Local plan scoping consultation

Formal Objection to Inclusion of Ashley Land in Cheshire East Local Plan / SHELAA
Submission Regarding 291.03 Hectares of Land Surrounding Ashley
To whom it may concern,

I am writing to formally object to the inclusion of the 291.03-hectare land submission surrounding Ashley, comprising 12 adjoining sites, within the Cheshire East Local Plan and SHELAA assessment.
Objection Grounds
1. Conflict with Green Belt Policy
The parish of Ashley is classified as “wash-over” Green Belt, representing the most stringent form of rural Green Belt protection. This designation is critical as it forms a regional strategic buffer, established in the 1950s, specifically to prevent urban sprawl. Ashley’s Green Belt status creates a narrow but essential green separation between South Manchester and Trafford (including Hale, Hale Barns, and Altrincham), and the villages and towns of Cheshire East (such as Mobberley and Knutsford).
Under national policy, Green Belt land may only be considered for release if it meets the “Grey Belt” test, which requires it to be either previously developed brownfield land or land that makes a negligible contribution to Green Belt objectives. The open, working farmland across Ashley does not satisfy this requirement and therefore fails the national test for release.
Furthermore, the proposed development directly conflicts with the core purposes of Green Belt policy, as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). Specifically, Purpose A is to check unrestricted urban sprawl. The Ashley Green Belt serves as the primary barrier preventing the Manchester conurbation from expanding southwards, thereby stopping the physical merging of Greater Manchester settlements with Cheshire villages and towns. Protecting this land is essential to prevent suburban encroachment and aligns with national policy to preserve prime agricultural resources.
2. Sustainable Settlement Hierarchy
Ashley is a small, rural parish with minimal public transport options, limited primary infrastructure, scarce medical facilities, and few local employment opportunities. Allocating large-scale development in such an area contravenes sustainable development principles, which dictate that growth should be prioritised in Tier 1 and Tier 2 urban centres.
3. Highways and Safety
The local rural road network is constrained by narrow railway bridges and single-lane pinch points. These limitations render the area incapable of safely accommodating thousands of additional vehicle movements, particularly towards the A538 and M56.
4. Inadequate Rail Connections
Ashley train station cannot be considered a well-connected transit hub. It currently operates at a maximum frequency of one train per hour in each direction. With the anticipated opening of the new station at Cheadle, service models suggest that Ashley’s service frequency could fall to just one train every two hours, making it utterly incapable of supporting sustainable commuter demand.
5. Flight Path and Safety Hazards
The land lies directly within operational noise contours and bird-strike hazard safety zones related to flight paths. These factors make the area unsuitable for high-density housing.
6. Drainage and Utilities
The area lacks sufficient deep sewer, electricity grid, and surface water drainage capacity. This deficiency presents considerable surface-water flood risks to the River Bollin catchment.
7. Loss of High-Grade Agricultural Land
Independent soil surveys, including HS2 Phase 2b data, have confirmed that the land contains Grade 2 and Subgrade 3a Best and Most Versatile (BMV) agricultural soil. National policy protects such land for its contribution to food security.
8. Environmental and Heritage Harm
Development would irreparably damage the Bollin Valley and Parklands LLD, Rostherne/Tatton Park LLD, Cotterill Clough Nature Reserve, ancient woodlands, protected species corridors, and the setting of 19 Grade II listed buildings, including Ashley Hall.

In light of these reasons, I respectfully request that Cheshire East Council formally classify this 291.03-hectare area (12 adjoining sites totalling 291.03 hectares) as Unsuitable and Undeliverable in the SHELAA assessment.

Thank you,

Peter Ross