Full text:
Dear Cheshire East Council Planning and Strategic Planning Team,
Re: Cheshire East New Local Plan – Formal representation concerning proposed mixed-use, employment, regeneration and other development within Little Bollington
I am writing on behalf of the Little Bollington community to object formally to the identification or allocation of inappropriate sites within the Little Bollington Neighbourhood Plan Area through the emerging Cheshire East Local Plan.
Our objection concerns proposals for employment, mixed-use, retail, leisure, tourism, roadside and car-park uses, and associated infrastructure. We recognise the importance of appropriate rural enterprise and local employment. However, development is not automatically suitable in a Green Belt location. The relevant question is whether the scale, nature and effects of each proposal are compatible with Little Bollington’s landscape, settlement character, infrastructure and adopted planning framework.
Executive summary
The Council should not allocate sites in Little Bollington where development would:
1. Constitute inappropriate development in the Green Belt or harm the Open Countryside.
2. Urbanise the rural setting and undermine the character of the village.
3. Generate unacceptable traffic, parking, servicing, noise, lighting or access impacts.
4. Increase flood risk or place additional pressure on drainage and attenuation infrastructure.
5. Cause cumulative harm when considered alongside other proposed sites and uses.
6. Set a precedent for further commercial encroachment into the Green Belt.
7. Duplicate uses that could be accommodated on brownfield land, existing employment sites or in more sustainable locations.
The Council should prioritise the re-use of existing buildings, small-scale rural enterprise and development genuinely dependent upon a rural location.
1. Planning context and Green Belt protection
Little Bollington is a small rural settlement entirely within the Green Belt. Its surrounding countryside provides its landscape setting, agricultural land, ecological value, important views and separation from neighbouring settlements.
Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy Policy PG3 protects the Green Belt, including its purposes of preventing unrestricted sprawl, safeguarding the countryside from encroachment and maintaining settlement separation. Policy PG6 provides further protection to the Open Countryside and rural gaps.
These policies are reinforced by the made Little Bollington Neighbourhood Plan and its Design Guide, which form part of the statutory development plan.
The Council’s Call for Sites evidence identifies land promoted for employment, retail, leisure, tourism and recreation uses. In particular, CFS493 at Spode Green Farm, approximately 12.25 hectares, includes employment and roadside/car-park uses, while CFS529, approximately 1.52 hectares, includes employment, retail, leisure/tourism and sport/recreation uses.
These proposals represent potentially significant commercial development in a small rural Green Belt settlement. They must therefore be assessed against Green Belt and countryside policies, rather than being treated as inherently preferable because they are not residential.
1. Prioritised objection: scale, landscape and village character
The principal objection is that substantial employment or mixed-use development would urbanise the countryside and harm Little Bollington’s distinctive character.
Commercial development can introduce large buildings, extensive hardstanding, parking, access roads, lighting, signage, fencing, plant, servicing areas, noise and extended operating hours. These effects may be comparable to, or greater than, those associated with residential development.
The Little Bollington Design Guide emphasises the importance of landscape character, field patterns, hedgerows, views, rural lanes and settlement form. Policy SE4 requires landscape character and quality to be conserved and, where possible, enhanced.
The Council should therefore assess the maximum realistic development and operational envelope of each proposal, including buildings, parking, servicing, lighting, signage and future expansion. Indicative layouts and proposed planting should not be relied upon to justify development which is fundamentally inappropriate in location or scale.
The Council should also assess effects on historic buildings, heritage assets, historic field patterns and key views. Large-scale commercial development risks introducing an incompatible urban form into a village whose character depends on the relationship between its historic buildings and surrounding agricultural landscape.
1. Traffic, access and sustainability
Employment, leisure, tourism, retail and roadside uses may generate substantial traffic, including employee, visitor, delivery, servicing and potentially HGV movements. The Council must consider peak-period, evening and weekend activity, parking demand, queuing, access safety, visibility, pedestrian and cycle safety, and the limited availability of public transport.
Little Bollington’s rural road network is not designed to accommodate significant commercial traffic. Robust, site-specific evidence of trip generation and highway capacity is therefore essential.
Economic benefit does not, by itself, establish a sustainable location. The Council should assess whether employees, customers and visitors could realistically access each site by walking, cycling or public transport. Where most journeys would be car-based, the resulting carbon emissions, congestion and environmental effects must be fully recognised.
1. Flood risk, drainage and infrastructure capacity
Existing and historic flood risk, together with the capacity and performance of drainage infrastructure, must form a central part of the evidence base.
