Local plan scoping consultation

Comment

Representation ID: 2180

Received: 22/08/2026

Respondent: Mrs Rayna Jackson

I am very disappointed that there is no reference here to the need to maintain the BMV agricultural land in Cheshire East. We have a reputation as a farming and rural county, and we have some of the best agricultural land in England. There is a DEFRA strategy that prioritises maintaining BMV land to protect our food security. This is made even more relevant by the climate change effect on land further South.

Comment

Representation ID: 2181

Received: 22/08/2026

Respondent: Mrs Rayna Jackson

Again no mention of the need to maintain BMV agricultural land for reasons of food security

Comment

Representation ID: 2182

Received: 22/08/2026

Respondent: Mrs Rayna Jackson

An offer of a site is the wrong place to start. In Knutsford for example there has already been significant housing development with no medical centre or additional medical staff, no neighbourhood shops and no additional school facilities. There is 1 train an hour to Manchester and limited local bus provision. No transport to the airport. Apparently no demand for the consented mixed use site on Manchester Road.
These infrastructure issues MUST be resolved before more housing development is permitted.

Comment

Representation ID: 2183

Received: 22/08/2026

Respondent: Mrs Rayna Jackson

As far as I can tell Cheshire East, unlike many other Councils, has not produced any listing of brownfield sites. This should be the starting point for new developments, particularly of infrastructure and energy installations. Reactive development from sites offered by landowners benefits the landowners rather than the residents.

Comment

Representation ID: 2184

Received: 22/08/2026

Respondent: Mrs Rayna Jackson

5.11 discusses "filtering sites". As already submitted, this is the wrong approach. Cheshire East must start from what is assessed to be needed where, having consulted with local residents.