Local plan scoping consultation

National planning policy provides an important framework, but the Local Plan should reflect the distinctive characteristics of Cheshire East. Local evidence, community priorities and environmental constraints should shape decisions alongside national policy to ensure development is appropriate for each area.

The Strategic Environmental Assessment should be a meaningful part of decision-making rather than a procedural exercise. It should fully assess cumulative impacts on biodiversity, landscape, climate resilience, agricultural land, flood risk and the wellbeing of local communities before development sites are allocated.

The baseline provides a useful overview of Cheshire East and should form the foundation of the Local Plan. It is important that decisions are based on up-to-date evidence and recognise not only growth pressures but also the environmental, social and economic qualities that make different parts of the borough distinct.

Cheshire East's geography is one of its greatest strengths, combining thriving towns, villages, countryside and strategic transport links. The Local Plan should recognise that different settlements have different capacities for growth, and future development should reflect local character, environmental constraints and infrastructure rather than applying a one-size-fits-all approach.

Good connectivity is essential, but increased development should not be assumed to improve it. The Local Plan should recognise existing pressures on the road network and public transport and ensure infrastructure is delivered alongside growth. Sustainable transport, walking and cycling should be encouraged where practical, while recognising that many rural communities remain reliant on cars.

Dear Sir or Madam,
Re: Cheshire East New Local Plan Scoping Consultation
Please accept this email as my formal response to the New Local Plan Scoping Consultation and confirm that it will be recorded as a consultation representation.
I recognise that Cheshire East must plan for significantly increased housing requirements and that national planning policy has changed. My concern is that the resulting pressure to identify land must not allow housing numbers to override the fundamental purpose of good planning: putting development in the right places and creating sustainable communities.
Green belt and site selection
The increased housing requirement should not automatically result in Green Belt release. Where Green Belt is considered, the Council should rigorously assess how that land performs its strategic functions and whether development would contribute to urban sprawl, loss of settlement separation, erosion of landscape setting or encroachment into open countryside.
Brownfield and underused land should be maximised first, and any Green Belt release should be demonstrably necessary and based on transparent, published evidence.
This is particularly important following the introduction of "grey belt". Land should not effectively become grey belt simply because it is attractive or convenient to develop. Its actual Green Belt function must be properly assessed.
Bollington and HE61 – Sych Farm, Ledley Street
Bollington is a particularly good example of why a settlement-specific approach is necessary. It is a distinct town surrounded by Green Belt, with the surrounding countryside forming an important part of its setting and separation from Macclesfield and Tytherington.
I note that HE61, Sych Farm, Ledley Street, Bollington, comprising approximately 18.66 hectares, has been submitted through the Call for Sites for housing.
Previous Green Belt assessment work commissioned by Cheshire East found that land in this area made a significant contribution to Green Belt purposes, recognising its open farmland character and role within the countryside surrounding Bollington.
That existing evidence should form an important starting point for any reassessment. If the Council subsequently reaches a different conclusion about the function or importance of this land, the evidence and reasoning supporting that change should be clearly published.
The cumulative effect of development around Bollington must also be considered. Individual sites may appear manageable when assessed separately, but collectively they could fundamentally alter the scale, character and landscape setting of the town.
Infrastructure and sustainable locations
Infrastructure capacity should be a determining factor in where new housing is allocated, rather than something addressed after sites have been chosen.
The Council should demonstrate that roads, schools, healthcare, drainage, utilities and public transport can accommodate the cumulative level of development proposed for each settlement, with necessary improvements realistically deliverable alongside housing.
National planning policy increasingly emphasises development in sustainable, well-connected locations. That principle should work both ways. Settlements without strong rail or mass-transit connections should not absorb disproportionate growth where doing so would significantly increase car dependency.
Landscape, countryside and agricultural land
The assessment of potential sites should properly value what would be lost as well as what development would provide.
