Local plan scoping consultation

I should like to put forward my views on the sites you are considering in Mobberley Ward:

4 Pockets of Land along BroadOak Lane / Pepper Street and Smith Lane

I object to the proposed mixed-use development on Land North of Station Road. While regeneration can bring benefits, this site is unsuitable due to the increase in traffic congestion it will cause, pressure on local infrastructure, and loss of open space. Existing roads, schools, healthcare services and public transport are already under strain and there is insufficient evidence that the necessary improvements can be delivered in a timely manner.

The development would also have an adverse impact on the character of the area, reducing the separation between built-up areas and harming local amenity. Alternative brownfield sites should be prioritised before releasing this land for development.

I also object to this site due to the lack of infrastructure and public transport in this area. The proposed mixed-use development on Land North of Station Road has poor accessibility and unsustainable reliance on private car travel. The site is not adequately served by public transport, limiting realistic travel options for future residents, employees and visitors. Train services from the local station are limited, reducing connectivity to key employment, education and service centres. Walking and cycling links are also insufficient to support a genuinely sustainable development and would be even more dangerous with an increase of traffic in the area.. As a result, the proposal is likely to generate significant additional car journeys, increasing traffic congestion, carbon emissions and pressure on local roads. This conflicts with sustainable planning principles.

Thirdly, I object to the proposed development on Land North of Station Road due to the harm it would cause to the identity and character of the village. The village has a distinct rural setting and strong sense of community which is closely linked to its scale, surrounding countryside and separation from neighbouring settlements. A large mixed-use development would fundamentally alter this character, making the village feel more urban and reducing its unique local identity. The development risks overwhelming existing communities, eroding the qualities that make the area attractive to residents and visitors, and diminishing the historic and rural character that has developed over generations.

Finally, I object to the proposed development on Land North of Station Road because of the loss of Green Belt land and the harm it would cause to the openness, landscape character and biodiversity of the area. The site provides an important undeveloped green space that contributes to the rural setting and visual amenity of the locality. Development would urbanise open countryside, reducing the sense of openness and damaging important views. It would also disrupt habitats used by local wildlife, potentially affecting birds, mammals, insects and other species that depend on these green spaces. The proposal therefore risks causing significant and irreversible environmental harm. This completely negates the need to become carbon net zero, and would increase our carbon out put, because of the reduction of the natural resources to capture carbon.

Land Between Ryecroft Lane and Pavement Lane, Mobberley

I strongly object to the proposed housing allocation on land between Ryecroft Lane and Pavement Lane. This development would result in the loss of valuable open countryside, eroding the rural character and setting of the area. The site is poorly served by existing infrastructure, with local roads already experiencing congestion and limited capacity to accommodate additional traffic. Increased housing would place further pressure on GP services, schools, and other community facilities. The proposal could also harm local biodiversity, wildlife habitats, and landscape quality. More sustainable brownfield sites should be prioritised before releasing greenfield land for residential development in this location.

Infrastructure based comment I also strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane and Pavement Lane, from an infrastructure perspective, due to its significant impact on local infrastructure and the environment. The surrounding road network is already under pressure and lacks the capacity to accommodate increased traffic, leading to congestion, road safety concerns, noise, and air pollution. Local schools, GP surgeries, and other essential services are stretched and would face additional demand. The development would also result in the loss of greenfield land, harm biodiversity, fragment wildlife habitats, reduce natural drainage, increase surface water runoff and flood risk, and weaken the rural character of the area.
From an increased traffic perspective, I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane and Pavement Lane. The local road network is narrow, poorly suited to increased traffic, and already experiences congestion at peak times. Additional vehicles would worsen road safety concerns for residents, cyclists, and pedestrians. Footpath provision in the area is limited and inadequate, making safe access to local services difficult and increasing reliance on cars. The development would generate significant additional traffic on roads that lack the capacity to accommodate further growth. It would also increase noise and air pollution, while placing further pressure on already stretched local infrastructure and services.

As a local resident, I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane and Pavement Lane. The proposal would cause significant harm to the openness and purposes of the Green Belt, replacing undeveloped countryside with extensive built development. It would result in the loss of the area's distinctive rural character, transforming an open, agricultural landscape into a suburban housing estate. The visual impact would be considerable, with new homes, roads, lighting and infrastructure creating an intrusive urban presence. Residents would lose valued countryside views and a sense of openness, while the development would erode the rural setting, landscape quality and local identity that make this area unique.
From a Village Character and Identity perspective, I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane and Pavement Lane. The proposal would cause significant harm to the openness and purpose of the Green Belt by replacing undeveloped countryside with extensive built development. It would erode the area's distinctive rural character and village charm, qualities that are highly valued by residents and contribute to the village's unique identity. The peaceful countryside setting, attractive views, and sense of separation from larger settlements would be lost. Housing, roads and lighting would create an intrusive urban presence, diminishing the village's character, setting, sense of place and long-established rural appeal.

