A full planning application (reference 11/2248M) has been submitted on behalf of Russell Homes to demolish a garage on Trafford Road and replace it with housing.
The plan is to replace the JN Bauer car showroom and Alderley Motor Co. garage with 4 semi-detached family homes. Each of which will have three bedrooms with the master suite on the third floor.
The application states that, given most of the properties along this part of Trafford Road are Victorian homes, " This change of use is better suited to the locality due to the fact that the other surrounding properties are all of residential use."
It will however result in the loss of two local businesses which support 8 families.
Manager of Alderley Motor Co., Peter Wright has worked at the business for 32 years and reckons the garage has probably been there for 40 to 50 years.
He told me "It is very sad. We don't want to go, it is as simple as that, we've all been here for many years but we are being realistic. We'll just have to wait and see what happens."
Jasper Bauer has run the car showroom next door for the past 8 years.
Jasper told me "If the Council gives planning permission for commercial properties to become residential then where will it end - it will kill off the village as the property is worth more as residential. If you take out the hairdressers, banks, building societies and restaurants there isn't much left.
He added "If the people want housing here and not a garage then that's what will happen."
A planning application registered in July 2003 (reference 03/1888P) for the development of nine apartments in a three and a half storey building, with two retail units on the ground floor and basement car parking, for this location was refused because the development was contrary to the Macclesfield Borough Local Plan, contrary to the interests of highway safety, the proposed building was out of character with the area and would contribute to an oversupply of housing in the area.
The planning application can be viewed on the Cheshire East planning portal by searching for planning reference 11/2248M.
Comments
Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below.
I strongly agree with the previous comments on this subject . Alderley Motors is part of the community and it will be a sad day if they close and are replaced by characterless houses .
It would be unforgivable if the Council fails to oppose this application and permits a highly appreciated village resource to disappear.
Perhaps one of our parish councillors (or anyone) could present an official, multi-signature petition/objection via the CEC appeals procedure? Surely a petition, signed by many residents/objectors would carry more weight than a few individuals two-pennyworth - although time is tight as the 'publicity end date' is 10th August.
http://bit.ly/reRqoU
By the way, here's my comments if you want to use or amend them
The development should be refused as the change of use to residential is inappropriate. This is not a vacant brownfield site, these are successful business units which have been in the village for many years and are used widely by local people. We have seen so many businesses collapse over the last few years in the village, so it would be unacceptable for a planning decision to lead to further job and business decline. Please do not allow this to happen.
The development itself is large and I suggest unneighbourly. Indeed to have three large houses on that plot is surely an over development of the site. The roof line is far too high. It looks to be on a level with the adjacent house(7) but please be aware that the road slopes down to the site and therefore the appearance will be one of domination of that area as the height will, in reality be so much greater. This must surely reduce the light for the neighbouring house.
Please refuse this application as it stands. Alderley edge needs businesses. There are enough houses to meet the needs of the village and there is really no need for this infill. Support the local business and refuse the application.
I am sure I was told this previously, and if it was surely it would be sensible to keep this building and the businesses within it, not only for regular customers but for historical purposes.
And after losing the library and Royal Oak, you have got to keep Alderley Edge's history. Haven't you?
My family has been using the garage for many years. Pete and his team have always been brilliant with fantastic service. Surely planning permission can't be given to build more housing in the village.
A local business that serves as many local people as the garage does verses 4 houses that will benefit only 4 families...........no contest.
This proposal would entail a change of use for the premises from business to residential. The businesses on the site are long-established and viable companies providing a service valued by the community. If this proposal is allowed to go ahead then it will put their employees out of work, deprive their many customers of a valuable service and be a further step towards turning Alderley Edge into a bijou dormitory village devoid of the everyday services that local residents require.
" This change of use is better suited to the locality due to the fact that the other surrounding properties are all of residential use."
So a office block surrounding the left and rear of it and across the road to the right is the Dental place & Barbers plus other businesses......
Highly accurate .......
We've submitted our objections.
For us, in our office next door, not only do we use the garage but the proposal will make a significant impact on our outlook, and with that maybe even whether we stay in our current office or move elsewhere.
