Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Regulation 22) C

Home , Bexton, Calveley, Cholmondeston, Edward Timpson, Higher Hurdsfield, Hurleston

PreSubmission Front green Hi ResPage 1 11/02/2014 14:11:51

Cheshire East Local Plan

CY May 2014

CMY

Chapters

1 Introduction 2 2 The Regulations 4 3 Core Strategy Issues and Options Paper (2010) 6 4 Place Shaping (2011) 11 5 Rural Issues (2011) 17 6 Minerals Issues Discussion Paper (2012) 21 7 Town Strategies Phase 1 (2012) 27 8 Wilmslow Vision (Town Strategies Phase 2) (2012) 30 9 Town Strategies Phase 3 (2012) 32 10 Development Strategy and Policy Principles (2013) 36 11 Possible Additional Sites (2013) 43 12 Pre-Submission Core Strategy and Non-Preferred Sites (2013) 46 13 Local Plan Strategy - Submission Version (2014) 52 14 Next Steps 58

Appendices

A Consultation Stages 60 B List of Bodies and Persons Invited to Make Representations 63 C Pre-Submission Core Strategy Main Issues and Council's Responses 72 D Non-Preferred Sites Main Issues and Council's Reponses 80 E Local Plan Strategy - Submisson Version Main Issues 87 F Statement of Representations Procedure 90 G List of Media Coverage for All Stages 92 H Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy - Submission Version: List of Inadmissible Representations 103 Contents

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 1 1 Introduction

1.1 This Statement of Consultation sets out the details of publicity and consultation undertaken to prepare and inform the Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy. It sets out how the Local Planning Authority has complied with Regulations 18, 19, 20 and 22 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning)(England) Regulations 2012 in the preparation of the Local Plan Strategy (formerly known as the Core Strategy).

1.2 From the beginning of the process the Council have made extensive effort to engage relevant agencies and the public in the formulation and refinement of planning policies and proposals. At each stage of the Local Plan Strategy preparation process the Council have adhered to the standards for consultation set out in the Council's Statement of Community Involvement,(1) as well as that established through Government legislation and guidance, and in fact gone beyond those requirements, as illustrated in Appendix A of this document. This has included publicising the consultations, inviting representations to be submitted and using the comments received to identify and address key issues through the preparation of the Local Plan Strategy.

1.3 This Statement will summarise the steps that have been taken to publicise, consult and engage with all the consultation bodies at each preparation stage of the Local Plan Strategy, how this meets or exceeds the Council's Statement of Community Involvement and how it meets legislative requirements. It will also summarise the main issues raised by the representations and detail how those representations have been addressed through the Local Plan Strategy.

1.4 For the purposes of this Statement it should be noted that the preparation of the Local Plan Strategy spanned two planning frameworks; initially that of the Local Development Framework (LDF), which latterly became the Local Plan following changes to national Government policies and the introduction of the National Planning Policy Framework in 2012.

1.5 Consultation that was undertaken under the LDF system is applicable to the preparation of the Local Plan and so this Statement will cover that consultation also.

1.6 There have been a number of stages in the development of the Local Plan Strategy. The consultation stages and associated evidence base collected to support the Local Plan Strategy has allowed the Council to develop a greater understanding of the issues and opportunities that exist in Cheshire East. Responses received during each previous consultation stage have been considered and changes made to the overall approach to the Local Plan Strategy as and when considered appropriate. The key stages in the development of the Local Plan Strategy are set out in Figure 1.1.

1 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/cheshire_east_local_plan/community_involvement.aspx Introduction

2 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 Figure 1.1 Key Stages in the Development of the Local Plan Strategy

1.7 Copies of the Council's Statement of Community Involvement, this Statement and all other published Local Plan documents are available on the Council's website at www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/localplan. Introduction

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 3 2 The Regulations

2.1 This Statement has been produced in accordance with the requirement under Regulations 18, 19, 20 and 22 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012 (the Regulations) to publish a statement setting out:

i. Which bodies and persons were invited to make representations under Regulation 18. ii. How those bodies and persons were invited to make representations under Regulation 18. iii. A summary of the main issues made by those representations under Regulation 18. iv. How those main issues have been addressed in the Local Plan Strategy. v. The number of representations made under Regulation 20 and a summary of the main issues raised in those representations.

2.2 The Regulations state that the Council, in its role as Local Planning Authority, must notify a range of agencies, organisations and individuals at each preparation stage of the Local Plan and invite them to make representations on its content. These representations must then be taken into consideration in the development of the Local Plan.

2.3 The bodies to be notified include those specific consultation bodies referred to in the Regulations, adjacent Authorities, Town and Parish Councils, representatives of the Local Strategic Partnership (Partnership for Action in Cheshire East)/Local Area Partnership, business interests and major landowners including developers and agents, infrastructure providers, interest groups and hard to reach groups. In addition the Council publicise each consultation stage and invite representations from the general public.

2.4 In Appendix B of this document there is a list of the bodies consulted on the preparation of the Local Plan Strategy; other bodies, for example Cheshire Local Nature Partnership, the Civil Aviation Authority and Manchester Airport, have been consulted through the Duty to Cooperate obligation introduced by the Localism Act (2011). Cheshire East's Duty to Cooperate Statement of Compliance can be found on the Council's website.(2) In addition private individuals who had expressed an interest in the Local Plan Strategy have been consulted at various stages, as well as local Councillors, other Council departments and other bodies including Cheshire Fire and Rescue Service and North West Ambulance Service. There were 13,875 active consultees registered on the Council's Local Plan consultation database at the end of the Pre-Submission Core Strategy consultation. At the end of the Local Plan Strategy - Submission Version formal representation period 14,001 active consultees had registered on the consultation database.

Statement of Community Involvement

2.5 The Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) sets out how Cheshire East Borough Council intends to involve all sectors of the community in the planning process. Both in the preparation of planning policy through the Local Development Framework (LDF) (now known as the Local Plan); and in the determination of planning applications. A draft SCI was consulted on between 23rd November 2009 and 18th January 2010 and the Statement was adopted on 14th October 2010. Regulations

2 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/research_and_evidence.aspx The

4 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 2.6 All consultation has been carried out in accordance with the Statement of Community Involvement, as illustrated in Appendix A of this document. A list of media coverage for the consultation stages undertaken as part of the preparation of the Local Plan Strategy can be found in Appendix G of this document. Regulations The

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 5 3 Core Strategy Issues and Options Paper (2010)

3.1 Cheshire East Council’s consultation on the Issues and Options for the Core Strategy took place between 8 November and 20 December 2010. In addition, Parish and Town Councils that requested extra time to enable them to make their submissions were given until 31 January 2011. Any other representations that were received during this period were also accepted.

3.2 The Issues and Options Paper set out options for the overall strategy for the future of the Borough and asked some fundamental questions about what Cheshire East should look like in 2030, how much growth should be included in the Core Strategy and where, in a broad sense, the development should be located. The document sets out a vision for the future of the Borough and included a number of strategic priorities for consultation.

3.3 The Core Strategy Issues and Options Paper also identified a number of strategic level issues and options for the future development of the Borough. The consultation on the Issues and Options Paper highlighted the need to provide a 'bottom up' understanding for the Principal Towns and Key Service Centres identified in the Determining the Settlement Hierarchy paper.(3)

How stakeholders were invited to make representations

3.4 Stakeholders were invited by email or letter to make representations, with full details of the consultation being available on Cheshire East's website. Comments could be submitted on the consultation portal, by email or by post.

3.5 The consultation documents comprised the formal Core Strategy Issues and Options Paper, a Sustainability Appraisal, Habitats Regulations Assessment, a leaflet, a questionnaire and a poster, copies of which were made available for inspection at Cheshire East Council’s

(2010) offices in Sandbach. They could also be viewed at the Council offices in Crewe and Macclesfield and all of the Cheshire East libraries. The libraries were also given an explanatory letter and a poster to put on public display. Details of the consultation were also included on the customer information screens at Cheshire East Council’s Customer Service Paper Centres.

3.6 Copies of the consultation documents were sent to Cheshire East Council Members, Parish and Town Councils and the Statutory Consultees (English Heritage, Natural England,

Options the Environment Agency and the Government Office for the North West). All Parish and Town Councils were sent a poster to put on public display.

and 3.7 The consultation included six workshops with the following stakeholders:

Cheshire East Council Members; environmental groups; Issues the business community; infrastructure providers; social housing providers; Strategy

3 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/research_and_evidence/settlement_hierarchy_study.aspx Core

6 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 house builders; and Parish and Town Councils.

3.8 The workshops were held at a variety of locations across Cheshire East, at different times of the day and were run by an independent facilitator. The workshops were attended by over 200 stakeholders and all Cheshire East Members were invited to the Members' workshop.

3.9 Two Focus Groups were also held with members of the Cheshire East Citizens Panel, who were selected at random and live in a variety of locations across Cheshire East. The Panel are invited to participate in research and consultation with the Council on a regular basis. The Focus Groups were held in the early evening, in the libraries at Crewe and Macclesfield. 20 Panel members attended the Focus Group Introduction sessions, which were facilitated by Officers from Cheshire East Council’s Research and Policy Team.

3.10 In addition, Officers have also attended other meetings with stakeholders, on request; they include various Local Area Partnership (LAP) and Town Council meetings.

3.11 The consultation publicity included two press releases, which resulted in a number of articles being published in the press; an article on Radio Stoke and an article in the Cheshire East News December 2010 edition, which was made available at Cheshire East Council’s offices, libraries and leisure facilities.

3.12 Two articles were published in editions of the Cheshire East ‘Partnerships’ newsletter, which is circulated to a wide range of Partners including the LAPs, Community and Voluntary Services (CVS) and Town Partnerships; it was also available on Cheshire East Council’s website.

3.13 Information was published on the screens in Cheshire East's Customer Service Centres, throughout the consultation period. (2010)

3.14 The home page of Cheshire East Council’s website featured the consultation in the ‘Have Your Say’ section, as well as on the Local Plan pages and the Cheshire East

Consultation Portal, all of which are linked. Paper

3.15 An article was included on the ‘Good Migration’ website, which is aimed at migrant workers in Cheshire East.

3.16 The Crewe Blog featured the press release on its website. Options

3.17 Two articles were included in the weekly staff newsletter ‘Team Talk’ and an article and was featured in the December 2010 edition of the internal Places Departmental newsletter ‘Your Place’.

