Local plan scoping consultation
Search representations
Results for Steven Gordon search
New search
New search
Local plan scoping consultation
Identifying and assessing sites
Respondent: Steven Gordon
Representation Summary:
I object to the proposed mixed-use allocation in Plumley due to its harmful impact on the village’s rural character, countryside setting, and sustainability. Development on greenfield agricultural land would erode the rural gap between surrounding settlements and contribute to urban sprawl. The local highway network, including access to the A556 and surrounding country lanes, lacks the capacity and infrastructure to safely accommodate significant additional traffic. Existing pressure on schools, healthcare facilities, and local services would be exacerbated. The loss of agricultural land, hedgerows, mature trees, and ecological corridors would harm biodiversity and increase flood risk through greater surface water runoff.
Full text:
Dear Planning Team,
I am writing to formally object to the proposed site allocation for mixed use development and regeneration within the parish of Plumley.
Plumley is a distinct, rural local community set within an agricultural landscape. Large-scale domestic development here represents unsustainable infill and encroachment that conflicts directly with National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) guidelines and Cheshire East Local Plan policies regarding rural protection.
My objection rests on the following material planning grounds:
1. Harm to Green Belt & Landscape Character
Plumley forms a vital rural gap between larger urban settlements such as Knutsford, Northwich, and Alderley Edge. Earmarking greenfield land here undermines the open character of the village landscape and risks incremental urban sprawl. Development on agricultural fields in Plumley directly conflicts with the strategic goal of protecting open countryside and maintaining clear settlement boundaries.
2. Highway Capacity, A556 Access & Country Lane Safety
The local road network in Plumley is unsuited for high-volume residential commuter traffic. Access points onto major routes like the A556 Chester Road already present notable safety and capacity challenges. Furthermore, minor routes (such as Plumley Moor Road, Back Lane, and Trouthall Lane) are narrow, predominantly unlit, and lack continuous footpaths. Substantial domestic development will create dangerous vehicle movements, worsening rural road safety for pedestrians, cyclists, and horse riders.
3. Infrastructure Capacity & School/GP Constraints
Plumley relies heavily on surrounding service centres (Knutsford and Northwich) for core healthcare and secondary education. Local primary facilities and regional GP surgeries are currently operating at or near maximum capacity. Adding housing without substantial, upfront infrastructure expansion will overload social services for both current and new residents.
4. Loss of Agricultural Greenfield & Ecological Corridors
The fields around Plumley consist of high-grade agricultural land and vital habitats, including established hedgerows, mature trees, and natural drainage routes. Developing these greenfield spaces will degrade biodiversity corridors, disrupt wildlife, and replace natural drainage with impermeable surfaces, increasing surface water runoff and localised flood risk across surrounding fields.
Conclusion
Plumley is a semi-rural village whose landscape and infrastructure cannot sustain substantial domestic expansion. I strongly urge Cheshire East Council to safeguard Plumley’s countryside by removing this allocation from the plan and focusing housing targets on brownfield sites in urban hubs with established infrastructure capacity.
For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our
help guide.