Local plan scoping consultation

Comment

Representation ID: 3033

Received: 28/08/2026

Respondent: Transition Wilmslow

5.9 So far, the “call for sites” appears to be a blunt tool that has yielded an indicative map showing how construction is to be intensified.

Comment

Representation ID: 3037

Received: 28/08/2026

Respondent: Transition Wilmslow

The “call for sites” appears to be a blunt tool that has yielded an indicative map showing how construction is to be intensified.
The map appears to be largely sourced from developers and landowners, whose interests lie in identifying large areas of undisturbed land next to existing centres, and can only be described as targeted sprawl.
CEC need to commission a borough-wide survey of derelict / empty properties and infill land, some of which is banked in offshore trusts. We'd like to see CEC employ emergency measures to compulsorily develop those sites before granting “grey” or Green Belt Planning permissions

Comment

Representation ID: 3040

Received: 28/08/2026

Respondent: Transition Wilmslow

‘Development around stations’ could put at risk key areas in the Lower and Upper Bollin LCAs and the Chonar landscape which separates Wilmslow from Alderley Edge. A ‘development led’ Green Belt assessment to identify grey belt land will exclude protecting the countryside as a Green Belt function. Instead the assessment should have full regard to both the Cheshire East and Wilmslow Landscape Character Assessments. The latter is integral to the WNP and part of the development plan. We would like to see the list of topics in the Scoping document extended to include ‘landscape’ and/or ‘countryside’ in their own right.

Comment

Representation ID: 3041

Received: 28/08/2026

Respondent: Transition Wilmslow

Although the overall minimum development requirement has already been established, its distribution across the borough must form an integral part of consultation, not be treated as an afterthought. Once the settlement review is complete, meaningful early engagement with communities at settlement level should inform how development is allocated equitably and sustainably. The proposed timetable allows sufficient opportunity for this. Consultation must also avoid predetermining outcomes: references to potential green-space loss, new settlements, taller buildings and relaxed infill rules suggest major changes may already have been decided. Genuine consultation should seek communities’ views before options are settled.

Comment

Representation ID: 3043

Received: 28/08/2026

Respondent: Transition Wilmslow

Considering supplementing national policies with local policies regarding development in the countryside seems a prudent approach. It also provides a clear opportunity to draw upon the opinions, knowledge and expertise to be found in the population of Cheshire East to input into, and help draft any local policies deemed necessary. We would recommend a dedicated assembly with a diverse range of expertise be created to further this. The timetable of the development of the new plan provides ample opportunity to build this in.

Comment

Representation ID: 3044

Received: 28/08/2026

Respondent: Transition Wilmslow

We welcome the opportunity to define what is genuinely affordable in the long term, and the type, size and standard of dwellings that are needed in the borough. Standards should focus on accessibility, energy efficiency, water efficiency, avoiding “locking in” detrimental carbon emissions over time (by making homes harder to retrofit later to a higher standard).
Meeting housing requirements should include a thoughtful retrofit strategy of existing buildings / sites, including, for example, a civic “offer and need” exchange mechanism so that residents remain in their communities and support networks, but have evolving needs (e.g. family expansion or downsizing needs).

Comment

Representation ID: 3045

Received: 28/08/2026

Respondent: Transition Wilmslow

We urge the council to define affordable housing in a way that truly addresses the need (key workers near service centres, for example) and not a market-defined formula. This also includes operating costs, thereby demanding new build standards that go beyond the minimum regulations to deliver practically “zero-bills” social housing.
Ignoring externalities such as carbon impacts (both embodied and in use) and nature depletion in the cost of housing means new build housing costs to society and the public purse are vastly underestimated – these should be fully considered in the definition of sustainable location and design.

Comment

Representation ID: 3046

Received: 28/08/2026

Respondent: Transition Wilmslow

We welcome the reference to supporting sustainable communities.
Housing numbers and location should be accompanied by strategic planning of the services required to support those homes, with easy access to / space provision in schools, medical care, public transport, safe routes, leisure and learning facilities.
Cheshire East could also explore its own role in providing social housing, especially as a more cost effective approach to providing social care which currently represents the council’s largest expenditure due to unregulated third party providers.

Comment

Representation ID: 3047

Received: 28/08/2026

Respondent: Transition Wilmslow

The housing mix and the Planning process should seek to encourage and value the benefits of intergenerational living: creating the village that allows its residents to look out for one another, be they families with small children needing childcare networks, oversight and spaces for teenagers, as well as weekend job opportunities, informal caregiving arrangements, keeping the ageing population youthful, dementia friendly environments, and a sharing economy, like repair shops and “tool” libraries, for example.

Comment

Representation ID: 3048

Received: 28/08/2026

Respondent: Transition Wilmslow

We support the inclusion of provision for travelling communities in the scope.