Full text:
I am writing to register a formal objection to allocating or considering the 291.03-hectare tract of land
surrounding Ashley across all 12 contiguous parcels within the SHELAA and the broader Local Plan
review. For clarity these are described on the Cheshire East Council Website Map (https://cheshire
east.opus4.co.uk/planning/localplan/maps/cec-site-submissions#/center/53.3578,
2.3423/zoom/15/baselayer/b:31/layers/o:16032,o:16033,o:16034,o:16035,o:16036,o:16037,o:16038
/lang/en-GB) as “Ashley Garden Village [NE, NW, SE SW] Quadrant”. The details of the site are in
the table at the foot of this submission. Promoted development of this magnitude in this sensitive
rural area is fundamentally unviable and directly violates statutory local policy and the National
Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).
1. Green Belt Protection and "Grey Belt" Disqualification
The whole of Ashley Parish is designated as Protected Wash-Over Designation (CELPS Policy PG 3)
This designation as "wash-over" Green Belt is designed to preserve the open, rural character of
sensitive villages and is the highest category green belt.
Ashley forms the narrowest remaining countryside buffer separating Greater Manchester (the
metropolitan brough of Trafford) from Cheshire East (principally the rural town of Knutsford and the
village of Mobberley). Under Policy GB2 and Policy GB6, allocating this site fails the national tests
set out in Annex E by driving urban sprawl (Purpose A) and merging distinct settlements (Purpose
B). Allowing any development would promote settlement coalescence, in violation of the stated
policies.
Under Policy GB7, "Grey Belt" land must not strongly contribute to core Green Belt purposes. This
contiguous tract of active farmland performs critical Green Belt functions. While the updated NPPF
removes the former Footnote 7 threshold from the initial Grey Belt qualification test, significant
heritage, ecological, and flood constraints across the site remain decisive barriers to development
under broader national policies. Thus, this development fails to meet the "Grey Belt" transfer criteria.
2. Loss of Best and Most Versatile (BMV) Agricultural Farmland
Detailed soil assessments, including survey data from HS2 Phase 2b, confirm that this 291.03 hectare
site consists predominantly of Grade 2 and Subgrade 3a Best and Most Versatile (BMV) farmland.
This makes the farmland of Ashley particularly valuable as an agricultural resource and should be
preserved for food production.
Concrete development across this uninterrupted, productive agricultural landscape directly
undermines regional food production, violating CELPS Policy SE 2 and national soil protection. This
policy mandates the requiring of local planning authorities to prioritize lower-grade or brownfield
land in preference to BMV farmland.
3. Highway Safety Hazards, Rail Deficits, and Aviation Restrictions
Policy GB7 introduces specific support for higher-density development near "well-connected"
railway stations. To qualify under this policy, a station must offer at least 4 services per hour (or 2 per
hour in one direction). Ashley station fails this test completely, operating on a maximum of 1 train
per hour with only a four vehicle commuter car park. Service levels will worsen further following the
funded, approved station at Cheadle; in March 2026, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for
Transport Keir Mather MP confirmed that service reallocations reducing Ashley and Plumley calls to
one train every two hours are necessary to accommodate Cheadle's stops (Hansard; Cheadle Train
Station - Volume 782: debated on Wednesday 18 March 2026).
Local rural infrastructure cannot accommodate heavy vehicular traffic. The network relies on narrow,
single-lane bridge pinch points over the railway (2 places), the River Bollin, and Birkin Brook,
creating severe cumulative congestion risks in violation of CELPS Policy CO 1, Policy CO 4, and
national transport safety policies. The narrow, rural roads cannot accommodate a significant volume
increase in traffic. In addition, brine extraction causes occurrences of road “slumping” where the
carriageway dips away to the gutter as the road sinks into the void below. Additional traffic will speed
this process.
Positioned beneath Manchester Airport's operational flight paths, the site falls within restricted noise
contours and bird-strike management zones, conflicting with aerodrome safety requirements and
CELPS Policy SE 12 regarding public health.
4. Adverse Impacts on Landscape, Ecology, and Cultural Heritage
Allocating these sites would permanently damage the settings of both the Bollin Valley and Parklands
Local Landscape Designation (LLD) and the Rostherne/Tatton Park LLD, violating CELPS Policy
SE 4. This will degrade the landscape and should not be permitted.