I strongly object to the proposed housing development on land between Ryecroft Lane and Pavement Lane, from the point of view of the effects on the environment. The scheme would result in the unnecessary loss of greenfield land, damaging the rural character and landscape of the area. Development would increase surface water runoff, flood risk, noise, air pollution, and carbon emissions from additional vehicle traffic. It could lead to the loss and fragmentation of wildlife habitats, negatively affecting birds, mammals, pollinators, and protected species. Mature trees, hedgerows, and biodiversity corridors may also be harmed. This completely negates the need to become carbon net zero, and would increase our carbon out put, because of the reduction of the natural resources to capture carbon. Furthermore, local roads, schools, healthcare services, and other infrastructure are already under pressure and may struggle to accommodate further growth.

Land between Railway and Smith Lane, Mobberley

I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing development. The site is poorly positioned for significant residential growth due to its proximity to the railway, which may result in increased noise, disturbance for future occupants. Development would also place additional pressure on local roads, services, and infrastructure that are already stretched. The loss of open land would adversely affect the character of the area and could have negative impacts on local wildlife and biodiversity. This completely negates the need to become carbon net zero, and would increase our carbon out put, because of the reduction of the natural resources to capture carbon. Alternative, ideally brownfield, sites should be prioritised before this location is considered for housing.

I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing development, from an infrastructure prospective, due to the significant pressure it would place on local infrastructure. Existing roads in the area already experience congestion, and additional housing would increase traffic volumes, worsening journey times and road safety concerns. Local services, including GP surgeries, schools, and public transport, are already under strain and may struggle to accommodate further population growth without substantial investment. There is no clear evidence that the necessary infrastructure improvements would be delivered alongside development. Approving this site risks overburdening community facilities and reducing residents' quality of life.

Due to the increase in traffic this development would create, I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing development due to the adverse impact it would have on local traffic conditions and highway safety. The development would generate a substantial increase in vehicle movements on roads that already experience congestion, particularly during peak hours. Increased traffic would lead to longer delays, greater pressure on local junctions, and reduced road safety. There are also concerns for pedestrian safety, as additional traffic would increase risks for those walking to local amenities, schools, and public transport stops. Without significant highway improvements, this development would create unacceptable traffic and pedestrian safety issues.

From a Green Belt prospective, I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing development because it would result in the loss of valuable Green Belt land. The Green Belt plays an important role in preventing urban sprawl, maintaining the openness of the countryside, and safeguarding the character and identity of surrounding communities. Development of this site would erode this essential buffer, setting an unwelcome precedent for further encroachment into rural areas. This completely negates the need to become carbon net zero, and would increase our carbon out put, because of the reduction of the natural resources to capture carbon. The site currently contributes to the visual amenity of the area and provides environmental benefits, including wildlife habitat and green space. Housing should instead be directed to previously developed sites wherever possible.

Our village has a wonderful character and identity, so I object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing development because of the harm it would cause to these The site forms part of the rural setting that distinguishes the village from surrounding urban areas and contributes to its unique sense of place. Development would introduce a substantial area of housing that is out of keeping with the existing scale and character of the settlement, resulting in a more urbanised appearance. The loss of open countryside would diminish important views and the attractive environment enjoyed by residents. This proposal would fundamentally alter the village’s character and erode its distinctiveness.

I also object to the allocation of land between the railway and Smith Lane for housing development due to its proximity to the airport and the resulting environmental impacts. Future residents would be subjected to regular aircraft noise from arrivals and departures, including early morning and late evening flights, which could disrupt sleep, reduce quality of life, and adversely affect wellbeing. Noise levels may be particularly noticeable during periods of high airport activity and could limit enjoyment of outdoor spaces. In addition, aircraft emissions and airport-related traffic may worsen local air quality, increasing exposure to pollutants that can negatively affect public health, particularly among vulnerable groups.

Land East/West of Pepper Street, Mobberley

I object to the proposed residential development at Land East/West of Pepper Street, due to its likely adverse impact on local infrastructure, traffic, and the character of the surrounding area. The scale of housing proposed risks increasing congestion on already busy local roads, placing additional pressure on schools, healthcare services, and community facilities. The development could also result in the loss of valuable green space and harm the rural setting that contributes to the area's identity. Furthermore, concerns remain regarding environmental impacts, drainage capacity, and the ability of existing infrastructure to support significant population growth sustainably.

I also object to the proposed housing development at Land East/West of Pepper Street due to the lack of infrastructure and public transport required to support substantial residential growth. Local roads already experience congestion and would be unable to accommodate the significant increase in traffic generated by the development. Public transport provision in the area is limited, with insufficient bus services and a lack of realistic alternatives to private car use for commuting, education, healthcare, and other daily activities. This reliance on cars would worsen congestion and environmental impacts. Existing schools, healthcare services, and community facilities are also under pressure, making the proposal unsustainable without major infrastructure investment.
Thirdly, I object to the proposed residential development at Land East/West of Pepper Street due to the significant impact it is likely to have on local roads, infrastructure, and the character of the area. The development would generate substantial additional vehicle movements, increasing congestion on Pepper Street and surrounding routes, particularly during peak commuting and school run periods. This could lead to longer journey times, reduced road safety for pedestrians and cyclists, and increased air pollution. The proposal would also place further strain on existing schools, healthcare services, and community facilities. In addition, the loss of green space and rural character would be detrimental to the local environment and residents' quality of life.
As a local resident, I object to the proposed housing development at Land East/West of Pepper Street, due to its likely adverse visual impact on existing residents and the surrounding landscape. The scale and extent of the development would significantly alter the area's rural character, replacing open green spaces with large areas of housing. This completely negates the need to become carbon net zero, and would increase our carbon out put, because of the reduction of the natural resources to capture carbon. Residents are likely to experience loss of attractive views, increased urbanisation, and a reduction in the sense of openness that currently defines the locality. The development could also appear intrusive within the existing landscape, adversely affecting the visual amenity of neighbouring properties and diminishing the character and quality of the area.

