Local plan scoping consultation

Regarding the current local plan, it was a sound plan and as I understand Cheshire East were on target to deliver as planned but the current government in a power grab for Westminster have invalidated any local decision making (devolution) by significantly increasing targets and invalidating the current plan.
Considering the effort and expense it took to generate the current plan can CEC challenge the government on these unachievable and unsustainable increased targets and ask them to provide clear evidence based justification.
Separately what guarantees are in place the government won't simply invalidate the new plan?

This section should place significantly greater emphasis on biodiversity, nature recovery and the protection and enhancement of the natural environment, rather than focusing primarily on climate change mitigation.

As set out in the Land Use Framework for England (DEFRA 2026), a thriving natural environment and resilience to a changing climate are fundamental to the health of our economy, communities and places. Biodiversity should therefore be recognised as a core consideration, with the protection, restoration and enhancement of nature embedded throughout the process.

Cheshire East must have due regard to the Cheshire and Warrington Local Nature Recovery Strategy (LNRS) throughout. This should include careful consideration of the LNRS priorities, mapped areas and proposed measures, with the Local Plan actively supporting opportunities for habitat creation, restoration, connectivity and the recovery of priority species and habitats.

This obligation reflects the strengthened biodiversity duty under Section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006, as amended by the Environment Act 2021, alongside the strengthened emphasis on biodiversity and nature recovery within the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF 2026). The Local Plan should therefore demonstrate how development will contribute to biodiversity recovery, ecological resilience and the creation of a coherent and connected nature recovery network, rather than simply seeking to mitigate harm to existing habitats.

Similarly, in responding to the effects of climate change, the Council should safeguard and enhance the natural environment, recognising the important role that healthy ecosystems, habitats, soils, trees, wetlands and green infrastructure play in climate adaptation, carbon storage, flood management and wider environmental resilience. Climate action and biodiversity recovery should be considered together, ensuring that measures to address climate change deliver positive outcomes for nature.

CEC must challenge the government method for defining housing need, the massive increase in requirement that has been forced onto this area is both unnecessary and unachievable, CEC must ask for clear and transparent detail on how this has been calculated with the evidence used to facilitate this challenge.

CEC must challenge the government method for defining housing need, the massive increase in requirement that has been forced onto this area is both unnecessary and unachievable, CEC must ask for clear and transparent detail on how this has been calculated with the evidence used to facilitate this challenge. The reliance on the “standard method” for housing requirements is also overly simplistic and focused on private-market provision. Given the current Government’s increased emphasis on social housing, it is unlikely to provide a realistic basis for determining Cheshire East’s housing needs.

Environmental protection should be a central principle of the new Local Plan, not a secondary consideration. Environmental assets including habitats, soils, water systems, biodiversity, climate resilience, noise and pollution should help determine where development is appropriate, rather than being subordinated to unconstrained economic growth.

The carrying capacity of the land should also be key. As an example where sites are already experiencing water shortage and/or rely regularly on ground water extraction this should be a key determining factor on whether it is possible to develop further housing.

The reliance on the “standard method” for housing requirements is overly simplistic and focused on private-market provision. Given the current Government’s increased emphasis on social housing, it is not going to provide a realistic basis for determining Cheshire East’s housing needs.
This must be challenged, in terms of devolution it is completely the opposite where central government is imposing its will over local decision making.

A key purpose of the Green Belt is to prevent the encroachment of development into the countryside. Countryside also plays a vital role in maintaining ecological connectivity and biodiversity, linking habitats and supporting the movement of wildlife between ecologically important areas. Where land performs this function, it should be recognised for its environmental value and should not be classified as “Grey Belt”, as doing so could undermine habitat connectivity and wider nature recovery objectives.

Brownfield sites can contain significant ecological value, supporting important habitat types containing both declining and rare species, particularly where they have remained undeveloped for several years. Such sites should not be redeveloped without a comprehensive ecological assessment and robust cost-benefit analysis, including a Natural Capital assessment aligned with HM Treasury’s Green Book and ENCA guidance. Development should prioritise the regeneration of existing urban areas and only suburban locations where ecological value is demonstrably low. This approach would support regeneration while protecting biodiversity and nature recovery.

Economic growth cannot be sustained without a healthy natural environment and a stable climate. The Cheshire and Warrington Combined Authority (CWCA) places a strong emphasis on economic growth, with very limited consideration of biodiversity, environmental protection or climate resilience in its public information. Its commitment to preparing a Spatial Development Strategy (SDS) under the Planning and Infrastructure Act 2026 should explicitly recognise the nature and climate crises. The SDS should ensure that environmental limits, biodiversity recovery and climate resilience are fundamental to planning decisions and long-term economic prosperity.

Additional Supplementary Plans are required for:

Peatland preservation and recovery
Biodiversity recovery
Ecological connectivity
Natural Capital accounting for all new developments

This assessment should emphasise key steps that are required to achieve biodiversity recovery, protection of irreplaceable habitats and ecological connectivity