Issues and Options main issues Issues

3.18 The response to the consultation included 1,295 comments, from 460 separate consultees. A petition, requesting the retention of the Green Gap boundary in the Willaston area, on the edge of Crewe, was also received. The petition contained 1,231 signatures. Strategy Core

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 7 The Sustainability Appraisal consultation received 40 representations from eight separate consultees, which have been presented in a table in Appendix D of the Pre-Submission Core Strategy Sustainability (Integrated) Appraisal report.(4)

3.19 The consultation was based on a questionnaire with the key messages summarised below.

Question 1

3.20 The three key issues with regards to key challenges were:

1. The need to provide new transport and other infrastructure plus the enhancement of public services with new development. These should be delivered in advance or alongside new development, rather than afterwards. In particular, delivery of the Poynton bypass and improvement/integration of public transport services were raised as key issues. 2. Protection of the Green Belt. This is a key challenge, with development directed to brownfield sites first, then to greenfield sites outside of the Green Belt. However, there is also a need for a strategic review of Green Belt to accommodate some development in settlements bounded by it. 3. The need for sustainable development. It is necessary to reduce the need to travel and provide a sufficient number of new houses in sustainable locations where need exists and where people want to live.

Question 2 (b)

3.21 The three key messages for improvements to the Spatial Vision were:

1. Vision is too generic, highly aspirational, and should be meaningful and deliverable. 2. Support Crewe Vision. (2010) 3. Support Key Service Centre (KSC) designations; they are critical to service delivery.

Question 3 (b) Paper 3.22 The three key messages for improvements to the Spatial Objectives were:

1. Strengthen the objectives to ensure sustainable patterns of development with good access to key services, employment opportunities and open space. Options 2. Include protecting landscape character, the countryside and key environmental assets in the objectives.

and 3. Emphasise the importance of developing a sustainable transport network, and promotion of walking, cycling and public transport.

Question 4 (b) Issues 3.23 The three key messages on the growth strategies were: Strategy

4 http://cheshireeast-consult.limehouse.co.uk/portal/planning/cs/cspresa Core

8 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 1. The high growth option meets the objectives of the Crewe Vision, All Change for Crewe, Unleashing the Potential Sub-Regional Economic Strategy and the objectives of the Core Strategy. 2. The high growth option delivers most affordable housing, meets both housing needs and migration, will prevent out migration and the fact that the low and medium growth options do not meet current or future development needs as reasons to support the high growth option. 3. There is a need for greater levels of development than the high growth option, as supported by the Cheshire East Strategic Housing Market Assessment. The high growth option is the minimum level acceptable.

Question 5 (b)

3.24 The three key messages with regards to the settlement hierarchy were:

1. Crewe has been identified as the biggest spatial priority where 37% of the proposed growth is proposed and this should be reflected in the designations. The town should be recognised as a Principal Growth Town or given Sub Regional town status. 2. Poynton should not be classed a Key Service Centre for a number of reasons including public transport provision, the impact upon the Green Belt and the capacity of the existing road network and public services. 3. Congleton should be a Principal Town; if it remains a Key Service Centre then it should be a focus for growth.

Question 6 (b and c)

3.25 There have been a number of points raised in the responses to the spatial options, in particular:

1. Part of/all of the Green Belt should be protected or extended. The Green Belt should (2010) be reviewed. 2. Green Gaps in the Crewe and Nantwich area should be maintained in the Core Strategy. 3. The importance of allowing communities to maintain their own local character, through Paper consultation with local people and local organisations. 4. The Options provided in the Core Strategy were very similar and there was no alternative option for Crewe as each of the Options gave Crewe 37% of the development. 5. There was opportunity for further development to be incorporated in the Key Service

Centres for a number of reasons including their sustainability and accessibility. Options 6. The greater Crewe or wider Crewe urban area should be the basis for the Crewe

development, with respondents suggesting the inclusion of Shavington. and

Question 7 (a)

3.26 The key messages from the responses received with regards to the rural variant were: Issues

1. Development in the Local Service Centres will benefit smaller communities served by them. 2. If development is to be allowed in the Local Service Centres and villages it should not

include development in Green Belt or Green Gap, as there are sites available that are Strategy capable of accommodating development without the loss of Green Belt or Green Gap. Core

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 9 3. Sustainable locations for development should take precedence, whether that is Principal Towns, Key Service Centres or Local Service Centres. 4. Development of sites in the Local Service Centres or villages is unlikely to provide sustainable transport.

How were these issues addressed?

3.27 The main issues were considered by officers and, where relevant, fed into the Development Strategy and Policy Principles documents. The majority of the policies in the Policy Principles have reflected issues raised during the consultation. Examples of this include: the need for infrastructure, including leisure facilities to be provided, addressed in policy SC 1 'Leisure'; the need to provide opportunities for healthy lifestyles for the Borough's residents, carried forward into policy SC 2 'Health and wellbeing'; and the need to deliver affordable homes, reflected in policy SC 4 'Housing to meet local needs'.

3.28 The response to the comments on the Sustainability Appraisal can be found in Appendix D of the Pre-Submission Core Strategy Sustainability (Integrated) Appraisal.(5)

3.29 Further information on this consultation, including copies of the consultation documents, presentations, stakeholder workshop and Citizens Panel focus group summaries, publicity and summaries of representations can be found on the Council's website.(6) (2010) Paper Options and Issues Strategy 5 http://cheshireeast-consult.limehouse.co.uk/portal/planning/cs/cspresa 6 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/cheshire_east_local_plan/local_plan_consultations/issues_and_options.aspx Core

10 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 4 Place Shaping (2011)

4.1 Cheshire East Council’s Place Shaping consultation took place between 1st July and 30th September 2011. In addition, Parish and Town Councils and Local Area Partnerships were given an extended deadline of 31 October 2011 and all schools were given an extended deadline of 18 November 2011.

4.2 To better understand the issues in each of the settlements identified in the Determining the Settlement Hierarchy paper,(7)a Snapshot Report was prepared for each Principal Town and Key Service Centre. The Snapshot Report provided information on housing, economy, town centre, transport, built and natural environment and community infrastructure in each town. The Snapshot Report and consultation provided a useful insight into the prominent planning issues in the Principal Towns and Key Service Centres and promoted an overall understanding of Cheshire East as a unified place.

How stakeholders were invited to make representations

4.3 Stakeholders were invited by email or letter to make representations, with full details of the consultation being available on Cheshire East's website. Comments could be submitted on the consultation portal, by email or by post, using a freepost address.

4.4 The consultation documents comprised detailed Snapshot Reports, along with summary leaflets, for the 11 towns of Alsager, Congleton, Crewe, Handforth, Knutsford, Macclesfield, Middlewich, Sandbach, Nantwich, Poynton and Wilmslow. A questionnaire was included in the centre of each of the summary leaflets and was also available as a separate document. The documents were made available for inspection at Cheshire East Council’s offices in Sandbach, the Council’s Customer Service Centres in Crewe and Macclesfield, and Cheshire East libraries. The libraries were also given an explanatory letter and a poster to put on public display.

4.5 Copies of the consultation documents were sent to Cheshire East Council Members and Parish and Town Councils and an MPs Briefing Note was sent out to all MPs that cover the Cheshire East area.

4.6 Posters were produced to publicise the consultation; these were sent to Town Centre Managers and were also put up by local Councillors and members of the Spatial Planning Team.

4.7 ‘Your Place’ packs were also produced for schools and groups to use as a resource, to enable them to explore the issues involved in planning for a community’s future. It was a new activity that was created to try and engage all members of the community in the Place Shaping consultation. It consisted of seven specially created characters with different 1) circumstances. Communities were asked to put themselves into their position and consider how their requirements may change with time; particularly looking ahead for the next 10 to (201 20 years or so. The consultation period for Your Place ran from 1 July 2011 until 30 September 2011 (31 October for schools, extended to 18 November 2011 to take into account half term). Shaping

7 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/research_and_evidence/settlement_hierarchy_study.aspx Place

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 11 4.8 Other methods used to involve young persons included presentations in schools, a Crewe Youth Voice event, a Connexions film and a photography competition.

4.9 Touch screens were placed at the Customer Service Centres in Crewe and Macclesfield, which enabled the questionnaire to be completed without using a computer; 97 responses were made using these.

4.10 Cheshire East Council Officers attended more than 30 meetings as part of the consultation.

4.11 The consultation included five Local Area Partnership (LAP) Assemblies, to which members of the LAPs and members of the public were invited. The LAP Assemblies were held in the early evening, in the towns of Macclesfield, Nantwich, Crewe and Congleton. Four of the LAP Assemblies were run by an independent facilitator, with a further one being facilitated by a member of Cheshire East Council’s Organisational Development Team. The LAP Assemblies were attended by around 400 stakeholders. Feedback from these events was placed on the Place Shaping blog shortly after they took place.

4.12 Two public meetings were also held, in the early evening, in Handforth and Shavington, at the request of local residents; they were attended by around 200 residents. Officers from the Spatial Planning Team also attended meetings with Parish Councils, on request, including Odd Rode, Holmes Chapel, Willaston, Prestbury and Disley.

4.13 The consultation included 13 exhibitions, held in the 11 towns that were the subject of the Snapshot Reports and upon request in the villages of Haslington and Shavington. They included display boards that set out the consultation process, along with details of the issues for each town. Members of Cheshire East Council staff were available to answer questions. Copies of the consultation documents and questionnaires were also available at each venue. The Your Place packs were available to inspect at the exhibitions as were aerial photographs of the towns, with stakeholders being able to write comments on them, on sticky notes. There was a ‘tops’ and ‘pants’ activity for young people to make their comments.

4.14 The exhibitions were attended by in excess of 1,350 stakeholders.

4.15 From 22 to 30 September 2011, the exhibition could be viewed in the reception area of Cheshire East Council’s Headquarters at Westfields in Sandbach.

