People living in a rural Stockport village below the Peak District fear they may have to leave if a daily rush hour 'nightmare' gets worse.

Across Stockport, concerns are mounting as plans move forward that could see more than 8,000 homes built across what is currently classed as green belt. Called a Local Plan, it is a key document produced by councils outlining a vision for their boroughs and a roadmap for development over 15 years.

Stockport council is currently asking for public feedback on plans before a likely submission in the next few months. While town hall bosses believe the plan is legally sound, it is still around 8,000 homes short of the housing targets set by the UK Government.

The government says its approach to housing is aimed at tackling a housing crisis as 'too many people are being priced out of the communities where they want to live and work'. However in High Lane on the edge of the Peak District, fears are growing that a rural village of less than 5,000 people could be changed forever as a result of housing pressure.

Under the draft Local Plan, 1,000 homes could be built to the north and south of the A6 which cuts through the village. A Persimmon Homes planning application is also being considered to the north for over 200 homes off Windlehurst Road.

People living in the village told the LDRS they now feel their 'sleepy' village is 'under siege' from developers. The new homes proposed could see the village grow by around half and the 1,000 homes proposed is the largest single allocation for new greenbelt housing in the local authority's plans.

As part of the process in delivering a Local Plan, councils have to demonstrate housing is deliverable. This means sites must be developable, have the support of whoever owns it, and viable.

Raising concerns about the inability of local infrastructure and services to cope with extra demand, Richard Jones said: "People just feel it's disproportionate.

"The infrastructure isn't there. The services aren't there. People are worried they won't be able to get to the doctors and dentists."

Mr Jones, who is the chair of the High Lane village neighbourhood forum, argues greenbelt developments are unnecessary when places like Stockport town centre are being regenerated and are only the result of an obsession with growth. However previous assessments of land in the borough have suggested greenbelt development is needed to address housing needs.

However one of the overwhelming concerns is the potential increased traffic on the A6. One woman said: "I am a mile from the A6 and the cars were stationary [at rush hour] outside my house. It's just crazy."

The road runs through High Lane down from the Peak District into Hazel Grove, Stockport, and then Manchester. 'Gridlock' traffic along the road is already an issue for many but it is fears things could get much worse.

Mr Jones said the rural nature of their village meant there was little alternative transport to the car, telling the LDRS: "It will become an even more congested black spot. I think a lot of people will leave.

"Those that can afford to leave will leave the village. The elderly people who can't afford to leave will have their lives blighted."

He added: "It's chronic congestion. The rush hour gets longer and longer. It's non-stop from 6am to 9am. It's not just cars. Because of the A555, it's now used by HGVs as a route to Derbyshire.

"The traffic has gone up. The majority of it is HGVs and that causes a lot of pollution and damage to the roads. It's intolerable and to think they are going to have even more congestion.

"It already is a nightmare. It is already one of the black spots of Greater Manchester. I really do not know how it is going to work. It's going to be standing traffic for hours and hours per day.

"The council really shouldn't be putting forward a site of this scale on the crossroads of the A6. It doesn't make sense."

It's not just people in the village raising concerns. Council highways engineers in response to Persimmon Homes' development said further work was needed and 'the current submissions create a level of doubt so great that no formal position can be conveyed at this time'.

Highways officers at Transport for Greater Manchester said the planning application's traffic modelling was 'extremely optimistic compared to existing conditions' and 'clearly incorrect' when it comes to capacity at the A6 and the A555 Manchester Airport relief road junction.

A Persimmon North West spokesperson said they' will listen carefully to local feedback throughout the planning process," adding: "Transport assessments have already been carried out and show that the proposed development can be accommodated safely within the existing network.

"The proposals also include improvements to local walking connections, helping residents access existing facilities and amenities.

"We'll continue to engage constructively with the council and relevant consultees to address any concerns and ensure the development is supported by appropriate infrastructure and delivers benefits for the local community."

In the long term, some hope the long-promised M60 to A6 by-pass might help relieve things. At the moment traffic along the A555 exits into the A6.

Councillor Jake Austin, the cabinet member overseeing the delivery of the Local Plan and a Hazel Grove councillor, said: "It's been a particular bug bear of mine to only have half of the relief road done."

He added: "We can't expect our residents to have one without having the other. If the government is going to require us to build houses, we need to have the infrastructure to support it at the same time."

However any relief road will come with a high price tag which the UK government will need to help pay for and Coun Austin said they needed to foot the bill if the borough has to build more homes. In the short term, the local authority wants to see public transport connections as well as active travel routes improved to tackle congestion through its transport strategy.

