Local plan scoping consultation

Comment

Representation ID: 1572

Received: 14/08/2026

Respondent: Barry Speed

It is not clear from this Plan what the environmental assessment really comprises. For example it is known that developers routinely split their applications into smaller chunks in order to avoid 'onerous' assessments. This area of the Plan needs to be expanded and clarified.

Comment

Representation ID: 1577

Received: 14/08/2026

Respondent: Barry Speed

I would not generalise with the words 'strong transport connections'. For example, Congleton has no rail links in the evenings or on Sundays, and there is highly infrequent bus connectivity between the towns. Rural areas have almost no public transport provision at all. We can see the horrendous impact on residents, with many families, even in terraced houses with no parking, forced to maintain two cars in order to get to work, school, shops and services.
Future generations will look back on this period as 'carmaggedon'

Comment

Representation ID: 1580

Received: 14/08/2026

Respondent: Barry Speed

We have a basic problem, that national plans seldom last longer than a parliamentary term. There should at least be a recognition that local plans may have to be revised after each new parliamentary election. However, there have to be some fundamental principles that should endure in the long term - for example priority to the natural environment, mitigation and adaptation to the climate and ecological crises, and a preservation of citizen's wellbeing.

Comment

Representation ID: 1581

Received: 14/08/2026

Respondent: Barry Speed

Perhaps this vison statement should come first in the Plan. I would include at least the following:
Preservation of an acceptable level of citizen wellbeing
Preservation and improvement of the natural environment
Actions to mitigate against and adapt to the climate and ecological crises

Comment

Representation ID: 1583

Received: 14/08/2026

Respondent: Barry Speed

As mentioned previously, the local Plan gives an opportunity to reject the presumption of unlimited perpetual economic growth.
Instead the Council should take a leadership role in establishing a measure of citizen wellbeing, with an adopted minimum standard. There are plenty of existing frameworks that can be followed, including the long-established UN framework for sustainable development.
Access to truly affordable housing has clearly to figure highly in any such measure.

Comment

Representation ID: 1586

Received: 14/08/2026

Respondent: Barry Speed

This call for sites did not appear to include any incentive to submit brownfield sites, for example empty properties or derelict buildings. The result appears to be a rush to include as many greenfield infills as possible, with further suburban sprawl, leading to traffic increase, reduction of access to the natural environment, and an overall reduction in our natural capital.
The method of site assessment does not appear to be included in the plan. The assessment methodology should surely be an important part of the Plan.

Comment

Representation ID: 1590

Received: 14/08/2026

Respondent: Barry Speed

An emphasis on brownfield sites is welcomed. However, the recent call for sites appears to give no incentive for such sites to be put forward. We need a comprehensive survey of underutilised, derelict and empty sites (including individual houses), to create a borough-wide register, and this should be included within the remit of the current consultation.
In addition the definition of grey belt appears incredibly vague. We need such areas defined and mapped, and included in this consultation.

Comment

Representation ID: 1593

Received: 14/08/2026

Respondent: Barry Speed

Housing development must be assessed in conjunction with local infrastructure provision. Where necessary the developers and land owners must include plans for local accessible infrastructure, services and connectivity.

Comment

Representation ID: 1596

Received: 14/08/2026

Respondent: Barry Speed

We need to see this Housing Needs Assessment within the timescale and scope of the current consultation

Comment

Representation ID: 1599

Received: 14/08/2026

Respondent: Barry Speed

We need a proper definition of 'affordable'. The current definitions of 10 or 20% below the average for the site, is not affordable for the majority of the population. In addition we see developers putting up unsustainable incentives to make new-builds affordable, eg variations of shared ownership schemes.
Any affordable housing policy must also include the rented sector, to ensure that rents are also truly affordable. To back this up, would also need stronger regulation over multiple property and empty property ownership.
Incentives for down-sizing could also be considered.