4.16 There were also eight ‘out and about’ events held in those towns that have markets, in August, in the markets/town centre areas on market day, where members of Cheshire East Council staff were available to answer questions.

4.17 Consultation documents were made available at other events that took place throughout 1) the consultation period. Spatial Planning Team officers attended events, for example Sandbach Today and East Cheshire Chamber Open Day, Congleton. Copies of consultation documents (201 were distributed through the Local Area Partnerships and at Cheshire East events, for example the reopening of Queens Park in Crewe.

4.18 The consultation has included seven press releases, which resulted in a number of articles being published in the press. Shaping Place

12 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 4.19 Local radio articles included features on BBC Radio Stoke; BBC Radio Manchester; Red Shift Radio; Silk FM and Chester Radio Dee 106.3. Details of the exhibitions in the Crewe and Nantwich area were also included in the Radio Stoke What’s On listing that is read out on air each day.

4.20 The home page of Cheshire East Council’s website featured the consultation in the ‘Have Your Say’ section, as well as on the Local Plan pages and the Cheshire East Consultation Portal, all of which were linked.

4.21 Four articles were published in editions of the Cheshire East ‘Partnerships’ newsletter, which is circulated to a wide range of Partners, including the LAPs, Community and Voluntary Services (CVS) and Town Partnerships; it was also available on Cheshire East Council’s website.

4.22 Articles were placed on several websites including the ‘Good Migration’ website, which is aimed at migrant workers in Cheshire East, as well as Crewe Blog, Knutsford.com, Mumsnet Haslington and Prestbury.com.

4.23 Eight articles were included in the internal Cheshire East Council staff newsletter ‘Team Talk’.

4.24 Seven articles were included in the internal Cheshire East Council Schools Bulletin. A request was also made for schools to display the exhibitions list poster.

4.25 An article was included in the internal Cheshire East Council staff newsletter ‘Places’.

4.26 Articles were included in the Summer and Autumn editions of Cheshire East News. This was distributed to 27,000 households in the Borough and 1,400 copies were also available, free of charge, from five venues in Cheshire East.

4.27 An article on the consultation was included on the Leighton Hospital, Crewe staff intranet, the Central and Eastern Cheshire Primary Care Trust’s intranet and in the Central and Eastern Cheshire Primary Care Trust’s staff newsletter.

4.28 Details of the consultation were also included on customer information screens at Cheshire East Council’s Customer Service Centres, throughout the consultation period.

4.29 Posters, promoting the consultation, were sent to all libraries and leisure centres in the Borough.

4.30 A vinyl banner was displayed outside exhibition venues, where possible, when the exhibitions were taking place. 1) 4.31 A ‘blue tooth’ device was placed at different locations across Cheshire East during

the consultation. (201

4.32 In excess of 100,000 leaflets publicising the Place Shaping consultation and the exhibitions were distributed to houses across the Borough, using a combination of a leaflet distribution company and free newspapers. Shaping Place

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 13 Place Shaping main issues

4.33 The response to the consultation included the submission of 2,359 questionnaires. The main issues have been summarised by town.

Alsager

4.34 The consultation identified that Alsager had good health facilities and a strong sense of community. Whilst the shopping facilities, job prospects and the affordability of homes in the town were identified as areas needing improvement in the town.

Congleton

4.35 The factors most valued in Congleton were that it enjoyed a strong sense of community and benefited from access to the countryside. Job prospects, shopping facilities and traffic levels were identified as being in most need of improvement in the town.

Crewe

4.36 In Crewe, the factors most valued were community facilities such as libraries and theatres, health and educational facilities. The town centre and its appearance, traffic levels and employment opportunities were identified as being of most need of improvement in the town.

Handforth

4.37 The consultation identified that people particularly liked the health services in Handforth. They also liked the transport links to nearby towns and villages and areas to go walking. The two things that were identified as areas most in need of improvement were the district centre as a whole and allotments, parks and other green spaces.

Knutsford

4.38 In Knutsford, the town centre, the appearance of the town, the restaurants, bars and pubs and the evening economy, the historic buildings and the sense of community were all highlighted as elements that people like. Needing significant improvement were a shortage in car parking spaces, high traffic levels in and through the town at peak periods, and a lack of convenient public transport links between the town and nearby towns and villages.

Macclesfield

4.39 The factors most valued in Macclesfield were the availability/access to areas for

1) walking (walk the dog, canal walks and country walks), closeness to health facilities (doctors, health centres, hospitals and other health facilities) and that it enjoyed a strong sense of

(201 community. The town centre as as a whole, shopping facilities, the appearance of the town and job prospects/employment opportunities were identified as being in most need of improvement in the town. Shaping Place

14 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 Middlewich

4.40 The factors most valued in Middlewich were that it has a number of attractive and diverse recreational, natural areas, canal walks and country walks; has a strong sense of community; and good provision of health services. Shopping facilities; job prospects and employment opportunities; transport links to nearby towns and villages; traffic levels in the town; and the town centre as a whole were identified as being in most need of improvement in the town.

Nantwich

4.41 In Nantwich, responses to the consultation indicated that the things people most liked about the town was the place as a whole, the historic buildings and character of the town; and the surrounding countryside. Areas in need of improvement included the high level of traffic; the under supply of car parking; employment opportunities and the availability of affordable housing.

Poynton

4.42 The things that people most liked about Poynton were areas to walk the dog, canal walks and country walks, the sense of community and the town centre as a whole. Identified as most needing improvement in the town were traffic levels, transport links to nearby towns or villages, outdoor sport and leisure pitches and job prospects and employment opportunities.

Sandbach

4.43 In Sandbach, responses to the consultation indicated that the things people most liked about the town were the town centre as a whole, the appearance of the town and that it enjoys a strong sense of community. Shopping facilities, traffic levels, job prospects and employment opportunities were identified as being of most need of improvement in the town.

Wilmslow

4.44 In Wilmslow, responses to the consultation indicated that the things people most liked about the town were the town centre as a whole, allotments, parks and other greenspaces and areas to walk the dog, canals walks and country walks. The appearance of the town, traffic levels and the town centre as a whole were identified as being of most need of improvement in the town.

How were these issues addressed?

4.45 The main issues were considered by officers and, where relevant, fed into the (draft) Town Strategies and the Policy Principles document. Examples of this include: the 1) improvement of job prospects and employment opportunities, addressed in policies EG 1 'Economic prosperity' and EG 3 'Existing and allocated employment sites'; the need for (201 housing for older people, carried forward into policy SC 3 'Residential mix'; the affordability of housing, reflected in policy SC 4 'Housing to meet local needs'; and the need to improve open space and a place's appearance, addressed in policy SE 5 'Green infrastructure'. Shaping Place

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 15 4.46 Further information on this consultation, including copies of the consultation documents, publicity, displays, presentations, the involvement of young persons and summaries of representations can be found on the Council's website.(8) 1) (201 Shaping

8 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/cheshire_east_local_plan/local_plan_consultations/place_shaping_consultation/place_shaping_results.aspx Place

16 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 5 Rural Issues (2011)

5.1 Cheshire East Council's consultation on the Rural Issues Summary Document took place between 16 September and 30 November 2011.

5.2 The discussion paper on rural issues set out the planning context, identified emerging Government guidance and key challenges for the Core Strategy to address. It included topics on the rural economy, Green Belt, landscape character, biodiversity, heritage, renewable energy, rural housing, transport and community facilities. The consultation provided a greater understanding of planning issues in the rural areas of the Borough.

How stakeholders were invited to make representations

5.3 A Rural Stakeholders Workshop was held on the 16 September 2011 to specifically address rural issues by seeking the expertise of a number of key agencies and establish an appropriate way forward to plan for the future of our rural communities over the next 20 years. This workshop was also where the consultation was launched.

5.4 Town and Parish Councils were invited by email to make representations, with full details of the consultation being available on Cheshire East's website. Comments could be submitted on the consultation portal, by email or by post.

5.5 The consultation documents comprised of the Rural Issues Summary Document and a questionnaire, copies of which were made available for inspection at Cheshire East Council's offices in Sandbach. They could also be viewed at the Council offices in Crewe and Macclesfield and all of the Cheshire East libraries.

Rural Issues main issues

5.6 There were 97 comments received to the wider consultation. The top three issues for each topic, based on the number of respondents, are outlined below.

Rural economy

The development of countryside enterprise and rural employment should be supported and encouraged and farm diversification, the setting up of micro businesses, the reuse of appropriate empty buildings and working landscape should be allowed. The best agricultural land for food production as a vital and increasingly important, core component of the rural economy, which is as important as the provision of development land for a growing economy should be acknowledged and protected. The size of housing developments in rural areas within defined parameters should be restricted. Small scale development should be considered first in the town/village catchment areas in consultation with Parish Councils. 1)

Green Belt (201

The Green Belt should be protected from development or re-categorisation. Issues Rural

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 17 Development in the Green Belt should be limited to agriculture, forestry, mineral extraction and outdoor sport and recreation that preserve the openness of the Green Belt, and some forms of renewable energy (as set out in the renewable energy study). Policies should maintain a presumption against development in the Green Belt.

Landscape character

Local designations are important and are needed. Cheshire County Council's Landscape Character Assessment is too broad brush, and is not protective. Areas of Special County Value (ASCV) recognise that some areas are more important than others and need more protection. The ASCV definition should be retained. Local designations should be produced, for example Parish Landscape Statements in the form of Supplementary Planning Documents. Preservation, protection and maintenance of the character and fabric for a variety of special landscape areas, for example wetland mosses, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and so on. Only allow small development that will not interfere with the present use of the countryside, which are in keeping with existing buildings and landscape and that do not change the landscape character from one character to another.

