Local plan scoping consultation

I would like to lodge my complaint and concern regarding 3 core areas;

1. Poor consultation
2. Lack of consideration of climate and biodiversity targets and policies
3. Lack of consideration of food security, water security, farming and the rural economy (particularly in light of 2)

1. The consultation has been poorly advertised, the sites put forward cover huge swathes of the county, and do not include further major local infrastructure projects affecting land and communities such as solar farms, data centres, necessary infrastructure due to mass housing development (i.e. schools/doctors surgeries/supermarkets). Therefore every resident of Cheshire East should have been contacted directly to comment using postal and digital communications, along with a longer window to respond as the window has covered the summer in which many people are away and have further childcare responsibilities limiting time available to respond.
The consultation process is extremely difficult to decode. I am an English teacher, with a masters degree, who has to complete computer admin at work daily, however I struggled to understand how to respond to the local plan digitally. I work with low literacy and high needs children and adults who would almost definitely find it impossible to decode the process of consultation and the consultation information. The consultation needs repeating and making more accessible.
2. In the governments recently published 'Global biodiversity loss, ecosystem collapse and national security A national security assessment' It was highlighted that the UK is at high risk of 'Ecosystem degradation is occurring across all regions. Every critical ecosystem is on a pathway to collapse (irreversible loss of function beyond repair).' The current local plans demands on land in Cheshire East will accelerate an already critical scenario, putting human and all other life in Cheshire East at risk. Cheshire East needs a local plan that instead looks at opportunities to improve the future not accelerate the crisis, this could include the development of ecological smallholdings that produce food for people, support the local economy, sustainability, climate resilience and biodiversity. Instead of car reliant developments that increase emissions and reduce biodiversity.
3. In the same national security assessment just quoted the government noted that the risk of 'Without significant increases in UK food system and supply chain resilience, it is unlikely the UK would be able to maintain food security if ecosystem collapse drives geopolitical competition for food.' is moderate. Further to this, the UK and all of Europe is facing terrible harvests this year due to subsequent years of extreme weather. Cheshire East's local plan does not mention food security or resilient farming as part of the plan for the future. However, it does not that we have 1% higher number of farmers than the national average county wide. Cheshire East is essentially a rural county, with the opportunity to develop a resilient and vibrant rural economy that supports nature and food resilient, however the plan currently in place seeks to further damage farm land. biodiversity and the climate, threatening the life in Cheshire in the future. The local plan needs reassessing with the consideration of farming and food security in mind. Further to this there is no mention of water security in the local plan consultation document, despite constant deliveries of water to Cheshire East residents. Prior to committing to a local plan that includes 1000s of houses across the borough residents need confidence that a sustainable water supply plan is in place to keep us safe and well in the future. Other councils nationwide have refused to develop local plans on these grounds, Cheshire should be thinking similarly https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/aug/02/we-cannot-magic-up-more-water-the-supply-problems-putting-housing-targets-in-england-at-risk

To conclude, the current local plan document is a terrifying example of ill consideration of the crises in which we face in the short, medium and long term here in Cheshire East. To imply that we can carry on business as usual building infrastructure which is carbon reliant and intensive with no plan as to how citizens can be ensured they will have a safe and secure supply of energy, green space, food, and water is a terrifying prospect. The local plan needs to be rethought with the crises we are facing front and centre with plans in place that seek to address those issues, not further the problems, such as building agroecological smallholdings for local food producers see example here: https://ourfoodtrust.org/we-are-building-three-new-farms-at-sarn-in-powys/

Further comments regarding specific consultation areas.

R.E. Section 2.1 which lays out the matters to address, the later parts of the document do not address the three following areas, see details below each:

4. protection and improvement of open areas
There is no short or medium term plan or strategy in Cheshire East to protect and improve open areas, the sites listed for housing development largely occlude access to open areas for a growing number of residents. Protection of open areas for biodiversity is a legally binding commitment of the government under the 30x30 agenda, there is no explanation as to how Cheshire East is supporting this commitment.
5. adapting to climate change
There is no explanation of how building out of any of these proposed housing developments support the adaptation to climate change. Some sites allocated are on peat soils which will be dug out to assist development, leading to CO2 emmissions (i.e. land on congleton road south macclesfield). Other development sites are on flood plains, which will intensify with climaate change (i.e.) Furthermore, almost all proposed sites with be out of town housing developments increasing pollution from vehicles in Cheshire East. Additionally house builders will not be stopped from using fossil fuel based materials and machinery (i.e. cement and HGV's) or obligated to provide renewable energy infrastructure or sustainable transport, meaning house building will contribute to further climate change and the houses will not be adapted sufficiently for climate change.
6. enabling growth of the local economy
Discussion around economic growth is all focused on urbanisation/urban development, Cheshire is a rural county which possesses many opportunities for growth through the rural economy, such as food production, and tourism.

    3.5 The increased housing target figures, can Cheshire East meet other legal and statutory obligations such as school places, clean water

R.E. Section 3.12 many of the sites put forward in the local plan document involve hamlets, villages and towns being joined or being joined less than a single field, such as the proposed sites in adlington which would join Adlington/Poynton/Macclesfield, leading to consistent urban sprawl from Manchester into Cheshire. Cheshire East are not clearly respecting the factors that require land to stay in the green belt (as referenced below).
• checking the unrestricted sprawl or large built-up areas
• preventing neighbouring towns from merging
Furthermore, how can Cheshire East commit to preventing the above mentioned factors from occurring in the future, in consideration of housing targets and increasingly limited space between urban areas/towns.

Natural environment 5.96-5.104

There is no clear strategy in the plan to protect nature and biodiversity in relation to development in all forms. We are living through a biodiversity crisis in which the government's own research states that we are extremely high risk of biodiversity collapse which would result in extreme issues to human health such as difficulties in growing food (pollinators) and providing clean water. Cheshire East needs a biodiversity recovery plan before committing huge swathes of land to development and economic growth, as committed to in national policy by the 30x30 agreement.

I would like to lodge my complaint and concern regarding 3 core areas;

1. Poor consultation
2. Lack of consideration of climate and biodiversity targets and policies
3. Lack of consideration of food security, water security, farming and the rural economy (particularly in light of 2)

