Local plan scoping consultation

Pott Shrigley Parish Council supports the preparation of a new Local Plan and accepts that the borough must plan for the homes it needs. We ask that the plan judges sustainability by measured transport access; that it treats school, health, highway and utility capacity as a pre-condition of allocation rather than something to be mitigated later; that it keeps tips and everyday services reasonably reachable from rural communities; that it settles its assessment methodologies openly and consults on them before applying them; that it sends the greater share of growth to the towns and to brownfield land; and that it engages parish councils in a way that allows us to take part. We intend to engage at every subsequent stage and would be glad to contribute local knowledge to the evidence base.

Pott Shrigley Parish Council welcomes the preparation of a new Local Plan and is pleased to respond.
This response sets out the policies and methods we would like to see in the new plan. It does not comment on individual sites or on the call for sites, which are matters for later stages. Our concerns are principally about transport, infrastructure and waste, and the response is ordered accordingly. Consultation paragraph references are given under each heading so that points can be recorded against the right topic, and the same points have been lodged through the consultation portal.
About the parish
Pott Shrigley is a village of around 257 people on the eastern edge of the borough, where the Cheshire plain rises into the Peak District. It is a good place to live and the community here is a strong one: a Grade I listed church built in the fifteenth century, a primary school endowed under a will of 1492 and still open, a village hall run by volunteer trustees, and a landscape of ancient woodland and old field walls that brings walkers here all year. Part of the parish lies inside the Peak District National Park. The boundary runs along Shrigley Road and Bakestone Road, so the village and its conservation area are divided between Cheshire East and the National Park Authority.
The parish is very lightly served by the two-hourly 391 service running six times a day during the week with no Sunday service. It has no link to Adlington Station two and a half miles away, from where trains run to Manchester every hour but again there is no Sunday service. No classified road runs through the parish; every journey begins on an unlit lane without a footway. The primary school has 26 pupils against a capacity of 42. There is no GP surgery, pharmacy, shop or post office. Since the closures of September 2024 the nearest household waste recycling centre is Macclesfield, some seven miles away. Almost every journey here is made by car.
We set this out as context rather than complaint. It explains why our comments concentrate on transport, infrastructure and waste, and why we want a plan that settles its methods openly and treats capacity as a pre-condition of growth.
Our main points
1.Judge whether a location is sustainable by measured transport access, not by distance from a town.
2.Treat school, health, highway and wastewater capacity as a pre-condition of allocation, not as later mitigation.
3.Keep household waste recycling reasonably accessible to rural communities.
4.Publish the site assessment methodology and criteria for comment before they are applied.
5.Direct the greater share of growth to the towns, to brownfield land and to station catchments.
6.Set out a proper method for engaging parish councils and consult when we are able to meet. Ensure that there is a readily available hierarchy of the officers with the main responsibility for each area along with their contact details.