Biodiversity

No development that negatively affects biodiversity. Require existing developments to actively improve their sites for the benefit of biodiversity, for example more tree planting and Tree Preservation Orders (developer contributions). Protection of indigenous species and facilitation for the reintroduction of species, along with the management of invasive species. Establishment of a baseline habitat survey and biodiversity audit, to include percentages of the total undeveloped area covered and not currently covered by designations that could help protect biodiversity, for example Local Nature Reserves. Greater protection of species routes and feeding areas as well as habitats. Sequential testing should be required to make sure that development is not permitted when there are alternative sites in an area. Maintain or improve the landscape for Biodiversity Action Plan species, for example old copse for dormice. This could link to the local economy and possible job creation. Protection of ancient woodlands and veteran trees outside woodlands (Planning Policy Statement 9 and draft National Planning Policy Framework) and a recognition that Environmental stewardship and English Woodland Grants Scheme can support better management and promote woodland planting. Protection of Sites of Special Scientific Interest and local wildlife sites, along with Green Belt and good farming practices will make sure wildlife is protected into the future. 1) Rural heritage

(201 Protection of heritage especially unique features, buildings and the character of an area wherever possible, including transport links such as canals and railways. Need more than a simple recording of where heritage sites exist. Need the adoption of

Issues the English Heritage conservation principles, protectionist policies and also a re-adoption Rural

18 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 of all Conservation Area Appraisals and more decision making by local groups and parishes involved. Acknowledgement of all Listed Buildings, sites, monuments, and Conservation Areas, and an agreement to retain these for future generations, undertaking preventative actions and maintenance and funding. Sympathetic change and modification with a positive and practical attitude will make sure buildings are retained for future use. Proactive policies should allow this, including grants

Renewable energy

The case for inland wind farms is not made satisfactorily (LDA Report 'Cheshire East Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Planning Research') commissioned by CEC). Applications should be viewed under the strictest criteria, with turbines being avoided in rural upland areas where they could have a detrimental effect on landscape character, nearby housing, tourism and migrating birds. The use of solar panels should be encouraged wherever possible with Cheshire East Council taking a lead, with relaxed planning requirements (except in Conservation Areas) and provide impartial advice about small energy production in the home. Incentives/subsidies for homes and businesses to adopt renewable energy schemes including wind power, solar energy and rain water harvesting. Small scale hydro-electric schemes are generally out of sight and should be explored as a good fit to Cheshire East’s landscape.

Rural housing

Village Design Statements and all other adopted Supplementary Planning Documents relating to housing, settlement patterns and landscape should be taken forward into the new Local Plan. Where Parish Plans indicate preferences with regard to local housing, these should be given due credence. These are all prime examples of 'localism' in action. As a general rule, the majority of housing development should be in existing towns and the 'brownfield land first' rule should apply everywhere. Unless a rural community has indicated differently through a Neighbourhood Plan or a Parish Plan, rural communities should not be expected to accept any more than the most modest amount of housing necessary to make sure that they retain a balanced mix of homes and that the infrastructure has the capacity to cope with additional demands. Retention of settlement zone lines; limited small scale development to provide starter homes in rural settlements should be supported provided the infrastructure is sufficient. Policies should demand a documented proof of need for the proposed number and types of houses in the area; this proof to be included in the submission of planning applications. The requirement to undertake individual parish assessments to ascertain the need -

prior to permitting development on greenfield (brownfield would be exempt). Sequential 1) Sustainability Tests should be required to make sure that development is not permitted

when there are alternative suitable brownfield sites in the area. (201

Transport and communication

Improved rural transport. Improved community facilities and transport links. Issues Rural

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 19 Improve road maintenance but reduce speed limits and increase signage to reduce accidents. More restrictions on vehicles over 3.5 tonnes in rural areas and on quite lanes, to ensure the safe use by walkers, cyclists and horse riders. That rural transport be protected and maintained (through subsidies) so rural communities flourish by making the bus route more viable by making the route cover much more area, linking more than one or two communities to several key towns or areas, with interlink stage points or hubs. Making access to rural health centres easier and hospitals.

How were these issues addressed?

5.7 The main issues were considered by officers and, where relevant, fed into the policies contained in the Policy Principles document. Examples of this include the incorporation of several issues into policy EG 2 'Rural economy' and the issues of scale of development and need in rural areas addressed in policy SC 5 'Rural exceptions housing for local needs'.

5.8 Further information on this consultation, including the consultation documents and a summary of the representations can be found on the Council's website.(9) 1) (201 Issues

9 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/cheshire_east_local_plan/local_plan_consultations.aspx Rural

20 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 6 Minerals Issues Discussion Paper (2012)

6.1 Cheshire East Council's consultation on the Minerals Issues Discussion Paper took place between the 2 March and 2 April 2012.

6.2 The Minerals Issues Discussion Paper served to discuss the importance of mineral extraction in the Borough. It gave an opportunity for those parties involved in minerals planning in Cheshire East to offer their views on how the Local Plan should approach key strategic minerals planning issues. There was also an opportunity to provide additional information on possible sites and areas of future mineral working and safeguarding.

How stakeholders were invited to make representations

6.3 Stakeholders were invited by email or letter to make representations, with full details of the consultation being available on Cheshire East's website. Comments could be submitted on the consultation portal, by email or by post.

6.4 The consultation documents comprised the Minerals Issues Discussion Paper and a questionnaire, copies of which were made available for inspection at Cheshire East Council's offices at Crewe, Macclesfield and Sandbach and all of the Cheshire East libraries.

6.5 The consultation was publicised through Council press releases with notification given to Cheshire East Local Members, Town and Parish Councils, MPs, statutory consultees, local mineral operators and environmental groups.

Minerals Issues main issues

6.6 There were 31 responses received to the consultation, primarily from groups and organisations (or their agents) with an interest in minerals planning in Cheshire East. The consultation was based on a questionnaire and the key viewpoints, by question, have been summarised below.

Question 1 (2012) It should be acknowledged we do not have a complete knowledge of mineral resources as this would depend on extensive geological surveying and the information currently

held should only be a starting point. It should also be noted that the viability of mineral Paper resources is dependent on the prevailing economic climate at any moment in time. It would therefore be prudent to allow some degree of flexibility when defining viability. Concerning silica sand, it should be emphasised that Cheshire East contains resources of the highest quality and that this mineral has been recognised as being of national importance. It is not so much a question of there being few locations in the UK where silica sand occurs in sufficient quantities to be economically viable to extract, but that Discussion there are very few silica sand deposits of any size in the UK. Concerning hard rock resources, further acknowledgement should be made of their importance for historic building and area conservation and enhancement. The National

Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) addresses both the need to secure building and Issues roofing stone for the repair of heritage assets. Minerals

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 21 Question 2

Responses from those with an interest in silica sand favoured the identification of Preferred Areas for future extraction and Areas of Search for possible extraction. This approach would provide a degree of both certainty and flexibility for the industry and local community. There is a need to maintain a minimum 10 year landbank at each site throughout the Plan period (or 15 years where significant capital investment required). From those with an interest in sand and gravel, the identification of specific sites, allocation of Preferred Areas and Areas of Search would provide the minerals industry and local communities with certainty as to the future location of mineral workings. This could be underpinned by a criteria based policy to provide the Plan with flexibility to meet any shortfall in sites to meet the sub-regional provision, or in the event that Preferred Areas or sites in Areas of Search do not come forward within the Plan period. There is a need for the Local Plan to seek to meet sub-regional apportionment though allocations and maintain a minimum landbank of 7 years. Responses concerning the provision of hard rock for aggregate purposes highlighted the need for meeting the recommended sub-regional apportionment and maintaining at least a 10 year landbank. With the landbank standing currently at about 34 years of production there is no general need for additional provision of hard rock reserves. However, there should be provision for borrow-pits where major infrastructure projects may be implemented, and where equivalent reserves may need to be imported from other areas. Planning to meet this aggregate provision and maintain supply should also be considered in the wider context, taking into account the impacts of the gradual rundown of aggregate supply from the neighbouring Peak District National Park. There is a need for and supply of stone for heritage building and roofing stone. An increase in the overall proportion of mineral provision should be secured from secondary and recycled sources first before primary aggregates, in line with the NPPF. For future areas for salt extraction in Cheshire East, an additional land area should be agreed to ensure the long term supply of salt (as brine) with the resulting cavity void space suitable for cost effective gas storage. This would provide certainty of supply for industry, which in turn helps future investment decisions and secures jobs. (2012) Responses relating to future coal extraction suggested that the Plan should not discount coal proposals coming forward, although it is probably sufficient for the Plan to set out overall criteria based policy framework for energy minerals collectively.

Paper Responses concerning the securing of an adequate and steady supply of onshore hydrocarbons highlighted the need for clearly defined policy that provides a presumption in favour of exploration and development, subject to assessing site specific considerations. Responses concerning future peat extraction highlighted policy in the NPPF stating that Local Authorities should not identify new sites or extensions to existing sites for peat extraction. Good quality peat is vital to act as a buffer to climate change and is valuable

Discussion for maintaining good water quality, flood attenuation, storing water, recording archaeology and historic climate changes as well as providing wildlife habitats for a range of protected flora and fauna.

Issues Question 3

For specialist materials, such as silica sand and building stone, the end use needs to be clearly identified as part of the planning application process and controls on end use Minerals

22 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 put in place. This could be achieved through suitable agreements or planning conditions. A fundamental element of the approach to minerals planning should be increasing targets for the proportion of mineral provision to be met by secondary and recycled minerals. It would be very difficult to set criteria that could then be monitored and controlled with the market ultimately determining how the resource is used. To say that resources are being used for a less than efficient purpose would require evidence and competence on the part of the Local Authority to judge whether a mineral is being used sustainably. Planning would therefore be straying into the realm of the commercial business of mineral operators for no good reason. In the case of silica sand, end uses are continually changing and whilst advancements are being made in technology to help increase recycling of glass cullet, the specification required by industry is so high that a large proportion of primary material is still required to produce the right quality glass.

Question 4

With the exception of glass, recycling would not be feasible in respect of silica sand. Sources of recycled aggregates are not necessarily going to be located in areas where demand is being generated. The environmental impacts of longer haulage for some recycled products should be taken into account. Due to the nature of the processes, the recycling of salt as a raw material for the salt and soda ash industries is not a viable option. Promotion of secondary mineral resources can only be achieved through the planning system by permitting sufficient environmentally acceptable recycling facilities (in quarries if necessary) and by changing specifications for public works to include recycled materials where possible. For recycled aggregates to achieve a significant part in the supply chain, sites where materials can be processed will be needed. The best place for policies encouraging recycled materials would be in the Waste Plan either through the identification of potential recycling sites or policy that supports planning applications for appropriately sited facilities, which may include mineral working sites.

