Local plan scoping consultation

Dear Sirs,
Objection to Cheshire East Council Local Plan
I am a resident of Oak Lane, Kerridge, which lies within a Conservation Area and is valued by residents and visitors alike for its historic character, countryside setting and recreational opportunities. I strongly object to the proposed scale and location of development because it is not supported by the infrastructure required to make it sustainable and would cause unacceptable harm to the local environment and community.
My primary concern is that existing infrastructure is already operating beyond capacity. Additional housing should not be approved without clear, funded plans to improve roads, public transport, healthcare, education, utilities and other essential services. In particular:
• Macclesfield District General Hospital is already under significant pressure, with long waiting times and limited parking.
• Local GP services are struggling to meet existing demand, and recruiting sufficient GPs and nurses remains a national challenge.
• Local schools already face capacity pressures.
• Public transport is limited, with infrequent bus services, encouraging greater dependence on private cars.
• Electric vehicle charging infrastructure is inadequate, with only two slow public charging points in Bollington, while many homes in Kerridge and surrounding areas have no off-road parking to enable home charging.
The proposed developments would inevitably increase traffic, congestion, parking problems and pollution in communities that are already under strain.
The proposals would also cause significant environmental harm. Kerridge lies on the edge of the Peak District National Park, and the countryside surrounding our communities provides important habitat for wildlife as well as valued open space for residents. Large-scale development across greenfield land risks creating urban sprawl that progressively merges Macclesfield, Adlington, Poynton and neighbouring settlements, eroding the distinct identity of each community.
The loss and fragmentation of green spaces would also reduce wildlife corridors linking habitats to the Peak District National Park, making it more difficult for species to move across the landscape. Building adjacent to Conservation Areas such as Kerridge and Bollington would undermine the very character these designations are intended to protect.
I am also concerned about the permanent loss of productive agricultural land. Once farmland is developed it cannot easily be replaced. Protecting agricultural land is increasingly important for food security, local employment, biodiversity and reducing the carbon emissions associated with importing food from overseas.
While I recognise that additional housing is needed, it should be delivered in a genuinely sustainable way. Priority should be given to:
• redevelopment of brownfield sites before any greenfield land is considered;
• regeneration of town centres such as Macclesfield, where investment would benefit existing communities;
• higher-density development that makes more efficient use of land; and
• a greater proportion of genuinely affordable and social rented homes that meet identified local need, rather than predominantly market housing.
In my view, development should not proceed simply because greenfield sites are easier and cheaper for developers to build on. The long-term environmental and social costs are borne by local communities, while the benefits are largely private.
For these reasons, I believe the proposed allocations are neither sustainable nor justified. Cheshire East Council should prioritise brownfield regeneration, infrastructure investment and the protection of the Green Belt, agricultural land and Conservation Areas before allocating further greenfield sites for development.
Yours faithfully,
Simon Somerville