November 2025 Minutes

Minutes of the meeting of High Lane Residents’ Association

Date: 6^th November 2025 Time: 8pm

Venue: High Lane Library

Present: Caroline Smith; Darrell Williams; Barry and Angie Sequeira; Sue Forrester; David Burks, John Baker, Lisa Robinson-Hall; Richard Jones (HLVNF); Cllr Aron Thornley; Cllr Colin MacAlister and Alex Swift (Lyme Park)

Apologies: Eryl Hughes

1. Welcome given by Caroline Smith and a thank you to everyone for attending. Caroline also welcomed Richard Jones and Alex Swift.

2. Minutes of the last meeting – approved.

3. Police and Crime Report – no police presence at the meeting.

4. Finances – John Baker

The HLRA General account

The opening balance for the HLRA General account, at the beginning of September 2025, carried forward from the previous financial year, was £ 4,671

Income

During September and October income to HLRA was £ 2,011

This consisted of:

Subscriptions	£ 920
Raffle at the AGM	£ 91
Two donations to the Adult Gym Project: One from G. D Burnett Funeral Services One from The Stair Shop Ltd	£ 500 £ 500
The split across the two periods was: A September income of An October Income of	£ 345 £ 1,666
Giving with the C/fwd. from last F Yr. and Income a Total of	£ 6,682

Expenditure

The expenditure during September was £ 38

The hire of the Village Hall	£ 25
The Website Licensing charge	£ 9
The Lloyds Bank account charge	£ 4

The expenditure during October was £ 94

AGM Hall hire and preparation expenses	£ 79
The Website Licensing charge	£ 9
The Lloyds Bank account charge	£ 6

For the two months our Total Expenditure was £ 132

Giving a balance of £ 6,550

On the 22^nd October it was decided to open another bank account with Lloyds Bank. This is a business savings account paying 0.6% interest, (on the levels of money we are likely to hold).

However, it has no charges and enables us to use this account as the HLRA Project account.

We have transferred all the donations received towards the Adult Gym project so far, from the current General account to the new Project account, separating general expenditure from project spending. On 22^nd October the following amounts were transferred from the General account to the new Project account.

Manchester Airport community fund donation	£1,735.00
High Lane Village Coffee morning donation	£ 200.00
GD Burnett Funeral Services donation	£ 500.00
The Stair Shop Ltd donation	£ 500.00
Total	£2,935.00

Going forward into November we now have:

HLRA General account £3,615

HLRA Project Account £2,935

HLRA Total Amount £6,550

5. Planning applications

Roselaya on the A6 just past the nursery DC/096826 -discharge of condition 2(materials) 20 contamination. 21 Remediation scheme, 23 investigations for past coal mining. OFN

8 Meadow Close DC/096578 - single storey rear and side extension. OFN

Former Thai Res. DC/095484 - discharge of condition 23 of planning permission DC/ 082338 Follow acceptable for development. Permanent ground gas risk assessment. Plot report. Environmental systems validation. OFN

Land next to Windlehurst Rd and near to Broadhurst Bridge. This matter has been raised by residents (Eryl reported this issue to Shan) and Dave Westhead visited the site recently. Please see below the reply sent to residents which updates on the action the Council are taking.

“Following your contact with the Council I have now conducted a site visit to the above land. Having done so I am satisfied that a material change in the use of the land has occurred from a field to as scaffolding yard. I am also satisfied that the change of use is unauthorised and that any application to retain that use would be recommended for refusal. I have therefore given the occupier until 6th October to cease the use, remove all shipping containers and scaffolding etc. remove the hard surfaced area and seed with a meadow grass seed mixture”. From David Westhead, Enforcement, Compliance & Monitoring, Manager Development Management at Stockport Council

Threaphurst Farm DC/ 098719 - Proposed single storey infill extension and addition of a Juliet balcony at first floor. OFN

Whitehaven ( opposite Roselaya on the A6) DC/096662 - alteration to existing dwelling comprising alteration to roof with addition of dormers and alteration to rear single storey. OFN

65 Ridge Lane DC/096515 - replacement steps to rear garden and erection of rear out building. OFN

14 Alders Rd DC/097310 - neighbour tree TPO 194E. It is on the boundary of East Cheshire and Stockport boundary. There is a large branch overhanging into the above property, and the owner wants permission to cut it back. He has had a conversation with the neighbour who has given permission for the branch to be cut back. OFN and the Stockport officer responsible for trees with a TPO.

