopy are created.
Development plan policies CS8 and NE3.1 and the NPPF require the integrity of local open
space, green chains and green infrastructure to be conserved and where possible enhanced.
Whilst the proposals will inevitably result in the loss of trees and vegetation across the site its is
considered that any harm can be appropriately mitigated through the imposition of conditions
relating to tree protection and a requirement for a detailed landscaping and tree replacement
scheme to be delivered alongside the development.
Page 48
Amenity
The layout of the proposed houses is in full compliance with and has been influenced by the
Council's separation standards with standards in all cases exceeded. There are no window
openings in the side elevations of the houses proposed and given their orientation no undue
loss of privacy would arise. The scope for overlooking would be further mitigated by retained
and newly planted trees along the boundaries of the site. The proposed pavilion building is
closer to the site boundaries and the gardens of neighbouring residential properties however
this relationship is considered acceptable given its height is limited to a single storey, boundary
vegetation will provide some screening and only high level windows are provided on the rear
elevation to provide light to the changing rooms. This relationship should not result in any
undue loss of privacy, however, it is considered necessary to require the high level windows on
the rear elevation to be obscure glazed to safeguard that position. Subject to the above, the
development is compliant with the NPPF, development plan policy and the Design of
Residential Development SPD in this regard.
Issues relating to potential noise and light pollution are considered below.
Design and landscaping
The layout of the proposed development is considered to be a sympathetic and appropriate
design solution that successfully reconciles site specific constraints and the need to provide
future users with optimum living standards and playing conditions. Residents of the houses
would benefit from south facing rear gardens of a size compliant with the Council's adopted
standards (100sqm for 4+ bedroom houses).
The appearance of the development would be softened by retained trees along the site
boundaries and further planting through the imposition of a condition requiring a detailed
landscaping scheme to be submitted, approved and implemented in full.
The buildings themselves are considered to be of a scale that is sympathetic to their
surroundings (see above) whilst also having a high quality appearance. The houses are of a
traditional, legible design with gables to front elevation, covered entrances and layouts that will
deliver natural surveillance across the site as a whole, including the tennis courts. Although
three storeys in height, the second storey is provided in the roof space ensuring the buildings
respect the suburban scale and character of the area. High quality materials are proposed for
the houses with red brick as the dominant facing material, slate roofs, timber front and garage
doors, anthracite (grey) UPVC windows, stone sills and lintels, zinc clad dormers, whilst
detailing such deep window reveals, brick band courses give depth and interest to the
elevations. No details of materials have been provided for the pavilion building. Although the
proposed palette of materials for the houses is supported in principle, it is recommended that a
condition be added to any consent requiring materials samples/further details for all buildings to
be submitted and approved to ensure a high quality finished appearance.
Similarly, despite support for the site layout, insufficient landscaping details have been provided
in support of the application so it is considered necessary to attach a condition requiring the
submission, approval and implementation of a detailed landscaping scheme that includes
details of hard surfaces, court surfaces, ball stop fencing, plot and boundary treatments,
floodlights, planting, ecological mitigation measures together with a timetable for
Page 49
implementation and detailed maintenance proposals. Again, this will ensure that a high quality
finished appearance and ecological enhancements are secured.
Subject to the recommended conditions, the development would be of a suitably high quality in
accordance with the NPPF and relevant development plan policies.
Pollution prevention
Although a tennis club is an established use on the site, it is clear that re-introducing high
quality tennis courts and supporting infrastructure has the potential to generate noise impacts
on existing and future residents and it is therefore considered necessary to attach a condition to
any planning permission requiring the submission and approval of a noise assessment to
address any noise impacts on sensitive receptors (existing and future residents) from the
proposed tennis club (including the courts, pavilion and parking areas) and existing noise
sources such as air traffic. Although operating hours of 08:00 to 22:00 daily are proposed, this
cannot be supported until the applicant has adequately demonstrated that these hours would
not have a significant adverse impact on neighbouring residents. Hours of operation may well
need to be reduced as part of a package of mitigation measures if an evidence based noise
assessment demonstrates it is necessary. This recommendation is supported by the Council's
Environmental Health Officer.
Similarly, the proposed floodlit courts could create light pollution at a level that has a significant
adverse impact on neighbouring residents and the site's ecology. A similar condition is
therefore recommended to measure, assess and mitigate external lighting impacts.
Subject to the imposition of these conditions, it is considered that the development would
comply with the NPPF and relevant development plan policies.
Contamination
Being a brownfield site in an suburban area, the proposed development and use has the
potential to disturb contaminate land that may pose a risk to human health and the wider
environment. It is therefore recommended conditions are attached to any consent requiring a
risk based site investigation and assessment to be undertaken to identify and if necessary
remediate any potential sources of contamination on the site. This recommendation is
supported by the Council's Environmental Health Officer and is considered necessary to secure
compliance with the NPPF and relevant development plan policies.
Sustainable transport, highway safety and parking
Use of the site as a tennis club is established whilst the site's sustainable location (it gains an
49.79 accessibility score) makes it suitable for residential development, particularly given the
absence of a 5 year housing supply. This view is supported by the Council's Senior Highways
Engineer in their response to the application. Detailed design concerns were initially raised,
however, subsequent dialogue have resolved matters such that the proposals are now
supported subject to conditions requiring the submission, approval and implementation of
details relating to the site access, cycle and car parking provision. Traffic calming are not
considered necessary in this case.
Sustainable Design and Construction
Page 50
Although the size of development falls below the threshold set in Core Strategy Policy SD3, the
