Tatton Estate is considering a new settlement of around 1,000 homes on Green Belt farmland at Ashley, Altrincham Today can reveal.
The Estate disclosed its early-stage vision for the first time after confirming it has submitted hundreds of acres of land in and around the village for consideration in Cheshire East Council's new Local Plan.
Any development would begin with an initial phase of approximately 250 homes and form part of a mixed-use settlement including infrastructure, amenities and employment space - but only if the council identifies the land as suitable, a process that has not yet begun.
The disclosure comes as Ashley residents launch a campaign against development of the land. In its written response to Altrincham Today's questions, the Estate said: "If Cheshire East identifies any land as potentially suitable for allocation, the Estate's initial thinking is around circa 1,000 homes over the long term, with an initial phase of approximately 250.
"This would form part of a smaller-scale, mixed-use settlement alongside investment in infrastructure, amenities, employment opportunities and connectivity. It is entirely dependent on the Local Plan process and is not currently a planning proposal."
The Keep Ashley Green campaign says 291 hectares (720 acres) of agricultural land across 12 adjoining sites has been submitted to the council's "call for sites" - the exercise inviting landowners to identify land that could be assessed for future development - and calculates that, at standard suburban densities, the area could accommodate between 8,700 and 11,640 homes.
Tatton Estate confirmed it submitted parcels through both the 2024 and 2026 call for sites exercises, under the broad category of "mixed-use development and regeneration", but strongly disputed the campaign's housing figures.
Ashley is one of the smallest parishes in Cheshire East. At the 2021 census it had a population of just 358 people living in 131 households, according to the Office for National Statistics.
Pete Crowther, chief executive of the Estate, said: "A Call for Sites submission is not a planning application, a site allocation or an approved development scheme.
"If Cheshire East identifies any land as potentially suitable for allocation, our current vision would be for a mixed-use settlement designed appropriately within the landscape. This is entirely dependent on the Local Plan process and would be shaped by infrastructure capacity, environmental and agricultural considerations, the proposed Northern Powerhouse Rail route and engagement with the community."
The Estate said the campaign had combined the gross area identified through the two separate exercises, and that the total "should not be interpreted as the boundary of one development or as an indication that all the land would be developed".
It said the 8,700–11,640 figure "treats the entire gross area displayed on the Council's website as a single housing development" without accounting for mixed uses, infrastructure, landscape, agricultural land or the proposed rail route. No masterplan or development scheme has been started, it said.
The Estate acknowledged that an earlier vision document had explored the wider area's "theoretical, very long-term growth potential", but said this did not form the basis of the 2026 submission and is not its current vision.
Campaigners argue the land is precisely what the Green Belt exists to protect. Ashley's countryside forms part of the narrow green gap separating Hale, Hale Barns and Altrincham from the Cheshire villages beyond.
"The open countryside around Ashley is the very definition of Green Belt," said one resident involved in the campaign, who asked not to be named while a spokesperson is appointed. "The whole way from Hale to the centre of Manchester is developed. The Ashley Green Belt checks the urban sprawl, and allows the conurbation to breathe."
Another said: "Development here would affect so many people - Altrincham, Hale, Hale Barns, Bowdon and beyond."
Residents also said the submission had come "out of the blue with no consultation". The Estate said it had presented its scaled-back 2026 vision to Ashley Parish Council at its July meeting and plans to hold its first community engagement event in August, adding: "We look forward to talking to everyone very openly."
The row comes at a sensitive moment for planning in Cheshire East. The council's housing target has risen 41% to 2,530 homes a year under the government's revised calculation method, and the council has acknowledged it cannot currently demonstrate a five-year supply of housing land - a position that makes refusing housing applications harder, including on Green Belt land, and which national policy says can justify reviewing Green Belt boundaries.
A new category of "grey belt" land - Green Belt making only a limited contribution to its purposes - must be considered first for any release, and a borough-wide Green Belt assessment is under way. National policy also now allows Green Belt development around well-connected railway stations; Ashley has its own station on the Mid-Cheshire line.
The council stresses that call for sites submissions carry no planning status, and that this stage of the Local Plan - a "scoping" consultation running until 5pm on Tuesday 1 September - is not considering individual sites.
Initial site assessments are not expected to be published until the next consultation stage in 2027. Residents can respond to the current consultation at cheshireeast.gov.uk/newlocalplan, by email to localplan@cheshireeast.gov.uk, or by post.
Mr Crowther said the Estate's ambition was "to work with the community on a well-planned approach that supports the village's long-term sustainability", considering infrastructure, amenities, employment and connectivity alongside any new homes.
He confirmed there is "ongoing dialogue" with Cheshire East Council given the Estate's landholdings, and that the Estate has received "speculative approaches from developers, of which nothing has been taken forward".
The Keep Ashley Green campaign is at keepashleygreen.org.
Cheshire East Council was approached for comment.