Upgrade of telecommunication at Park Rd. Radio station to improve 4G and 5G coverage. (NGR:/395945,395945,385097/MG/VF86667-12 Radio substation upgrade. Sounds like quite a lot of work. I presume they will write to people to explain the nature and scope of the work. I have no idea what those numbers mean.

6. Update from Lyme Park

Alex gave an update on the proposal to upgrade/extend the existing admissions hut in Lyme Park by adjusting the model to cope with busy periods. The purpose of this is to reduce the queuing of vehicles along the A6 by introducing a more efficient and quicker way of paying. Planning has been approved (details of the approval can be found on the Cheshire East planning portal – application number 24/4158/FUL). It was decided to leave the hut where it is now because the infrastructure and facilities are already in place. Along with estate residents, several other stakeholders have been approached to help inform our construction plans. A construction specialist will be selected with the aim of minimising the impact that an infrastructure project of this scale could have on our visitors and neighbours. ‘Pay on exit’ trials have been taking place and feedback has been gathered from residents, visitors, and team members. Dual payment trials have been conducted – two ‘entry lanes’ running at busier times which has been working well. No timeline for completion at the moment.

Q. During busy times will you be operating pay on entrance and pay on exit?

A. No – it will be one or the other

Q. Are there any similar situations at any other NT sites?

A. No. None of the 500 estates are as awkward as Lyme! It’s virtually unheard of for a NT trust to have one entry and one exit that is single vehicle passage over an infrastructure bridge. The other entrances to Lyme aren’t now viable for vehicles as they are private roads.

Q. Will timber local to Lyme Park be used in the construction?

A. Yes – some trees have been felled by the rangers and are hoping that some of the timber can be used in the build.

Lyme Park newsletters and leaflets with more details of the new admissions hut were on display.

7. Stockport Plan

Richard Jones introduced himself to the meeting and gave a short history about how HLVNF came about: “I've been chairman since about 2018 and our neighbourhood forum was set up back in 2018 when there was some plans to build 4000 houses in High Lane so we got together and we created a neighbourhood forum. We also created what's called a designated area which was recognized by Stockport along with our neighbourhood plan and that designated area stretches from Hazel Grove right through to the east boundary and it matches the local authority voting area for South Marple”.

He went on to talk about the latest planning proposals put forward by SMBC.

“Its consultation started today. It's been a long time coming because the council worked very hard and produced the first version of the plan back in 2023, and then the Conservative government with Mr. Gove said they might change the NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework) so it all had to go on hold. Then a new government came in last year and said they were definitely going to change the NPPF. So, the second version of the Stockport local plan also went on hold and those were based on very different numbers to what the government has now set. The new government came in - they not only changed the rules, the NPPF and even created this wonderful new thing called grey belt, which nobody still quite understands, to make the task of building things supposedly easier. They also put in lots of other constraints on the council and the upshot was new higher targets so Stockport needed to create a local plan. The government stated if they didn't do it pronto, on the 16th of September, the government were going to do it for them. So, it would be done to us instead of with us.

Within our designated area, they've allocated two sites - one immediately adjacent to High Lane on the west, for 1,000 houses, which I think is much bigger than we'd even feared and a second one also within our designated area adjacent to Hazel Grove, called Sandbank Road, for 300 houses. So, that's 1,300 houses in a small piece of green belt adjacent to our local community.

So, what can we do about it?

Well, as your statutory consultee, we're going to do our best to try and pull together facts and arguments against that allocation and then share them with you and explain the plan to you so that you can respond. We're just in the process of getting posters and some flyers printed and the residents' association has very kindly agreed to help us distribute them - 2,200 to every house in the village.

The consultation runs from the 6th, today until the 21st of December so, there's plenty of time to get your thoughts together and respond. There are three ways of responding: via a portal, which is the council's preferred way because it gathers the data more efficiently and effectively but it's not the simplest thing in the world; via email or you can send a response by post.

