Matthews Garden Centre appeal dismissed

Matthews Garden Centre has lost their appeal for an extension to their original planning consent, which was granted in 2005, to relocate their garden centre.

This permission, which expired in April 2010, allowed them to relocate their garden centre and landscape contractors' business across the road from their original centre, within the North Cheshire Green Belt in Nether Alderley.

The original business ceased to operate in 2005, although it took until 2007 for all the buildings to be demolished, and the site is now a cricket pitch and sports facilities for use by Astra Zeneca employees.

The garden centre has not been re-established since its closure in 2005 whereas the landscape contractor's part of the business has been operating from a site at Somerford Booths.

I & W Urquhart, who ran Matthews Garden Centre, appealed against Cheshire East Council's refusal to grant an extension to their expired planning permission (reference 03/3214P) on the grounds that "the original case is unchanged".

Planning Inspector Alison Lea was appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government to hear the appeal on Tuesday 20th September.

Having taken into account the views of local residents and other interested parties the Planning Inspector dismissed the appeal on the grounds that the proposal constitutes inappropriate development which by definition is harmful to the Green Belt.

Alison Lea stated in her report "I have found that the development would cause significant harm to the openness and visual amenity of the Green Belt and the character and appearance of the surrounding area and some, albeit limited, harm to a European Protected Species."

At the time, the original permission was determined reference was made to the original business being long established and making a considerable contribution to the local economy. It stressed that it was essential that the business be relocated within the immediate vicinity in order to maintain the existing client base and to safeguard jobs. These matters were judged to amount to the very special circumstances necessary to justify the development.

However, given the original business closed 2005, the Planning Inspector concluded that any need to protect an existing business and safeguard jobs by providing a replacement site in the immediate vicinity has long gone.

Alison Lea stated in her report "I note the various reasons provided by the appellant as to why it has not been possible to re-establish the garden centre on the appeal site during the intervening years, and in particular accept that during the economic down turn obtaining finance may have been difficult. I also accept that the operations at Somerford Booths do not amount to a relocation of the garden centre, that the operations at that site are constrained and that it would not be possible to develop a retail side to the business at that site. Moreover, I note the appellants' view that the circumstances in the market have not changed and that a new garden centre on the appeal site would be commercially viable and would provide employment.

"However, none of these matters alters the fact that the Original Business no longer exists and that there has therefore been a significant change in circumstances since the grant of the Original Permission. Given the location of the site and the harm which the proposal would cause to the Green Belt this is not a case of sustainable development envisaged by the guidance and the weight which can be given to the Original Permission is limited. Similarly little weight can be given to the need to protect an existing business and its client base and to safeguard jobs."

She added "I conclude therefore that the very special circumstances necessary to justify the development do not exist and I dismiss this appeal."

Speaking after the decision, Alex Urquhart told me "To be honest, we are all very surprised and disappointed with her decision. There was a genuine desire to carry on 80 years of trading, 65 at Nether Alderley, but this now seems to unlikely. I am waiting to be given the notes and I will then make a decision."

Whilst there is no association between this appeal and Dobbies, it is viewed as very significant by those opposed to Dobbies' plans because the consent for Matthews' relocation is a "material consideration" in Dobbies' Garden World application (reference 09/3109M), submitted in September 2009.

Dobbies' Planning Statement from 2009 said "The proposal is conceived as a replacement for the SE Matthews Garden Centre consented at the SE Matthews Relocation site to the north of Bollington Lane. If the present application is approved, the applicant (and SE Matthews) will enter into a S106 Agreement to extinguish the existing SE Matthews consent to ensure one garden centre will only ever be developed."

Tags:

Cheshire East Council, Planning Applications