Local plan scoping consultation

I am very concerned about the length of time before the new Local Plan is expected to be adopted in March 2029. The Government’s increase in Cheshire East’s housing requirement from around 1,800 to 2,530 homes a year has effectively moved the goalposts, leaving the borough unable to demonstrate sufficient housing supply under the existing Plan. This creates an unacceptable vulnerability to speculative development during the intervening years, including pressure on Green Belt and farmland. Cheshire East must set out how it will protect communities from inappropriate speculative development while urgently progressing a robust, brownfield-first new Local Plan.

I support the principle of a long-term Local Plan that provides certainty for residents, communities and businesses about how Cheshire East will develop. We need new homes and economic growth, but development must be in the right places, supported by the necessary infrastructure and balanced against the need to protect the character, countryside and productive farmland that make Cheshire East such a good place to live and work.
I would like the new Local Plan to be firmly evidence-led, infrastructure-led and brownfield-first. There should be a clear presumption that development is directed towards suitable brownfield and previously developed land rather than the Green Belt or productive agricultural land. Our Green Belt performs an important role in preventing urban sprawl, maintaining the separation and identity of communities and protecting the countryside from encroachment. Productive farmland is also a finite resource which supports food production, rural businesses and our long-term food security. Once either is built over, that loss is effectively permanent.
The Council should therefore demonstrate that every reasonable opportunity to regenerate and make better use of brownfield and previously developed land has been exhausted before contemplating the release of Green Belt or productive agricultural land. The availability of undeveloped countryside should not make it the easier or cheaper option for meeting development targets.
Infrastructure should be considered at the outset rather than after development has been allocated. The Plan needs to consider the capacity of roads, public transport, schools, healthcare, water, sewerage and drainage, and demonstrate how the infrastructure required by new development will actually be delivered.
It is also essential that the cumulative impact of development is considered. The proposals for very large-scale development around Adlington demonstrate why individual sites cannot sensibly be considered in isolation. The combined effect of existing development, future Local Plan allocations and other major proposals needs to be understood before decisions are made that could permanently change communities and landscapes.
The Local Plan is an opportunity to provide the homes our communities need, support businesses and encourage investment without unnecessarily sacrificing the Green Belt, productive farmland and countryside that future generations will depend upon. Protecting these assets, while directing growth towards sustainable locations and brownfield regeneration, should be at the heart of the new Plan.

I am concerned that housing need or the new ‘grey belt’ designation could lead to unnecessary loss of Cheshire East’s Green Belt. Green Belt boundaries should only be changed as a last resort, after suitable brownfield and previously developed land has been fully considered. Land labelled ‘grey belt’ may still provide valuable countryside, productive farmland, wildlife habitat, flood management and separation between communities. Its wider value should therefore be assessed, not simply whether it meets the three stated Green Belt purposes. Development around railway stations should also be proportionate and infrastructure-led, respecting existing communities and avoiding inappropriate large-scale development.

We all agree - Brownfield first!

Cheshire East’s relatively low population density is part of its character and should not be treated simply as capacity for development. The scale of the new housing targets risks permanently changing the borough, with development spreading across the countryside and creating an increasingly continuous belt of housing towards Greater Manchester. Once Green Belt, farmland and the green spaces separating our towns and villages are built over, they cannot be restored. The Local Plan must protect the distinct identity of Cheshire East’s towns and villages and prevent their gradual coalescence into a wider urban sprawl.

These figures demonstrate why Cheshire East’s countryside, Green Belt and productive farmland must be treated as strategic assets, not simply as land potentially available for development. The Green Belt protects the separate identity of our towns and villages and provides an essential buffer against the outward spread of Greater Manchester. Farming is also a significant part of our local economy and character, supporting thousands of jobs as well as domestic food production and food security. Once productive farmland, wildlife habitats and valued landscapes are built over, that loss is effectively permanent. The Local Plan should therefore prioritise brownfield regeneration.

I am very concerned about the length of time before the new Local Plan is expected to be adopted in March 2029. The Government’s increase in Cheshire East’s housing requirement from around 1,800 to 2,530 homes a year has effectively moved the goalposts, leaving the borough unable to demonstrate sufficient housing supply under the existing Plan. This creates an unacceptable vulnerability to speculative development during the intervening years, including pressure on Green Belt and farmland. Cheshire East must set out how it will protect communities from inappropriate speculative development while urgently progressing a robust, brownfield-first new Local Plan.

The vision should support sustainable growth while protecting what makes Cheshire East distinctive. It should be firmly brownfield-first, protect Green Belt and productive agricultural land, prevent towns and villages merging, and ensure infrastructure is delivered alongside development. Growth should strengthen, not overwhelm, existing communities. Measurable outcomes should include the proportion of development on brownfield land, Green Belt and farmland protected, infrastructure delivered, and green separation maintained between settlements. Success should be measured not simply by homes built, but by whether Cheshire East remains a distinctive and attractive place to live for future generations.

The Local Plan must make recycling easy and accessible. The closure of Bollington’s Household Waste Recycling Centre means residents now face longer journeys to Macclesfield, additional traffic and, at busy times, significant queues. This is inconvenient for residents and creates unnecessary journeys and emissions. As Cheshire East plans substantial housing growth, waste and recycling infrastructure must grow with it, not become less accessible. Making responsible disposal more difficult risks reducing recycling and increasing fly-tipping. The Plan should ensure convenient local recycling provision, sufficient capacity for future population growth and easy access to facilities across both urban and rural communities.

As a Local Service Centre, Bollington should be a priority for improved public transport. It has no railway station and residents depend heavily on buses and cars to reach Macclesfield for rail connections, employment and essential services. A sustainable settlement strategy cannot consider new development separately from transport provision. Better, more frequent and reliable bus services connecting Bollington with Macclesfield station and town centre would reduce car dependency, congestion and emissions, while improving opportunities for young people, older residents and those without cars. Public transport investment should therefore be an integral part of the Local Plan’s approach to Bollington.