To help you with those last two things HLNVF is going to produce a pro forma which will enable you to capture all the things the council need e.g. your name, address, email etc. and your response against the plan. You must be very careful how you respond so they will take notice of it. You have to say which chapter it is in the plan, which policy it is, and even in which paragraph if you're objecting to it.

We've designed the forms to make that clear and we'll send that out as a blank copy. There is an event on the 22nd of November, Saturday, 2:00 to 4:30, where the HLVNF will be present to not only explain a little bit more about the plan but to provide copies of the pro formas for people who would rather respond by post. We will also be providing some of that information to you - small snippets of what we think are the key facts, the key four or five things that we think might be most effective and we'll keep on gathering the data. About 10 days before the end of the consultation, around about the 10th of December, we will email an update to everybody who subscribes on what we think is the latest and best information to furnish your response. We're hoping that on the 22nd that some of our councillors will be able to join us and support us.

Our advice is to hold your powder and wait or you might want to go early and know that you've made your response.

The reason the response is important is there's a planning principle called “weight” and the HLNVF do have a little bit more weight as a statutory consultant and we will try to make the best use of that. The more people that respond in the same way the more weight is lent for the argument against the build. For example just to state that this is what I think and this is why isn’t enough. The council will ask you “what would you do differently; what would you do instead and where might the 1000 new homes be situated?” The HLNVF can help with that as well by providing forms and information and then we hope that as many people as possible put a response in and lend their weight to putting the right development of the right type in the right place which in our view is not on green belt even if it can be redefined as grey belt which is what Stockport Council have done.

Q. Can you put forward an objection individually or per household?

A. Any one person from a household can put in an objection. For example, if you have three people in your house, every individual from that household can object. Over 18's only and can only be one objection [submission] per person.

Richard continued to speak about the public meeting on Saturday 22^nd November – “information and facts about the plan will be provided e.g. why it is?, what it is? and what the allocations are about? The High Lane meeting is called HOM 2.16 and that's one of the key facts that we'll share with you. We're also inviting the Hazel Grove Greenbelt Action Group, who we’ve been trying to support for the last couple of months and like us were very surprised when there was an allocation put forward for 300 houses in their area and they will provide information on what they're doing to oppose the planning application.

We will be having a collaborative session where we're going to talk around the facts that we have been gathering around green belt versus grey belt and why we think there might be some weaknesses in the grey belt argument that might help us and then we also want to have a quick discussion about traffic and infrastructure because if you build 1,000 houses either side of the A6 with a staggered T junction and possibly 2,000 more cars, it will cause more problems on the A6 then we already have. We believe that the council are considering north exits possibly onto Windlehurst Rd.

The HLVNF are compiling some questionnaires with simple questions because it's one thing about people saying I object, I don't like it but the thing that gave us weight, real weight with SMBC last time was when we did questionnaires around how many houses would you think was realistic to build for High Lane and then we compile and share those numbers and that was quite an effective argument with the council last time around. We'll also be asking you questions about whether (armed with some facts), you think that this land really is grey belt or is it green belt and a few other questions about the fact that we are different from virtually everywhere else in the Stockport plan – we are a rural village and that's important because there's different rules in the NPPF for rural communities and rural villages.

We're hoping to get a few more people to join our committee - we're a small team of half a dozen people and there's only so much we can do and it would be brilliant if somebody else could join us too and help a bit more. I will share the questionnaire with HLRA and we need as many people as possible to complete it. It can be emailed to you and we can then put forward a good case against the planned proposal with the help of the data received”.

Q. Does Sandown Road fall into the South Marple ward or is it just on the boundaries?

A. Sandown Road development is in the green belt within our designated area. Within this summary booklet that HLNVF has produced, the council has produced a map of all of the allocations and we've overlaid that with our designated area. It still surprises some people that the land is within our electoral boundary and our designated area so that's why we're collaborating with the Hazel Grove Action Plan but we're going to focus on High Lane.

Q. When the Hazel Grove Forum is formulated, that land will go back to them potentially?

A. That's a long way down the road because it took us 2-3 years to establish a forum in High Lane. We did ask Hazel Grove councillors back in 2018 whether they wanted to set up their own forum and they didn’t but we're fulfilling our duty - that's our designated area and any planning application within it we'll respond to it.

