Local plan scoping consultation
Search representations
Results for Mrs Kathleen Atherfold search
New search
New search
Local plan scoping consultation
Identifying and assessing sites
Respondent: Mrs Kathleen Atherfold
Representation Summary:
As part of an Ashley resident family, I object strongly to the Call for Sites being allocated for development. This working farmland, not spare land waiting to be built on — Grade 2 and 3a soil that should be protected for growing food, not concrete. The Green Belt here does a job: it keeps Manchester and Cheshire from merging into one another and stops these open fields and lanes disappearing under housing. This will ruin our history, our community, and the wildlife — there are brownfield alternatives that should be used instead. I want this development stopped, not just reconsidered.
Full text:
Subject: Objection to Ashley Call for Sites (291.03 hectares) — Local Plan / SHELAA
Dear Sir/Madam,
As a family member of Ashley residents, I am writing to strongly object to the 291.03-hectare land submission around Ashley (the 12 adjoining sites) being included in the Cheshire East Local Plan or SHELAA.
I've walked these fields and lanes for years — the same footpaths, the same hedgerows, the same views that haven't changed in generations. I've watched magnificent birds circle over the farmland, heard owls at dusk, and seen the seasons turn on land that's been farmed, not built on, for centuries. This isn't just scenery to me — it's where Ashley's identity and its sense of community come from. Once it's built over, it's gone for good. There's no getting it back, and no development anywhere else can replace what would be lost here.
My objections:
1. This land is Green Belt, and not just any Green Belt
Ashley is designated "wash-over" Green Belt — the strongest form of protection a rural area can have. It was set up in the 1950s for a specific reason: to stop South Manchester and Trafford (Hale, Hale Barns, Altrincham) merging into the towns and villages of Cheshire East (Mobberley, Knutsford). Ashley is the narrow green strip that keeps them apart.
Under national policy, Green Belt can only be released if it's "Grey Belt" — meaning it's already been built on, or it does almost nothing to serve Green Belt purposes. This is open, working farmland. It doesn't come close to meeting that test.
Building here would directly work against the reasons Green Belt exists in the first place: it would let Manchester's urban area spread further south, it would physically join up Greater Manchester with Cheshire's villages and towns, and it would replace active farmland with suburban housing.
2. It's the wrong location for large-scale housing
Ashley is a small rural parish. There's barely any public transport, no significant infrastructure, no medical facilities to speak of, and very little local employment. National planning policy says growth like this should go to Tier 1 and Tier 2 towns and cities that already have the services to support it — not a village like Ashley.
3. The roads can't take it
The lanes around Ashley are narrow, with single-track pinch points and low railway bridges. They simply aren't built for the extra traffic this would send toward the A538 and the M56 — and that's before you factor in thousands of new car journeys a day.
4. The train station won't help — it's about to get worse, not better
Ashley station only has one train an hour in each direction, which already isn't enough to support serious rail commuting. It's about to get worse: with the new Cheadle station fully funded and moving ahead, services are expected to be reallocated, cutting Ashley down to one train every two hours. In March 2026, Transport Minister Keir Mather told Parliament that reducing stops at Ashley and Plumley "is the only way" an hourly service at the new Cheadle station could be delivered. In other words, this isn't a temporary gap — it's a planned, permanent reduction in the one piece of public transport Ashley has.
5. The airport makes this the wrong place for housing
This land sits directly under Manchester Airport's flight paths, within the noise contours and the bird-strike safety zones. That's not a sensible place to put high-density housing.
6. There isn't the drainage to cope
There's no proper sewer capacity, grid capacity, or surface water drainage in the area. Building here would create a real flood risk for the River Bollin catchment.
7. This is some of the best farmland in the country
Independent soil surveys — including data gathered for the HS2 Phase 2b environmental assessment — confirm this land is Grade 2 and Subgrade 3a Best and Most Versatile agricultural land. National policy protects land at this quality specifically because of what it means for the country's food security.
8. The environmental and heritage damage would be permanent
This development would cause lasting harm to the Bollin Valley and Parklands landscape, the Rostherne/Tatton Park landscape, Cotterill Clough Nature Reserve, ancient woodland, protected wildlife corridors, and the setting of 19 Grade II listed buildings, including Ashley Hall.
I'm strongly requesting for Cheshire East Council to formally assess this 291.03-hectare area (all 12 adjoining sites) as Unsuitable and Undeliverable in the SHELAA.
Many Thanks
Kathleen Atherfold
For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our
help guide.