1. The consultation has been poorly advertised, the sites put forward cover huge swathes of the county, and do not include further major local infrastructure projects affecting land and communities such as solar farms, data centres, necessary infrastructure due to mass housing development (i.e. schools/doctors surgeries/supermarkets). Therefore every resident of Cheshire East should have been contacted directly to comment using postal and digital communications, along with a longer window to respond as the window has covered the summer in which many people are away and have further childcare responsibilities limiting time available to respond.
The consultation process is extremely difficult to decode. I am an English teacher, with a masters degree, who has to complete computer admin at work daily, however I struggled to understand how to respond to the local plan digitally. I work with low literacy and high needs children and adults who would almost definitely find it impossible to decode the process of consultation and the consultation information. The consultation needs repeating and making more accessible.
2. In the governments recently published 'Global biodiversity loss, ecosystem collapse and national security A national security assessment' It was highlighted that the UK is at high risk of 'Ecosystem degradation is occurring across all regions. Every critical ecosystem is on a pathway to collapse (irreversible loss of function beyond repair).' The current local plans demands on land in Cheshire East will accelerate an already critical scenario, putting human and all other life in Cheshire East at risk. Cheshire East needs a local plan that instead looks at opportunities to improve the future not accelerate the crisis, this could include the development of ecological smallholdings that produce food for people, support the local economy, sustainability, climate resilience and biodiversity. Instead of car reliant developments that increase emissions and reduce biodiversity.
3. In the same national security assessment just quoted the government noted that the risk of 'Without significant increases in UK food system and supply chain resilience, it is unlikely the UK would be able to maintain food security if ecosystem collapse drives geopolitical competition for food.' is moderate. Further to this, the UK and all of Europe is facing terrible harvests this year due to subsequent years of extreme weather. Cheshire East's local plan does not mention food security or resilient farming as part of the plan for the future. However, it does not that we have 1% higher number of farmers than the national average county wide. Cheshire East is essentially a rural county, with the opportunity to develop a resilient and vibrant rural economy that supports nature and food resilient, however the plan currently in place seeks to further damage farm land. biodiversity and the climate, threatening the life in Cheshire in the future. The local plan needs reassessing with the consideration of farming and food security in mind. Further to this there is no mention of water security in the local plan consultation document, despite constant deliveries of water to Cheshire East residents. Prior to committing to a local plan that includes 1000s of houses across the borough residents need confidence that a sustainable water supply plan is in place to keep us safe and well in the future. Other councils nationwide have refused to develop local plans on these grounds, Cheshire should be thinking similarly https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/aug/02/we-cannot-magic-up-more-water-the-supply-problems-putting-housing-targets-in-england-at-risk

To conclude, the current local plan document is a terrifying example of ill consideration of the crises in which we face in the short, medium and long term here in Cheshire East. To imply that we can carry on business as usual building infrastructure which is carbon reliant and intensive with no plan as to how citizens can be ensured they will have a safe and secure supply of energy, green space, food, and water is a terrifying prospect. The local plan needs to be rethought with the crises we are facing front and centre with plans in place that seek to address those issues, not further the problems, such as building agroecological smallholdings for local food producers see example here: https://ourfoodtrust.org/we-are-building-three-new-farms-at-sarn-in-powys/

Further comments regarding specific consultation areas.

R.E. Section 2.1 which lays out the matters to address, the later parts of the document do not address the three following areas, see details below each:

4. protection and improvement of open areas
There is no short or medium term plan or strategy in Cheshire East to protect and improve open areas, the sites listed for housing development largely occlude access to open areas for a growing number of residents. Protection of open areas for biodiversity is a legally binding commitment of the government under the 30x30 agenda, there is no explanation as to how Cheshire East is supporting this commitment.
5. adapting to climate change
There is no explanation of how building out of any of these proposed housing developments support the adaptation to climate change. Some sites allocated are on peat soils which will be dug out to assist development, leading to CO2 emmissions (i.e. land on congleton road south macclesfield). Other development sites are on flood plains, which will intensify with climaate change (i.e.) Furthermore, almost all proposed sites with be out of town housing developments increasing pollution from vehicles in Cheshire East. Additionally house builders will not be stopped from using fossil fuel based materials and machinery (i.e. cement and HGV's) or obligated to provide renewable energy infrastructure or sustainable transport, meaning house building will contribute to further climate change and the houses will not be adapted sufficiently for climate change.
6. enabling growth of the local economy
Discussion around economic growth is all focused on urbanisation/urban development, Cheshire is a rural county which possesses many opportunities for growth through the rural economy, such as food production, and tourism.

    3.5 The increased housing target figures, can Cheshire East meet other legal and statutory obligations such as school places, clean water

R.E. Section 3.12 many of the sites put forward in the local plan document involve hamlets, villages and towns being joined or being joined less than a single field, such as the proposed sites in adlington which would join Adlington/Poynton/Macclesfield, leading to consistent urban sprawl from Manchester into Cheshire. Cheshire East are not clearly respecting the factors that require land to stay in the green belt (as referenced below).
• checking the unrestricted sprawl or large built-up areas
• preventing neighbouring towns from merging
Furthermore, how can Cheshire East commit to preventing the above mentioned factors from occurring in the future, in consideration of housing targets and increasingly limited space between urban areas/towns.

Natural environment 5.96-5.104

There is no clear strategy in the plan to protect nature and biodiversity in relation to development in all forms. We are living through a biodiversity crisis in which the government's own research states that we are extremely high risk of biodiversity collapse which would result in extreme issues to human health such as difficulties in growing food (pollinators) and providing clean water. Cheshire East needs a biodiversity recovery plan before committing huge swathes of land to development and economic growth, as committed to in national policy by the 30x30 agreement.

I would like to lodge my complaint and concern regarding 3 core areas;

1. Poor consultation
2. Lack of consideration of climate and biodiversity targets and policies
3. Lack of consideration of food security, water security, farming and the rural economy (particularly in light of 2)

1. The consultation has been poorly advertised, the sites put forward cover huge swathes of the county, and do not include further major local infrastructure projects affecting land and communities such as solar farms, data centres, necessary infrastructure due to mass housing development (i.e. schools/doctors surgeries/supermarkets). Therefore every resident of Cheshire East should have been contacted directly to comment using postal and digital communications, along with a longer window to respond as the window has covered the summer in which many people are away and have further childcare responsibilities limiting time available to respond.
The consultation process is extremely difficult to decode. I am an English teacher, with a masters degree, who has to complete computer admin at work daily, however I struggled to understand how to respond to the local plan digitally. I work with low literacy and high needs children and adults who would almost definitely find it impossible to decode the process of consultation and the consultation information. The consultation needs repeating and making more accessible.
2. In the governments recently published 'Global biodiversity loss, ecosystem collapse and national security A national security assessment' It was highlighted that the UK is at high risk of 'Ecosystem degradation is occurring across all regions. Every critical ecosystem is on a pathway to collapse (irreversible loss of function beyond repair).' The current local plans demands on land in Cheshire East will accelerate an already critical scenario, putting human and all other life in Cheshire East at risk. Cheshire East needs a local plan that instead looks at opportunities to improve the future not accelerate the crisis, this could include the development of ecological smallholdings that produce food for people, support the local economy, sustainability, climate resilience and biodiversity. Instead of car reliant developments that increase emissions and reduce biodiversity.
3. In the same national security assessment just quoted the government noted that the risk of 'Without significant increases in UK food system and supply chain resilience, it is unlikely the UK would be able to maintain food security if ecosystem collapse drives geopolitical competition for food.' is moderate. Further to this, the UK and all of Europe is facing terrible harvests this year due to subsequent years of extreme weather. Cheshire East's local plan does not mention food security or resilient farming as part of the plan for the future. However, it does not that we have 1% higher number of farmers than the national average county wide. Cheshire East is essentially a rural county, with the opportunity to develop a resilient and vibrant rural economy that supports nature and food resilient, however the plan currently in place seeks to further damage farm land. biodiversity and the climate, threatening the life in Cheshire in the future. The local plan needs reassessing with the consideration of farming and food security in mind. Further to this there is no mention of water security in the local plan consultation document, despite constant deliveries of water to Cheshire East residents. Prior to committing to a local plan that includes 1000s of houses across the borough residents need confidence that a sustainable water supply plan is in place to keep us safe and well in the future. Other councils nationwide have refused to develop local plans on these grounds, Cheshire should be thinking similarly https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/aug/02/we-cannot-magic-up-more-water-the-supply-problems-putting-housing-targets-in-england-at-risk

To conclude, the current local plan document is a terrifying example of ill consideration of the crises in which we face in the short, medium and long term here in Cheshire East. To imply that we can carry on business as usual building infrastructure which is carbon reliant and intensive with no plan as to how citizens can be ensured they will have a safe and secure supply of energy, green space, food, and water is a terrifying prospect. The local plan needs to be rethought with the crises we are facing front and centre with plans in place that seek to address those issues, not further the problems, such as building agroecological smallholdings for local food producers see example here: https://ourfoodtrust.org/we-are-building-three-new-farms-at-sarn-in-powys/

Further comments regarding specific consultation areas.

