Keith, Graham and Iain

Your Lib Dem team for Cheadle & Gatley Learn more

Tatton Cinema planning proposals now out

by Lib Dem team on 25 August, 2015

For a while we’ve been saying that the owners of the Tatton Cinema site were bringing forward development proposals, but it was taking time. They are finally here!

We have not seen the proposals in detail, so we put them here for everyone – including ourselves – to take a look at and come back with comments.

The planning application is here. Not all the documents are online yet – they will be added over the next few days.

The summary of the proposed development is:

  • Demolition of existing buildings at the site – but keeping the art-deco frontage.
  • A new mixed use building containing ground floor retail space, with all plant associated with the food retail unit to be located in a plant area to the rear at ground floor level, and deliveries via access doors on the eastern facing elevation. This will be a small supermarket, the proposed trading hours are 0800-2000hrs Monday-Saturday and 1000-1600hrs on Sundays;
  • A total of 7 apartments on the first-third floors above the small supermarket, with a small private terrace to the rear of the building.
  • A new 4 storey residential block to the rear of the site with a shared garden/amenity space to the rear backing onto the rear of buildings on Old Hall Road. This will be 26 two-bedroom apartments. They will be for retired people looking to downsize, but will not be a care home or sheltered accommodation.
  • Residential car parking to the rear of the site behind the mixed use building and in front of the residential block;
  • Some additional external works including the formation of 9 car parking spaces at the front of the mixed use building.

The Lib Dem team have long campaigned for a decent development on the Tatton site to replace the current eyesore.

We want to listen to what people have to say on this. One thing we do have to say, though, is that the site is privately owned and the owners have made clear they will only consider a proposal that gives them a financial return. The real decision will be whether we want this proposal or whether we want the site to remain as it is for the next few years and hope that something better comes along at some point.



34 Responses

  1. Decent proposal. I’d object to the apartments being ‘just’ for retired people, personally, think they should be open to rent/buy by all. Other than that, roll with it.

  2. Simob says:

    The plans look great however I think this development could benefit from more than 9 spaces of parking for the retail front. There is already limited parking along the road and side streets as is and I think businesses in the village would benefit from a few more spaces than those proposed.

  3. Anne Davidson says:

    Just be glad to get rid of this eyesore. Sounds ok. Hope adequate parking is provided for all apartments.

  4. sarah says:

    Apartments in this area are not a great investment opportunity therefore likely most would end up as rentals ;(

    Supermarket – this is make or break. If you put an Asda, Tesco or Morrisons there it brings down the area. If you put a waitrose in then happy days.

    Gatley is a stunning village with a whole heap of potential. Look what they have done in Chorlton on Beech Road.

    The question should be how do we revitalise Gatley/Cheadle, how do we bring the area up, increase property values and then assess whether a block of flats with a supermarket is the right thing.

  5. Jonathan says:

    A super market that is only open untill 8:00pm begins to suit Booths. Yet even they prefer 9:00pm / 10:00pm. Out of interest how much money have the council spent on their proposed CPO of this property?

    • Iain Roberts says:

      Hi Jonathan,

      Nothing significant spent on CPO, just officer time. If the threat of a CPO has helped bring about a planning application, I’d say it was money well spent.

  6. John Hartley says:

    I like the idea that the retirement apartments will be two bedroom. Mostly these developments are only one bedroom (I think that’s the case with both existing developments in Gatley). Two bedrooms will give residents a bit more space day-to-day and also provides for relatives/friends coming to stay. It’s the sort of place that, very long term, I could see myself living in.

    I also like the idea of keeping the 1930s frontage.

    Good call on the part of the site owners (but then I was quite a fan of their original development proposal). Thta said, you have to wonder how successful another small supermarket/convenience store will be, as we have the two Co-ops and the Tesco.

  7. Lois Evans says:

    I am concerned about the increase in traffic. Are there any plans for road widening? and will 9 parking places be sufficient? There are already long delays on Gatley road, and turning from Hall Road across to Church Road is always difficult. Please let us know what are the plans for traffic management associated with this scheme.