applicant has submitted an Energy Statement confirming that the development would be
assessed against and delivered in accordance with Part L of the current 2013 Building
Regulations ensuring CO2 reductions required by the Core Strategy would be achieved.
Currently, the proposals lack any kind of detailed drainage proposals which has led to United
Utilities and the Council's Drainage Engineer raising concerns with the proposed development.
The applicant has stated on the application form that foul and surface water would be
connected to the mains sewer. Both the NPPG and Core Strategy Policy SD6 require new
developments to incorporate SUDs wherever possible to reduce surface water run off and help
reduce the risk of flooding elsewhere. Given the limited size and scale of the development
proposed and its location in Flood Zone 1 it is considered that this can be adequately
addressed through the imposition of conditions requiring foul and surface water to be drained
separately in accordance with United Utilities requirements and a detailed surface water
drainage condition requiring the site to be drained in accordance with the drainage hierarchy
set out in national and local planning guidance and policy.
Other relevant matters
The public right of way that runs immediately adjacent to the site will benefit from greater levels
of activity and natural surveillance than is currently the case and due care will be taken when
assessing detailed design proposals required by conditions to ensure this interface is
optimised.
The questions raised by residents over land ownership and restrictive covenants are ultimately
a private civil matters between those with an ownership interest in the land unless the local
planning authority believes that the statutory declaration on the planning application forms is
inaccurate or misleading. Applicants are required by law to serve notice on all those with an
ownership interest in a planning application site (i.e. a freehold interest or a leasehold interest
of seven years or more) or is an agricultural tenant before submitting the application to the local
planning authority and confirm those details on the application form itself (ownership
certificates). In this case the applicant signed Certificate B and identified two trustees of the
Broadway (Cheadle) Lawn Tennis Club as the only other owners of the site. It is an offence to
knowingly issue false or misleading certificates and local planning authorities must "not
entertain" applications that they know to have not satisfied this statutory requirement (Section
65 of the Town and Country Planning Act). Although many residents are disputing the
applicant's ability to develop site due to restrictive covenants, to date no evidence has been
brought to officers' attention that confirms that the certificates are incorrect. The obligation to
notify all those with an ownership interest in the site is the applicant's not the local planning
authority's.
For information, in response to the issues raised a trustee of the club has made the following
statement:
"To whom it may concern, the land at Barcheston Road which was
formally the Broadway (Cheadle) Tennis Club is owned and has
been owned since 1936 by the trustees of the aforementioned Club.
The current trustees of the club are myself and George Balon. We
have no personal interest in the land and will not make any
Page 51
personal gains in the sale of the section of land for the 4 houses,
the sale will only facilitate the reinstatement of the courts and
facilities, any monies left over will be retained for the future benefit
of the club.
We would like it to be known that many efforts over the years have
been made to different private clubs, organisations and companies
about renovating the tennis club including applying for Lottery
money, all to no avail despite the hours days and weeks put in,
especially by two committee members in particular ( Elliot Cohen
and Robert Frais )
The Trustees believe that since the club doesn't possess sufficient
funds to build or renovate 3 courts and negotiations with the Lawn
Tennis Association proved fruitless, they are left with the alternative
of entertaining a scheme such as that proposed or leave the land
as it is - an eyesore to the neighbours and a health hazard to the
public.
We can confirm the new facilities are for the good of the
neighbourhood and that indeed membership of the club will be
welcomed from the local community."
Numerous residents have raised the condition of the Barcheston Road carriageway in their
representations with some arguing that the additional traffic generated by the development
justifies the resurfacing of the carriageway and the installation of speed bumps. Whilst
additional traffic will inevitably be generated by the proposals its impact will be very limited and
does not in itself justify the remedial measures suggested.
Some residents have stated that the contrary to the submitted Planning Statement, a minimum
of three courts are required to establish official tennis clubs. Whilst that may be the case, the
express support of the Lawn Tennis Association and Sport England for the proposals should be
given significant weight when assessing the proposals, particularly given the baseline position
on the quality of the courts and the site's
Some residents have questioned whether reduced fee or reduced rate membership will be
offered to local residents. That will remain a commercial matter between the residents and the
club / court operator however the applicant has stated that membership applications from local
residents would be welcomed (see above).
Like the issue of the reduced rate membership for local residents, the ongoing maintenance
and management of the facilities will rest with the club / court operator however it should be
noted that the local planning authority does have the ability to enforce any breaches of planning
control and issue improvement notices under Section 215 of the Act should private property be
poorly maintained have an adverse affect on the wider area.
SUMMARY
Although the proposed development will result in the partial loss of land allocated as Local
Open Space by UDP policy UOS1.3, the Cheadle area is the only area of the Borough that
Page 52
enjoys a 'surplus' of open space provision. Given this 'surplus' position, the clear support of
Sport England and the Lawn Tennis Association (see above) for the qualitative improvements
being offered and the clear benefits the scheme will bring to improving the use and amount of
open space available to local residents by returning a currently derelict and inaccessible area of
local open space to active use, the proposed development is considered to satisfy the relevant
development plan policies and the NPPF. At the same time, the proposed development will
make a small but nonetheless valuable contribution to meeting the Borough's currently unmet
housing needs by providing additional family housing in a sustainable location. Subject to the
imposition of appropriate conditions, the proposals are considered "sustainable development" in
accordance with both the NPPF and the development plan and approval is recommended
accordingly.
Conditions are recommended to address the following residual matters:
Development in accordance with approved plans and documents