R.E. Section 2.1 which lays out the matters to address, the later parts of the document do not address the three following areas, see details below each:

4. protection and improvement of open areas
There is no short or medium term plan or strategy in Cheshire East to protect and improve open areas, the sites listed for housing development largely occlude access to open areas for a growing number of residents. Protection of open areas for biodiversity is a legally binding commitment of the government under the 30x30 agenda, there is no explanation as to how Cheshire East is supporting this commitment.
5. adapting to climate change
There is no explanation of how building out of any of these proposed housing developments support the adaptation to climate change. Some sites allocated are on peat soils which will be dug out to assist development, leading to CO2 emmissions (i.e. land on congleton road south macclesfield). Other development sites are on flood plains, which will intensify with climaate change (i.e.) Furthermore, almost all proposed sites with be out of town housing developments increasing pollution from vehicles in Cheshire East. Additionally house builders will not be stopped from using fossil fuel based materials and machinery (i.e. cement and HGV's) or obligated to provide renewable energy infrastructure or sustainable transport, meaning house building will contribute to further climate change and the houses will not be adapted sufficiently for climate change.
6. enabling growth of the local economy
Discussion around economic growth is all focused on urbanisation/urban development, Cheshire is a rural county which possesses many opportunities for growth through the rural economy, such as food production, and tourism.

    3.5 The increased housing target figures, can Cheshire East meet other legal and statutory obligations such as school places, clean water

R.E. Section 3.12 many of the sites put forward in the local plan document involve hamlets, villages and towns being joined or being joined less than a single field, such as the proposed sites in adlington which would join Adlington/Poynton/Macclesfield, leading to consistent urban sprawl from Manchester into Cheshire. Cheshire East are not clearly respecting the factors that require land to stay in the green belt (as referenced below).
• checking the unrestricted sprawl or large built-up areas
• preventing neighbouring towns from merging
Furthermore, how can Cheshire East commit to preventing the above mentioned factors from occurring in the future, in consideration of housing targets and increasingly limited space between urban areas/towns.

Natural environment 5.96-5.104

There is no clear strategy in the plan to protect nature and biodiversity in relation to development in all forms. We are living through a biodiversity crisis in which the government's own research states that we are extremely high risk of biodiversity collapse which would result in extreme issues to human health such as difficulties in growing food (pollinators) and providing clean water. Cheshire East needs a biodiversity recovery plan before committing huge swathes of land to development and economic growth, as committed to in national policy by the 30x30 agreement.

I would like to lodge my complaint and concern regarding 3 core areas;

1. Poor consultation
2. Lack of consideration of climate and biodiversity targets and policies
3. Lack of consideration of food security, water security, farming and the rural economy (particularly in light of 2)

1. The consultation has been poorly advertised, the sites put forward cover huge swathes of the county, and do not include further major local infrastructure projects affecting land and communities such as solar farms, data centres, necessary infrastructure due to mass housing development (i.e. schools/doctors surgeries/supermarkets). Therefore every resident of Cheshire East should have been contacted directly to comment using postal and digital communications, along with a longer window to respond as the window has covered the summer in which many people are away and have further childcare responsibilities limiting time available to respond.
The consultation process is extremely difficult to decode. I am an English teacher, with a masters degree, who has to complete computer admin at work daily, however I struggled to understand how to respond to the local plan digitally. I work with low literacy and high needs children and adults who would almost definitely find it impossible to decode the process of consultation and the consultation information. The consultation needs repeating and making more accessible.
2. In the governments recently published 'Global biodiversity loss, ecosystem collapse and national security A national security assessment' It was highlighted that the UK is at high risk of 'Ecosystem degradation is occurring across all regions. Every critical ecosystem is on a pathway to collapse (irreversible loss of function beyond repair).' The current local plans demands on land in Cheshire East will accelerate an already critical scenario, putting human and all other life in Cheshire East at risk. Cheshire East needs a local plan that instead looks at opportunities to improve the future not accelerate the crisis, this could include the development of ecological smallholdings that produce food for people, support the local economy, sustainability, climate resilience and biodiversity. Instead of car reliant developments that increase emissions and reduce biodiversity.
3. In the same national security assessment just quoted the government noted that the risk of 'Without significant increases in UK food system and supply chain resilience, it is unlikely the UK would be able to maintain food security if ecosystem collapse drives geopolitical competition for food.' is moderate. Further to this, the UK and all of Europe is facing terrible harvests this year due to subsequent years of extreme weather. Cheshire East's local plan does not mention food security or resilient farming as part of the plan for the future. However, it does not that we have 1% higher number of farmers than the national average county wide. Cheshire East is essentially a rural county, with the opportunity to develop a resilient and vibrant rural economy that supports nature and food resilient, however the plan currently in place seeks to further damage farm land. biodiversity and the climate, threatening the life in Cheshire in the future. The local plan needs reassessing with the consideration of farming and food security in mind. Further to this there is no mention of water security in the local plan consultation document, despite constant deliveries of water to Cheshire East residents. Prior to committing to a local plan that includes 1000s of houses across the borough residents need confidence that a sustainable water supply plan is in place to keep us safe and well in the future. Other councils nationwide have refused to develop local plans on these grounds, Cheshire should be thinking similarly https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/aug/02/we-cannot-magic-up-more-water-the-supply-problems-putting-housing-targets-in-england-at-risk

To conclude, the current local plan document is a terrifying example of ill consideration of the crises in which we face in the short, medium and long term here in Cheshire East. To imply that we can carry on business as usual building infrastructure which is carbon reliant and intensive with no plan as to how citizens can be ensured they will have a safe and secure supply of energy, green space, food, and water is a terrifying prospect. The local plan needs to be rethought with the crises we are facing front and centre with plans in place that seek to address those issues, not further the problems, such as building agroecological smallholdings for local food producers see example here: https://ourfoodtrust.org/we-are-building-three-new-farms-at-sarn-in-powys/

Further comments regarding specific consultation areas.

R.E. Section 2.1 which lays out the matters to address, the later parts of the document do not address the three following areas, see details below each:

4. protection and improvement of open areas
There is no short or medium term plan or strategy in Cheshire East to protect and improve open areas, the sites listed for housing development largely occlude access to open areas for a growing number of residents. Protection of open areas for biodiversity is a legally binding commitment of the government under the 30x30 agenda, there is no explanation as to how Cheshire East is supporting this commitment.
5. adapting to climate change
There is no explanation of how building out of any of these proposed housing developments support the adaptation to climate change. Some sites allocated are on peat soils which will be dug out to assist development, leading to CO2 emmissions (i.e. land on congleton road south macclesfield). Other development sites are on flood plains, which will intensify with climaate change (i.e.) Furthermore, almost all proposed sites with be out of town housing developments increasing pollution from vehicles in Cheshire East. Additionally house builders will not be stopped from using fossil fuel based materials and machinery (i.e. cement and HGV's) or obligated to provide renewable energy infrastructure or sustainable transport, meaning house building will contribute to further climate change and the houses will not be adapted sufficiently for climate change.
6. enabling growth of the local economy
Discussion around economic growth is all focused on urbanisation/urban development, Cheshire is a rural county which possesses many opportunities for growth through the rural economy, such as food production, and tourism.