Q. I've heard somewhere there's lots of mining shafts under this land.

A. Yes and there are there are lots of potential issues with the development but what we're trying to do is focus on have they made the right decision in declaring that a grey belt, not a green belt area and have they made the right decision in choosing that grey belt to be built on? On Monday, we had a meeting with all the 4 forums in the area including Woodford and Marple and they shared another map with us but I haven't seen the actual map itself yet. They say they're going to send me this later.

Q. Who made that decision?

A. Stockport planning ultimately decided where they were allocating.

Q. Do we know how many people are on that planning board is it a majority decision?

A. It's not an actual body - they are professional planners, it's a planning group and they were given the task of coming up with a number of sites to create a certain number of developments against the target.

Q. Was High Lane allocated the greatest number of houses in Stockport so including the Sandown estate that is 1,300 houses

A. That's correct and the point I was going to make is they've also, as part of allocating green belt, the council have said 46% of the Stockport area when you look at the map is green belt and they've allocated or changed the designation on 30% of that to be grey belt.

Q. What does grey belt mean?

A. Nobody knows! A lot of people are arguing about it. There is a petition going around at the moment to get signatures to have that definition reviewed because the original definition which was going to be previously developed land i.e.if it had had a car park or a petrol station on it but now the council have redefined it as “green belt land of low quality” which is fairly subjective so they've decided that there are now lots of grey belts all-round the area.

Cllr MacAlister stated that it sounds as though the council haven't decided what grey belt is. The government forced the council to employ independent surveyors to look at the green belt areas and then produce a report to advocate what, in their opinion, is green belt. So the green belt was not as we said before, previously developed land - it is actually green belt - it's a developer's recipe to build on green belt.

An attendee of the meeting talked about the population of High Lane - it's not quite 6,000. It's roughly 5,800 - the 2021 census was 4,600 so the increase in population is well over 30% and it's probably increasing up to 40, 45, 50%. [Editor: using the ONS website, the mid-2021 population estimate for High Lane (based on the 2021 census) was 4,195. The lastest estimate (published 07-Nov-2025) was for mid-2024, where the estimate was 4,207. These figures are calculated from the sum of three Lower Layer Super Output Areas that cover High Lane: Stockport 038B, Stockport 038C and Stockport 038D.]

Cllr MacAlister stated that there are areas of the borough that are worse than High Lane, e.g. Heald Green, Woodford and Bramhall.

Richard continued to say that there are lots of grey belt areas in and around the village and he can’t say how exactly how the council allocated those areas as grey belt. The HLVNF are asking – “why have the council allocated this grey belt and not some others?” We are a rural area and the rules for tests for building in a rural area are different because we don't have the infrastructure of urban areas and therefore there are lots of grey belt adjacent to urban areas, which in theory, even looking at the NPPF, would seem to be better options so that's one of the things that we want to explore - this might be grey belt, but is it the right grey belt?

David from HLRA made a point that even if they don’t build any homes at all in High Lane, the A6 is still going to get busier because we don't know what the council are planning in Disley, Whaley Bridge, Birch Vale, etc. and traffic produced by building new houses in those areas is all going to be funnelled onto the A6 through the village. So these homes are going to be on top of that. David stated that he is part of a non-political organisation and has lived in Cheshire about 60 years. In his lifetime, High Lane has never returned a Labour MP and he’s not aware of actually electing a Labour councillor so if he was in the Labour Party he would say – “go fill your boots in High Lane because there's nothing to lose” and he emphasised that it so very, very important that we make a really good fight, a big weighty fight.

A resident stated that he backs onto this land where the development is planned on the south side behind Windlehurst Chapel. At the moment it's being used as farming land and there's cattle grazing on it but at the end of August, there were surveyors on that land for about a week and when he questioned them they would not tell him what they were doing.

Richard referred to Appendix A in the planning document where you can find the official maps of where the proposed developments are going to be built and the reasons why they've selected the allocations.

The resident continued to say that the little playground adjacent to the church could be used as an access point. He wants to provide proof that the park is being used and has recently (with permission) taken photographs of children playing on the park as evidence that it is being used.