Phasing conditions
Courts and lighting built to LPA specifications
Tree retention
Tree protection
Detailed landscaping scheme
Contamination - site assessment, investigation and remediation (if necessary)
Foul drainage
Surface water drainage scheme based on SUDS hierarchy
Implementation of ecological mitigation measures
Details of building materials
Noise assessment and mitigation measures (if necessary)
External lighting
Site access details
Car parking provision
Cycle parking provision
Page 53
All dimensions should be checked on site

Any drawing errors should be brought to the attention of the architect
Do not scale off this drawing COPYRIGHT theCAVE a+d limited
REVISIONS :
REV
Page 54
PROJECT :
SCALE :
DRAWN BY :
CHEADLE TENNIS CLUB

OFF BARCHESTON ROAD
1:1250 A4
SXJ
SEPT 15
DRAWING TITLE :
DWG N :
REVISION :
CHECKED :
LOCATION PLAN
121.18-LP
12 GEORGE STREET ALDERLEY EDGE SK9 7EJ.

01625 541 483
www.the-cave.co.uk
mail@the-cave.co.uk
INIT
DETAILS OF REVISION
DATE :
CAJ
Page 55
Page 56
FLOOR PLAN
FRONT ELEVATION
DISABLED
WC
FEMALE
CHANGING
TERRACE
CLUB ROOM
2016
Barcheston Tennis Club
MALE
WC
SIDE ELEVATION
SIDE ELEVATION
REAR ELEVATION
DETAILS OF REVISION
www.the-cave.co.uk
DRAWN BY :
CAJ
REVISION :
SCALE :
1:100 A3
DWG N :
121.18-PL02
PLAN & ELEVATIONS

