10th July 2026
Stockport Council is approaching a crucial decision on the proposed 250-home development at Hyde Bank Meadows, the name given to the farmland site where the houses are proposed. For many local residents, this area forms part of the wider Tangshutt Fields landscape, which is highly valued as an important green space.
It is important to distinguish between the proposed housing development at Hyde Bank Meadows and Tangshutt Fields park itself. As far as residents are aware, there are currently no proposals to build houses directly on the park. However, the plans do raise significant concerns about the impact on the park, including proposals for an access road through Tangshutt Fields, the introduction of additional traffic into an area currently valued as traffic-free, and the potential construction of a large car park and associated facilities within the park.
The developer has submitted a document arguing that the scheme does not require a full Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Residents should remember one important fact: this is not the Council’s decision. It is the developer’s argument for why a full environmental assessment should not be required.
The question now is whether Stockport Council will simply accept those arguments or subject them to the rigorous scrutiny they deserve.
Having reviewed the developer’s screening request, several issues immediately stand out.
The first is cumulative impact. The report states that it has considered planning applications within just one kilometre of the site over the last four years and found no significant effects. That seems a surprisingly narrow assessment for a development of up to 250 homes. Traffic congestion, pressure on drainage, schools, healthcare services and air quality do not stop at an arbitrary one-kilometre boundary. The Council should be asking whether the wider impact on Romiley has genuinely been considered.
Then there is ecology.
The developer’s consultants state that there is no ancient woodland on the site.
However, ecologists from the Greater Manchester Ecology Unit, using the same recognised assessment methods applied across Greater Manchester, have reached a different conclusion. They have identified areas of significant ancient woodland within the woodland on the site.
That difference is not a minor technical disagreement.
Ancient woodland is recognised nationally as an irreplaceable habitat. National planning policy gives it some of the strongest environmental protection available. Where qualified ecological professionals disagree over whether ancient woodland exists, the Council must carefully examine the evidence and explain clearly how it has reached its conclusion.
The woodland also carries another important designation. It is recognised as a Site of Biological Importance, acknowledging its value for wildlife.
Further evidence has also been provided through the wildlife records collected by Friends of Tangshutt volunteers. These records identify a number of ancient woodland indicator plant species within the area. Such species are widely used by ecologists as evidence of long-established woodland and should be properly considered alongside the developer’s own ecological assessments.
The screening request also relies heavily on technical reports that have yet to be completed. It repeatedly suggests that future Transport Assessments, Flood Risk Assessments, Air Quality Assessments and Landscape Assessments will demonstrate that any impacts can be managed.
Perhaps they will.
But that is not the purpose of EIA screening. The Council’s role at this stage is to decide whether significant environmental effects are likely. It should not assume that future reports will automatically resolve issues that have not yet been fully examined.
This proposal would result in major change to an area of valued open land. It raises important questions about biodiversity, landscape impact, recreation, traffic, drainage and the wider cumulative effect on Romiley.
The proposed changes to Tangshutt Fields park also deserve careful consideration. Introducing an access road, increased traffic and large-scale parking infrastructure into a currently open recreational space could fundamentally alter the character and use of the park.
None of this automatically means that a full Environmental Impact Assessment is legally required.
Equally, it does mean that the decision should not be treated as a routine administrative exercise.
Where there is conflicting expert evidence on ancient woodland, recognised ecological value, potential impacts on a valued park, and strong public concern, Stockport Council owes residents a Screening Opinion that is detailed, transparent and independently reasoned.
This is one of the most significant planning proposals Romiley has faced in years.
If the Council concludes that no Environmental Impact Assessment is required, residents deserve to know exactly why — and how every piece of evidence, including the ancient woodland designation by the Greater Manchester Ecology Unitand the wildlife records collected by Friends of Tangshutt volunteers, has been considered before that conclusion is reached.
That decision should be based on evidence, openness and careful scrutiny. Romiley deserves nothing less.
