Full text:
I am writing as a long-standing resident of Ashley to object to the inclusion and consideration of substantial areas of land surrounding Ashley for large-scale residential and mixed-use development through the emerging Cheshire East Local Plan and associated site-assessment process.
I live at [REDACTED], immediately adjacent to the crossroads formed by Back Lane, Cow Lane, Ashley Road and Mobberley Road. I therefore have direct, day-to-day experience of the road network, traffic conditions and rural environment which would be affected by development on this scale.
I recognise that the Call for Sites process is not itself a planning application. However, decisions at this stage could determine whether development capable of fundamentally changing Ashley and the surrounding countryside becomes possible. I therefore believe that the Council should reject the principle of large-scale strategic development at Ashley.
Highway safety and the Ashley crossroads
I am particularly concerned about the implications for highway safety.
[REDACTED] As a resident, I have witnessed the problems at this junction first-hand. There have already been numerous accidents and incidents around the crossroads.
This is not an abstract concern about possible future congestion. It is an existing highway problem which would inevitably be exacerbated by introducing potentially thousands of additional vehicle movements into the area.
The junction connects narrow rural roads which were never designed to accommodate the volume of traffic that a substantial new residential settlement would generate. Visibility, road widths, bends, bridges and the nature of the surrounding lanes all constrain the ability of this network to absorb materially greater traffic volumes safely.
Importantly, concerns regarding this particular junction have previously been recognised in official transport assessments. Cheshire East Council itself has previously identified capacity and mitigation concerns at the Ashley Road/Back Lane/Mobberley Road/Cow Lane junction.
It would therefore be extremely difficult to reconcile the acknowledged limitations of this junction and surrounding road network with a decision to locate major strategic housing development in Ashley.
The Council should require a rigorous assessment not merely of theoretical highway capacity after mitigation, but of the practical consequences for road safety and residential amenity for those people who already live immediately alongside these roads.
Green Belt, settlement character and landscape
The countryside surrounding Ashley performs an important Green Belt function by maintaining physical and visual separation between Greater Manchester – including Hale, Hale Barns, Bowdon and Altrincham – and the rural settlements of Cheshire, including Ashley, Mobberley and Knutsford.
Large-scale development would erode this strategic gap, promote urban sprawl and risk the effective coalescence of settlements. Ashley is a small historic rural village. Development involving even a fraction of the larger numbers which have been discussed would be wholly disproportionate to its existing scale and character. At the upper end, this would not represent an extension to Ashley. It would amount to the creation of a new town.
The cumulative impact on the landscape, farms, historic buildings, country lanes, footpaths, hedgerows and open countryside must therefore be considered across the entire area rather than assessing individual development parcels in isolation.
The historic environment and Midways
I am also particularly concerned about the impact upon Ashley’s historic environment. Midways is a historic Arts & Crafts house dating from the late nineteenth century. It forms part of the historic development and character of Ashley and is specifically recognised locally as one of the village’s heritage landmarks.
Ashley contains a collection of historic houses, farms, buildings, field patterns, lanes and established landscape features which collectively give the village its distinctive character.
The importance of these buildings cannot sensibly be assessed solely by asking whether development physically affects the building itself. Their setting is an integral part of their significance.
Midways, for example, is experienced as a substantial historic country house within a rural landscape. Replacing surrounding fields and countryside with large-scale housing estates, roads, lighting and associated infrastructure would fundamentally change that setting.
The same principle applies to the numerous listed and historic buildings throughout Ashley.
The Council should therefore undertake a comprehensive heritage assessment of the cumulative effect of strategic development upon both designated and non-designated heritage assets and, crucially, upon their rural settings.
Transport and sustainability
Ashley has extremely limited public transport relative to the scale of development being contemplated.
The railway station provides a limited service and there is no meaningful bus network capable of supporting a large new residential population. Consequently, the overwhelming majority of journeys to employment, education, healthcare, shopping and leisure would inevitably be made by car.
This would place further pressure not only on the Ashley crossroads but on the surrounding network towards Hale, Altrincham, Mobberley, Knutsford, the A538 and M56.
The existence of a railway station should not, by itself, be used to characterise Ashley as a sustainable location for strategic development. What matters is whether public transport has the frequency, capacity, connectivity and destinations necessary to provide a realistic alternative to private cars. At present it plainly does not.
Infrastructure
Development on this scale would require enormous investment in infrastructure including schools, GP and healthcare provision, drainage and sewerage capacity, utilities, roads, public transport and community facilities.
Ashley does not currently possess infrastructure remotely approaching that necessary to support a major new settlement.
The Council should establish that such infrastructure is both technically and financially deliverable before determining that Ashley is an appropriate strategic development location. It should not assume that infrastructure problems can simply be resolved after land has been allocated.
Agricultural, ecological and environmental impacts
The surrounding land includes substantial areas of actively farmed agricultural land.
Once developed, the loss of this land would effectively be permanent. At a time when food security and domestic agricultural production are increasingly important, the loss of hundreds of hectares of productive countryside requires exceptionally compelling justification. The area also contains mature trees, historic hedgerows, watercourses, farmland and established wildlife habitats and forms part of the wider Bollin Valley landscape.
Large-scale development would inevitably result in habitat fragmentation and substantial increases in traffic, artificial lighting, noise, surface-water runoff and recreational pressure.
These impacts should be addressed now, at the strategic site-selection stage, rather than deferred until individual planning applications are submitted after the principle of development has effectively been established.
Spatial strategy and reasonable alternatives
I recognise that Cheshire East has an obligation to plan for additional housing. My objection is therefore not an objection to housebuilding in principle. It is an objection to locating development of an extraordinary scale in a small rural village with limited infrastructure, constrained roads, inadequate public transport and important Green Belt, agricultural, landscape and heritage characteristics.
Housing should principally be directed towards brownfield land and existing towns and larger settlements where transport, services, employment, schools and healthcare already exist or can realistically be expanded.
The fact that a large contiguous area of land may be available for development does not make that land an appropriate or sustainable location for development.
Conclusion
As somebody who lives at the heart of Ashley and [REDACTED], I would urge the Council to consider what development on this scale would mean in practical terms.
The Ashley crossroads already experiences accidents and highway-safety issues. The surrounding roads are narrow rural lanes. Public transport is limited. The village contains important historic buildings and landscapes, including Midways, whose character and significance are inseparable from their rural setting.
Against that background, introducing development capable of generating thousands of additional residents and vehicle movements would fundamentally and permanently alter Ashley.
This is not simply a question of whether individual fields can physically accommodate houses. The proper planning question is whether Ashley is an appropriate and sustainable location for strategic development of this magnitude. I strongly believe that it is not.
The development would undermine the strategic function of the Green Belt, place unacceptable pressure upon an already constrained road network, increase risks at an existing problematic junction, damage the setting of historic buildings, result in the permanent loss of agricultural countryside and fundamentally change the identity of Ashley.
Once this countryside has been developed, those consequences cannot be reversed.
I therefore request that Cheshire East Council rejects the inclusion of the land surrounding Ashley for large-scale strategic development and identifies it as unsuitable through the SHELAA and Local Plan processes.
