Local plan scoping consultation

Dear planners,
I am writing to comment on the latest local plan for Cheshire East. I feel exceeding strongly that our Green Belt must be retained, and am very disappointed that building on Green Belt is being considered in the region, generally, and specifically around Macclesfield.
The Green Belt must be retained for the following reasons.
1) The Green Belt is all that separates communities from each other. It is clear that without this protection, development will spread out from Stockport/Manchester, via Adlington, Wilmslow resulting in one continuous conurbation. Recent proposals for the Adlington new town being one example, albeit temporarily parked.
2) The Green Belt is an important buffer providing a visual, physical and mental transition between the built environment and open countryside. Removal of this would significantly affect the feel of Macclesfield as a distinct community and take away a portion of what makes the town an attractive place to live in or visit.
Buffers, natural or otherwise are vitally important to avoid urban sprawl of identikit development as far as the eye can see. This side of Macclesfield has recently seen a huge amount of development on the old Kings School site, which has only been restricted by the fortunate placing of the Macclesfield canal.
3) Green Belt provides a vitally important wildlife corridor, enabling mixing of local animal / bird / plant populations. In our area of east Macclesfield badgers, birds of prey, hares etc are regular visitors, and amphibians traverse the fields behind Leadbeaters Reservoir (as exemplified by the “toads crossing” signs).
4) particularly on the hilly, eastern portion of Macclesfield Green Belt, the lack of “concreting over” enables the land to absorb extreme rain, without flooding occurring. Our climate is changing to a more chaotic, higher energy, one, with flash flooding becoming more frequent across the country.
Development on the particular area between Buxton Road and Blakelow Road has regularly been proposed, and refused for a variety of reasons, including the steep access required, lack of public transport and environmental damage. None of these reasons have changed in any way.

I do understand that more housing is required, particularly genuinely affordable housing, but believe that other approaches such as brownfield or town centre regeneration must be considered instead. Once the Green Belt is lost it is gone forever.
Yours
Barry Hayter