TENNIS PAVILLION
DRAWING TITLE :
INIT
mail@the-cave.co.uk
JPH
CHECKED :
SEPT 15
DATE :
CHEADLE TENNIS CLUB

OFF BARCHESTON ROAD
PROJECT :
01625 838 632
12 GEORGE ST ALDERLEY EDGE CHESHIRE SK9 7EJ
REV
REVISIONS :

Do not scale off this drawing
COPYRIGHT theCAVE a+d limited
Page 57
REAR ELEVATION
FRONT ELEVATION
SLATE ROOF
SIDE ELEVATION
ANTHRACITE uPVC BIFOLDING DOOR
STONE SILL
ANTHRACITE uPVC SASH WINDOW
BRICK
STONE LINTEL
POWDER COATED ANTHRACITE

ALUMINIUM CAPPING

STONE SILL
VELUX ROOF LIGHT
STONE LINTEL
STONE SILL
BRICK
SLATE ROOF
VELUX ROOF LIGHT
STONE LINTEL
SLATE ROOF
TIMBER FRONT DOOR
STONE SILL
BRICK
TIMBER GARAGE DOOR
SPLIT BY STONE COLUMN
BRICK
STONE LINTEL
BRICK BAND COURSE

STONE SILL
ANTHRACITE uPVC DORMER WINDOW
STONE LINTEL
STONE SILL
STONE CAP
SLATE ROOF
BRICK BAND COURSE
VELUX ROOF LIGHT
STONE LINTEL
BRICK
DETAILS OF REVISION
www.the-cave.co.uk
STONE CAP
BRICK
BRICK
BRICK BAND
COURSE
POWDER COATED
ANTHRACITE
ALUMINIUM
CAPPING
ANTHRA ZINC
CLAD DORMER
BRICK BAND
COURSE
mail@the-cave.co.uk
REVISION :
121.18-PL04
JWFL
DRAWN BY :
DWG N :
1:100 A3
SCALE :
ELEVATIONS
DRAWING TITLE :
CAJ
CHECKED :
FEB 16
DATE :
CHEADLE TENNIS CLUB

OFF BARCHESTON ROAD
PROJECT :
01625 838 632
INIT
SLATE ROOF
REV
REVISIONS :

GARAGE
DINING
GROUND FLOOR PLAN
Page 58
LOUNGE
UTILITY
W.C.
KITCHEN
FAMILY AREA
HALL
FIRST FLOOR PLAN
EN SUITE
EN SUITE
BED 2
DRESSING ROOM
MASTER SUITE
STUDY
SECOND FLOOR PLAN
BED 3
BATHROOM
BED 4
DETAILS OF REVISION
www.the-cave.co.uk
DRAWN BY :
CAJ
REVISION :
SCALE :
1:100 A3
DWG N :
121.18-PL03
FLOOR PLANS
DRAWING TITLE :
INIT
mail@the-cave.co.uk
JPH
CHECKED :
SEPT 15
DATE :
CHEADLE TENNIS CLUB

OFF BARCHESTON ROAD
PROJECT :
01625 838 632
REV
REVISIONS :

REAR BOUNDRY EDGE
BOUNDRY EDGE
BOUNDRY EDGE
Page 59
DETAILS OF REVISION
www.the-cave.co.uk
DRAWN BY :
JWFL
REVISION :
SCALE :
1:200 A3
DWG N :
121.18-PL05
FRONT STREET SCENE
DRAWING TITLE :
INIT
mail@the-cave.co.uk
CAJ
CHECKED :
FEB 16
DATE :
CHEADLE TENNIS CLUB

OFF BARCHESTON ROAD
PROJECT :
01625 838 632
REV
REVISIONS :

Page 60
APPEAL DECISIONS, CURRENT PLANNING APPEALS AND ENFORCEMENTS

Report of the Deputy Chief Executive
1.
MATTER FOR CONSIDERATION
1.1
This report summarises recent appeal decisions, lists current planning appeals and dates for local inquiries and informal
hearings, progress upon authorised enforcement action set out by area committee.
2.
INFORMATION
2.1
The appeal decisions, details of current appeals and current enforcement action for each committee area are appended.
3.
RECOMMENDATION
3.1
That the report be noted.
BACKGROUND PAPERS
Anyone with enquiries relating to planning appeals should telephone Joy Morton on 474 3219
Anyone with enquiries relating to enforcement activity should contact Dave Westhead on 0161 474 3520
Page 61
AGENDA ITEM
Agenda Item 7.
There are no background papers.
Page 62