    3.5 The increased housing target figures, can Cheshire East meet other legal and statutory obligations such as school places, clean water

R.E. Section 3.12 many of the sites put forward in the local plan document involve hamlets, villages and towns being joined or being joined less than a single field, such as the proposed sites in adlington which would join Adlington/Poynton/Macclesfield, leading to consistent urban sprawl from Manchester into Cheshire. Cheshire East are not clearly respecting the factors that require land to stay in the green belt (as referenced below).
• checking the unrestricted sprawl or large built-up areas
• preventing neighbouring towns from merging
Furthermore, how can Cheshire East commit to preventing the above mentioned factors from occurring in the future, in consideration of housing targets and increasingly limited space between urban areas/towns.

Natural environment 5.96-5.104

There is no clear strategy in the plan to protect nature and biodiversity in relation to development in all forms. We are living through a biodiversity crisis in which the government's own research states that we are extremely high risk of biodiversity collapse which would result in extreme issues to human health such as difficulties in growing food (pollinators) and providing clean water. Cheshire East needs a biodiversity recovery plan before committing huge swathes of land to development and economic growth, as committed to in national policy by the 30x30 agreement.

I would like to lodge my complaint and concern regarding 3 core areas;

1. Poor consultation
2. Lack of consideration of climate and biodiversity targets and policies
3. Lack of consideration of food security, water security, farming and the rural economy (particularly in light of 2)

1. The consultation has been poorly advertised, the sites put forward cover huge swathes of the county, and do not include further major local infrastructure projects affecting land and communities such as solar farms, data centres, necessary infrastructure due to mass housing development (i.e. schools/doctors surgeries/supermarkets). Therefore every resident of Cheshire East should have been contacted directly to comment using postal and digital communications, along with a longer window to respond as the window has covered the summer in which many people are away and have further childcare responsibilities limiting time available to respond.
The consultation process is extremely difficult to decode. I am an English teacher, with a masters degree, who has to complete computer admin at work daily, however I struggled to understand how to respond to the local plan digitally. I work with low literacy and high needs children and adults who would almost definitely find it impossible to decode the process of consultation and the consultation information. The consultation needs repeating and making more accessible.
2. In the governments recently published 'Global biodiversity loss, ecosystem collapse and national security A national security assessment' It was highlighted that the UK is at high risk of 'Ecosystem degradation is occurring across all regions. Every critical ecosystem is on a pathway to collapse (irreversible loss of function beyond repair).' The current local plans demands on land in Cheshire East will accelerate an already critical scenario, putting human and all other life in Cheshire East at risk. Cheshire East needs a local plan that instead looks at opportunities to improve the future not accelerate the crisis, this could include the development of ecological smallholdings that produce food for people, support the local economy, sustainability, climate resilience and biodiversity. Instead of car reliant developments that increase emissions and reduce biodiversity.
3. In the same national security assessment just quoted the government noted that the risk of 'Without significant increases in UK food system and supply chain resilience, it is unlikely the UK would be able to maintain food security if ecosystem collapse drives geopolitical competition for food.' is moderate. Further to this, the UK and all of Europe is facing terrible harvests this year due to subsequent years of extreme weather. Cheshire East's local plan does not mention food security or resilient farming as part of the plan for the future. However, it does not that we have 1% higher number of farmers than the national average county wide. Cheshire East is essentially a rural county, with the opportunity to develop a resilient and vibrant rural economy that supports nature and food resilient, however the plan currently in place seeks to further damage farm land. biodiversity and the climate, threatening the life in Cheshire in the future. The local plan needs reassessing with the consideration of farming and food security in mind. Further to this there is no mention of water security in the local plan consultation document, despite constant deliveries of water to Cheshire East residents. Prior to committing to a local plan that includes 1000s of houses across the borough residents need confidence that a sustainable water supply plan is in place to keep us safe and well in the future. Other councils nationwide have refused to develop local plans on these grounds, Cheshire should be thinking similarly https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/aug/02/we-cannot-magic-up-more-water-the-supply-problems-putting-housing-targets-in-england-at-risk

To conclude, the current local plan document is a terrifying example of ill consideration of the crises in which we face in the short, medium and long term here in Cheshire East. To imply that we can carry on business as usual building infrastructure which is carbon reliant and intensive with no plan as to how citizens can be ensured they will have a safe and secure supply of energy, green space, food, and water is a terrifying prospect. The local plan needs to be rethought with the crises we are facing front and centre with plans in place that seek to address those issues, not further the problems, such as building agroecological smallholdings for local food producers see example here: https://ourfoodtrust.org/we-are-building-three-new-farms-at-sarn-in-powys/

Further comments regarding specific consultation areas.

R.E. Section 2.1 which lays out the matters to address, the later parts of the document do not address the three following areas, see details below each:

4. protection and improvement of open areas
There is no short or medium term plan or strategy in Cheshire East to protect and improve open areas, the sites listed for housing development largely occlude access to open areas for a growing number of residents. Protection of open areas for biodiversity is a legally binding commitment of the government under the 30x30 agenda, there is no explanation as to how Cheshire East is supporting this commitment.
5. adapting to climate change
There is no explanation of how building out of any of these proposed housing developments support the adaptation to climate change. Some sites allocated are on peat soils which will be dug out to assist development, leading to CO2 emmissions (i.e. land on congleton road south macclesfield). Other development sites are on flood plains, which will intensify with climaate change (i.e.) Furthermore, almost all proposed sites with be out of town housing developments increasing pollution from vehicles in Cheshire East. Additionally house builders will not be stopped from using fossil fuel based materials and machinery (i.e. cement and HGV's) or obligated to provide renewable energy infrastructure or sustainable transport, meaning house building will contribute to further climate change and the houses will not be adapted sufficiently for climate change.
6. enabling growth of the local economy
Discussion around economic growth is all focused on urbanisation/urban development, Cheshire is a rural county which possesses many opportunities for growth through the rural economy, such as food production, and tourism.

    3.5 The increased housing target figures, can Cheshire East meet other legal and statutory obligations such as school places, clean water

R.E. Section 3.12 many of the sites put forward in the local plan document involve hamlets, villages and towns being joined or being joined less than a single field, such as the proposed sites in adlington which would join Adlington/Poynton/Macclesfield, leading to consistent urban sprawl from Manchester into Cheshire. Cheshire East are not clearly respecting the factors that require land to stay in the green belt (as referenced below).
• checking the unrestricted sprawl or large built-up areas
• preventing neighbouring towns from merging
Furthermore, how can Cheshire East commit to preventing the above mentioned factors from occurring in the future, in consideration of housing targets and increasingly limited space between urban areas/towns.

Natural environment 5.96-5.104

There is no clear strategy in the plan to protect nature and biodiversity in relation to development in all forms. We are living through a biodiversity crisis in which the government's own research states that we are extremely high risk of biodiversity collapse which would result in extreme issues to human health such as difficulties in growing food (pollinators) and providing clean water. Cheshire East needs a biodiversity recovery plan before committing huge swathes of land to development and economic growth, as committed to in national policy by the 30x30 agreement.

