Local plan scoping consultation

Comment

Representation ID: 3361

Received: 30/08/2026

Respondent: Mr Richard Wheatcroft

The new plan must protect our existing green and open areas, particularly those that contain Peat. Any damage to peatland will contribute to climate change, however is can be used as an asset within Cheshire East to help minimise our impact on climate change. with a bit of restoration work, even actively fight it! Peat can store significantly more carbon than the same area of woodland!

Comment

Representation ID: 3374

Received: 30/08/2026

Respondent: Mr Richard Wheatcroft

Very concerned that this will significantly impact the green spaces we have. Particularly removing the green corridors that are within our existing towns, that enable wildlife to get about, and also affecting the residents health in not having access to as many nearby green spaces. Changing the green belt boundaries cannot happen. If so every year, developers will push for more green belt to be reclassified, enabling further building on easier sites, rather than improving existing brownfield and other areas for development. Housing may need to be built, but for the people, not the developers!

Comment

Representation ID: 3383

Received: 30/08/2026

Respondent: Mr Richard Wheatcroft

I am in favour of this. We also ned to consider building homes in town centres. For accommodation, and to bring people into the centres for a higher footfall to help maintain business. These homes may not suit everyone, but they certainly suit many people. You only need to look at a few European towns to see thriving neighbourhoods with homes above resteraunts and shops. Why can this not happen here?

Comment

Representation ID: 3390

Received: 30/08/2026

Respondent: Mr Richard Wheatcroft

the current supplementary planning documents are very out of date. They make no mention of protecting peatland. Or what checks will be made to ensire that environmental assesments are accurate. Not just made as an anecdotal observation.

Comment

Representation ID: 3393

Received: 30/08/2026

Respondent: Mr Richard Wheatcroft

Looking forward is a good thing. However, if you set poor goals for the next 15 years that decimate the environment, reduce the quality of life, and make Cheshire east a worse place to live. That would not be a good thing!
Their MUST be enough flexibility to change, to make sure a plan developed today can recognise mistakes and short-sightedness within itself.

Comment

Representation ID: 3396

Received: 30/08/2026

Respondent: Mr Richard Wheatcroft

Some areas have very large homes, on very large sites. Could it be made more viable for builders to use some of these? They could still have a significant number of very large and high value homes built for those that want them. Or even estates with a higher density of housing. This could also increase the population in areas where there is existing infrastructure, without the need to add more.

Comment

Representation ID: 3397

Received: 30/08/2026

Respondent: Mr Richard Wheatcroft

Cheshire East does not already recognise areas of significant ecological and environmental importance, such as Peatland. To use this "Grey Belt" would be a travesty. I bet much of is of importance to the local residents and wildlife.

Comment

Representation ID: 3400

Received: 30/08/2026

Respondent: Mr Richard Wheatcroft

Affordable housing seem to be what the builder can get away with, rather than what could be built. Why are there so many Detached houses built? They are often only separated by a couple of feet. This is a significant waste of land, to increase the market value for the developer. More semi Detached homes, and short terraces would be better. Its not hard to insulate thermally, and acoustically between homes today. This would be more efficient for housing density, and the environment, improving the thermal properties of the homes.

Comment

Representation ID: 3401

Received: 30/08/2026

Respondent: Mr Richard Wheatcroft

A greater diversity of home types would be good. So many of our buildings look very similar. I also believe that the self build and independent builders can do a better job of making use of some of the more unusual sites, than larger home builders ever would. They could add a significant number of homes to the area with more support, reducing our reliance on the large hose building companies that would rather build on swathes of our green belt land.

Comment

Representation ID: 3408

Received: 30/08/2026

Respondent: Mr Richard Wheatcroft

Walking and cycling have been of very little priority to CE. I have been very disappointed to see how little regard has been given to improve the infrastructure during existing building works. And resistance to suggestions.
This must be a priority of any development, and all road improvements. Some areas dedicated infrastructure will be needed, others paint (which I'm not a fan of) or changing the speed limits/ road priorities can suffice.
Reducing our reliance on the car for journeys can have a huge benefit to the environment, as well as economically to CE.