Question 5 (2012) Responses in relation to underground salt resources noted that a sufficient land area should be safeguarded to allow for access and extraction of the mineral and sufficient above and below ground infrastructure for development of gas storage facilities. A safeguarded area for salt should be sufficiently large to allow for the safety requirements Paper of a Control of Major Accidents Hazards (COMAH) site in the case of gas storage. In relation to underground unconventional hydrocarbon resources, it was suggested that the full extent of the Petroleum Exploration and Development Licence area should be assumed to be viable and safeguarded with policy framed to provide a presumption in favour of exploration and development. As below ground mineral resources are extensive, if the areas they cover were the Discussion subject of Mineral Safeguarding Areas (MSAs) it would greatly constrain any new development activity and therefore should not be the subject of MSAs. With regard to the initial approach to safeguarding, it was noted that there should be a Issues robust assessment of which minerals present in Cheshire East are of ‘local and national importance’ as set out in the NPPF. Minerals

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 23 Question 6

6.7 Minerals Safeguarding Areas (MSAs) should not be curtailed by urban areas. Reasons given included:

Nowhere in national policy does it indicate that mineral safeguarding is not necessary to be undertaken in urban areas. Best practice advice from the British Geological Survey (BGS) on safeguarding advises that urban areas and environmental designations should not be excluded - MSAs are intended to protect mineral resources for the long term. MSAs need to guard against indirect sterilisation from development of close areas. MSAs can highlight the potential opportunity for valuable prior mineral extraction, for example on brownfield or regeneration sites. The Coal Authority is not aware of any Development Plan Document having been successfully adopted with the urban area excluded from mineral safeguarding. Prior extraction of surface coal resources can easily take place in urban areas without undue harm to residential amenity. Technological advancements develop very quickly and may enable safe extraction in the future.

6.8 Other views questioned the need to safeguard all areas. Reasons for not safeguarding all areas included:

Conflict with the health and safety of an existing urban area where there may be environmental considerations that could be detrimental for the urban area. Areas are highly unlikely to be brought forward by the industry having regard to political issues and environmental constraints. Good quality deposits of salt are primarily located in rural areas therefore existing urban areas are unlikely to be affected by future extraction of minerals. Insofar as sand and gravel is concerned, land values and the cost of working reserves let alone environmental concerns would be likely to make any urban MSA an irrelevance.

(2012) Question 7

Buffer zone distances depend on the mineral resource in question. Advice on mineral safeguarding buffers is contained within BGS guidance and most Authorities seem to Paper use either 200m or 250m for sand and gravel and other soft rocks, and 500m for hard rocks that need blasting. In respect of coal, the Coal Authority does not see any particular need to apply a buffer zone around the surface coal resource in the definition of any MSA. For salt and subsequent gas storage, any requirement for a buffer distance is specified by COMAH requirements. Discussion Buffer distances are a useful aid to minerals planning, but they need to be flexible in order to take account of other methods of mitigation, such as bunding and tree planting, which could limit the requirement for a specific buffer distance. There is no need to distinguish between different mineral resources, and buffer distance applied around Issues them, as long as Government guidance relating to noise, air quality, blast vibration and visual amenity are met in respect of each proposal. Minerals

24 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 Question 8

The infrastructure listed in the NPPF (para. 143) should be safeguarded. There is a need to safeguard infrastructure associated with the processing of silica sand and salt (brine). Infrastructure related to sustainable modes of transportation should in principle also be safeguarded, such as historic rail sides or rail junction sites.

Question 9

The appropriate restoration of mineral sites should depend on the nature of the site taking each case on its merits. Restoration proposals that assist in providing for climate change adaptation being the most valued. Suggested appropriate end uses included:

Leisure facilities/areas for the public or private use. Wildlife conservation/place of beauty. Returned to agricultural use including salt cavities used for gas storage. Infill of inert materials. Housing, business and retail parks, employment land, office based business and science parks

Responses also noted that a pre-defined afteruse may not be appropriate as local societal and community needs will inevitably change.

Question 10

Priority should not be given to specific after-uses as such an approach may place unnecessary restrictions or burdens on future mineral sites and stifle innovative restoration/after-use proposals. It would therefore not be appropriate to designate specific afteruses for certain types of mineral working. Instead local planning policy should be developed to encourage consideration for positive and sustainable after uses appropriate for the local environment and the needs of the community as a whole. By generalising and placing preference over certain types of restoration on an Authority-wide basis, this may lead to a distorted number of projects that may not (2012) necessarily be in keeping with the local setting of the site, community aspirations for the long term use of the site or its environmental setting. Paper Question 11

The location of mineral deposits in Cheshire East does not generally lend itself to sustainable alternatives, such as strategically placed railways, waterways or pipelines. With the exception of salt (brine) and silica sand pipelines, there is currently no alternative transport method to road. Discussion Sustainable transportation infrastructure can often require significant capital investment. As such investment can only be made if sufficient long term supplies of mineral are available, long term planning is essential.

Minerals can only be worked where they are found, often in rural locations where road Issues is the only means of transporting the mineral from site to market. In the case of local quarries serving local markets, minimising the distance travelled even by road is a Minerals

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 25 sustainable outcome. Moreover, if there is no alternative to road transport then this is by definition the most sustainable option. The first requirement should be minimising demand. This, in turn, minimises the need for mineral transportation.

Question 12

Operators should only be required to demonstrate suitability of sustainable alternatives if a viable/economical alternative exists. This would need to be appropriate and accord with the NPPF and national and international obligations in respect of climate change. Any requirement would go beyond any national policy or technical guidance and be an expensive and futile exercise as there is no realistic alternative in Cheshire. Mineral operators are already required to look at transport alternatives as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment for new mineral sites and extensions to existing sites. Alternatives such as rail and water require very specific locational criteria (on top of a rail line, or next to a canal or river), plus a large reserve (to amortise the investment over 20 years or more), plus a concentrated market (to minimise double handling once delivered), plus large volumes (that is a train full) plus long distances to market (to out-compete with road haulage). The chance that all of these will occur together is fairly slim. Therefore, encouragement should be given to alternative transport where it is likely to be feasible but maintain a flexible attitude and not require every operator to demonstrate why they are not proposing alternatives such as rail or water.

Question 13

For gas storage and solution mining operators, economically viable projects need scales of economy that can only be achieved by developing a sufficient number of cavities that lie close to each other. For such reasons a pro-active approach is supported by the industry as it would give certainty to potential investors and developers. Permissions for gas storage in old salt mines should include a compulsory obligation that infrastructure on the surface is landscaped and screened.

(2012) How were these issues addressed?

6.9 The main issues were considered by officers and, where relevant, fed into policy SE 10 'Minerals' in the Policy Principles document. Paper 6.10 Further information on this consultation, including the consultation document can be found on the Council's website.(10) The consultation took place alongside the Phase1 consultation of the Town Strategies and therefore joint letters and emails were sent out, which can be found on the Council's website.(11) Discussion Issues

10 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/cheshire_east_local_plan/local_plan_consultations/mineral_issues_paper.aspx 11 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/cheshire_east_local_plan/local_plan_consultations/town_strategies_2012/phases_1_and_2_consultation.aspx Minerals

26 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 7 Town Strategies Phase 1 (2012)

7.1 Following on from the the Issues and Options and Place Shaping consultation, draft Town Strategies for Alsager, Congleton, Middlewich and Sandbach were prepared, as part of a Neighbourhood Planning 'Frontrunner' project, with funding from the Department for Communities and Local Government. Advisory Panels were formed in each town, made up of Town Councils, community partnerships, local businesses and community groups. Workshops were held and the draft Town Strategies were consulted upon. This consultation took place between 2 March and 2 April 2012.

7.2 The Town Strategies set out a vision for each town together with potential development opportunities and priorities for investment in infrastructure. They also covered other issues such as the future of each town centre.

7.3 The Strategies for Alsager, Middlewich, Congleton and Sandbach(12) have been finalised following consultation and approval by their respective Town Councils. They now form part of the evidence base for the Local Plan.

How stakeholders were invited to make representations

7.4 Stakeholders were invited by email or letter to make representations, with full details of the consultation being available on Cheshire East's website. Comments could be submitted on the consultation portal, by email or by post, using a freepost address.

7.5 The consultation documents comprised the draft Town Strategies for Alsager, Congleton, Middlewich and Sandbach, a questionnaire for each of the towns as well as a Sustainability Appraisal for each draft Town Strategy. Copies of the consultation documents could be inspected at Cheshire East Council’s offices in Sandbach. They were also available at the Council’s Customer Service Centres in Crewe and Macclesfield, along with the Cheshire East libraries. The libraries were also given an explanatory letter.

7.6 Copies of the consultation documents were sent to Cheshire East Council Members, Parish and Town Councils adjoining the four towns concerned, MPs covering the Cheshire East areas concerned and the Statutory Consultees of the Environment Agency, English Heritage and Natural England.

7.7 The consultation included exhibitions, held in the libraries of the four towns that were the subject of the draft Town Strategy Consultation, between 2 and 19 March 2012. They included display boards that set out the consultation process, along with details of the issues (2012) 1 for each town. The information on the display boards included a Quick Response (QR) code that members of the public could scan with a mobile phone (with the capability to do so), which then took them to the Local Plan page on the website, with the details of the consultation on it. Phase

7.8 Cheshire East Council staff were available to answer questions, at set times, at each exhibition. In addition, some Town Council and Stakeholder Panel members also made themselves available to answer questions at some of the exhibitions, at different times. Copies of the consultation documents and questionnaires were also available at each venue. Strategies

12 Sandbach Town Council has agreed the Final Strategy with the exception of Development Options, which have not been endorsed. own T

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 27 7.9 From 19 March 2012, the exhibitions for Alsager and Sandbach could be viewed in the reception area of Cheshire East Council’s Headquarters at Westfields in Sandbach; the exhibitions for Congleton and Middlewich could be viewed at the appropriate Town Council offices.