  8. Robert Cohen says:

    Don’t wish to be negative. The development should be entirely residential, with minimum sized flats that local people wanting to downsize can seriously consider. There is an abundance of supermarket chains – and looking after smaller enterprises should be more important. Whilst I’m moaning, the number fast food outlets in the area is causing litter and a huge amount of inconvenience in terms of bad parking and failure to observe one way and resident only parking!

  9. Iain Roberts says:

    Lois – I don’t know if there are any amendments to the junction, I’ve not seen those parts of the plans yet. I would be surprised if there was anything major though. 9 spaces would be fairly standard for a shop of that size (think of the other ones in the village and how much parking they have).

    Robert – that’s a totally fair view. The only thing I’d say is that the owners of a private site have put forward a plan and we can only accept or reject it, not modify it.

  10. Judy says:

    This seems like a sensible solution to me. We do have several supermarkets and it is more likely to be an Aldi than a Waitrose but for residents of the retirement apartments it will be very useful. The whole site has been an eyesore for far too long and at least it isn’t another fast food outlet. Iain, what is the timescale?

  11. Ruth says:

    At last some progress: Let’s hope it goes ahead.

    I would be worried about cars and traffic issues.
    But retirement apartment developers usually work on a limited number of cars owned and spaces needed and hence less traffic.
    Also I believe that companies like McCarthy and Stone (retirement apartments) do not allow sublets…so, hopefully no buy to lets.

    If 30+ new homes mostly for retired without cars then more shopping in Gatley which is a trade off against a couple more new shops.

  12. Mr S Powell says:

    A new supermarket will take trade away from the existing shops, so plans for any more shops should be dropped. More apartments mean more congestion for parking, the best plan would be to demolish the whole building, and building only so many shops as are already trading, and then the rest of the space should be turned into car parking – which is what Gatley needs more than anything- so go ahead with the CPO and giv us what the residents of Gatley REALLY NEED- I speak as a resident of Gatley of over 53 years. Mr. S. Powell

  13. Iain Roberts says:

    Judy – difficult to be accurate on timescale. The owners say they want to get on with it as quickly as possible, but an approved application does not force anyone to do anything so no guarantees.

    Mr Powell – there are certainly different views on shops. The new Tesco at the other end of the village seems to have had a positive effect, but I’m no expert on these things. There are strict rules about when we can do a CPO. If the owners are actively developing the site then we can’t CPO it.

  14. Judy says:

    So Iain, if the developers aren’t tied to a timescale but having submitted a plan they have halted the CPO am I being cynical in thinking this might yet be another delaying tactic? Or have I misunderstood this?

  15. Bruce says:

    This must go ahead because if it doesn’t it is we could wait another 10 years. LiBdems must back this – unlike the previous proposal which they campaigned against to a man.

  16. ruth says:

    what would be really great would be for the council to buy the property and develop it to have small units for rental inside – much like houldsworth mill or the old corn exchange in manchester. There could be music studios, youth club activities, health and fitness, furniture making, crafts of various kinds, food, a cafe, meeting rooms, computer studios, and many other small businesses. The space at the back could be a public car park with a small charge. I know it would be expensive, but the benefit to the local area would be that it would be much more for the people. we have so many flats and tiny places aimed at older folk. this would be overkill. And supermarkets? they sell junk food and there are 3 already, and to get decent food nowadays it is necessary to go outside gatley.

    • Bruce says:

      Ruth – just cannot agree with your ideas which to me are totally unrealistic
      Not a descendant of Lewis Carroll are you?
      Furniture making? computer studios?
      Cafes – we have numerous already
      Charging for parking?
      Supermarkets that sell junk food?
      Decent food? just what is decent food?

      • ruth says:

        decent food – fresh, not containing gmo products or animals fed on gmo feed, not glyphosate laced, or pesticide or fungicide or other poisons including those derived from petrochemicals etc.
        cafes- there isnt one open in the evening for a coffee etc.
        parking – i only suggest a small charge for the tatton to help offset costs, the rest to remain free.
        there is a wealth of average bog standard late shop type places selling the same non- descript stuff. It would be good for gatley to have something outside of that, that benfitted the community, and gave opportunities to small business and to those who like to do more than play bowls or go to church or drink in hydes pubs

  17. Stewart Bale says:

    Lets just get it passed and proceed as fast as possible.
    Lets have no more long wasteful discussions.In my view this is our last chance don’t lets waste it

  18. les says:

    I’m with you Ruth. Gatley needs a community facility and above all a proper car park not MORE supermarkets. Even a whetherspoons would be better than the proposed plan. They preserve period architecture, provide a social enviroment for eating and drinking and are very good value for money. Would liven up that end of gatley!!! Horse and farrier make enough noise so a bit more would blend in.