PLANNING APPEALS
Appeal Date
30/03/16
Appeal Procedure
Written Representations
Location
9 RODMILL DRIVE, GATLEY, STOCKPORT SK8 4JX
Proposal
Appeal against the refusal of planning permission for the erection of one detached dwelling
Case Officer
Jim Seymour
Appeal Decision
Pending
Appeal Date
01/03/16
Appeal Procedure
Written Reps
Location
LAND TO THE REAR OF 14 LYNTONVALE AVENUE, GATLEY
Proposal
Erection of a single storey dwelling
Case Officer
Jim Seymour
Appeal Decision
Pending
Appeal Date
22/4/16
Appeal Procedure
Written Reps
Location
Land to the north of Stanley Green Retail Park, Cheadle Hulme
Proposal
Demolition of vacant cottages, erection of new access road, boundary treatments, landscaping, lighting and the erection of A3/A4 unit
Case Officer
Jane Chase
Appeal Decision
Allowed & Partial allowance of costs against the Council.
ENFORCEMENT APPEALS
None Current
ENFORCEMENT NOTICES
None Current
Page 63
Agenda Item 8.
PLANNING & HIGHWAYS REGULATION COMMITTEE
ALL AREA COMMITTEES
ANNUAL REVIEW OF OUTCOMES TOUR
Report of the Corporate Director (Place Development)
1.
MATTER FOR CONSIDERATION
1.1
This report announces the intention to hold the Annual Review of Outcomes
on Friday 7th October 2016. The Area Committee is requested to submit their
recommendations for a completed development site within their area to be
included on the list of sites to be inspected by the Tour delegates. In addition
the Area Committee is asked to provide nominations for delegates to attend.
2.
INFORMATION
2.1
Each year the Committee selects recently completed developments for review,
one for each of the Area Committees. These sites are then inspected to
review the effectiveness of the development management process, to identify
good practice, areas for improvement and lessons for the future.
2.2
The sites selected attempt to broadly reflect the nature of development within
the borough. Each of the sites are visited and inspected by a team of
Members, Officers and guests from external organisations and other
Authorities.
2.3
For each site a written report on the planning issues is distributed beforehand
and an Officer from the development management team gives an oral
presentation and answers any questions on the day. The participants view the
site and complete a questionnaire concerning the merits of the development.
2.4
Following the completion of the Tour the findings and any recommendations
are reported to the Planning and Highways Regulation Committee.
3.
RECOMMENDATION
3.1
That the Planning and Highways Regulation Committee agree the date for the
Annual Review and request that each Area Committee nominate a recently
completed development site to be included on the list of sites to be inspected
on the Annual Review Tour and
3.2
That the Area Committee nominates Members to attend the Annual Review
Tour on Friday 7th October 2016.
The contact officer for this report is Kevin Brooks tel: 0161 474 4905
Page 64
Agenda Item 9.
STOCKPORT COUNCIL
EXECUTIVE REPORT SUMMARY SHEET
Subject: York Close, Cheadle
Report to: (a) Cheadle Area Committee
Date: Tuesday 12 July 2016
Report of: (b) Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration
Forward Plan
NO / YES (Please circle)

General Exception
Special Urgency
(Tick box)
Summary: To seek approval to erect bollards on both footways at the junction of York
Close and Councillor Lane.
Recommendation(s):
The Area Committee is asked to consider and comment upon the proposals and
recommend that the Executive Councillor (Communities and Housing) approves the
installation of 8 No bollards on York Close, at the junction with Councillor Lane.
Relevant Scrutiny Committee (if decision called in): (d)
Environment & Economy Scrutiny Committee
Background Papers (if report for publication): (e)
There are none.
Contact person for accessing
background papers and discussing the report
Urgent Business: (f)
Officer: Craig Peet

Tel: 0161 474 4813
YES / NO (please circle)
Certification (if applicable)

This report should be considered as urgent business and the decision exempted from
call-in for the following reason(s):
AGENDA ITEM
Key Decision: (c)
The written consent of Councillor

and the Chief Executive/Monitoring
Officer/Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services for the decision to be
treated as urgent business was obtained on
/will be obtained before
the decision is implemented.
Page 65
Cheadle Area Committee
Meeting: Tuesday, 12 July 2016