I would like to lodge my complaint and concern regarding 3 core areas;

1. Poor consultation
2. Lack of consideration of climate and biodiversity targets and policies
3. Lack of consideration of food security, water security, farming and the rural economy (particularly in light of 2)

1. The consultation has been poorly advertised, the sites put forward cover huge swathes of the county, and do not include further major local infrastructure projects affecting land and communities such as solar farms, data centres, necessary infrastructure due to mass housing development (i.e. schools/doctors surgeries/supermarkets). Therefore every resident of Cheshire East should have been contacted directly to comment using postal and digital communications, along with a longer window to respond as the window has covered the summer in which many people are away and have further childcare responsibilities limiting time available to respond.
The consultation process is extremely difficult to decode. I am an English teacher, with a masters degree, who has to complete computer admin at work daily, however I struggled to understand how to respond to the local plan digitally. I work with low literacy and high needs children and adults who would almost definitely find it impossible to decode the process of consultation and the consultation information. The consultation needs repeating and making more accessible.
2. In the governments recently published 'Global biodiversity loss, ecosystem collapse and national security A national security assessment' It was highlighted that the UK is at high risk of 'Ecosystem degradation is occurring across all regions. Every critical ecosystem is on a pathway to collapse (irreversible loss of function beyond repair).' The current local plans demands on land in Cheshire East will accelerate an already critical scenario, putting human and all other life in Cheshire East at risk. Cheshire East needs a local plan that instead looks at opportunities to improve the future not accelerate the crisis, this could include the development of ecological smallholdings that produce food for people, support the local economy, sustainability, climate resilience and biodiversity. Instead of car reliant developments that increase emissions and reduce biodiversity.
3. In the same national security assessment just quoted the government noted that the risk of 'Without significant increases in UK food system and supply chain resilience, it is unlikely the UK would be able to maintain food security if ecosystem collapse drives geopolitical competition for food.' is moderate. Further to this, the UK and all of Europe is facing terrible harvests this year due to subsequent years of extreme weather. Cheshire East's local plan does not mention food security or resilient farming as part of the plan for the future. However, it does not that we have 1% higher number of farmers than the national average county wide. Cheshire East is essentially a rural county, with the opportunity to develop a resilient and vibrant rural economy that supports nature and food resilient, however the plan currently in place seeks to further damage farm land. biodiversity and the climate, threatening the life in Cheshire in the future. The local plan needs reassessing with the consideration of farming and food security in mind. Further to this there is no mention of water security in the local plan consultation document, despite constant deliveries of water to Cheshire East residents. Prior to committing to a local plan that includes 1000s of houses across the borough residents need confidence that a sustainable water supply plan is in place to keep us safe and well in the future. Other councils nationwide have refused to develop local plans on these grounds, Cheshire should be thinking similarly https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/aug/02/we-cannot-magic-up-more-water-the-supply-problems-putting-housing-targets-in-england-at-risk

To conclude, the current local plan document is a terrifying example of ill consideration of the crises in which we face in the short, medium and long term here in Cheshire East. To imply that we can carry on business as usual building infrastructure which is carbon reliant and intensive with no plan as to how citizens can be ensured they will have a safe and secure supply of energy, green space, food, and water is a terrifying prospect. The local plan needs to be rethought with the crises we are facing front and centre with plans in place that seek to address those issues, not further the problems, such as building agroecological smallholdings for local food producers see example here: https://ourfoodtrust.org/we-are-building-three-new-farms-at-sarn-in-powys/

Further comments regarding specific consultation areas.

R.E. Section 2.1 which lays out the matters to address, the later parts of the document do not address the three following areas, see details below each:

4. protection and improvement of open areas
There is no short or medium term plan or strategy in Cheshire East to protect and improve open areas, the sites listed for housing development largely occlude access to open areas for a growing number of residents. Protection of open areas for biodiversity is a legally binding commitment of the government under the 30x30 agenda, there is no explanation as to how Cheshire East is supporting this commitment.
5. adapting to climate change
There is no explanation of how building out of any of these proposed housing developments support the adaptation to climate change. Some sites allocated are on peat soils which will be dug out to assist development, leading to CO2 emmissions (i.e. land on congleton road south macclesfield). Other development sites are on flood plains, which will intensify with climaate change (i.e.) Furthermore, almost all proposed sites with be out of town housing developments increasing pollution from vehicles in Cheshire East. Additionally house builders will not be stopped from using fossil fuel based materials and machinery (i.e. cement and HGV's) or obligated to provide renewable energy infrastructure or sustainable transport, meaning house building will contribute to further climate change and the houses will not be adapted sufficiently for climate change.
6. enabling growth of the local economy
Discussion around economic growth is all focused on urbanisation/urban development, Cheshire is a rural county which possesses many opportunities for growth through the rural economy, such as food production, and tourism.

    3.5 The increased housing target figures, can Cheshire East meet other legal and statutory obligations such as school places, clean water

R.E. Section 3.12 many of the sites put forward in the local plan document involve hamlets, villages and towns being joined or being joined less than a single field, such as the proposed sites in adlington which would join Adlington/Poynton/Macclesfield, leading to consistent urban sprawl from Manchester into Cheshire. Cheshire East are not clearly respecting the factors that require land to stay in the green belt (as referenced below).
• checking the unrestricted sprawl or large built-up areas
• preventing neighbouring towns from merging
Furthermore, how can Cheshire East commit to preventing the above mentioned factors from occurring in the future, in consideration of housing targets and increasingly limited space between urban areas/towns.

Natural environment 5.96-5.104

There is no clear strategy in the plan to protect nature and biodiversity in relation to development in all forms. We are living through a biodiversity crisis in which the government's own research states that we are extremely high risk of biodiversity collapse which would result in extreme issues to human health such as difficulties in growing food (pollinators) and providing clean water. Cheshire East needs a biodiversity recovery plan before committing huge swathes of land to development and economic growth, as committed to in national policy by the 30x30 agreement.

I would like to lodge my complaint and concern regarding 3 core areas;

1. Poor consultation
2. Lack of consideration of climate and biodiversity targets and policies
3. Lack of consideration of food security, water security, farming and the rural economy (particularly in light of 2)