Open countryside is not simply unused development land. It contributes to landscape character, biodiversity, food production, flood management, climate resilience, recreation and wellbeing. Productive agricultural land and important landscapes should therefore be treated as assets when assessing alternative locations for growth.
A genuinely spatial strategy
The Call for Sites should inform the Local Plan, not determine it. The fact that landowners or developers have submitted land should not influence where growth is ultimately directed.
The Council should first determine what scale of growth individual settlements can sustainably accommodate and then identify the most appropriate sites to meet that requirement.
In particular, the spatial strategy should:
• prioritise brownfield and underused land;
• protect Green Belt that continues to perform important strategic functions;
• direct growth towards genuinely sustainable and well-connected locations;
• assess cumulative infrastructure and environmental impacts;
• protect the separate identity and landscape setting of existing settlements;
• consider agricultural land, biodiversity and climate resilience; and
• transparently explain why individual sites are selected or rejected.
Transparency and community involvement
Residents need to be able to understand how these decisions are reached.
For each potential allocation, the Council should publish an accessible assessment showing the site's benefits and constraints, infrastructure implications, Green Belt assessment where applicable, environmental and landscape impacts, reasonable alternatives considered and the reasons for the eventual decision.
Following each consultation stage, the Council should also explain how representations have influenced the emerging Plan.
I support the need for a new Local Plan and recognise the need for additional housing. My objection is not to development itself, but to allowing increased housing requirements to produce unsustainable development in locations whose infrastructure, environment or landscape cannot reasonably accommodate it.
The new Local Plan is an opportunity for Cheshire East to establish a robust, evidence-led strategy that can both deliver the homes that are needed and defend the places that should remain undeveloped. I strongly encourage the Council to use it to do both.
Please confirm receipt and that this email will be recorded as my formal representation to the consultation.
Kind regards,
Megan Codling

Dear Sir or Madam,
Re: Cheshire East New Local Plan Scoping Consultation
Please accept this email as my formal response to the New Local Plan Scoping Consultation and confirm that it will be recorded as a consultation representation.
I recognise that Cheshire East must plan for significantly increased housing requirements and that national planning policy has changed. My concern is that the resulting pressure to identify land must not allow housing numbers to override the fundamental purpose of good planning: putting development in the right places and creating sustainable communities.
Green belt and site selection
The increased housing requirement should not automatically result in Green Belt release. Where Green Belt is considered, the Council should rigorously assess how that land performs its strategic functions and whether development would contribute to urban sprawl, loss of settlement separation, erosion of landscape setting or encroachment into open countryside.
Brownfield and underused land should be maximised first, and any Green Belt release should be demonstrably necessary and based on transparent, published evidence.
This is particularly important following the introduction of "grey belt". Land should not effectively become grey belt simply because it is attractive or convenient to develop. Its actual Green Belt function must be properly assessed.
Bollington and HE61 – Sych Farm, Ledley Street
Bollington is a particularly good example of why a settlement-specific approach is necessary. It is a distinct town surrounded by Green Belt, with the surrounding countryside forming an important part of its setting and separation from Macclesfield and Tytherington.
I note that HE61, Sych Farm, Ledley Street, Bollington, comprising approximately 18.66 hectares, has been submitted through the Call for Sites for housing.
Previous Green Belt assessment work commissioned by Cheshire East found that land in this area made a significant contribution to Green Belt purposes, recognising its open farmland character and role within the countryside surrounding Bollington.
That existing evidence should form an important starting point for any reassessment. If the Council subsequently reaches a different conclusion about the function or importance of this land, the evidence and reasoning supporting that change should be clearly published.
The cumulative effect of development around Bollington must also be considered. Individual sites may appear manageable when assessed separately, but collectively they could fundamentally alter the scale, character and landscape setting of the town.
Infrastructure and sustainable locations
Infrastructure capacity should be a determining factor in where new housing is allocated, rather than something addressed after sites have been chosen.