A council spokesperson said: "The proposed allocations in the Local Plan are supported by detailed transport evidence, and we continue to work with partners on improvements to the local transport network."

Describing the council's situation as 'between a rock and a hard place', Coun Austin said he and his Liberal Democrat colleagues fully understood people's concerns and supported their opposition.

However he added: "The council is in a position that we need to meet a 32,000 home target. If we don't go through this Local Plan process, if we tell the government bugger off, they will do it for us.

"We know what the position is. We are 8,000 homes away from the target. If the government wants to come in and do this, they will be much more bullish."

Defending the government, Labour councillor David Meller pointed to long waiting lists for social housing, adding: "It's not just a local issue, it's a national issue but at the same time, one of the reasons the council has seen such a high increase and has to build this buffer in the Local Plan is the council hasn't been delivering anywhere near enough homes to meet its figures.

"They delivered well under what they should have been delivering. The lack of delivery over years as the result of various planning impasses the council has had are all coming home to roost. We are where we are."

On the calls for the new relief road, Coun Meller said he was sympathetic to congestion issues but argued the business case for the more than £500m road was not there. Alongside any potential environmental impact in the Goyt Valley, he said the money would be much better spent on public transport.

He said: "It's a colossal amount of money. It might help in the short to medium term but it may very likely get clogged up again."

With pressure mounting on the greenbelt, some campaigners have criticised the Liberal Democrats for the party's decision to withdraw from a wider Greater Manchester development plan in December 2020. With at least twice as many homes set to be built on the greenbelt now, questions are being asked whether it was the right decision.

The Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF) was a region-wide plan being developed by the Greater Manchester Combined Authority which would have seen around 3,060 green belt homes built across the borough. However on December 3 six years ago, Liberal Democrat, Conservative, and other councillors voted to reject it defeating the minority Labour administration at the time.

The reason for this was due to those 3,060 greenbelt homes but officer reports and even then-Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham warned Stockport doing it alone risked the borough needing to find room for a further 5,000 homes. This is because over 25% of the homes Stockport was assessed as needing would have been built elsewhere in the region.

Mr Burnham later pointed to the Stockport withdrawal as a cautionary tale when Oldham requested to do the same, adding: "What we have seen in Stockport is green belt become more vulnerable to developers as they do not have a plan and it's easier for people to access green belt."

In 2020, officers also warned the council could start to lose appeals impacting council finances and the local authority's ability to control developments in a sustainable way. In recent years, the council has lost appeals on decisions to reject extending the Woodford Garden Village as well as homes on Gatley Golf Course and Mirrlees Fields.

In the years following that 2020 decision, the council developed a new Local Plan but a previous version including little greenbelt development had to be scrapped after the new Labour UK government increased housing targets in 2024.

That left the borough back at square one and the UK government has since threatened to intervene if progress isn't made. Campaigners have accused the council of being 'asleep at the wheel while mass overdevelopment is now inevitable'.

The area currently earmarked for 1,000 homes in High Lane under Stockport's draft Local Plan also would have not been at risk of development under those Greater Manchester plans put forward in 2020. The proposal at the time was for 500 homes but reportedly pressure from councillors and then-Hazel Grove MP William Wragg saw the plans dropped.

Areas in Heald Green and Woodford that were proposed for development in 2020 too, rejected by councillors at the time, are now earmarked for homes under the Local Plan the council is now moving forward. However Hazel Grove MP Lisa Smart, who was one of the councillors who rejected the 2020 plan, defended the decision.

She told the LDRS: "The GMSF wasn't good enough and now the Labour government has made it even worse. They've driven a coach and horses through the definition of the green belt and doubled the housing target for Stockport."

However Coun Meller said: "This is the chickens that are coming home to roost. A lot of these sites that the Liberal Democrats have had to put in their Local Plan that they had in the GMSF."

He added: "It would have safeguarded it for a length of time and then going forward we know what is going to come forward. It would have provided certainty for residents and developers over the development and what the numbers were."

Even if the lack of an updated plan has left the borough more vulnerable to developers though, Coun Austin, who was first elected in 2023, also told the LDRS: "You can only go on the information that you have at the time.

"We had no foresight to the planning changes that have happened over the years since then.

"You make decisions based on what you know at that time. I am confident that we made the right decision."

A Ministry for Housing, Communities, and Local Government spokesperson said: "All areas, including Stockport, must play their part in building the homes we need, and we will not hesitate to step if councils fail to put an up-to date local plan in place.

"At the same time, we are strongly safeguarding our green belt, with rules ensuring councils prioritise brownfield and other low-quality grey belt land."