York Close, Cheadle
Report of the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration

1.
INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1 To seek approval to erect bollards on both footways at the junction of York Close
and Councillor Lane.
2.
INFORMATION
2.1 Traffic Services have received a number of complaints that vehicles still park at the
junction of York Close and Councillor Lane Service Road, even though there are
parking restrictions No Waiting at Any Time (Double Yellow Lines) in place.
However, these restrictions are not preventing vehicles from parking half on / off the
footways adjacent to the parade of shops on both sides of the junction. This is not
only causing obstructions to vehicles using the junction and pedestrians using the
footways, but is also deteriorating the condition of the footway. What makes it
frustrating is that there are ample parking spaces on Councillor Lane Service Road,
which front the parade of shops, and that drivers are just being inconsiderate and
too lazy to walk a short distance.
2.2 As Civil Enforcement Officers cannot be there all the time to enforce the existing
parking restrictions, the Ward Councillor asked if bollards could be erected at the
junction to prevent vehicles from parking on the footway.
2.3 An estimated cost was provided and the Ward Councillor requested that a report be
prepared for the Area Committee to consider the proposal to install bollards as
shown on the attached Drawing No NM18-6037-01
3.
FUNDING
3.1 The estimated cost for this scheme is:8 No Bollards @ 250 each
TOTAL
2000
To be funded from the Area Ward delegated budget.

4.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 The Cheadle Area Committee is asked to consider and comment upon the
proposals and recommend that the Executive Councillor (Communities and
Housing) approves the installation of 8 No bollards on York Close, at the junction of
Councillor Lane.
Page 66
Background Papers
There are no background papers to this report.
Anyone wishing further information please contact Craig Peet on telephone number Tel:
0161 474 4813 or by email on craig.peet@stockport.gov.uk
Page 67
Page 68

Cheadle Area Committee Agenda 12th July 2016

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Cheadle Area Committee Agenda 12th July 2016

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Public Document Pack

Meeting: Tuesday, 12 July 2016

To consider a report of the Democratic Services Manager.

Web: www.stockport.gov.uk/democracy or scan the QR Code*

Public Question Time

Ward Flexibility Funding - Gatley Village Partnership

To consider an application from Gatley Village Partnership towards the cost of a

DC061537 - Land at Barcheston Road, Cheadle

The Area Committee is recommended to grant planning permission, subject

Cheadle Area Committee - 7 June 2016

Public Question Time

No public questions were submitted.

RESOLVED That the report be noted.

Cheadle Area Committee - 7 June 2016

Ward Flexibility Funding - St Ann's Lourdes Group

Cheadle Area Committee - 7 June 2016

DC/061294 - 116 Styal Road, Gatley

Cheadle Area Committee - 7 June 2016

Cheadle Area Committee - 7 June 2016

15. HIGHWAYS AND TRAFFIC WARD SPOKESPERSONS

Cheadle Area Committee - 7 June 2016

CHEADLE AREA COMMITTEE

Date: 12 July 2016

GATLEY RECREATION GROUND PAVILION - FORMER GATLEY PAVILION

WARD FLEXIBILITY FUNDING

Cheadle Hulme North

Funding awarded in 2015/16

Cheadle Golf Club

All Hallows Church Youth

Funding awarded in 2015/16

Gatley Village Partnership

Cheadle Golf Club

All Hallows Church Youth

Cheadle Village Hall

Cheadle Village Partnership

Walter Stansby Memorial

Cheadle Village Hall

2nd Cheadle Scout Group

The Its OK Club

5th Cheadle Hulme Scouting

Budget Carried Forward

Cheadle Golf Club

2nd Cheadle Scout Group

Budget carried forward

Plus budget of 3,000 for

St. Anns Road North Allotment 328

2nd Cheadle Scout Group

The Its OK Club

Budget Carried Forward

Plus budget of 3,000 for

St. Anns Road North

St Anns Lourdes Group

Plus budget of 3,000 for 7,504.25

Oak Tree Primary

Appendix A - Resume Of Issues Progress Report

Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration submitted a

Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration outlining

Carrs Road, Cheadle. Operative from 2nd May 2016

A petition was submitted containing twenty signatures requesting that

RESOLVED That the petition be referred to the Corporate Director for

Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration submitted a

for Order to be operative.

A representative of the Democratic Services submitted a report of the