The Council should demonstrate that roads, schools, healthcare, drainage, utilities and public transport can accommodate the cumulative level of development proposed for each settlement, with necessary improvements realistically deliverable alongside housing.
National planning policy increasingly emphasises development in sustainable, well-connected locations. That principle should work both ways. Settlements without strong rail or mass-transit connections should not absorb disproportionate growth where doing so would significantly increase car dependency.
Landscape, countryside and agricultural land
The assessment of potential sites should properly value what would be lost as well as what development would provide.
Open countryside is not simply unused development land. It contributes to landscape character, biodiversity, food production, flood management, climate resilience, recreation and wellbeing. Productive agricultural land and important landscapes should therefore be treated as assets when assessing alternative locations for growth.
A genuinely spatial strategy
The Call for Sites should inform the Local Plan, not determine it. The fact that landowners or developers have submitted land should not influence where growth is ultimately directed.
The Council should first determine what scale of growth individual settlements can sustainably accommodate and then identify the most appropriate sites to meet that requirement.
In particular, the spatial strategy should:
• prioritise brownfield and underused land;
• protect Green Belt that continues to perform important strategic functions;
• direct growth towards genuinely sustainable and well-connected locations;
• assess cumulative infrastructure and environmental impacts;
• protect the separate identity and landscape setting of existing settlements;
• consider agricultural land, biodiversity and climate resilience; and
• transparently explain why individual sites are selected or rejected.
Transparency and community involvement
Residents need to be able to understand how these decisions are reached.
For each potential allocation, the Council should publish an accessible assessment showing the site's benefits and constraints, infrastructure implications, Green Belt assessment where applicable, environmental and landscape impacts, reasonable alternatives considered and the reasons for the eventual decision.
Following each consultation stage, the Council should also explain how representations have influenced the emerging Plan.
I support the need for a new Local Plan and recognise the need for additional housing. My objection is not to development itself, but to allowing increased housing requirements to produce unsustainable development in locations whose infrastructure, environment or landscape cannot reasonably accommodate it.
The new Local Plan is an opportunity for Cheshire East to establish a robust, evidence-led strategy that can both deliver the homes that are needed and defend the places that should remain undeveloped. I strongly encourage the Council to use it to do both.
Please confirm receipt and that this email will be recorded as my formal representation to the consultation.
Kind regards,
Megan Codling

Dear Sir or Madam,
Re: Cheshire East New Local Plan Scoping Consultation
Please accept this email as my formal response to the New Local Plan Scoping Consultation and confirm that it will be recorded as a consultation representation.
I recognise that Cheshire East must plan for significantly increased housing requirements and that national planning policy has changed. My concern is that the resulting pressure to identify land must not allow housing numbers to override the fundamental purpose of good planning: putting development in the right places and creating sustainable communities.
Green belt and site selection
The increased housing requirement should not automatically result in Green Belt release. Where Green Belt is considered, the Council should rigorously assess how that land performs its strategic functions and whether development would contribute to urban sprawl, loss of settlement separation, erosion of landscape setting or encroachment into open countryside.
Brownfield and underused land should be maximised first, and any Green Belt release should be demonstrably necessary and based on transparent, published evidence.
This is particularly important following the introduction of "grey belt". Land should not effectively become grey belt simply because it is attractive or convenient to develop. Its actual Green Belt function must be properly assessed.
Bollington and HE61 – Sych Farm, Ledley Street
Bollington is a particularly good example of why a settlement-specific approach is necessary. It is a distinct town surrounded by Green Belt, with the surrounding countryside forming an important part of its setting and separation from Macclesfield and Tytherington.
I note that HE61, Sych Farm, Ledley Street, Bollington, comprising approximately 18.66 hectares, has been submitted through the Call for Sites for housing.
Previous Green Belt assessment work commissioned by Cheshire East found that land in this area made a significant contribution to Green Belt purposes, recognising its open farmland character and role within the countryside surrounding Bollington.