Can I suggest you all push your local Councillors to find alternative accommodation for both companies – the planning application is not the issue?
Mixed Use Areas
AEC4 within the mixed use areas shown on the proposals map, planning permission may be granted for Class A2 and Class A3 uses together with other uses commensurate with the role the centre serves provided that:
1 The amenities of local are residents are not harmed
2 The operation of other uses would not be prejudiced
3 The proposal does not conflict with other proposals of the plan
4 Any redevelopment must be sympathetic in scale and character to the setting and the character of the area.
Reason
13.6 The areas are characterised by a variety of uses which are appropriate within these areas and add to the vitality of the village centre. The policy provides guidance on the types of uses that may be acceptable.
Housing on that site clearly contradicts point 1.
Housing on that site will clearly NOT 'add to the vitality of the village centre'.
Perfect, black-and-white reasons for objections in my view.
Thanks for the pointer, Marc.
The Alderley Garage Repair Workshop has fully-trained mechanics who served their apprenticeships at Main-Dealer garages, but they only charge a fraction of the £100+ per hour labour service charges normally associated with this type of expertise. if we lost this Workshop, the local community would be hard pushed to find alternative premises in the area with the level of competence and great value for money they offer.
To propose building houses on this site is a total nonsense, especially when you consider just how many empty and For-Sale houses are available in this area. It seems that Peter Ogden's comments are out of step with the majority, and I'm wondering how close he is to the landlord, especially as he discloses that the Landlord has not increased the rent for the last six years .... How does he know ? and what about the threat that the Landlord may "empty the premises" if he does not get his planning permission .... again, How does he know ?
It's not up to the Local Councillors to find alternative accomodation, it's up to the Landlord not to go ahead with this Planning Application ! ......
The Planning Application is the one and only issue here !
Perhaps more interesting, he also hired out the horses for the local volunteer fire brigade. These horses were housed on the second floor of the building and came down a ramp to the fire station on Heyes Lane.
This parcel of land has been used for commercial purposes for well over 100 years, so why change its use now, when both businesses are so successfully serving the village.
Harold Smith, Chairman of the Alderley History Group.
There is no fundamental reason why they should move. They do a wonderful job and the only reason this subject has even been raised is the fact that their landlord ("Russell Homes") ? has applied for Planning Permission to build houses on the site.
Peter Ogden states again that the Local Authority is working towards providing new garage facilities, etc, etc. ..... I ask the question Why ? There is no need for the Local Authority to do anything whatsoever if these businesses are allowed to stay on this site that they have occupied for the last few years.
What is the urgency for the landlord to close these businesses so suddenly ?
Where is Peter Ogden getting his confidential information from ?
He says "Anyone could discuss this with the business owners and all the information will be freely available" Well, when I asked them what is happening, they said it was confidential and they were not allowed to discuss it with me or anyone else.
So, it seems to me that Peter Ogden may have a hidden agenda ?
Who exactly is giving him the information ? Is he associated with Russell Homes ?
Again, this is not a planning point as the landlord is not prepared to keep them in at a ridiculous and uneconomic rent, in a building with a porous roof that is falling down and is not being repaired or maintained by the current tenants. So in answer to the question ”what is the urgency” I would not call 6 years of waiting impatience. You don’t seem to understand it is not the local authority deciding whether the businesses, or any business, can stay on the site – this is a privately owned site.
I don't understand why you continually drift from the point which is NOT about relocating the businesses but building yet more unecessary housing on the plot.
Direct question; Do you think houses should be built on that site?
Did he get the answers from Alderley Motors Company ?
Did he get the answers from J.Bauers Car Showroom ?
How does he know the Landlord want these businesses to pay twice the amount of rent ?
How does he know the current tennants are not maintaining the building ?
(I'm quite sure that is one comment they would NOT be telling him)
Clearly, Peter Ogden has a hidden agenda and he's not on the side of the two businesses !
." in a building with a porous roof that is falling down and is not being repaired or maintained by the tenants"!
This cant be right.