Local plan scoping consultation

Formal Submission on the Local Plan – Local Plan Scoping Consultation
Groves Town Planning has been instructed to respond to the above consultation linking
the scoping of the local plan with concerns over a number of sites registered in the call
for sites process. My clients are concerned that the scale of interest in presenting sites
for consideration in the local plan – via the call for sites process must be carefully
appraised when scoping the content of the new local plan.
It is critical that the level of interest is not conflated with demand and that the
preparation of the local plan should always reflect the core purposes of the planning
system.
The latest version of the NPPF (Aug 2026) continues to note that the purpose of the
planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development by
managing the use and development of land in the long-term public interest. (Paragraph
15)
It is crucial for the scope of the new plan to afford equal weight to the three overarching
objectives as noted at paragraph 17 of the Framework.
In a context where large amounts of unplanned and uncoordinated development has
been permitted as a consequence of the Council’s position in respect of housing
delivery, it is critical that control is regained; that the sustainability of development, the
delivery of infrastructure necessary to support development is to the fore.
The new local plan must at its core recognise the importance of the size, character and
history of the towns and settlements in the northern part of the Council’s area. The role
of the Green Belt in managing the scale and form of new development must be to the
fore of the objectives of the plan.
In that context concern and strong objection is presented to four specific areas flagged
through the emerging local plan – particularly the call for sites process.
Sites in and around Ashley
We strongly urge the Council to reject the promotion of sites in and around Ashley.
These areas consist predominantly of protected Green Belt land. National planning
policy dictates that Green Belt boundaries should only be altered in exceptional
circumstances. No such circumstances exist here while alternative, non-Green Belt
brownfield land remains available across the borough to satisfy local housing targets.
Furthermore, Ashley lacks the vital infrastructure required to support residential
expansion; it does not even possess a baseline local amenity such as a corner shop. As
a result, future occupiers would be entirely dependent on private vehicles for daily
journeys. This directly contradicts the Council's core statutory obligations to promote
sustainable development and reduce transport-related carbon emissions.
Whilst Ashley has a railway station the provisions of GB3.4 do not apply. The station is
not well connected and land around it is not suitable land for development.
In general terms the scope of the plan should recognise that stations on rural lines in
relatively isolated locations should not be promoted on this basis.
The local plan must follow the provisions of the updated version of the Framework
which limits scope for development outside settlements
Sites in Rostherne
The sustainability flaws identified for Ashley apply even more critically to the proposals
in Rostherne.
Development within Rostherne is entirely unsustainable The settlement lacks any
baseline public transport infrastructure, including a train station or regular bus service.
Crucially, the parcels of land being put forward comprise high-quality agricultural land.
In an era where national policy places immense weight on food security and
environmental stewardship, safeguarding productive agricultural land from permanent
loss to development must be prioritized over unsustainable housing allocation.
Sites on Central Public Car Parks in Knutsford
There are strong reasons to resist the allocation of central public car parks in Knutsford
town centre for housing.
Knutsford currently provides a thriving, highly successful independent commercial
centre. Economic activity in areas such as Knutsford supports wider economic growth
across Cheshire East and plays a key role in making the wider area attractive for
investment.
This economic success relies heavily on the convenience and availability of central
public parking for shoppers, tourists, and visitors. Repurposing these central sites for
residential development would create a severe and irreversible deficiency in town
centre parking spaces. This would restrict footfall, stifle local trade, and trigger a long
term economic decline for existing town centre businesses.
Cumulative Westward Sprawl (Knutsford to Lostock Gralam Corridor)
The call for sites process has produced an array of submissions for the consideration of
land to the west of Knutsford. In whole or part development in this location represents
re is a highly disproportionate concentration of site submissions running west from
Knutsford, spreading under and around the M6 motorway, and extending toward
Lostock Gralam.
If allocated, these developments will cause the total coalescence of independent rural
communities—including Knutsford, Tabley, Plumley, and Lostock Gralam—into a single,
continuous urban sprawl. Historically, the M6 motorway has served as a logical, hard
boundary for Knutsford’s westward growth. Allowing major development to leapfrog
over or cluster around the motorway junction completely rewrites the local landscape
character and sets a dangerous planning precedent.
The economic benefits of development in such locations has been shown to be limited
with focus on logistics with low employment densities and limited scope for local
business to engage with multi-national companies.
In addition, this westward strip straddles the boundary between Cheshire East and
Cheshire West and Chester. Large-scale development here will put uncoordinated,
unsustainable pressure on local public services (such as hospital capacity and
secondary schools) that cross these administrative borders. The strategic corridor
between Knutsford and Lostock Gralam is already under immense traffic strain during
peak hours. Funnelling thousands of additional commuter vehicles onto the A556 and
around M6 Junction 19 will paralyze the local road network, increase air pollution, and
severely impact highway safety.
Scoping for the plan should recognise the cross-boundary implications of large-scale
development focused on motorway junctions seeking to ensure that the protection of
green belt, open countryside and areas of valued landscape – including that without
formal designation, to ensure protection of the core qualities of the area which make
Cheshire East and attractive place to live and work. To abdicate control on the basis of
the scope for growth would undermine the very reasons which have historically been
considered to be assets which require maintenance and protection.
At a time when food security is critical, the council should not support the loss of high
yield, active agricultural land. Replacing hundreds of hectares of open, natural drainage
fields across both Ashley and the Knutsford-to-Lostock corridor with impermeable
concrete surfaces will significantly increase surface-water flooding risks for existing
residents.
Conclusion
In summary, the proposals for Ashley and Rostherne fail to meet fundamental national
and local sustainability criteria, while the Knutsford car park proposals actively threaten
the economic health of one of our borough’s premier town centres. The planning
reasons for refusing the proposed western sprawl of Knutsford are clearly set out above.
We request that the Council takes these substantial planning objections into full
account and excludes these sites from the upcoming draft Local Plan allocation.