That existing evidence should form an important starting point for any reassessment. If the Council subsequently reaches a different conclusion about the function or importance of this land, the evidence and reasoning supporting that change should be clearly published.
The cumulative effect of development around Bollington must also be considered. Individual sites may appear manageable when assessed separately, but collectively they could fundamentally alter the scale, character and landscape setting of the town.
Infrastructure and sustainable locations
Infrastructure capacity should be a determining factor in where new housing is allocated, rather than something addressed after sites have been chosen.
The Council should demonstrate that roads, schools, healthcare, drainage, utilities and public transport can accommodate the cumulative level of development proposed for each settlement, with necessary improvements realistically deliverable alongside housing.
National planning policy increasingly emphasises development in sustainable, well-connected locations. That principle should work both ways. Settlements without strong rail or mass-transit connections should not absorb disproportionate growth where doing so would significantly increase car dependency.
Landscape, countryside and agricultural land
The assessment of potential sites should properly value what would be lost as well as what development would provide.
Open countryside is not simply unused development land. It contributes to landscape character, biodiversity, food production, flood management, climate resilience, recreation and wellbeing. Productive agricultural land and important landscapes should therefore be treated as assets when assessing alternative locations for growth.
A genuinely spatial strategy
The Call for Sites should inform the Local Plan, not determine it. The fact that landowners or developers have submitted land should not influence where growth is ultimately directed.
The Council should first determine what scale of growth individual settlements can sustainably accommodate and then identify the most appropriate sites to meet that requirement.
In particular, the spatial strategy should:
• prioritise brownfield and underused land;
• protect Green Belt that continues to perform important strategic functions;
• direct growth towards genuinely sustainable and well-connected locations;
• assess cumulative infrastructure and environmental impacts;
• protect the separate identity and landscape setting of existing settlements;
• consider agricultural land, biodiversity and climate resilience; and
• transparently explain why individual sites are selected or rejected.
Transparency and community involvement
Residents need to be able to understand how these decisions are reached.
For each potential allocation, the Council should publish an accessible assessment showing the site's benefits and constraints, infrastructure implications, Green Belt assessment where applicable, environmental and landscape impacts, reasonable alternatives considered and the reasons for the eventual decision.
Following each consultation stage, the Council should also explain how representations have influenced the emerging Plan.
I support the need for a new Local Plan and recognise the need for additional housing. My objection is not to development itself, but to allowing increased housing requirements to produce unsustainable development in locations whose infrastructure, environment or landscape cannot reasonably accommodate it.
The new Local Plan is an opportunity for Cheshire East to establish a robust, evidence-led strategy that can both deliver the homes that are needed and defend the places that should remain undeveloped. I strongly encourage the Council to use it to do both.
Please confirm receipt and that this email will be recorded as my formal representation to the consultation.
Kind regards,
Megan Codling

Dear Sir or Madam,
Re: Cheshire East New Local Plan Scoping Consultation
Please accept this email as my formal response to the New Local Plan Scoping Consultation and confirm that it will be recorded as a consultation representation.
I recognise that Cheshire East must plan for significantly increased housing requirements and that national planning policy has changed. My concern is that the resulting pressure to identify land must not allow housing numbers to override the fundamental purpose of good planning: putting development in the right places and creating sustainable communities.
Green belt and site selection
The increased housing requirement should not automatically result in Green Belt release. Where Green Belt is considered, the Council should rigorously assess how that land performs its strategic functions and whether development would contribute to urban sprawl, loss of settlement separation, erosion of landscape setting or encroachment into open countryside.
Brownfield and underused land should be maximised first, and any Green Belt release should be demonstrably necessary and based on transparent, published evidence.
This is particularly important following the introduction of "grey belt". Land should not effectively become grey belt simply because it is attractive or convenient to develop. Its actual Green Belt function must be properly assessed.
