Tatton Services scheme for M56 approved by Cheshire East

Tatton Services wants to build the Tebay-style services, which will include new motorway service building with farm shop, a 100-bed hotel and filling station, on land between J7 and J8.

Today (Wednesday) Cheshire East Council’s strategic planning board voted by seven to three in favour of the scheme – although, due to the scale and nature of the proposal, it will now be referred to the secretary of state, who has the final say.

The application has divided public opinion, and the council’s own planning officers noted it is ‘inappropriate development in the green belt’.

But they recommended it be approved, arguing there were very special circumstances it should go ahead on highways safety grounds.

Those special circumstances included there was a need for another motorway service area (MSA) – as guidelines state there should be no more than 28 miles between services.

The scheme will be modelled on the popular Tebay Services in Cumbria and Gloucester Services on the M5, owned by the Westmorland family.

Strategic planning board meeting (Image: Belinda Ryan, LDRS)Sarah Dunning, Westmorland chair and member of the family, told councillors: “Our idea is to transform what is a derelict farmstead into a vibrant business whose purpose it is to celebrate local  farmers, local producers and communities. We design buildings to complement those already there."

She added: “It will create 325 jobs, it will support, we hope, 130 local farmers and food producers, it will promote Cheshire as a visitor destination.”

But the proposal has divided local opinion – resulting in about 150 objections, including from neighbouring Trafford Council, as the site is very close to its border.

Objector Bill Dixon, who lives close to the site, told councillors there was no need for the MSA and he listed other nearby service stations.

Mr Dixon added: “The scheme will have a severe economic impact on businesses in Knutsford and Altrincham and local Cheshire East villages… This isn’t a normal motorway services. The proposal is for a visitor destination, taking away business from local communities.”

But Terry Haywood, from the North Cheshire Chamber of Commerce, disagreed.

“There is a need for an MSA from a safety and welfare perspective and for that reason alone I believe this project should be supported,” he told councillors.

He said it would boost the local economy, grow local food businesses and provide much needed  jobs.

Cllr Steve Edgar (Image: Cheshire East Council)Cllr Steve Edgar (Haslington, Con) said he was very protective of open spaces but ‘this to my mind isn’t really green belt anyway, it’s surrounded by motorways’.

“The benefits that I can see - the  local food, local jobs, agriculture, outlet for produce - substantially outweigh the negatives,” he said, and proposed the scheme be approved.

This was seconded by Cllr Lesley Smetham (Gawsworth, Con) who said: “Normally I’m protective of green belt but, in this case, I think that for people’s safety on the road, that really trumps green belt in my mind.”

But not all councillors agreed.

Cllr Andrew Kolker (Image: Cheshire East Council)

Cllr Andrew Kolker (Dane Valley, Con) disputed the 28-mile gap issue in the report saying there were alternative routes.

He said there has to be really exceptional need to build on the green belt and ‘I would argue whether there is a real strategic need, from a highways point of view’.

Cllr Ken Edwards (Bollington, Lab) referred to the proposal as ‘a very large invasion of a very significant facility’.

He said he wasn’t convinced by the gaps in provision argument.

“If you could find a place which needed it, I’d be delighted to support it but I can’t on this occasion,” he said.

Committee chair Stewart Gardiner (Knutsford, Con) said government policy – the 28-mile gap and highways safety – had to be taken into account.

The committee resolved to approve the application by seven votes to three and it will now be referred to the secretary of state.