7.10 A Blog, accessed through the draft Town Strategy consultation page, was regularly updated during the consultation period and provided updates on the exhibitions, including photographs. Links were also provided to Spatial Planning pages on Facebook, twitter and LinkedIn.

7.11 A leaflet was produced to publicise the consultation, with about 40,000 distributed to all houses and businesses in the towns concerned and the immediately surrounding areas. Copies of the leaflet were also made available at the libraries in the four towns, the four Town Council offices and at Cheshire East Council’s Offices at Westfields in Sandbach.

7.12 The consultation has included a number of press releases that resulted in articles being published in the press.

7.13 Local radio articles included features on Silk FM (17/02/12) and BBC Radio Stoke; Councillor David Brown (Portfolio Holder for the Local Plan) was interviewed on Radio Stoke on 27 February 2012. Details of the exhibitions were also included in the Radio Stoke ‘What’s On’ listing that is read out on air each day.

7.14 An article was published in the March 2012 edition of the Cheshire East ‘Partnerships’ newsletter, which is circulated to a wide range of Partners, including the Local Area Partnerships (LAPs), Community and Voluntary Services (CVS) and Town Partnerships; it was also available on Cheshire East Council’s website.

7.15 An article was included on the ‘Good Migration’ website, which is aimed at migrant workers in Cheshire East.

7.16 Two articles were included in the internal Cheshire East Council weekly staff newsletter ‘Team Talk’.

7.17 Two articles were included in the internal Cheshire East Council Schools Bulletin, which included details of the exhibitions and a link to the Local Plan web page. Copies of the relevant documents and questionnaires were sent to the secondary schools in the four towns concerned. (2012)

1 7.18 Details of the consultation were also included on the customer information screens at Cheshire East Council’s Customer Service Centres, throughout the consultation period.

7.19 Posters, promoting the consultation, were sent to the libraries in the four towns and

Phase to the four relevant Town Councils and Town Partnerships.

7.20 In addition, a ‘Town Strategy Frequently Asked Questions’ (FAQ) sheet was produced and was sent to Cheshire East Councillors; Town Councils; Town Partnerships; put on the website and made available at all of the exhibitions. Strategies own T

28 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 Town Strategy Phase 1 main issues

7.21 The number of responses to the draft Town Strategy consultations, by town were: Alsager 222; Congleton 153; Middlewich 62; and Sandbach 256. In addition, a petition was received in respect of the draft Sandbach Town Strategy with 152 signatures. In terms of the Sustainability Appraisals the number of responses by town were: Alsager two; Congleton 71; Middlewich one; and Sandbach 23.

7.22 The key themes have been summarised by town and question in separate Summary Reports of Consultation Findings documents, which can be found on Cheshire East's website using the following links:

Alsager(13) Congleton(14) Middlewich(15) Sandbach(16)

How were these issues addressed?

7.23 The main issues were considered by officers and, where relevant, fed into the Development Strategy and Policy Principles documents. The majority of the policies in the Policy Principles have reflected issues raised during the consultation. Examples of this include: the importance of food security and support for sustainable farming and food production has been addressed in policy EG 2 'Rural economy'; the need for a greater choice of retail and leisure has been looked at in policy EG 5 'Promoting a town centre first approach to retail and commerce'; and the importance of leisure facilities reflected in policy SC 1 'Leisure'.

7.24 Further information on this consultation, including copies of the consultation documents and publicity can be found on the Council's website.(17) (2012) 1 Phase

13 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/cheshire_east_local_plan/local_plan_consultations/town_strategies/alsager_town_strategy.aspx

14 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/cheshire_east_local_plan/local_plan_consultations/town_strategies/congleton_town_strategy.aspx Strategies 15 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/cheshire_east_local_plan/local_plan_consultations/town_strategies/middlewich_town_strategy.aspx 16 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/cheshire_east_local_plan/local_plan_consultations/town_strategies/sandbach_town_strategy.aspx 17 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/cheshire_east_local_plan/local_plan_consultations/town_strategies/phases_1_and_2_consultation.aspx own T

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 29 8 Wilmslow Vision (Town Strategies Phase 2) (2012)

8.1 A draft Wilmslow Vision was produced by Wilmslow Town Council, in partnership with consultants and Cheshire East Council as part of Phase 2 of the Town Strategy work.

8.2 The draft Vision was prepared in a workshop setting using an Advisory Panel drawn from the Town Council, businesses, organisations, community, environment, health, education and resident groups. The document was then consulted upon between 30th March and 31st May 2012. The consultation period was originally due to end on 30th April 2012, however this was extended to 31st May 2012 due to the level of interest in the consultation.

8.3 The draft Vision set out a vision for the town together with potential development opportunities. It also covered other issues such as the future of the town centre.

8.4 The draft Vision for Wilmslow was rewritten accordingly as the Wilmslow Town Strategy following consultation and approval by Wilmslow Town Council and now forms part of the evidence base for the Local Plan.

How stakeholders were invited to make representations

8.5 Stakeholders were invited by email to make representations, with full details of the consultation being available on Cheshire East's website. Comments could be submitted on the consultation portal, by email or by post, using a freepost address.

8.6 The consultation documents comprised the draft Wilmslow Vision, a questionnaire and a Sustainability Appraisal document. Copies of the documents were made available at Wilmslow library, Wilmslow Leisure Centre, the Town Council and at Cheshire East Council's offices at Westfields in Sandbach. (2012)

2) 8.7 An exhibition was held in the foyer of Wilmslow Leisure Centre throughout the consultation period; at certain times it was staffed by members of Wilmslow Town Council; Cheshire East Council officers and representatives from the consultants. On two dates in May the exhibition was moved to Dean Row Village Hall and St Johns Church Rooms, where Phase it was also staffed to answer local resident’s questions.

8.8 In addition a Frequently Asked Questions leaflet was produced and made available at the exhibitions; it could also be downloaded from the Cheshire East website.

8.9 A number of articles were published in the local press; they included articles in the Strategies Wilmslow Express and on the website wilmslow.co.uk.

own Wilmslow Vision main issues (T 8.10 There were 1,446 representations made to the consultation, which included 497 copies of a standard letter. In addition four petitions were received from local residents

ision groups including ‘Lindow Action Group’, ‘Keep Prestbury Road Green Belt Green’, ‘Save Our

V Green Belt’ and ‘No Building in Dean Row’. ilmslow W

30 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 8.11 The key themes have been summarised by question in a separate Summary Report of Consultation Findings document, which can be found on Cheshire East's website.(18)

How were these issues addressed?

8.12 The main issues were considered by officers and, where relevant, fed into the Development Strategy and Policy Principles documents. Examples of this include: the importance of food security and support for sustainable farming and food production has been addressed in policy EG 2 'Rural economy'; the importance of the evening economy has been addressed in policy EG 5 'Promoting a town centre first approach to retail and commerce'; and the importance of leisure facilities reflected in policy SC 1 'Leisure'.

8.13 Further information on this consultation, including copies of the consultation documents and publicity can be found on the Council's website.(19) (2012) 2) Phase Strategies own (T ision V

18 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/cheshire_east_local_plan/local_plan_consultations/town_strategies/wilmslow_town_strategy.aspx 19 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/cheshire_east_local_plan/local_plan_consultations/town_strategies/phases_1_and_2_consultation.aspx ilmslow W

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 31 9 Town Strategies Phase 3 (2012)

9.1 Draft Town Strategies for Crewe, Macclesfield, Handforth, Knutsford, Nantwich and Poynton were prepared as part of Phase 3 of the Town Strategy work. Advisory Panels were formed in each town, made up of Town Councils (where applicable), community partnerships, local businesses and community groups. Workshops were held and the draft Town Strategies were consulted upon. This consultation took place between 31st August and 1st October 2012.

9.2 The draft Town Strategies set out a vision for each town together with potential development opportunities and priorities for investment in infrastructure. They also covered other issues such as the future of each town centre.

9.3 The draft Town Strategies for Crewe, Macclesfield, Handforth, Knutsford, Nantwich and Poynton now form part of the evidence base for the Local Plan.

How stakeholders were invited to make representations

9.4 Stakeholders were invited by email and letter to make representations, with full details of the consultation being available on Cheshire East's website. Comments could be submitted on the consultation portal, by email or by post, using a freepost address.

9.5 The consultation documents comprised the draft Town Strategy documents for Crewe, Handforth, Knutsford, Macclesfield, Nantwich and Poynton. There was also a questionnaire produced for each of the towns as well as a Sustainability Appraisal for each draft Town Strategy. Copies of the consultation documents could be inspected at Cheshire East Council's offices in Sandbach. They were also available at the Council's Customer Service Centres, in Crewe and Macclesfield, along with the Cheshire East libraries. The libraries were also given an explanatory letter.

9.6 An e-mail was sent out to Cheshire East Council Members and Parish and Town Councils, to inform them that the consultation was taking place and that they could collect copies of documents from the certain locations. Copies of the documents and a covering letter were sent out to the three Statutory Consultees of Natural England, English Heritage and the Environment Agency and the MPs that covered the Cheshire East areas concerned.

9.7 The consultation included exhibitions held in the libraries in the six towns that were the subject of the draft Town Strategy consultation, between 31st August and 1st October 2012. (2012) They included display boards that set out the consultation process, along with details of the 3 issues for the relevant town. The information on the display boards included a Quick Response (QR) code that members of the public could scan with a mobile phone (with the capability to do so), which then took them to the Local Plan page on the website, with the details of the

Phase consultation on it.

9.8 Some Town Councils set times to answer questions at some of the exhibitions/other venues.

9.9 Other exhibitions and events included: Strategies own T

32 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 14th September 2012 – Make it Macclesfield Business Breakfast, Macclesfield Town Hall Crewe Local Area Partnership Rural events – 15 September 2012 - Wychwood Village Hall, Wychwood Park, Weston and 20 September 2012 – Youth Centre, Shavington 20 September 2012 - South Cheshire Chamber – Nantwich Branch Meeting, Nantwich Museum 21st September 2012 - Booths, Knutsford – consultation event (Knutsford Town Council) 21st September 2012 – Wybunbury Parish Council Consultation event 24th September 2012 – Nantwich Town Council Consultation event 24th September 2012 – Sutton Parish Council open meeting 27 September 2012 - South Cheshire Chamber Meeting, Wulvern Housing Offices, Crewe September 2012 – ‘Crewe 175’ exhibition in Crewe Market Hall,– information on the draft Crewe Town Strategy was displayed 28th September 2012 – Public Meeting – Mablins Lane Primary School, Crewe

9.10 A Communications Plan for the consultation was produced by Cheshire East Council’s Communications Team, working closely with the Spatial Planning Team.