Bollington and HE61 – Sych Farm, Ledley Street
Bollington is a particularly good example of why a settlement-specific approach is necessary. It is a distinct town surrounded by Green Belt, with the surrounding countryside forming an important part of its setting and separation from Macclesfield and Tytherington.
I note that HE61, Sych Farm, Ledley Street, Bollington, comprising approximately 18.66 hectares, has been submitted through the Call for Sites for housing.
Previous Green Belt assessment work commissioned by Cheshire East found that land in this area made a significant contribution to Green Belt purposes, recognising its open farmland character and role within the countryside surrounding Bollington.
That existing evidence should form an important starting point for any reassessment. If the Council subsequently reaches a different conclusion about the function or importance of this land, the evidence and reasoning supporting that change should be clearly published.
The cumulative effect of development around Bollington must also be considered. Individual sites may appear manageable when assessed separately, but collectively they could fundamentally alter the scale, character and landscape setting of the town.
Infrastructure and sustainable locations
Infrastructure capacity should be a determining factor in where new housing is allocated, rather than something addressed after sites have been chosen.
The Council should demonstrate that roads, schools, healthcare, drainage, utilities and public transport can accommodate the cumulative level of development proposed for each settlement, with necessary improvements realistically deliverable alongside housing.
National planning policy increasingly emphasises development in sustainable, well-connected locations. That principle should work both ways. Settlements without strong rail or mass-transit connections should not absorb disproportionate growth where doing so would significantly increase car dependency.
Landscape, countryside and agricultural land
The assessment of potential sites should properly value what would be lost as well as what development would provide.
Open countryside is not simply unused development land. It contributes to landscape character, biodiversity, food production, flood management, climate resilience, recreation and wellbeing. Productive agricultural land and important landscapes should therefore be treated as assets when assessing alternative locations for growth.
A genuinely spatial strategy
The Call for Sites should inform the Local Plan, not determine it. The fact that landowners or developers have submitted land should not influence where growth is ultimately directed.
The Council should first determine what scale of growth individual settlements can sustainably accommodate and then identify the most appropriate sites to meet that requirement.
In particular, the spatial strategy should:
• prioritise brownfield and underused land;
• protect Green Belt that continues to perform important strategic functions;
• direct growth towards genuinely sustainable and well-connected locations;
• assess cumulative infrastructure and environmental impacts;
• protect the separate identity and landscape setting of existing settlements;
• consider agricultural land, biodiversity and climate resilience; and
• transparently explain why individual sites are selected or rejected.
Transparency and community involvement
Residents need to be able to understand how these decisions are reached.
For each potential allocation, the Council should publish an accessible assessment showing the site's benefits and constraints, infrastructure implications, Green Belt assessment where applicable, environmental and landscape impacts, reasonable alternatives considered and the reasons for the eventual decision.
Following each consultation stage, the Council should also explain how representations have influenced the emerging Plan.
I support the need for a new Local Plan and recognise the need for additional housing. My objection is not to development itself, but to allowing increased housing requirements to produce unsustainable development in locations whose infrastructure, environment or landscape cannot reasonably accommodate it.
The new Local Plan is an opportunity for Cheshire East to establish a robust, evidence-led strategy that can both deliver the homes that are needed and defend the places that should remain undeveloped. I strongly encourage the Council to use it to do both.
Please confirm receipt and that this email will be recorded as my formal representation to the consultation.
Kind regards,
Megan Codling

Dear Sir or Madam,
Re: Cheshire East New Local Plan Scoping Consultation
Please accept this email as my formal response to the New Local Plan Scoping Consultation and confirm that it will be recorded as a consultation representation.
I recognise that Cheshire East must plan for significantly increased housing requirements and that national planning policy has changed. My concern is that the resulting pressure to identify land must not allow housing numbers to override the fundamental purpose of good planning: putting development in the right places and creating sustainable communities.