1. The consultation has been poorly advertised, the sites put forward cover huge swathes of the county, and do not include further major local infrastructure projects affecting land and communities such as solar farms, data centres, necessary infrastructure due to mass housing development (i.e. schools/doctors surgeries/supermarkets). Therefore every resident of Cheshire East should have been contacted directly to comment using postal and digital communications, along with a longer window to respond as the window has covered the summer in which many people are away and have further childcare responsibilities limiting time available to respond.
The consultation process is extremely difficult to decode. I am an English teacher, with a masters degree, who has to complete computer admin at work daily, however I struggled to understand how to respond to the local plan digitally. I work with low literacy and high needs children and adults who would almost definitely find it impossible to decode the process of consultation and the consultation information. The consultation needs repeating and making more accessible.
2. In the governments recently published 'Global biodiversity loss, ecosystem collapse and national security A national security assessment' It was highlighted that the UK is at high risk of 'Ecosystem degradation is occurring across all regions. Every critical ecosystem is on a pathway to collapse (irreversible loss of function beyond repair).' The current local plans demands on land in Cheshire East will accelerate an already critical scenario, putting human and all other life in Cheshire East at risk. Cheshire East needs a local plan that instead looks at opportunities to improve the future not accelerate the crisis, this could include the development of ecological smallholdings that produce food for people, support the local economy, sustainability, climate resilience and biodiversity. Instead of car reliant developments that increase emissions and reduce biodiversity.
3. In the same national security assessment just quoted the government noted that the risk of 'Without significant increases in UK food system and supply chain resilience, it is unlikely the UK would be able to maintain food security if ecosystem collapse drives geopolitical competition for food.' is moderate. Further to this, the UK and all of Europe is facing terrible harvests this year due to subsequent years of extreme weather. Cheshire East's local plan does not mention food security or resilient farming as part of the plan for the future. However, it does not that we have 1% higher number of farmers than the national average county wide. Cheshire East is essentially a rural county, with the opportunity to develop a resilient and vibrant rural economy that supports nature and food resilient, however the plan currently in place seeks to further damage farm land. biodiversity and the climate, threatening the life in Cheshire in the future. The local plan needs reassessing with the consideration of farming and food security in mind. Further to this there is no mention of water security in the local plan consultation document, despite constant deliveries of water to Cheshire East residents. Prior to committing to a local plan that includes 1000s of houses across the borough residents need confidence that a sustainable water supply plan is in place to keep us safe and well in the future. Other councils nationwide have refused to develop local plans on these grounds, Cheshire should be thinking similarly https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/aug/02/we-cannot-magic-up-more-water-the-supply-problems-putting-housing-targets-in-england-at-risk

To conclude, the current local plan document is a terrifying example of ill consideration of the crises in which we face in the short, medium and long term here in Cheshire East. To imply that we can carry on business as usual building infrastructure which is carbon reliant and intensive with no plan as to how citizens can be ensured they will have a safe and secure supply of energy, green space, food, and water is a terrifying prospect. The local plan needs to be rethought with the crises we are facing front and centre with plans in place that seek to address those issues, not further the problems, such as building agroecological smallholdings for local food producers see example here: https://ourfoodtrust.org/we-are-building-three-new-farms-at-sarn-in-powys/

Further comments regarding specific consultation areas.

R.E. Section 2.1 which lays out the matters to address, the later parts of the document do not address the three following areas, see details below each:

4. protection and improvement of open areas
There is no short or medium term plan or strategy in Cheshire East to protect and improve open areas, the sites listed for housing development largely occlude access to open areas for a growing number of residents. Protection of open areas for biodiversity is a legally binding commitment of the government under the 30x30 agenda, there is no explanation as to how Cheshire East is supporting this commitment.
5. adapting to climate change
There is no explanation of how building out of any of these proposed housing developments support the adaptation to climate change. Some sites allocated are on peat soils which will be dug out to assist development, leading to CO2 emmissions (i.e. land on congleton road south macclesfield). Other development sites are on flood plains, which will intensify with climaate change (i.e.) Furthermore, almost all proposed sites with be out of town housing developments increasing pollution from vehicles in Cheshire East. Additionally house builders will not be stopped from using fossil fuel based materials and machinery (i.e. cement and HGV's) or obligated to provide renewable energy infrastructure or sustainable transport, meaning house building will contribute to further climate change and the houses will not be adapted sufficiently for climate change.
6. enabling growth of the local economy
Discussion around economic growth is all focused on urbanisation/urban development, Cheshire is a rural county which possesses many opportunities for growth through the rural economy, such as food production, and tourism.

    3.5 The increased housing target figures, can Cheshire East meet other legal and statutory obligations such as school places, clean water

R.E. Section 3.12 many of the sites put forward in the local plan document involve hamlets, villages and towns being joined or being joined less than a single field, such as the proposed sites in adlington which would join Adlington/Poynton/Macclesfield, leading to consistent urban sprawl from Manchester into Cheshire. Cheshire East are not clearly respecting the factors that require land to stay in the green belt (as referenced below).
• checking the unrestricted sprawl or large built-up areas
• preventing neighbouring towns from merging
Furthermore, how can Cheshire East commit to preventing the above mentioned factors from occurring in the future, in consideration of housing targets and increasingly limited space between urban areas/towns.

Natural environment 5.96-5.104

There is no clear strategy in the plan to protect nature and biodiversity in relation to development in all forms. We are living through a biodiversity crisis in which the government's own research states that we are extremely high risk of biodiversity collapse which would result in extreme issues to human health such as difficulties in growing food (pollinators) and providing clean water. Cheshire East needs a biodiversity recovery plan before committing huge swathes of land to development and economic growth, as committed to in national policy by the 30x30 agreement.

I would like to lodge my complaint and concern regarding 3 core areas;

1. Poor consultation
2. Lack of consideration of climate and biodiversity targets and policies
3. Lack of consideration of food security, water security, farming and the rural economy (particularly in light of 2)

1. The consultation has been poorly advertised, the sites put forward cover huge swathes of the county, and do not include further major local infrastructure projects affecting land and communities such as solar farms, data centres, necessary infrastructure due to mass housing development (i.e. schools/doctors surgeries/supermarkets). Therefore every resident of Cheshire East should have been contacted directly to comment using postal and digital communications, along with a longer window to respond as the window has covered the summer in which many people are away and have further childcare responsibilities limiting time available to respond.
The consultation process is extremely difficult to decode. I am an English teacher, with a masters degree, who has to complete computer admin at work daily, however I struggled to understand how to respond to the local plan digitally. I work with low literacy and high needs children and adults who would almost definitely find it impossible to decode the process of consultation and the consultation information. The consultation needs repeating and making more accessible.
2. In the governments recently published 'Global biodiversity loss, ecosystem collapse and national security A national security assessment' It was highlighted that the UK is at high risk of 'Ecosystem degradation is occurring across all regions. Every critical ecosystem is on a pathway to collapse (irreversible loss of function beyond repair).' The current local plans demands on land in Cheshire East will accelerate an already critical scenario, putting human and all other life in Cheshire East at risk. Cheshire East needs a local plan that instead looks at opportunities to improve the future not accelerate the crisis, this could include the development of ecological smallholdings that produce food for people, support the local economy, sustainability, climate resilience and biodiversity. Instead of car reliant developments that increase emissions and reduce biodiversity.
3. In the same national security assessment just quoted the government noted that the risk of 'Without significant increases in UK food system and supply chain resilience, it is unlikely the UK would be able to maintain food security if ecosystem collapse drives geopolitical competition for food.' is moderate. Further to this, the UK and all of Europe is facing terrible harvests this year due to subsequent years of extreme weather. Cheshire East's local plan does not mention food security or resilient farming as part of the plan for the future. However, it does not that we have 1% higher number of farmers than the national average county wide. Cheshire East is essentially a rural county, with the opportunity to develop a resilient and vibrant rural economy that supports nature and food resilient, however the plan currently in place seeks to further damage farm land. biodiversity and the climate, threatening the life in Cheshire in the future. The local plan needs reassessing with the consideration of farming and food security in mind. Further to this there is no mention of water security in the local plan consultation document, despite constant deliveries of water to Cheshire East residents. Prior to committing to a local plan that includes 1000s of houses across the borough residents need confidence that a sustainable water supply plan is in place to keep us safe and well in the future. Other councils nationwide have refused to develop local plans on these grounds, Cheshire should be thinking similarly https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/aug/02/we-cannot-magic-up-more-water-the-supply-problems-putting-housing-targets-in-england-at-risk

To conclude, the current local plan document is a terrifying example of ill consideration of the crises in which we face in the short, medium and long term here in Cheshire East. To imply that we can carry on business as usual building infrastructure which is carbon reliant and intensive with no plan as to how citizens can be ensured they will have a safe and secure supply of energy, green space, food, and water is a terrifying prospect. The local plan needs to be rethought with the crises we are facing front and centre with plans in place that seek to address those issues, not further the problems, such as building agroecological smallholdings for local food producers see example here: https://ourfoodtrust.org/we-are-building-three-new-farms-at-sarn-in-powys/

Further comments regarding specific consultation areas.