9.11 The consultation included 24 press releases, which resulted in a number of articles being published in the press. The press releases included the use of case studies featuring local people who talked about their circumstances, such as concerns about buying their first house or where their children will work in the future and why this meant that the draft Town Strategy was of importance to them.

9.12 The consultation featured on the front page and an article was included on the two centre pages of the September 2012 edition of Cheshire East News. This was distributed to 166,657 households in the Borough and was also available on the Cheshire East website.

9.13 Local radio articles included features on BBC Radio Stoke; BBC Radio Manchester; Red Shift Radio; Canalside Radio; Silk FM; Imagine FM; Signal Radio; the Cat Radio and Chester Radio Dee 106.3. They included interviews with Councillor Michael Jones, Leader of Cheshire East Council, on Radio Stoke, on 30 July 2012 and 19 September 2012; Imagine FM on 17 September 2012; Silk FM on 19 September 2012; Red Shift Radio on 19 September 2012. Details of the exhibitions in the Crewe and Nantwich area were also included in the Radio Stoke 'What’s On' listing, which is read out on air each day.

9.14 An article was published on the front page of the September 2012 edition of the (2012)

Cheshire East ‘Partnerships’ newsletter, which is circulated to a wide range of Partners, 3 including the Local Area Partnerships (LAPs), Community and Voluntary Services (CVS) and Town Partnerships; it was also available on Cheshire East Council’s website.

9.15 Articles were place on various websites including the ‘Good Migration’ website, which Phase is aimed at migrant workers in Cheshire East, Nantwich News and Knutsford.com.

9.16 Seven articles were included in the internal Cheshire East Council weekly staff newsletter ‘Team Talk’. Strategies own T

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 33 9.17 A Members’ Bulletin was produced and e-mailed to all Cheshire East Councillors, on 10th September 2012. It set out details of the draft Town Strategy consultation, along with the different communication methods being used. It asked all Councillors for their help in publicising the consultation and offered to provide them with information packs to give out.

9.18 Two articles were included in the internal Cheshire East Council Schools Bulletin. A request was also made for schools to print out and display the postcard that was produced and aimed at young people. The card had information about the consultation, links to facebook and twitter, as well as on the Alton Towers Prize draw, whereby everyone who completed a representation on line was entitled to enter.

9.19 An article on the consultation was included on the Mid Cheshire Hospitals Foundation Trust staff intranet.

9.20 Details of the consultation were also included on the customer information screens, at Cheshire East Council’s Customer Service Centres, throughout the consultation period.

9.21 Facebook and twitter pages were regularly updated and were linked from the Cheshire East website, including details of the six ‘A’ Team Roadshows and photographs taken at the roadshows. Details of the consultation were also placed on LinkedIn.

Town Strategy Phase 3 main issues

9.22 The number of responses to the draft Town Strategy consultations, by town were: Crewe 1,985 (including 1,544 standard letters); Handforth 443; Knutsford 462; Macclesfield 689; Nantwich 2,435 (including 2,296 standard letters); and Poynton 516. In addition a number of petitions were received:

Crewe – one petition received, with 111 signatures; two further petitions were received (one with 250 signatures and one with 3,700 signatures) that had been presented to Edward Timpson MP, both in relation to retaining the Green Gaps surrounding the towns of Crewe and Nantwich and the villages of Shavington, Haslington, Willaston, Wistaston, Wybunbury and Weston and to protect the countryside in the Leighton and Maw Green Wards, by designating them as Green Gap. Cheshire East Council is aware of another e-petition related to the Green Gap, on the HM Government E-Petition website (signed by 723 people on 31/10/2012). This petition was not formally submitted to the consultation and expired on the 19/12/2012. The key message is to retain the Green Gap wholly intact and incorporate it in the Plan. (2012) Handforth – 4 petitions received. One petition, of 67 signatures, supported parking and 3 disabled access at the railway station; the remaining three petitions, against development on various sites in Handforth, had 1,377 signatures. This includes an e-petition, which closed on 31 December 2012.

Phase Knutsford – one petition received, with 498 signatures. Macclesfield – three petitions received.

9.23 In terms of the Sustainability Appraisals the number of responses by town were: Crewe zero; Handforth three; Knutsford 80; Macclesfield 106; Nantwich nine; and Poynton 11. Strategies own T

34 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 9.24 The key themes have been summarised by town and question in separate Summary Report of Consultation Findings documents that can be found on Cheshire East's website.(20)

How were these issues addressed?

9.25 The main issues were considered by officers and, where relevant, fed into the Development Strategy and Policy Principles documents. Examples of this include: the importance of the evening economy has been addressed in policy EG 5 'Promoting a town centre first approach to retail and commerce'; the need to provide for a mix of housing types was reflected in policy SC 3 'Residential mix'; and the importance of affordable housing was addressed in policy SC 4 'Housing to meet local needs'.

9.26 Further information on this consultation, including copies of the consultation documents, publicity and the Communications Plan can be found on the Council's website.(21) (2012) 3 Phase Strategies

20 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/cheshire_east_local_plan/local_plan_consultations/town_strategies_2012/phase_3_consultation.aspx 21 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/cheshire_east_local_plan/local_plan_consultations/town_strategies/phase_3_consultation.aspx own T

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 35 10 Development Strategy and Policy Principles (2013)

10.1 Cheshire East Council's consultation on the Development Strategy and Policy Principles documents took place between 15th January and 26th February 2013 and represents further preparatory work under Regulation 18 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012. However, although the consultation started on 15 January 2013, the consultation documents were made available on the website before Christmas 2012, to give people as much time as possible to read them.

10.2 The Development Strategy and Policy Principles consultation presented the Council's preferred policy and site options and alternatives that were not favoured. The Development Strategy set out options for the overall number of homes and employment land that will be needed in Cheshire East over the next 17 years and proposed levels of development for each of the Principal Towns and Key Service Centres. It also set out the overall level of proposed development in Local Service Centres, other settlements and rural villages of the Borough with alternative options.

How stakeholders were invited to make representations

10.3 Stakeholders were invited by email or letter to make representations, with full details of the consultation being available on Cheshire East's website. Comments could be submitted on the consultation portal, by email or by post.

10.4 The consultation documents comprised the Development Strategy and Policy Principles documents, which together comprised the preferred options version of the Core Strategy, along with a Summary document of the Development Strategy, a comments form, Sustainability Appraisal and a Habitats Regulations Assessment. (2013) 10.5 Copies of the consultation documents were made available for inspection at all of the libraries in the Borough. They were also made available at the Council’s Customer Service Centres in Crewe and Macclesfield and Cheshire East Council’s offices in Sandbach. Copies of the Summary document were also available for people to take away. All of the libraries were also given an explanatory letter. Principles 10.6 An e-mail was sent out to Cheshire East Council Members and the Parish and Town Councils, to inform them that the consultation was taking place and that they could collect copies of documents from various locations. Those Parish Councils situated in adjoining Policy Local Authority areas were also sent an e-mail.

and 10.7 Copies of the documents and a covering letter were sent out to the three Statutory Consultees for the Sustainability Appraisal of Natural England, English Heritage and the Environment Agency. Copies of the documents and a covering letter were also sent out to the MPs that cover the Cheshire East area concerned.

Strategy 10.8 Numerous meetings were held with Town and Parish Councils and local residents groups, involving Cheshire East Council’s Leader and/or Deputy Leader and Officers, regarding the Local Plan consultation. Development

36 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 10.9 Officers also attended other events/meetings, including: Make it Macclesfield Forum; Macclesfield Business Breakfast; Alsager Town Council; Poynton Local Area Partnership; Wilmslow Trust; Cheshire Association of Local Councils (CHALC); Protect Congleton – Civic Society; Barthomley Action Group; Alsager Partnership; and Alsager Residents Action Group.

10.10 The consultation included press releases on 21 December 2012, 13 February 2013, 18 February 2013 and 19 February 2013. Letters were sent out to the Press from Councillor Brown, urging people to comment on the forthcoming consultation, regarding the town of Crewe, dated 11 December 2012 and the towns of Alsager, Congleton, Knutsford, Macclesfield, Nantwich and Poynton, dated 12 December 2012. These letters resulted in a number of articles being published in the press.

10.11 There was also local radio coverage of the consultation and the Local Plan process, along with interviews on BBC television. Details of the consultation were also included in the Radio Stoke ‘What’s On’ listing that is read out on air each day.

10.12 An article was published in the January/February 2013 edition of the Cheshire East ‘Partnerships’ newsletter, which is circulated to a wide range of Partners, including the Local Area Partnerships (LAPs), Community and Voluntary Services (CVS) and Town Partnerships; it was also available on Cheshire East Council’s website.

10.13 Articles were placed on various websites including the ‘Good Migration’ website, which is aimed at migrant workers in Cheshire East, Haslington Online, Nantwich News and Knutsford.com.

10.14 Three articles were included in the internal Cheshire East Council weekly staff newsletter ‘Team Talk’.

10.15 Two articles were included in the internal Cheshire East Council Schools Bulletin. (2013)

10.16 An article on the consultation was included on the Mid Cheshire Hospitals Foundation Trust staff intranet.

10.17 Details of the consultation were also included on the customer information screens Principles at Cheshire East Council’s Customer Service Centres, throughout the consultation period.