Richard said that the HLNVF want to collaborate with HLRA because we think that the points of access planned to serve a 1000 homes site is really important – potentially 2 exits north and south onto the A6 with another possible north location. We want to get some pictures of those potential access points which are often already completely congested on an average Tuesday morning and we can then explain the impact that that might have. Plus the effect on the infrastructure - 1,000 extra houses, 2,000 minimum extra people that's nearly 50%. How do you get 50% more doctors, dentists, schools, etc.?

Cllr MacAlister wanted to warn the meeting that there are a number of sites within High Lane but regulation 18 of the planning process also allows the council to submit extra sites and they will be submitting every single site they possibly can. On the right-hand side of Windlehurst Road past Andrew Lane, there's a 30-acre plot that has had surveyors there and it's been purchased by them but not for agricultural land. He advised that every single person who can contribute to the planning's consultation should do so and to make sure it's on issues such as transport, community planning etc. The infrastructure is a prime example with concerns about traffic etc. Don't just say you don't like it - you've got to give reasons why and that's why what Richard is doing is so important to provide you with information to do exactly that.

Q. David asked Cllr MacAlister if the government wants to provide these houses as fast as possible?

A. Colin replied in the affirmative.

David asked because building on a brownfield site takes a lot more time because you've got to do ground tests etc., is it likely that they will start building on greenfield sites before they start to build on brownfield sites?

A. Colin again replied in the affirmative.

Richard said that it was a question that was asked by the forums of SMBC because some people misunderstood the principle of brownfield first. ‘Brownfield first’ applies to when the council are allocating sites for development, i.e. finding a site, so this does not apply to the order in which they are built, unfortunately.

Q. Can grey belt now be classed as green belt of low quality.

A. Richard replied in the affirmative and continued to say that even the local government planning association, the body that oversees all planning has said it's an unhelpful definition.

Q. Who decided what's low quality green belt?

A. Richard replied that there's a national petition against it and if we can get 100,000 signatures on that petition, we can probably try and change that definition because it's as somebody said - it's a ‘developer's carrot’. The final point I wanted to make is that it is more than coincidence that from all of the sites allocated particularly around the Hazel Grove area, all but two of them have existing developer proposals in there. We know who the people are who proposed 500 homes for High Lane and they are now trying to double that. We'll share their publicly available information and if you want to, write to them as well and express your feelings (providing you do it in a respectful manner!) and question them on their development credentials and why they think that getting rid of our green belt is sustainable and beneficial to a rural community.

Q. Can I ask what are the plans are for Middlewood Station within the plan for Stockport?

A. As far as I understand, there is no direct plan for anything. There are commitments that infrastructure will be required to meet any development but there are no detailed proposals.

Richard explained how planning proposals works. There are hoops to jump through which is good news and if you can stop an allocation or change it early, is the best chance for a reg 18 consultation. Once it gets to reg 19, it's a bit more difficult, because it's already more than halfway there but once an allocated site is agreed, then there is a negotiation with the developer around what that means. There are some policy additions and constraints on each of these where they talk about the number of affordable homes that would have to be built on the High Lane site but on the infrastructure there are promises but no detail available.

Q. From the council point of view if green belt is purchased as green belt and then converted in order to give planning permission is there any way of making that less attractive to the people who have purchased it because they must have purchased it at green belt prices. Can it be made less attractive by the council saying, if it goes that way, there will be an increased precept on the property of that land.

A. So it's still technically not grey belt. This is a proposal that it becomes grey belt, which is why we have still got time and space to argue. If the proposal is, is still in green belt, it's not being designated grey. Then the green belt issue, the special measures, they would still apply, as far as planning is concerned, there must be special reasons why you would grant planning permission on green belt. The problem on the green belt designation is that you cannot refuse it on the grounds that previously there were special measures on the green belt. So, if you did refuse it, and it went to appeal, the likelihood is, that it would be overturned on appeal and then the costs, potentially, could be then put on the council and for us as the taxpayer.

That's the dilemma that, myself as a councillor, all the councillors have got. What fights do we pick? Do we pick on fights that we know we're going to lose? Do we pick on fights that potentially we can win or do you actually say, you make that stand and let the government overturn it, knowing that you're going to get criminalised or possibly fined for it. Those are all decisions that, ultimately, myself and when you're at planning, are going to have to make, and that's why the weight that Richard spoke about on what the local population thinks is so important because I'd be much more comfortable if I knew that the majority of people in High Lane are making that stand.

