We have a final chance.
Please send an email to Dan Evans requesting that he actions a material change of circumstances review.
To: Evans, Daniel <Daniel.Evans@cheshireeast.gov.uk>
Cc: MULDOON, Mike (Councillor) <mike.muldoon@cheshireeast.gov.uk>
Subject: URGENT : ref 25/2406/OUT request for material change of circumstances review
Dear Mr Evans
Formal request for a Material Change of Circumstances Review regarding planning ref 25/ 2406/OUT
I write to request that prior to the signing of any section 106 agreement or the issue of a decision notice relating to the above application, that you carry out and publish your findings of a material change of circumstances review on the application.
The rationale for that request is as follows
1. A considerable period of time has elapsed from 28th January 2026, the date on which the Strategic Planning Board resolved to grant permission subject to section 106 agreements, to the publication of the draft agreement on 10th September 2026. During that period of time many material considerations have changed significantly, so I do not believe that you still have the legal mandate to issue the decision notice without carrying out a formal review and potentially referring the application back to the planning committee.
2. Material considerations that have changed are as follows
a. On 26th August 2026, the government issued a heavily revised National Planning Policy Framework. Several policy changes have a direct impact on this proposal, making it less sustainable than originally perceived to be. Full details on the policy changes are detailed later.
b. The government have issued the Hillsborough Law requiring council officers to act with candour at all times, particularly during investigations and to act in the best interests of the public at all times. Failure to do so can result in prosecution and imprisonment.
c. The supply position of housing in Sandbach has changed significantly, to the extent that the town can now demonstrate that it will be able to meet it’s housing need without this site. Details of this are included in the Sandbach Neighbourhood Plan which is about to enter the screening stage. The 5 year housing need based on the standard method is 700 dwellings. Excluding this application, Sandbach already has 266 under construction with 655 more with outline approval. That’s a total of 921 dwellings or 6.57 years supply. This is a very different position to that presented to the Strategic Planning Board in January and would not be classed as “unmet need” under the revised NPPF. As such the presumption in favour of development that was a factor in January, would no longer apply.
d. Government and Local Plan policies that have historically pushed development to the previously unconstrained Sandbach, are no longer as restrictive. There is now more flexibility to build on grey belt areas and some of the strategic gaps around Crewe. The withdrawal of funding for Jodrell Bank may lead to closure, no longer restricting development in the consultation area. Conversely, Sandbach has become more constrained due to the limited infrastructure capacity.
e. Funding for the conversion of Westfields into a special needs school is now more in doubt, so the building represents a greater opportunity to convert into sustainably located apartments.
f. The provision of infrastructure in the town continues to show increased stress.
i. Highways : Section 106 agreements for infrastructure funding for now approved developments have been struck out by the planning inspectors. The Highways contribution for Crewe Road was refused.
ii. Healthcare: contributions for both Crewe Road and perhaps also The Hill have been refused, but the residents moving there will add further strain to Ashfields and Haslington primary care facilities, both of which are acknowledged to be too small to cope with current demands, both in need of expansion.
iii. Education : In January it was felt that s106 funding for primary school places was not required for the Bradwall Road application. However, the capacity that this conclusion was based on will now be taken up by the unaccounted for committed development on Crewe Road and The Hill, neither of which provide primary school funding.
g. Updated traffic surveys have been completed in Sandbach. The results of these surveys were not considered in the evaluation of traffic impacts at the time.
h. Clear evidence that the Transport Assessment that supported this application is flawed to the extent that it’s conclusions cannot be relied upon has been provided to Cheshire East Council and is subject to an as yet incomplete inquiry under complaint reference number 38427297 and earlier Executive Correspondence under reference number 37378093.
i. The Middlewich bypass has been approved with construction now underway. This will add to traffic congestion through Sandbach during construction and beyond.
j. The redevelopment of Sandbach Boy’s school has been confirmed with a significant amount of construction traffic set to increase congestion on the main routes through Sandbach.
k. Construction on the Palmer’s Cross estate has commenced. Construction traffic is already causing severe problems on The Hill and Hassall Road. This disruption will impact on the Brookhouse roundabout when the reconfiguration of that junction commences.
