Local plan scoping consultation

To whom it may concern,

I am a resident of the Greenside estate and I am extremely concerned regarding the new proposed site development. The current areas of Greenside and Whirley Road are already overloaded with parked cars and traffic due to the new build housing estate on Chester Road. There are not enough primary school places for local children, let alone hundreds more when new houses are built and I do not want our little Whirley school to become overloaded and lose its small village charm it currently has. We as locals want the green belt to stay green for mental health and wellbeing, as well as preserving habitats for our local wildlife. I have seen endangered species in the surrounding areas whose habitats could be destroyed to make way for unnecessary new homes. Please preserve our green belt, build houses elsewhere, and keep our greenside area green as its name implies. In the scope of the Local Plan, I would like the following matters to be included, reflecting my experiences and concerns.

Green Belt and countryside
The Green Belt boundary around this part of Macclesfield follows Whirley Road and Birtles Road, and the fields beyond help contain the town and prevent spread into the countryside. The government’s grey-belt guidance indicates that open land can still contribute to preventing sprawl where development would create an extended “finger” into the Green Belt. This is a real concern for several sites around Birtles Road, Whirley Road and Sandy Lane. The council should follow a clear order when identifying land: prioritise brownfield and underused urban land, test higher urban densities and existing safeguarded land, and only then consider Green Belt release. If Green Belt land is needed, national policy says previously developed land should come first, followed by grey belt and then other Green Belt land. Previous council assessments found that Green Belt parcels in this area significantly contributed to preventing the unrestricted sprawl of Macclesfield. If the council now reaches a different view, it should explain what has changed.

Roads and access
Birtles Road, Whirley Road and Sandy Lane are narrow country roads with constrained sections, limited passing space and no continuous pavement. They are already used by walkers, cyclists, horse riders and agricultural vehicles as well as cars. The Weaver Green development is particularly relevant; Cheshire East required its vehicle access to be from Chelford Road and explicitly prohibited access onto Whirley Road “in the interests of highway safety” under planning permission 17/4277M. That decision does not automatically rule out future development, but it demonstrates that safety problems on Whirley Road have been recognised. If it is now believed that these roads can support more large housing sites, clear evidence should be provided explaining why. The council should assess all proposed sites around Greenside together, as considering each site separately could underestimate the combined traffic on Whirley Road, Birtles Road, Sandy Lane, Chelford Road and Broken Cross. Safe access, pavements, cycle routes and any necessary road widening should be shown to be genuinely possible before land is allocated, rather than left to be resolved later.

Infrastructure
Housing should only be planned where schools, doctors, drainage, public transport, utilities and roads can cope. The council should state what extra infrastructure each growth option would require, what it would cost, who would pay for it, and when it would be delivered. It should also consider whether road improvements would involve removal of hedgerows, trees and verges or would alter the rural character of the area.

Please take these points into account when defining the scope of the new Local Plan and preparing the next consultation stage. I would also welcome a clear account of how consultation responses have influenced the plan.

Yours faithfully,
Charlotte Pritchard