Richard agreed with Colin in that it is another plan by the government to basically load all of the dice against the councils. The key thing is because these applications ultimately will be reviewed through the councillors so the more weight and information we can give to our elected representatives, Aaron, Colin and Shan to fight our cause and on our behalf, the better because if we can give them facts and numbers all saying the same thing, then it really strengthens their argument to say if you want to build 1000 homes there are better places to do it. People might say don't object to a small number of homes but 1000 against a village of 2200 is nearly 50%.

It's totally disproportionate, and the planning guidance states that developments in rural villages needs to be proportionate.

Q. If the village doesn't want the houses built where they're proposing, we'd have to come up with somewhere else for them to be built and what numbers would we want to be built on those alternative sites?

A. You're not going to have to object in that much detail, but our thinking is more along the lines that if people through our questionnaire, say there is a different number that they would accept, then that's useful information but in response what we can say is that there are grey belt areas adjacent to urban land elsewhere in Stockport because we're one of the few rural areas and we can suggest that they are built somewhere else. So don't put 1000 houses adjacent to a rural village, put them somewhere where there is better infrastructure and we don't have to name that place.

A resident pointed out that the main problem in the village is the A6 which is a major thoroughfare. 1000 houses equals 2 cars per house so potentially 2000 more vehicles which is going to cause still more chaos.

Richard stressed that to put your arguments together facts and numbers are important. There are more HGVs and more cars and some of the work that's already been done by the RA in terms of analysing those figures is important. The other thing is, we know that there have been other traffic surveys carried out recently and for whatever reason we don't seem to be able to access the data. So one of the actions I can follow is using the Freedom of Information Act to request that information.

David told the meeting that he had been assured that a full consultation had been done regarding car parking charges around the village so he made an application through the freedom of information act to access the data and he received an email about 6 to 8 weeks after the application which said they couldn't find this information and it would be too expensive to find out anything further.

Cllr Aron Thornley said the village needs to get behind the HLVNF to go through the documents with a fine tooth comb and find what your arguments are against it and up until the moment when they build a bypass here which might take 50 years, your best argument is the A6. There might be other things for example mine shafts so if people have local knowledge they can bring that to the group. He would recommend counting how many houses they're building in Cheshire East and in High Legh and the statistics can be obtained from those councils. Another argument is if there are sheep grazing on the land allocated surely that land becomes different to the land across the road. Everyone has a right to protest but I think people need to realize you're going to need some clever strong arguments and that's what people need to do is to try and start finding those solutions early. For example if the government announced tomorrow that they're going to build a bypass and it took 10 years to build it you would guarantee that there would be 1000 houses built on there in no time but because you've got the A6 road and it cripples this village and has done since the A555 was built you've got a great argument against those two sites in High Peak.

Richard said that Hazel Grove Greenbelt Action Group (HGGAG) has been talking with all the other protective developer sites, which are around that area and there's a lot of houses being built that side as well which means traffic getting onto the A6 and the A555 from the other direction so we will be working with them to get those numbers as part of our argument to look at the collective impact. He continued to say that the council are doing a few things to help us. The SMBC planning portal isn’t easy to use and email etc. The council are having a drop-in session from 10.30am to 2.30pm on 28th of November at the library attended by the librarians and people from planning who will be on hand to talk to you and advise you and maybe explain the 213-page planning document. What they are also doing is they're training up the librarians to show people how to use the portal to submit the data so if you want to use the portal and you're not confident with your IT the librarians will be able to help you as well as giving advice on emailing and posting your objections. You can only submit one objection via the portal, email or post.

Colin stated if people don’t hear me objecting against sites that's because he can't. If he does, then he won't be able to vote ultimately on the documentation and so he will have to say something like, "I’ll have to be persuaded" or "I'll have to look at all the evidence" and that is what you're going to hear from councillors. They're not being obstructive - they have to remain independent until the decision's made.

Q. How are you're going reach the people of High Lane with this information? During the last campaign, people put placards and notices in their gardens and we found that it did work but I'm not saying it will work now.

A. 2200 leaflets are going to print on Monday 10^th November. As regards to poster and placards, Hazel Grove Greenbelt Action Group have been doing that and it hasn’t generated a huge response – only a few percent.