R.E. Section 2.1 which lays out the matters to address, the later parts of the document do not address the three following areas, see details below each:

4. protection and improvement of open areas
There is no short or medium term plan or strategy in Cheshire East to protect and improve open areas, the sites listed for housing development largely occlude access to open areas for a growing number of residents. Protection of open areas for biodiversity is a legally binding commitment of the government under the 30x30 agenda, there is no explanation as to how Cheshire East is supporting this commitment.
5. adapting to climate change
There is no explanation of how building out of any of these proposed housing developments support the adaptation to climate change. Some sites allocated are on peat soils which will be dug out to assist development, leading to CO2 emmissions (i.e. land on congleton road south macclesfield). Other development sites are on flood plains, which will intensify with climaate change (i.e.) Furthermore, almost all proposed sites with be out of town housing developments increasing pollution from vehicles in Cheshire East. Additionally house builders will not be stopped from using fossil fuel based materials and machinery (i.e. cement and HGV's) or obligated to provide renewable energy infrastructure or sustainable transport, meaning house building will contribute to further climate change and the houses will not be adapted sufficiently for climate change.
6. enabling growth of the local economy
Discussion around economic growth is all focused on urbanisation/urban development, Cheshire is a rural county which possesses many opportunities for growth through the rural economy, such as food production, and tourism.

    3.5 The increased housing target figures, can Cheshire East meet other legal and statutory obligations such as school places, clean water

R.E. Section 3.12 many of the sites put forward in the local plan document involve hamlets, villages and towns being joined or being joined less than a single field, such as the proposed sites in adlington which would join Adlington/Poynton/Macclesfield, leading to consistent urban sprawl from Manchester into Cheshire. Cheshire East are not clearly respecting the factors that require land to stay in the green belt (as referenced below).
• checking the unrestricted sprawl or large built-up areas
• preventing neighbouring towns from merging
Furthermore, how can Cheshire East commit to preventing the above mentioned factors from occurring in the future, in consideration of housing targets and increasingly limited space between urban areas/towns.

Natural environment 5.96-5.104

There is no clear strategy in the plan to protect nature and biodiversity in relation to development in all forms. We are living through a biodiversity crisis in which the government's own research states that we are extremely high risk of biodiversity collapse which would result in extreme issues to human health such as difficulties in growing food (pollinators) and providing clean water. Cheshire East needs a biodiversity recovery plan before committing huge swathes of land to development and economic growth, as committed to in national policy by the 30x30 agreement.

I would like to lodge my complaint and concern regarding 3 core areas;

1. Poor consultation
2. Lack of consideration of climate and biodiversity targets and policies
3. Lack of consideration of food security, water security, farming and the rural economy (particularly in light of 2)

1. The consultation has been poorly advertised, the sites put forward cover huge swathes of the county, and do not include further major local infrastructure projects affecting land and communities such as solar farms, data centres, necessary infrastructure due to mass housing development (i.e. schools/doctors surgeries/supermarkets). Therefore every resident of Cheshire East should have been contacted directly to comment using postal and digital communications, along with a longer window to respond as the window has covered the summer in which many people are away and have further childcare responsibilities limiting time available to respond.
The consultation process is extremely difficult to decode. I am an English teacher, with a masters degree, who has to complete computer admin at work daily, however I struggled to understand how to respond to the local plan digitally. I work with low literacy and high needs children and adults who would almost definitely find it impossible to decode the process of consultation and the consultation information. The consultation needs repeating and making more accessible.
2. In the governments recently published 'Global biodiversity loss, ecosystem collapse and national security A national security assessment' It was highlighted that the UK is at high risk of 'Ecosystem degradation is occurring across all regions. Every critical ecosystem is on a pathway to collapse (irreversible loss of function beyond repair).' The current local plans demands on land in Cheshire East will accelerate an already critical scenario, putting human and all other life in Cheshire East at risk. Cheshire East needs a local plan that instead looks at opportunities to improve the future not accelerate the crisis, this could include the development of ecological smallholdings that produce food for people, support the local economy, sustainability, climate resilience and biodiversity. Instead of car reliant developments that increase emissions and reduce biodiversity.
3. In the same national security assessment just quoted the government noted that the risk of 'Without significant increases in UK food system and supply chain resilience, it is unlikely the UK would be able to maintain food security if ecosystem collapse drives geopolitical competition for food.' is moderate. Further to this, the UK and all of Europe is facing terrible harvests this year due to subsequent years of extreme weather. Cheshire East's local plan does not mention food security or resilient farming as part of the plan for the future. However, it does not that we have 1% higher number of farmers than the national average county wide. Cheshire East is essentially a rural county, with the opportunity to develop a resilient and vibrant rural economy that supports nature and food resilient, however the plan currently in place seeks to further damage farm land. biodiversity and the climate, threatening the life in Cheshire in the future. The local plan needs reassessing with the consideration of farming and food security in mind. Further to this there is no mention of water security in the local plan consultation document, despite constant deliveries of water to Cheshire East residents. Prior to committing to a local plan that includes 1000s of houses across the borough residents need confidence that a sustainable water supply plan is in place to keep us safe and well in the future. Other councils nationwide have refused to develop local plans on these grounds, Cheshire should be thinking similarly https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/aug/02/we-cannot-magic-up-more-water-the-supply-problems-putting-housing-targets-in-england-at-risk

To conclude, the current local plan document is a terrifying example of ill consideration of the crises in which we face in the short, medium and long term here in Cheshire East. To imply that we can carry on business as usual building infrastructure which is carbon reliant and intensive with no plan as to how citizens can be ensured they will have a safe and secure supply of energy, green space, food, and water is a terrifying prospect. The local plan needs to be rethought with the crises we are facing front and centre with plans in place that seek to address those issues, not further the problems, such as building agroecological smallholdings for local food producers see example here: https://ourfoodtrust.org/we-are-building-three-new-farms-at-sarn-in-powys/

Further comments regarding specific consultation areas.

R.E. Section 2.1 which lays out the matters to address, the later parts of the document do not address the three following areas, see details below each:

4. protection and improvement of open areas
There is no short or medium term plan or strategy in Cheshire East to protect and improve open areas, the sites listed for housing development largely occlude access to open areas for a growing number of residents. Protection of open areas for biodiversity is a legally binding commitment of the government under the 30x30 agenda, there is no explanation as to how Cheshire East is supporting this commitment.
5. adapting to climate change
There is no explanation of how building out of any of these proposed housing developments support the adaptation to climate change. Some sites allocated are on peat soils which will be dug out to assist development, leading to CO2 emmissions (i.e. land on congleton road south macclesfield). Other development sites are on flood plains, which will intensify with climaate change (i.e.) Furthermore, almost all proposed sites with be out of town housing developments increasing pollution from vehicles in Cheshire East. Additionally house builders will not be stopped from using fossil fuel based materials and machinery (i.e. cement and HGV's) or obligated to provide renewable energy infrastructure or sustainable transport, meaning house building will contribute to further climate change and the houses will not be adapted sufficiently for climate change.
6. enabling growth of the local economy
Discussion around economic growth is all focused on urbanisation/urban development, Cheshire is a rural county which possesses many opportunities for growth through the rural economy, such as food production, and tourism.

