Local plan scoping consultation

I am writing to make a formal response to the New Local Plan Scoping Consultation. I am particularly concerned about the implications of the proposed approach to growth, site selection and Green Belt land for the rural setting and settlement identity of Prestbury, including the land around Alderley Road, SK10 4RH.

I recognise that the Council must plan for housing and employment needs. However, the new Local Plan should not treat the Government's housing requirement as justification for releasing environmentally sensitive Green Belt land where development would cause significant and irreversible harm. The Council's own scoping document states that site selection must take account of infrastructure capacity, environmental constraints, landscape, ecology, heritage, flood risk, agricultural land, Green Belt and the availability of brownfield and urban land. I strongly support that approach and ask that it is applied rigorously and transparently.

1. Green Belt should be protected from inappropriate release

The Council's scoping document acknowledges that Green Belt boundaries should only be altered where the relevant exceptional circumstances exist, and that the Council should consider development outside the Green Belt first, maximise brownfield and underused land, and assess whether exceptional circumstances justify any Green Belt boundary changes.

This principle should be applied particularly rigorously around Prestbury.

The countryside around Prestbury performs an important Green Belt function in preventing the outward expansion of Macclesfield and maintaining separation between settlements. Development on Green Belt land south of Alderley Road would risk progressively eroding that separation and extending built development into an open rural corridor.

The Council should therefore ensure that its land availability methodology does not treat Green Belt land as a convenient reserve simply because it is capable of accommodating housing. Sites which make a substantial contribution to preventing urban sprawl, maintaining settlement separation or safeguarding the countryside should be identified and filtered out at an early stage.

The new Local Plan should also make clear that a site's potential classification as "grey belt" cannot be treated as an automatic justification for development. Each site's actual contribution to the Green Belt purposes must be properly assessed.

2. Preventing coalescence and protecting the identity of Prestbury

Prestbury is identified in the current settlement hierarchy as a Local Service Centre, while Macclesfield is a Principal Town. The Council's own consultation document recognises that Cheshire East contains settlements with very different character, function and form, and that the settlement hierarchy will inform the spatial distribution of development and the allocation of sites.

That distinction is important.

The open land surrounding Prestbury is not simply undeveloped land awaiting development. It contributes directly to the distinct identity and physical separation of Prestbury from the expanding urban area of Macclesfield.

Development along the Alderley Road corridor, particularly when considered cumulatively with other potential development sites, risks creating a progressively more continuous built-up area and weakening the strategic gap between Prestbury and Macclesfield.

The new Local Plan should therefore adopt a clear objective of preventing settlement coalescence and preserving the distinct identity of Prestbury. The cumulative effect of multiple small and medium-sized sites must be assessed, rather than assessing each site in isolation.

3. Historic environment and landscape setting

The land around Alderley Road forms part of the rural approach and setting to Prestbury and contributes to the character of the surrounding historic landscape.

The Council's scoping document correctly identifies heritage, landscape character, nature and ecology as matters which must influence the spatial distribution of development.

This should include proper consideration of the setting of designated heritage assets in and around Prestbury, including listed buildings and the wider historic character of the village and its approaches.

The historic environment cannot be adequately protected simply by retaining individual buildings or providing landscaping around new housing. The relationship between historic buildings, open agricultural land and the surrounding landscape is itself an important part of their setting.

I therefore ask that the new Local Plan's site assessment methodology gives substantial weight to the landscape and heritage consequences of development in the rural setting of Prestbury.

4. The Alderley Road / Prestbury corridor should not become a development corridor

I am particularly concerned about the cumulative consequences of residential development in the fields around Alderley Road and the wider corridor towards Macclesfield.

A series of individually modest developments can have a much greater strategic effect than any single application suggests. The Council's methodology should therefore assess cumulative development, including:

loss of open countryside;
erosion of the physical separation between Macclesfield and Prestbury;
increased ribbon development;
changes to the rural approach to Prestbury;
pressure on local roads and junctions;
landscape and heritage impacts; and
the cumulative effect of multiple sites on the character of the settlement.