They found that where it's most successful is immediately adjacent to where the development is and not surprisingly the 500 people living immediately around the development are the ones that are most involved. Our committee have voted on distributing the leaflets because even if that means 100 more people submit a response it's worth doing. The HLRA has generously offered to fund part of the cost and we're going to collaborate on delivery. Everybody will get these in the next few weeks and hopefully that will generate some people coming to the event. The leaflets include our website address and our email so you can go to our website which is being rebuilt at the moment, and that will have all the information on it so rather than having to wade your way through Stockport's planning document we'll be able to provide the information you need at the click of a button. Also because we don't get any money from the government, surprisingly, they paid for us to set up a forum and then gave us nothing in the 5 years since we’ve been established.

So we've set up a collective like GoFundMe which it allows us to achieve some income. This is to support not only this, but the rest of the campaign. This is only round one, in boxing parlance and there will be other opportunities for us to get our blows in!

Q. Is that on website already?

A. It will be once Jamie's put the QR code on it. Some people have already been very generous so if you can help us with anything, however small, we can use that money for our campaign.

Q. Will the leaflets be ready for the November 22^nd meeting?

A. Yes. They will be printed on Monday 10^th November and we're going to start distributing them next week and email copies will go to everybody as well and the leaflet will be displayed in shops and notice boards.

Lisa (HLRA) said regarding the distribution of information via the leaflets we need to go online as well via High Lane Village Facebook forum – it gets people talking across all ages.

Richard agreed with Lisa and said that HLVNF have own Facebook page where you’ll find weekly updates linked to High Lane Village. Richard confirmed that the collective will be posted on their Facebook page so you can click onto it and donate some money.

David asked that when people see the post on the High Lane Facebook page to put a like to because then it comes back to the top of the page and the more likes it gets, the higher up the page it gets so when anybody clicks on there the post will be the first thing they see.

Lisa continued to say that regarding pro formas, it's vital that the key points that need to be addressed on the pro forma because some people won’t know where to start, so if there is a completed template available in which people can just alter their address and details, you may get more people to object.

Richard replied that there will be a blank template, a completed template and an attachment so you can email the form with the key facts and see the attachment.

Lisa talked about signing a petition about Grey and Greenbelt land and asked if HLVNF could share that petition to enable it to be shared further.

Richard replied that HLVNF are sharing as much as can without overloading the RA’s inbox! The petition is already on the HLNVF Facebook and we'll share it with you again on the village Facebook.

Angie asked if there have there been any more traffic counts since we had the report on the A6 from Sue Stevenson.

Richard replied that people have reported counters out on the A6 as promised by Sue Stevenson.

A resident remarked that a camera pot had been situated just outside the Methodist Church and on the signpost as you're coming up the A6. He was told it was a traffic survey but he wouldn't tell me who it was for. The cameras were running for three days.

John (HLRA) thought that the only people who can put things on council architecture is the council – the GMCA (the Greater Manchester Combined Authority).

Q. Could we undertake our own traffic count?

A. Official data from official sources always carries a bit more weight but there's nothing stopping us requesting the report via the Freedom of Information.

Lisa (HLRA) told the meeting that there's been a committee for something completely different, who had gathered traffic data as part of their appeal and we could perhaps use that. She was positive they would share their information.

Richard said that the Carr Brow group have been working with the HLNVF and he would ask Stuart Barton who fronted the group so I'm sure he'll share anything he's got with us.

Angie (HLRA) thought the traffic count needs to include Windlehurst and beyond because of all the traffic coming from Marple.

Richard said that all data is good data and the job is to try and find out what they call ‘the killer facts’ so if we can find half a dozen really strong facts and arguments that say ‘ not that many, not here and for these reasons’, that's where we want to get to.

John (HLRA) said that we know that with all the extra houses there will be extra traffic and that will impact on the A6. He asked if there is anything to stop us crossing the road more frequently and using the pelican crossings more thereby making a statement saying if this build goes ahead then there will not only more traffic but more pedestrians crossing the A6.