Mass construction would sever critical habitat corridors and imperil nearby sensitive ecological
assets, including the Cotterill Clough SSSI/Nature Reserve, breaching CELPS Policy SE 3 and
national nature recovery mandates. Permitting ecological fragmentation should not be permitted. In
the site under consideration, three species on the “Red List” of the 5th revision of Birds of
Conservation Concern (RSPB: 332-00738-20-21), namely Greenfinch, Grey Partridge and Tree
Sparrow are in residence throughout the year.
The open fields frame the settings for 19 Grade II listed structures, including Ashley Hall. Allocating
this site violates statutory requirements under CELPS Policy SE 7 and national heritage policies that
require local authorities to give great weight to conserving designated historic assets and their rural
settings. Permitting development will cause irreversible heritage damage:
5. Hydrological Risks, Drainage, and Infrastructure Inadequacies
Paving over this catchment area would dramatically increase surface water run-off into the River
Bollin, creating severe off-site flood risks in breach of CELPS Policy SE 13 and national flood
resilience policies. As previously noted, the land is partially unstable due to brine extraction, causing
“road slumping” and the formation of “flashes”. Examples of both these phenomena are present
throughout the site and will require extensive mitigation plans in order to facilitate developments, and
will present an ongoing issue to drainage, utilities and foundations.
The local area lacks the sewer system capacity, power grid infrastructure, and drainage networks
needed for intensive growth, failing the deliverability requirements of CELPS Policy IN 1. Obstacles
to overcoming these deficiencies are noted above.
6. Invalidation under Spatial Strategy and Settlement Hierarchy
Under CELPS Policy PG 2, Ashley sits at the lowest tier of the settlement hierarchy, lacking the
primary schools, local healthcare facilities, and job markets required to support a strategic population
influx. It should additionally be noted that the local Primary Care Trust – East Cheshire NHS Trust is
particularly struggling to accommodate the current needs of the local population, especially so since
the recent large developments of housing around Knutsford and Wilmslow, neither of which included
the construction or provision of additional care facilities.
Directing strategic housing to an isolated rural village, conflicts with CELPS Policy SD 1 and Policy
SD 2, as well as national plan-making principles that mandate concentrating major developments
within Tier 1 Principal Towns and Tier 2 Key Service Centres.
7. Invalidity of submitted map of the site
The map submitted to the Call for Sites, and now being commented on here, is fundamentally flawed.
The map submitted by Tatton Estates includes plots of land over which they have no jurisdiction
(public roads, public paths, bridleways &c.) and land which they do not own or control. The inclusion
of these plots should lead to the rejection of this site and the exclusion of them as Unsuitable.
Conclusion and Action Requested
The submission across all 12 contiguous parcels (totalling 291.03 hectares) fails every fundamental
planning test under both local policies and the current NPPF framework. I formally request that
Cheshire East Council mark all 12 site submissions as Unsuitable, Unavailable, and Undeliverable
within the SHELAA report and exclude them entirely from future Local Plan allocations.
Site Description Table from Map on CEC Website
Quadrant Name Address Size (Ha) Source
South East Ashley Garden Village SE quadrant Castle Mill Lane/Back Lane/Tanyard Lane, Ashley 73.62 HE 320c
South East Land South East of Tanyard Lane Tanyard Lane, Ashley 4.55 CFS26 565
South East Land east of Mobberley Road Mobberley Road/Back Lane, Ashley, WA15 0QH 6.77 CFS26 564, HE 317
South East Land west of Mobberley Road Mobberley Road, Ashley, WA15 0QW 5.32 HE 318, CFS26 572
South East Land north of Back Lane, Ashley (04) Land north of Back Lane, Ashley 5.26 HE 316, CFS26 558
South East Land between Cow Lane and Tanyard Farm Cow Lane/Tanyard Lane, Ashley, WA15 0QT 9.59 CFS26 548, HE 315
South East Land west of Cow Lane Cow Lane, Ashley, WA15 0QS 2.56 HE 314, CFS26 540
South West Ashley Garden Village SW quadrant Ashley Road, Ashley 50.93 HE 320d
South West Land south of Ashley Road Ashley Road, Ashley, WA14 3QF 6.57 HE 319, CFS26 562
South West Land north of Ashley Road Ashley Road, Ashley, WA14 3QE 4.01 HE 313, CFS26 533
North West Ashley Garden Village NW quadrant Ashley Road, Ashley 79.18 HE 320a
North East Ashley Garden Village NE quadrant Ashley Road/Cow Lane, Ashley 42.67 HE 320b