Our village has a lovely character, so I object to the proposed housing development at Land East/West of Pepper Street due to concerns about increasing urbanisation and the resulting loss of the area's rural character. The site currently provides an important sense of openness and serves as a clear separation between existing settlements. Development of this scale would extend the built environment into the countryside, creating a more suburban appearance and eroding the distinct identity of the area. The proposal would replace open land with dense residential development, reducing green space and altering the landscape permanently. This completely negates the need to become carbon net zero, and would increase our carbon out put, because of the reduction of the natural resources to capture carbon. This gradual urbanisation would have a detrimental impact on local character, amenity, and residents' quality of life.

From an environmental perspective, I object to the proposed housing development at Land East/West of Pepper Street due to concerns about its environmental impact. The development would result in the loss of open green space, reducing habitat availability for wildlife and diminishing local biodiversity. Increased housing and associated infrastructure could place additional pressure on natural resources and contribute to greater levels of noise, light, and air pollution. The significant increase in vehicle use is also likely to worsen carbon emissions and affect local air quality. Furthermore, development of this scale risks altering the natural landscape and undermining the environmental character that makes the area valuable. This completely negates the need to become carbon net zero, and would increase our carbon out put, because of the reduction of the natural resources to capture carbon.

Land north of Town Lane, Mobberley

I object to the allocation of Land north of Town Lane, Mobberley for housing development. This site lies within a sensitive rural area where significant development would erode the village's character, openness and separation from surrounding settlements. The proposal would place additional pressure on already constrained local roads, increasing traffic, congestion and road safety concerns. Development of this scale risks harm to biodiversity, mature hedgerows and wildlife habitats that contribute to the local environment. Existing infrastructure, including schools, healthcare services and utilities, may be unable to accommodate further growth. Priority should be given to more sustainable brownfield locations before releasing countryside land.

I also strongly object to the allocation of Land north of Town Lane, Mobberley for housing development, because the site would generate a substantial increase in vehicle movements onto Town Lane and the surrounding local highway network. Town Lane is already heavily used by residents, agricultural vehicles and traffic associated with Manchester Airport and nearby employment areas. Additional housing would increase peak-hour congestion, particularly at junctions connecting to Knutsford Road and other local routes. Increased traffic would also raise concerns regarding pedestrian and cyclist safety, given the limited footway provision in parts of the village. The cumulative impact of this development, alongside other proposed growth in the area, could lead to unacceptable pressure on the local road network.

From the prospective of the effect on the Green Belt, I object to the allocation of Land north of Town Lane, Mobberley for housing development. The site lies within the Green Belt and its release would conflict with the fundamental purpose of Green Belt policy, which is to protect openness and prevent encroachment into the countryside. This completely negates the need to become carbon net zero, and would increase our carbon out put, because of the reduction of the natural resources to capture carbon. Development would harm the rural character of Mobberley and reduce the clear separation between settlements. The proposal would also increase traffic on narrow rural roads, creating additional congestion and road safety risks for pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders and other vulnerable users. Exceptional circumstances have not been demonstrated, and more sustainable brownfield sites should be prioritised instead.

Thirdly, I strongly object to the allocation of Land north of Town Lane, Mobberley for housing development from a village character and identity prospective. This proposal would undermine the distinctive rural character and identity of Mobberley, a historic village whose appeal lies in its countryside setting and separation from surrounding settlements. Development on this scale would erode the Green Belt, reducing openness and contributing to the gradual urbanisation of the area. This completely negates the need to become carbon net zero, and would increase our carbon out put, because of the reduction of the natural resources to capture carbon. The loss of undeveloped land would alter the village's character, placing increasing pressure on local infrastructure and roads. Approving such development risks setting a precedent for further expansion, ultimately diminishing the unique character and independence of Cheshire's villages.

I strongly object to the allocation of Land north of Town Lane, Mobberley for housing development, due to the topography of the site. The site's topography raises concerns regarding drainage and flood risk. Due to its elevated and undulating nature, development would increase the amount of hard surfacing, such as roofs, roads and driveways, reducing natural ground infiltration. Surface water could then flow more rapidly downhill towards lower-lying areas, increasing the risk of localised flooding and placing additional pressure on existing drainage infrastructure which will also affect neighbouring properties, roads and agricultural land. Given the increasing frequency of extreme rainfall events, the site's topography makes it less suitable for large-scale development and raises concerns about the long-term effectiveness and maintenance of drainage solutions.