The existence of a housing requirement should not result in these cumulative effects being overlooked.

5. Development should be directed towards the most sustainable locations

The Council's proposed spatial strategy appropriately recognises that the distribution of development should take account of infrastructure capacity, services and facilities, jobs, commuting patterns, sustainable transport, landscape, heritage, ecology, flood risk and the availability of brownfield and urban land.

I strongly support this evidence-led approach.

However, it needs to result in development being directed towards locations where it can genuinely be accommodated sustainably, rather than simply towards areas where land is available.

Macclesfield is identified as a Principal Town and has substantially greater services, employment opportunities, public transport and existing infrastructure than peripheral rural locations.

The Local Plan should therefore prioritise regeneration, brownfield land, appropriate urban development and sustainable locations before considering the release of sensitive Green Belt countryside around smaller settlements.

Prestbury should not be expected to absorb disproportionate growth simply because development pressure exists on land around the settlement.

6. Infrastructure capacity must be demonstrated, not assumed

The Council's scoping document identifies infrastructure capacity as one of the factors which must influence the distribution of development and confirms that further highways and infrastructure evidence is being prepared.

This is particularly important in assessing sites around Prestbury.

Any future allocation in this area should be dependent upon robust evidence demonstrating that the local highway network, junctions, pedestrian infrastructure, public transport, drainage, schools, healthcare and other community infrastructure can accommodate the cumulative additional demand.

It should not be assumed that infrastructure can simply be upgraded retrospectively once development has been permitted.

7. The site-selection methodology must be genuinely exclusionary

I welcome the Council's proposal to develop a land availability assessment methodology which will include an approach to filtering sites that are obviously unsuitable for development.

I ask that this methodology is sufficiently robust to exclude sites where fundamental constraints exist, rather than allowing sites with significant conflicts to proceed simply for further consideration because of housing numbers.

The methodology should explicitly give strong weight to:

Green Belt purposes;
settlement separation and coalescence;
landscape character;
designated and non-designated heritage assets and their settings;
agricultural land;
biodiversity and ecological value;
highway and infrastructure capacity;
flood risk and drainage;
sustainable transport accessibility;
cumulative development impacts; and
the availability of more sustainable brownfield and urban alternatives.

The assessment should also be transparent, with the evidence and scoring for individual sites published so that residents can properly scrutinise the Council's conclusions.

Conclusion

I support the preparation of a new Local Plan which provides genuinely needed housing and employment in appropriate locations. However, the Plan must not become a mechanism for progressively eroding the Green Belt and rural setting of Prestbury simply to meet numerical development targets.

The land around Alderley Road, SK10 4RH and the wider Prestbury/Macclesfield interface demonstrates why the Council needs a robust spatial strategy and a rigorous site-selection methodology from the outset.

I therefore ask Cheshire East Council to ensure that the new Local Plan:

Prioritises brownfield, previously developed and sustainable urban land before Green Belt release;
Applies the Green Belt purposes rigorously when assessing potential sites;
Protects the separation and distinct identity of Prestbury and Macclesfield;
Assesses the cumulative effect of development along the Alderley Road corridor rather than considering sites in isolation;
Gives proper weight to landscape, heritage, ecological and agricultural constraints;
Requires demonstrable infrastructure and highway capacity before identifying development locations; and
Publishes a transparent site-selection methodology capable of filtering out fundamentally unsuitable sites at an early stage.

The Council should ensure that the significant housing requirement facing Cheshire East is met through a genuinely sustainable spatial strategy rather than by allowing the gradual erosion of sensitive Green Belt countryside around established settlements.

I respectfully ask that these matters are recorded as part of the formal consultation response and taken into account in developing the new Local Plan.

Sincerely,

Scott Marriott