There is documented evidence within the parish of repeated flooding affecting residential property and surrounding land, alongside ongoing concerns and investigations regarding drainage and attenuation infrastructure associated with the A556.
Before any land within the affected catchment is considered for allocation, the Council should assess:
* historic flooding and recorded flood events;
* existing surface-water flows and exceedance routes;
* the capacity and condition of drainage infrastructure;
* the performance and capacity of attenuation systems;
* the relationship between A556 drainage infrastructure and surrounding land;
* the cumulative effect of additional impermeable surfaces and development; and
* climate-change allowances and increased rainfall intensity.
Development must not increase flood risk to existing properties or divert surface water towards homes, roads, agricultural land or other vulnerable locations. The Council should not rely solely on mitigation proposed at application stage. It must demonstrate, through robust site-specific and cumulative evidence, that sufficient drainage and attenuation capacity exists without worsening existing conditions.
No site within an affected catchment should be allocated unless the Council can demonstrate that existing properties and infrastructure would not be placed at greater risk.
1. Cumulative environmental and infrastructure impacts
The Council must assess the combined effect of all proposed development in and around Little Bollington, including employment, retail, leisure, tourism, recreation, roadside and car-park uses.
The cumulative assessment should address:
* traffic, parking and servicing;
* landscape and visual character;
* noise, lighting and activity;
* biodiversity, trees, hedgerows and ecological connectivity;
* agricultural land;
* heritage assets and rural character;
* surface-water drainage and flood risk;
* infrastructure capacity; and
* the potential for future expansion.
The combined effect of separate sites may be substantially greater than the effect of each proposal considered in isolation. The Council must also consider the precedent effect. Once substantial commercial development is established in the Green Belt, it may create pressure for further incremental encroachment and weaken the settlement boundary and countryside protection.
1. Appropriate rural economic development
This representation is not opposed to local businesses, agriculture, tourism or rural enterprise. The issue is the scale, location and character of the proposed development.
The Council should prioritise:
* re-use of existing buildings;
* small-scale rural enterprise;
* agricultural diversification;
* tourism linked to the rural character of the area; and
* development genuinely dependent upon a rural location.
Uses that could reasonably be accommodated on brownfield land, within existing employment areas, in town centres or in more sustainable locations should not be directed to Green Belt countryside without clear justification.
Request to Cheshire East Council
We respectfully request that the Council:
1. Reject employment, mixed-use, retail, leisure, tourism, roadside and car-park sites that constitute inappropriate Green Belt development or harm the Open Countryside.
2. Give full weight to the Little Bollington Neighbourhood Plan and Design Guide.
3. Require robust site-specific assessment of landscape, visual, heritage, biodiversity, agricultural land, highway, drainage, flood-risk and infrastructure impacts.
4. Assess the full operational effects of each proposal, including traffic, parking, servicing, lighting, noise and operating hours.
5. Assess all proposals cumulatively, including their combined effects on drainage, attenuation capacity and flood risk.
6. Prioritise the re-use of existing buildings and genuinely rural-scale development.
7. Demonstrate why proposed uses cannot be accommodated on brownfield land, existing employment sites or in more sustainable locations.
8. Ensure that economic benefits are not given disproportionate weight over permanent environmental harm or increased flood risk.
9. Avoid allocating sites that would establish a precedent for further Green Belt encroachment.
10. Do not allocate any site within an affected catchment unless robust evidence demonstrates that existing properties, roads, agricultural land and infrastructure would not be placed at greater risk of flooding.
Conclusion
Little Bollington supports a sustainable rural economy, but this does not justify substantial commercial development in the Green Belt.
The village’s character and setting depend on the surrounding countryside, which is protected by Green Belt policy, Open Countryside policy and the adopted Neighbourhood Plan. The Call for Sites proposals at Spode Green Farm illustrate the potential scale and range of commercial development that could fundamentally alter this rural context.
The existing and historic flood-risk position is an additional material consideration. Repeated flooding, concerns regarding surface-water flows and investigations into drainage and attenuation infrastructure associated with the A556 demonstrate the need for a comprehensive evidence base before any further land within the affected catchment is considered for development.
We therefore request that Cheshire East Council distinguish clearly between appropriate rural economic activity and development that would urbanise the countryside, and that it does not allocate inappropriate commercial or mixed-use sites within the Little Bollington Neighbourhood Plan Area.
Please record this representation against all relevant site submissions and consult the community on any future progression of these proposals.
Yours faithfully,
Dr Chris Craig
On behalf of the Little Bollington community