Richard answered that he wouldn't want anyone to put their life at risk because even when he uses the pedestrian crossings, a car goes through on red and he sometimes takes photographs of the offending car. What we can do is where we think the entry and exit points are going to be, it would be quite compelling to do some counts at those entry and exit points and do some short videos of the traffic. One of the things the Hazel Grove group are doing is using speeded-up videos of the traffic at the congestion points during rush hour so you can see in 20 seconds an hour's worth of traffic.

Richard had spoken at the Marple Area Committee about the traffic survey work that had been carried out by volunteers in High Lane was the most compelling data. So if there is a summary of the ‘rat run’ data taken over a month of how many cars at these points cut through that would be strong data to put into a spreadsheet or a summary table to prove that this is the result of the existing congestion and with the development that would increase by 40%

David (HLRA) said we must make sure that the council will consider that data and he’s aware that a lot of data was not considered.

Angie (HLRA) asked David if the police have the information but David replied that the council don't listen to the local police - they only to listen the Greater Manchester Police. That data would be very useful but it's only useful if the council will take notice of it.

Richard thought that if that data is shown in a considered format and providing it to our councillors as well as to SMBC, it becomes another argument and it's about having four or five good arguments and another strong and compelling reason not to put houses there. If that traffic data is in the correct format that would be very useful along with the increased air pollution - they are both very strong arguments and it might compel the council to undertake some more surveys of traffic and air quality before they make a final decision.

Q. If we were to undertake our own count would we have to employ professionals?

A. It certainly would have more weight but the traffic surveys are carried out by people trained by the police so that is why their surveys have that bit more weight because they are trained to do what they're doing but what we should do is to write to GMCA using the Freedom of Information Act and request the traffic data because it’s public information.

Aron suggested asking the councillors to contact GMCA.

Richard said that regardless of politics, we've seen the statements that Lisa Smart our MP has made and we've seen the petitions that she's posted online and if we give our support to Lisa regardless of our political persuasions because she's fighting our cause and she's on our side, to petition to get the Grey Belt definition changed to something that's sensible so all those things added up might make a difference.

Caroline asked Aron and Colin if there was anything else or any other points you think we need to know?

Colin reiterated that it's important to make sure transportation issues, infrastructure e.g. doctor surgeries and schools are considered and what impact an increase in the population will have on an already overloaded infrastructure.

John (HLRA) asked if it would be possible to get some data from the 199 bus company to see how their timetable is affected by the heavy traffic through High Lane?

Aron replied that there was some good data provided in the A6 MARR report which Stockport Council carried out well.

Caroline asked if the build would be undertaken by one developer or more than one?

Richard answered that the little that we know with regards to the 1000 allocation, there has been a number of developers lobbying for it for the last three years but we do know a little about the people that have bought the land and submitted the previous proposal - KDC and Q Developments one for the south side and one for the north side. We are intending to gather some information on them and share that. A round of applause was given to thank Richard.

Richard finished by saying that it had been good to hear everybody's questions and asked people to attend the public meeting on the 22^nd in the Village Hall and look out for the emails that we will send and that we'll share with the HLRA and above all else, please make your responses. If you think of something else that may help please email the HLVNF and you can ask us any questions via email.

Angie asked if people are prepared to volunteer with the distribution of leaflets although we might not actually use them, we would be grateful and to please provide their names, emails and phone numbers.

Caroline thanked everyone for coming and asked people to spread the news and we'll try and get everybody at the public meeting in November.

8. AOB

David told the meeting that the proposed children’s home on Carr Brow had been approved by the council with the condition that they have to make the car park larger to allow for two cars. David expressed his disappointment with the council because a lot of information was submitted that was not considered. There's been a lot of conflict of interest.

A resident asked how they're going to get these youths backwards and forwards to school and what they're going to do with their time at weekend and during school holidays?

David said that everything has been mentioned in the appeal against the children’s home. He would like to make the council aware of vicarious liability (corporate manslaughter) which means that a third party with a duty of care should take steps to prevent harm being caused to prevent the issue escalating, so what that means is that if something should happen on Carr Brow then the whole committee who passed that decision are responsible for them. The meeting continued to discuss the council’s decision and the possible problems which may occur.

Adlington campaign leaflets against the 14,000 to 20,000 build were available to take and a petition was available to sign in Poynton.

The next HLRA meeting is on Thursday December 4^th at 8pm in High Lane library