Plans for a car wash have been thrown out by a planning inspector due to the impact it would have on the living conditions of neighbouring residents.

Congleton Autos Ltd, which was established in June last year, is located off Newcastle Road, Astbury, and is currently used for vehicle repairs, a MOT testing station, and car sales.

Previously Paul Sheard Autos, the development proposed was for the change of use to mixed use comprising of MOT station, car repairs and hand car wash.

Shwan Isa, who owns Congleton Autos Ltd, appealed against the decision of Cheshire East Council, who refused the planning application in September last year.

The main issue was the effect of the car wash on the living conditions of adjoining occupiers, regarding noise and disturbance.

The surrounding area is predominantly residential, and the site shares its rear and side boundaries with the gardens of 1 and 2 Padgbury Close.

Number two Padgbury Close also has a first-floor window that directly overlooks the northern part of the site. Marsh House to the south, is a three-storey residential building with upper floors that have windows facing across the site.

Planning Inspector Mr Cooper said in his report: "At the time of my visit the car repairs and MOT testing station were operating from within the workshop building, and the external areas beneath the canopy and in the northern part of the site were being used for cars sales.

"Whilst the existing vehicle repair and MOT testing station are likely to use machinery and generate some noise, these activities take place within an existing building, which is likely to assist in containing the noise associated with the use.

"In comparison the proposed car wash activities are to take place outside, albeit partially beneath a canopy."

Mr Cooper suggested that the proposed site layout showed that vehicles using the car wash would pass through a one-way system, accessing from the south and leaving from the north.

Mr Cooper added: "The car wash layout shows customer parking and three queuing lanes in front of the building leaving little room to access and operate the existing vehicle repairs and MOT testing station.

"Overall this indicates that the car wash would become the predominant use of the site.

"Given the number of vehicles indicated on the drawing, it is likely to be more intensive in terms of the number of customers, staffing, the throughput of vehicles and the associated activities."

The appellant submitted in the plans to the inspector that the current lawful use of the site does not have any planning conditions restricting the times of working/opening.

However, Mr Cooper stated in the appeal decision report that even though there were currently no time restrictions, the appeal proposals were materially different to the existing use of the site.

Mr Cooper added: "The external car washing activities would result in additional noise beyond that created by the existing activities, including the coming and going of vehicles, engines running, doors closing, and staff talking, and potential use of radios onsite.

"Such noise and disturbance is likely to prevent adjoining occupiers from being able to have windows open or enjoy the use of their gardens, in particular those residents at 1 and 2 Padgbury Close."

Mr Cooper acknowledged that existing car sales would likely occur all week including on Saturdays and Sundays, but he felt the current use would likely generate fewer customers, require less staff and have lower levels of activity than the proposed car wash.

The planning inspector continued: "Residents have become accustomed to the existing uses with minimal noise and disturbance at the weekends.

"In contrast, the introduction of the external car wash facility open six days a week, including the reduced hours on Saturday, is likely to result in materially different noise conditions that would disturb adjoining occupiers."

The working hours proposed were 9am to 5pm Monday to Friday, 9am to 2pm on Saturdays, with no operations on Sundays and bank holidays.

Mr Cooper concluded: "I have considered whether the identified harm by reason of noise and disturbance could be overcome by conditions restricting the proposed hours, and that no machines are to be used.

"However, I am not satisfied that such conditions are sufficient to overcome the harm that I have identified to the living conditions of occupiers of nearby residential properties.

"I conclude that the proposed car wash would harm the living conditions of neighbouring residents, with regard to noise and disturbance."

The appeal was dismissed. Since May 2018, appellant Mr Isa has had three planning applications turned down by Cheshire East and two appeals dismissed at the same location.

Congleton Town Council, who recommended the application for refusal because of concerns about noise and traffic safety welcomed the decision at Thursday's Planning Committee.