Green belt and site selection
The increased housing requirement should not automatically result in Green Belt release. Where Green Belt is considered, the Council should rigorously assess how that land performs its strategic functions and whether development would contribute to urban sprawl, loss of settlement separation, erosion of landscape setting or encroachment into open countryside.
Brownfield and underused land should be maximised first, and any Green Belt release should be demonstrably necessary and based on transparent, published evidence.
This is particularly important following the introduction of "grey belt". Land should not effectively become grey belt simply because it is attractive or convenient to develop. Its actual Green Belt function must be properly assessed.
Bollington and HE61 – Sych Farm, Ledley Street
Bollington is a particularly good example of why a settlement-specific approach is necessary. It is a distinct town surrounded by Green Belt, with the surrounding countryside forming an important part of its setting and separation from Macclesfield and Tytherington.
I note that HE61, Sych Farm, Ledley Street, Bollington, comprising approximately 18.66 hectares, has been submitted through the Call for Sites for housing.
Previous Green Belt assessment work commissioned by Cheshire East found that land in this area made a significant contribution to Green Belt purposes, recognising its open farmland character and role within the countryside surrounding Bollington.
That existing evidence should form an important starting point for any reassessment. If the Council subsequently reaches a different conclusion about the function or importance of this land, the evidence and reasoning supporting that change should be clearly published.
The cumulative effect of development around Bollington must also be considered. Individual sites may appear manageable when assessed separately, but collectively they could fundamentally alter the scale, character and landscape setting of the town.
Infrastructure and sustainable locations
Infrastructure capacity should be a determining factor in where new housing is allocated, rather than something addressed after sites have been chosen.
The Council should demonstrate that roads, schools, healthcare, drainage, utilities and public transport can accommodate the cumulative level of development proposed for each settlement, with necessary improvements realistically deliverable alongside housing.
National planning policy increasingly emphasises development in sustainable, well-connected locations. That principle should work both ways. Settlements without strong rail or mass-transit connections should not absorb disproportionate growth where doing so would significantly increase car dependency.
Landscape, countryside and agricultural land
The assessment of potential sites should properly value what would be lost as well as what development would provide.
Open countryside is not simply unused development land. It contributes to landscape character, biodiversity, food production, flood management, climate resilience, recreation and wellbeing. Productive agricultural land and important landscapes should therefore be treated as assets when assessing alternative locations for growth.
A genuinely spatial strategy
The Call for Sites should inform the Local Plan, not determine it. The fact that landowners or developers have submitted land should not influence where growth is ultimately directed.
The Council should first determine what scale of growth individual settlements can sustainably accommodate and then identify the most appropriate sites to meet that requirement.
In particular, the spatial strategy should:
• prioritise brownfield and underused land;
• protect Green Belt that continues to perform important strategic functions;
• direct growth towards genuinely sustainable and well-connected locations;
• assess cumulative infrastructure and environmental impacts;
• protect the separate identity and landscape setting of existing settlements;
• consider agricultural land, biodiversity and climate resilience; and
• transparently explain why individual sites are selected or rejected.
Transparency and community involvement
Residents need to be able to understand how these decisions are reached.
For each potential allocation, the Council should publish an accessible assessment showing the site's benefits and constraints, infrastructure implications, Green Belt assessment where applicable, environmental and landscape impacts, reasonable alternatives considered and the reasons for the eventual decision.
Following each consultation stage, the Council should also explain how representations have influenced the emerging Plan.
I support the need for a new Local Plan and recognise the need for additional housing. My objection is not to development itself, but to allowing increased housing requirements to produce unsustainable development in locations whose infrastructure, environment or landscape cannot reasonably accommodate it.
The new Local Plan is an opportunity for Cheshire East to establish a robust, evidence-led strategy that can both deliver the homes that are needed and defend the places that should remain undeveloped. I strongly encourage the Council to use it to do both.
Please confirm receipt and that this email will be recorded as my formal representation to the consultation.
Kind regards,
Megan Codling