l. Structural issues with the M6 motorway bridge at junction 17 remain. The numerous temporary repairs continue to fail on a regular basis. The lifetime of the bridge is unknown, it struggles to cope with existing demand and a permanent repair would be very disruptive.
m. Roads in and around Sandbach continue to be susceptible to sink holes which cause increased danger as motorists swerve to avoid them.
n. There have been a number of fatalities on the highway network in and around Sandbach. In addition there have been several serious accidents within the town and near misses taking place on a frequent basis. There is evidence to suggest that the recently completed junction upgrade at M6 junction 17 is not to the required specification. Visibility splays are insufficient and the turning radius from the northbound slip road into Capricorn is too tight for large vehicles. Damage to crash barriers on the roundabout demonstrates that this represents a genuine safety concern.
o. The impacts of climate change and continuing global conflict has demonstrated how fragile our domestic food supply is and the importance of genuinely reducing the need to travel by focussing development around locations of employment.
p. The Sandbach Neighbourhood Plan update is almost complete and ready for submission for screening. The plan allocates sites to meet the evidenced housing requirement.
Details of the updated NPPF and the significance to this application are as follows.
1. Page 23 : Achieving sustainable development. This explains that the objective is to “limit development away from settlements to help safeguard the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside”.
� Application 25/2406/OUT would conflict with this objective in that it will detract from the intrinsic character and beauty of the area.
2. Page 23 : Policy S1 : Positive plan making. 1b “the development plan should… provide for new development that promotes a sustainable pattern of growth and seeks to mitigate climate change”
� This application is not sustainable, increases the need to travel and would negatively impact on climate change.
3. Page 25 : Policy S5 : Principle of development outside settlements. “Only certain forms of development should be approved outside of settlements….including
a. limited infilling within groups of houses”
b. Residential and mixed use development which would
i. Be within reasonable walking distance of a well connected station – this site is not. Annex B defines a reasonable walking distance to a station as 800m and 400m to a hot food takeaway.
ii. Be physically well related to the station or the settlement within which the station is located.
iii. Be of a scale which can be accommodated taking into account the existing or proposed availability of infrastructure.
c. Development that would address an evidenced unmet need.
Notes regarding the Bradwall Road site in relation to these policy changes
� The site is outside the settlement boundary of Sandbach and is an extended finger of development on 3 sides into open countryside, so does not represent limited infilling.
� The site is already beyond the previous guidance of 1,200m from most facilities, so even further from the new reduced guideline distances.
� The site is not well related to the station or the settlement it is located in due to the infrequent and uncoordinated public transport options.
� The proposal is not of a scale that can be accommodated by existing or planned infrastructure.
� There is no longer a demonstrated unmet need in Sandbach.
4. Page 27 : Policy S6 : Neighbourhood Plans and the presumption. “For development proposals involving the provision of housing, the benefits of approving development are likely to be substantially outweighed by the adverse effects where a proposal would conflict with a neighbourhood plan, provided the following apply. (a) the neighbourhood plan became part of the development plan five years or less before the date on which the decision is made and (b) the neighbourhood plan contains allocations to meet its identified housing requirement.
� Both these criteria will be met when the Sandbach Neighbourhood Plan is approved.
5. Page 72 : Policy TR6 : Assessing transport impacts. “Development proposals should be refused if they would have a severe adverse impact on the transport network (in terms of capacity and congestion, including cumulative impacts), or an unacceptable impact on highway safety. This applies both during the construction phase and following completion”
With regard to ref 25/2406/OUT
� Factual errors in the transport assessment provided for this application render it unable to demonstrate that impacts will not be severe
� Evidence suggests that the impacts will be severe
� Significant safety concerns already exist at many locations in Sandbach, including the series of junctions from Congleton Road / Old Mill Road the petrol station and junction 17 of the M6. These would be made worse during construction and likely to continue following completion of the development and any mitigation.
� The roads around the proposed site are narrow with parked cars and school children walking on narrow pavements with substantial obstacles blocking movement. This represents an unacceptable increased safety risk during construction and beyond.