Full planning permission is being sought for a ‘glamping’ site on Bomish Lane about half a kilometre from the Lovell. JBO has opposed the proposal, noting “that the impact from the additional potential contribution to the existing level of interference coming from that direction will be moderate to severe.”
link to application: 18/5000m Comments by 14th Nov.
The application, for Mr Barber of Cheshire Country Holidays on Bridge Lane, includes the construction of 10 glamping pods – on wheels covered by decking- a permanent reception/office, store, shop and shower block with parking spaces for 15 vehicles.
Jodrell Bank Observatory have objected to the proposal and were opposed to a previous application for 26 homes at this location (Ashalls submitted a different proposal in 2014 – 14/1964C ; refused and then withdrawn before appeal) however the new developer has included a ‘bund’ to the east in the hope that it might help block interference – higher than the houses??).
It is not clear how effective that would be and details of its height are not included – but …would diffraction be an issue anyway?
“The development will create 12 new dwellings with associated public open space , which provides a choice of housing to meet the needs of the area, whilst respecting and enhancing the site’s environmental assets. This will be achieved through the provision of 9 market houses and 3 affordable homes . Housing will be set within a robust green infrastructure, which will include existing mature trees and hedgerows. It will also include a permanent earth bund to the east side of the site which will help to block any interference to Jodrell Bank. The development will provide a mixture of market and affordable homes enhancing the land which has previously been used for agriculture and is currently empty .” Design & Access, Crabtree Homes.
*(15th Nov) This application has been withdrawn – presumably a new version will be submitted soon.
You may have noticed the empty and forlorn looking (previous) vicarage on Blackden Lane, with its garden trees etc cut back; Calderpeel have now put forward plans for a large replacement dwelling on the site for Mr & Mrs Mark Bowers. See pictures below. Link to their application on the CEC planning page: 18/4949C
The proposed house, “Fairfields”, would be somewhat larger than the present footprint; 3325 sq ft rather than the current 1745 sq ft.
“The design intent for this development was rooted in the belief that The Vicarage should fit comfortably among the existing buildings in the area. It was our intention that the new building should sit on the footprint of the original building and be of a similar height so as to be as unobtrusive as possible for the neighbouring dwellings. The roof of the proposed building is comparable to that of the existing property, but features more gable ends to give interest to the elevations. There will also be a number of skylights in the roof to give the attic space some natural lighting. A lighter brick will be used for the external walls of the proposed building to modernise the scheme a little.” Calderpeel
Jodrell Bank Observatory have objected to two current applications in Goostrey and Twemlow, ‘noting that the cumulative impact of this and other developments is more significant than each development individually‘:
8 proposed houses 18/4079C
-Outline planning for 8 houses on the site of The Grange livery’s stables and menage off Station Road. Decision expected 9th Nov. (link to application: 18/4079C)
-A proposal for new offices at the entrance to the exMoD Twemlow site. Approved. (link to planning page 18/3670C).
Updated Nov 2018. The Appeal after the Jan2018 refusal has been dismissed for a subterranean house near Jodrell Bank Observatory in the garden of Coachman’s Cottage. PLANNING INSPECTORATE REFERENCE: APP/R0660/W/18/3206533.
The main reason given was the potential harm to the efficiency of JBO; the Appeal Inspector also stated……
“I therefore conclude, on balance, that the proposed development would be in an unsuitable location, having regard to local and national policy. Although any harm to the character and appearance of the countryside would be limited by the subterranean design of the dwelling, it would conflict with Policy PG 6 of the CELP, which seeks to protect the open countryside by carefully restricting development outside any settlement with a defined settlement boundary. It would also conflict with Policy HOU1 of the Neighbourhood Plan. Given that the Council has a sufficient supply of housing, there is no justification for breaching the spatial strategies of the CELP or the Neighbourhood Plan”
Both JBO and Goostrey PC had objected. Two reasons were given for the initial refusal: firstly it would be in ‘Open Countryside’ and secondly, even though partially subterranean, would impair the efficiency of JBO. Cheshire East’s Local Plan policies and Goostrey’s Neighbourhood Plan policies were quoted. Link to the Officer’s Report:
“The application is located in the open countryside where development is subject to stricter control and the policy focus is on preserving the openness, character and appearance of the countryside. The application seeks permission for a new subterranean dwelling in the garden of Coachman’s Cottage. Policy PG 6 of the Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy 2017 (CELP) defines open countryside as the area outside of any settlement with a defined settlement boundary. Within the Open Countryside only development that is essential for the purposes of agriculture, forestry, outdoor recreation, public infrastructure, essential works undertaken by public service authorities or statutory undertakers, or for other uses appropriate to a rural area will be permitted. The policy allow several exceptions for new dwellings including where there is an opportunity for limited infilling, re-use of existing buildings and replacement buildings. Infilling is allowed in villages and ‘the infill of a small gap with one or two dwellings in an otherwise built up frontage elsewhere’. The CELP defines infilling as ‘the development of a relatively small gap between existing buildings’. The site could not reasonably be described as an infill plot, it does not have a built up frontage and is not located between two or more existing buildings but rather is adjacent to woodland and agricultural fields. The proposal would not re-use an existing building and is not a replacement building. As such it does not comply with any of the exceptions which allow new buildings. New buildings are not permitted within the open countryside and therefore the principle of the development is not acceptable.“
Goostrey’s Mount Pleasant Residential Park (Tingdene Parks Ltd) has applied for the demolition of 60 & 60a Main Road and the garage blocks to redevelop the site with 9 new park homes. Link to CEC planning page: 18/4510C (last date for comments 17th October)
Although they could be seen as in line with general Neighbourhood Plan policies they would be in a general area where the Jodrell Bank Observatory has found dwellings unacceptable in the past (south of Mount Pleasant park as well as behind Fairway to the north): GNP Policy SC2 ‘Developments will not be permitted which can be shown to impair the efficient operation of the radio telescopes.’
Unsurprisingly the Planning Statement states that “it is not anticipated that its impact will be significant. It is unlikely to amount to material harm.” but JBO has yet to comment.
Goostrey Parish Council has objected however as it would conflict with Neighbourhood Plan policies.
Today is the last day for submitting comments on the application for 8 houses at The Grange Livery’s stables and menage off Station Road. Click the link to CEC planning portal: 18/4079C. (Your name is required but it won’t show on the objection)
Goostrey Parish Council voted to object last night, due to the conflict with policies in the Neighbourhood Plan and supporting JBO – if they object.
Jodrell Bank Observatory are, LG believes, most likely to object – having previously objected to 6 houses opposite Mt Pleasant, 3 next to the Red Lion and 6 at Swallowdale behind it, all at a greater distance.
The application itself is for outline planning (generally used to find out if the scale and nature of a proposal will be acceptable without incurring costs before final details are submitted at ‘reserved matters’ stage).