  19. phil says:

    I like most just want the eyesore to be built on and the area tidied. Perhaps as part of the development the Council could resurface Cambridge Road, which at present is terrible and in parts falling apart. Will the footpath from Cambridge to Gatley Road stay?

  20. Carolyn Minkes says:

    I hope the retirement flats will have a lift. I’m thinking about moving but don’t want a one bedroom so these sound promising. I often buy food locally and it’s quite possible to buy healthy food from the supermarkets. It would be good to have a Waitrose if they would take such a small site.

  21. Paul says:

    Let’s try and make whatever goes into this space something that kick starts a re generation of galley. I’ve lived here all my life ( 45 years ) and it saddens me that that the only reason I go into gatley is get my takeaway. Look at Chorlton or west didsbury – both used to be dumps until good food and drink outlets arrived ( metropolitan ) – I’d love to spend my time and money in our pretty village but it needs something distinctive to start a real regeneration of the place – either a quality brand – or something locally created and run – a community run pub???

  22. Gatley Freedom Fighters says:

    The best situation would be to develop the site and just not have this carbuncle bringing the area down.

    I have met people from miles away who refer to this site when I tell them I live in Gatley. This is how the area is judged !!
    I have lived here for 30 years and half of that time is spent looking at this mess every time I walk through my Village.
    If everyone were to complain to the council as i have, then maybe we could create change.

    Do not let this chance go by without giving it a fair hearing.

    Freedom to the people.

    • Iain Roberts says:

      Glad to say that developing the site is what the owners are now proposing. Separate to that, the council is moving forward with the Compulsory Purchase Order, in case the development stalls.

  23. Matthew says:

    I live on Cambridge Road backing on to the Tatton site. One thing to consider is that (after checking my title deeds) it appears the boundaries for the properties on Cambridge Road backing on to the site extend beyond the current boundary fences. It is possible that the development proposal includes development on land they don’t own (albeit only a small portion of the total site). This needs to be looked into as part of the consultation.

    • Iain Roberts says:

      Hi Matthew,

      That’s certainly something worth raising with Dickens, the owners. I’m not sure whether it would be relevant to the planning process (you can submit a planning application for someone else’s land as long as they’re notified, but of course if you don’t own the land you can’t do anything with the planning permission).

      • Rob says:

        Hi Ian,

        Another point needs to be raised in regards to these proposals and it’s about time my voice was heard about this whole process.
        I actually own 2 Tatton Buildings next door to the cinema and for years have been trying to have Dickens sort out the issue of access to the back of my property.
        Ever since the rear auditorium was knocked down, the back of my property has been wire fenced in, causing a serious fire risk. Should (God forbid) a fire break out in the front of my property, I would be trapped in the back with no escape.
        I have had a representative of Dickens out to the property before showing them this issue, and needless to say they were very sheepish about the whole ordeal, especially considering there are loose bricks and glass hanging from the rear which could easily fall and kill someone
        A year later after several emails etc. to the group, I have been blatantly ignored and judging by these new proposals, Dickens Property Group have not taken on board these serious issue and have planned to fence myself in at the rear.
        I would welcome your feedback on the issue. Thus far I have stayed away from public media in regards to this, however going to the local newspaper with this issue may give them the kick up the backside they need, as I have plenty of photos to back this up.

        • Iain Roberts says:

          Hi Rob,

          Good points, and not an issue I was aware of, though I do know about the security issue with the fencing and the young people getting into the back. Safety is certainly an issue that has to be considered in the planning process.

  24. Mile coop says:

    Any update on this? The link to Stockport planning department is no longer valid!

Leave a Reply

You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>