    3.5 The increased housing target figures, can Cheshire East meet other legal and statutory obligations such as school places, clean water

R.E. Section 3.12 many of the sites put forward in the local plan document involve hamlets, villages and towns being joined or being joined less than a single field, such as the proposed sites in adlington which would join Adlington/Poynton/Macclesfield, leading to consistent urban sprawl from Manchester into Cheshire. Cheshire East are not clearly respecting the factors that require land to stay in the green belt (as referenced below).
• checking the unrestricted sprawl or large built-up areas
• preventing neighbouring towns from merging
Furthermore, how can Cheshire East commit to preventing the above mentioned factors from occurring in the future, in consideration of housing targets and increasingly limited space between urban areas/towns.

Natural environment 5.96-5.104

There is no clear strategy in the plan to protect nature and biodiversity in relation to development in all forms. We are living through a biodiversity crisis in which the government's own research states that we are extremely high risk of biodiversity collapse which would result in extreme issues to human health such as difficulties in growing food (pollinators) and providing clean water. Cheshire East needs a biodiversity recovery plan before committing huge swathes of land to development and economic growth, as committed to in national policy by the 30x30 agreement.

I would like to lodge my complaint and concern regarding 3 core areas;

1. Poor consultation
2. Lack of consideration of climate and biodiversity targets and policies
3. Lack of consideration of food security, water security, farming and the rural economy (particularly in light of 2)

1. The consultation has been poorly advertised, the sites put forward cover huge swathes of the county, and do not include further major local infrastructure projects affecting land and communities such as solar farms, data centres, necessary infrastructure due to mass housing development (i.e. schools/doctors surgeries/supermarkets). Therefore every resident of Cheshire East should have been contacted directly to comment using postal and digital communications, along with a longer window to respond as the window has covered the summer in which many people are away and have further childcare responsibilities limiting time available to respond.
The consultation process is extremely difficult to decode. I am an English teacher, with a masters degree, who has to complete computer admin at work daily, however I struggled to understand how to respond to the local plan digitally. I work with low literacy and high needs children and adults who would almost definitely find it impossible to decode the process of consultation and the consultation information. The consultation needs repeating and making more accessible.
2. In the governments recently published 'Global biodiversity loss, ecosystem collapse and national security A national security assessment' It was highlighted that the UK is at high risk of 'Ecosystem degradation is occurring across all regions. Every critical ecosystem is on a pathway to collapse (irreversible loss of function beyond repair).' The current local plans demands on land in Cheshire East will accelerate an already critical scenario, putting human and all other life in Cheshire East at risk. Cheshire East needs a local plan that instead looks at opportunities to improve the future not accelerate the crisis, this could include the development of ecological smallholdings that produce food for people, support the local economy, sustainability, climate resilience and biodiversity. Instead of car reliant developments that increase emissions and reduce biodiversity.
3. In the same national security assessment just quoted the government noted that the risk of 'Without significant increases in UK food system and supply chain resilience, it is unlikely the UK would be able to maintain food security if ecosystem collapse drives geopolitical competition for food.' is moderate. Further to this, the UK and all of Europe is facing terrible harvests this year due to subsequent years of extreme weather. Cheshire East's local plan does not mention food security or resilient farming as part of the plan for the future. However, it does not that we have 1% higher number of farmers than the national average county wide. Cheshire East is essentially a rural county, with the opportunity to develop a resilient and vibrant rural economy that supports nature and food resilient, however the plan currently in place seeks to further damage farm land. biodiversity and the climate, threatening the life in Cheshire in the future. The local plan needs reassessing with the consideration of farming and food security in mind. Further to this there is no mention of water security in the local plan consultation document, despite constant deliveries of water to Cheshire East residents. Prior to committing to a local plan that includes 1000s of houses across the borough residents need confidence that a sustainable water supply plan is in place to keep us safe and well in the future. Other councils nationwide have refused to develop local plans on these grounds, Cheshire should be thinking similarly https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/aug/02/we-cannot-magic-up-more-water-the-supply-problems-putting-housing-targets-in-england-at-risk

To conclude, the current local plan document is a terrifying example of ill consideration of the crises in which we face in the short, medium and long term here in Cheshire East. To imply that we can carry on business as usual building infrastructure which is carbon reliant and intensive with no plan as to how citizens can be ensured they will have a safe and secure supply of energy, green space, food, and water is a terrifying prospect. The local plan needs to be rethought with the crises we are facing front and centre with plans in place that seek to address those issues, not further the problems, such as building agroecological smallholdings for local food producers see example here: https://ourfoodtrust.org/we-are-building-three-new-farms-at-sarn-in-powys/

Further comments regarding specific consultation areas.

R.E. Section 2.1 which lays out the matters to address, the later parts of the document do not address the three following areas, see details below each:

4. protection and improvement of open areas
There is no short or medium term plan or strategy in Cheshire East to protect and improve open areas, the sites listed for housing development largely occlude access to open areas for a growing number of residents. Protection of open areas for biodiversity is a legally binding commitment of the government under the 30x30 agenda, there is no explanation as to how Cheshire East is supporting this commitment.
5. adapting to climate change
There is no explanation of how building out of any of these proposed housing developments support the adaptation to climate change. Some sites allocated are on peat soils which will be dug out to assist development, leading to CO2 emmissions (i.e. land on congleton road south macclesfield). Other development sites are on flood plains, which will intensify with climaate change (i.e.) Furthermore, almost all proposed sites with be out of town housing developments increasing pollution from vehicles in Cheshire East. Additionally house builders will not be stopped from using fossil fuel based materials and machinery (i.e. cement and HGV's) or obligated to provide renewable energy infrastructure or sustainable transport, meaning house building will contribute to further climate change and the houses will not be adapted sufficiently for climate change.
6. enabling growth of the local economy
Discussion around economic growth is all focused on urbanisation/urban development, Cheshire is a rural county which possesses many opportunities for growth through the rural economy, such as food production, and tourism.

    3.5 The increased housing target figures, can Cheshire East meet other legal and statutory obligations such as school places, clean water

R.E. Section 3.12 many of the sites put forward in the local plan document involve hamlets, villages and towns being joined or being joined less than a single field, such as the proposed sites in adlington which would join Adlington/Poynton/Macclesfield, leading to consistent urban sprawl from Manchester into Cheshire. Cheshire East are not clearly respecting the factors that require land to stay in the green belt (as referenced below).
• checking the unrestricted sprawl or large built-up areas
• preventing neighbouring towns from merging
Furthermore, how can Cheshire East commit to preventing the above mentioned factors from occurring in the future, in consideration of housing targets and increasingly limited space between urban areas/towns.

Natural environment 5.96-5.104

There is no clear strategy in the plan to protect nature and biodiversity in relation to development in all forms. We are living through a biodiversity crisis in which the government's own research states that we are extremely high risk of biodiversity collapse which would result in extreme issues to human health such as difficulties in growing food (pollinators) and providing clean water. Cheshire East needs a biodiversity recovery plan before committing huge swathes of land to development and economic growth, as committed to in national policy by the 30x30 agreement.