10.18 Local Plan posts were visible on 308 people’s Facebook newsfeed, during week

commencing 4 February 2013. Policy

10.19 An e-mail was received to say that Spatial Planning is one of the top 5% most viewed LinkedIn profiles for 2012. and

10.20 A You Tube film was made to encourage people to respond to the consultation. A link to the film was put on the Cheshire East Council Local Plan web page; the Town and Parish Council SharePoint site and their discussion forum. A link was included in the Cheshire East Council internal newsletter Team Talk on 8 February 2013; the Schools Bulletin on 11 Strategy February 2013 and on Facebook and Twitter. The film had 346 viewings. Development

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 37 Development Strategy and Policy Principles main issues

10.21 There were 11,489 comments, including various standard letters, by 4,127 different parties made to the consultation on the Development Strategy, Policy Principles, Sustainability Appraisal and Habitats Regulations Assessment documents. A breakdown of those comments is:

Development Strategy: 9,771 comments from 4,051 different parties Policy Principles: 1,426 comments from 500 different parties Sustainability Appraisal: 266 comments from 78 different parties Habitats Regulations Assessment: 26 comments from 22 different parties

10.22 In respect of the Shaping our Future: Policy Principles document, almost 1,500 responses were received to the consultation with about 50% registering support for the ‘Policy Principles’ and 20% raising objections; the remainder submitted general comments for consideration by the Council.

10.23 In respect of the Shaping our Future: A Development Strategy for Jobs and Sustainable Communities document, almost 10,000 responses were received to the consultation with just over 50% of the representations involving objections to the Development Strategy. A further 25% of responses highlight broad support with the remainder submitting comments for consideration by the Council.

10.24 In addition a number of petitions were received:

Site Nantwich 4 (alternative) Land to the South of Nantwich – petition with 1,529 signatures, from Edward Timpson MP, opposing development on the site.

(2013) Site New Settlement 2 – South East Crewe – petition with 1,261 signatures and e-petition with 373 names, from Barthomley Action Group opposing development on the site. Save Macclesfield Green Belt – petition submitted, with 2,390 signatures opposing development on the Green Belt. North Knutsford Community Group – petition with 512 signatures regarding the north Knutsford site. Principles Chelford Tenants and Residents Association – petition with 34 signatures, regarding the opposition to development on the Green Belt, agricultural land east of the railway line.

Policy 10.25 Following the closure of the consultation period, four further petitions were also received:

and Petition with 24 signatures, from ‘Keep it Green Cheshire Campaign’ regarding the Green Gap. Petition with 1,914 signatures, from the ‘Hands off Wistaston Action Group’ regarding the Green Gap

Strategy E-petition with 365 signatures from ‘Protecting Green Space in Wistaston’ regarding Green Belt, Green Gap and Strategic Open Gap.

10.26 Several standard letters were also received with an estimated 500 copies of a questionnaire submitted by the pressure group ‘Hands Off Handforth Green Belt’. Development

38 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 10.27 The responses received to the consultation documents were summarised on proformas that captured the key issues, in relation to each consultation point.

10.28 The following provides a brief summary of the responses received in relation to the Shaping our Future: Policy Principles document:

Concerns over definition of 'Local Service Centre’; Strong concern over definition of ‘sustainable village’ and identified settlements; General support for encouraging economic prosperity, including the rural economy; Overwhelming support for promoting a ‘town centre first’ approach; General support for ‘sustainable communities’ policies; Concerns over policies on housing to meet local needs; General support for policies on ‘protecting and enhancing environmental quality’; General support for ‘sustainable environment’ policies, particularly the historic environment and promoting high quality design; and General support for reducing the need to travel and promoting more sustainable travel modes.

10.29 The following provides a brief summary of the responses received in relation to the Shaping our Future: A Development Strategy for Jobs and Sustainable Communities document:

Overall support for Vision for Cheshire East in 2030; A majority of respondents objected to the levels of proposed new housebuilding; Concern over status and findings of Town Strategies; Concern at Growth Strategy, but general acceptance of growth to promote regeneration and jobs; (2013) Concern at findings of settlement hierarchy and spatial distribution of development; General support for Crewe and Macclesfield vision; Concern over visions for Key Service Centres, Local Service Centres and other Villages; Concern over adjustments to the Green Belt; Support for new Green Belt, Strategic Open Gap and Open Countryside policies; Concern over ‘safeguarded land’; Principles Support for sustainable development; Concern over supporting infrastructure, particularly roads;

Concern over focus on greenfield rather than brownfield land; Policy Strong objections to Leighton West, The Triangle and East Shavington sites in Crewe;

Support for Crewe Railway Exchange; and Strong objections to land between Chelford Road/Congleton Road in Macclesfield; Broad support for strategic sites around Congleton; Objection to site in North West Knutsford; Broad support for sites in Alsager, Middlewich and Nantwich; Strong objections to Capricorn site in Sandbach, as well as alternative sites; Strategy Strong objections to sites in Wilmslow; Strong objections to new settlement at Handforth East; Objections to new settlement at South East Crewe; Concern over evidence base; and Some support for alternative sites. Development

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 39 10.30 The following provides a brief summary of the responses received in relation to the Development Strategy and Policy Principles Sustainability Appraisal Report (2013). A total of 221 representations were submitted and are presented in a table in Appendix D of the Pre-Submission Core Strategy Sustainability (Integrated) Appraisal report.(22)

Objection to the length of the Sustainability Appraisal (SA) and how the sections have been split up; Concern that the proposals are unsustainable; Suggestions that the SA is superficial and repetitive; Doubts about the worth of the SA; Support for the principles of the SA; Suggestions that it is unclear as to how the SA has been used for inform the Development Strategy and Policy Principles documents; Concern that development can negatively affect an area’s character; Suggestion that the SA has not been objective for Handforth East; Suggestion that the SA is not compliant with legislation; Suggestion that there is a lack of detail on community infrastructure and health; Suggestions on additional sustainability considerations for canals; Queries on the scoring of some proposals and request for further clarity on how/why options have been selected or rejected; Suggestion that there is a lack of evidence to support statements in the SA; Queries as to the significance of some of the option’s effects; Objection to some of the terminology used; Concern regarding how the SA has been carried out; and Amendments suggested to some of the site commentaries.

(2013) 10.31 With regard to the responses received to the Habitats Regulations Assessment for the Development Strategy and Policy Principles consultation, 26 representations were received with an even split between support/comment and objections. The principal areas of concern related to the potential impact of development proposals on sensitive ecological areas, particularly the ‘Shavington Triangle’, Wybunbury, Goostrey and North West Knutsford. Officers gave due consideration to all of the responses received and they informed the Principles proposed site selection, as recommended to and agreed by Council Members.

10.32 Summaries of the representations received to both the Development Strategy and (23)

Policy Policy Principles documents can be found on Cheshire East's website.

How were these issues addressed? and

10.33 The main issue were considered by officers and, where relevant, fed into the Pre-Submission Core Strategy.

10.34 In the Committee Report that was considered and approved by Members at the Strategy Strategic Planning Board on 26th February 2014, main issues raised during the consultation were addressed, with recommendations. They included:

22 http://cheshireeast-consult.limehouse.co.uk/portal/planning/cs/cspre 23 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/cheshire_east_local_plan/local_plan_consultations/development_strategy.aspx Development

40 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 Concentrating development in the two Principal Towns of Crewe and Macclesfield by encouraging development that is necessary to support their regeneration and revitalisation. Development of the Key Service Centres linked to their distinctive needs and characteristics. Those in the central belt of the Borough should accommodate a greater proportion of development whilst those in the north of the Borough should accommodate correspondingly less development, recognising Green Belt constraints. New settlement(s) that can provide jobs and homes in a planned environment with good infrastructure, rather than loading onto the periphery of existing constrained settlements. Significant new employment areas to underpin the growth strategy whilst allowing existing key employers to grow and develop. A ‘town centre first’ approach to retailing and commercial development; this is supported by consultation responses on the Development Strategy document. There is support for the revitalisation of the Principal Town centres of Crewe and Macclesfield, which are identified as major growth points and the vision for them. Apart from areas allocated for necessary development, the unique character and distinctiveness of the Cheshire countryside should be protected and enhanced in the overall spatial strategy. Jobs and prosperity are at the heart of the Core Strategy - it seeks to promote the right conditions for job growth by boosting the delivery of existing major employment sites, improving connectivity and identifying new areas for future investment and expansion. Improved connectivity forms a vital part of the development strategy and provides the necessary links between land use and transport. Better transport is also a driver for economic growth with new development providing opportunities to secure new infrastructure. New road infrastructure will also be promoted and protected through the emerging Core Strategy. For example, a new northern link road is proposed around

Congleton to both relieve existing congestion and also open up new land, especially for (2013) employment development. This in turn will facilitate links into Macclesfield, where a new link road is also planned, again connected to new development. Similarly, a new Eastern By-Pass is planned for Middlewich; this will be instrumental in opening up additional employment land at Midpoint 18. With regard to housing, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) advises that Local Plans need to meet the full, objectively assessed housing needs for their area, as Principles far as is consistent with the policies set out in the NPPF. Demographic information, the strategic Housing Market Assessment and the Strategic Housing Land Availability

Assessment have all been used, along with other evidence, to produce the housing Policy figures for the Borough. The proposed housing sites were selected on the basis that they could make a significant contribution to meeting the housing needs of the area over and the whole plan period; they have the potential to significantly improve the supply of affordable, intermediate and market housing. There will also be a greater range of housing sites available with further sites to be identified in the Site Allocations and Policies Development Plan Document (DPD) in due course.

The proposed ‘Core Strategy Sites’ and ‘Strategic Locations’ will be located for the most Strategy part in the Principal Towns and Key Service Centres. These towns have the infrastructure and facilities best able to support new jobs, homes and other development. They reflect the overall spatial distribution of both jobs and homes and would be supported in many cases by community benefits such as affordable housing, schools, open space and improvements to pedestrian and cycle networks. Each site was considered, with a Development

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 41 commentary, regarding why it was considered to be appropriate for inclusion in the Core Strategy.

10.35 The Council's website(24) includes summary documents of the Development Strategy and Policy Principles comments and the Council's response to them.

10.36 The response to the comments on the Sustainability Appraisal can be found in Appendix D of the Pre-Submission Core Strategy Sustainability (Integrated) Appraisal.(25)

10.37 Further information on this consultation including the consultation documents, summary of comments and responses, the You Tube film and a report to Strategic Planning Board can be found on the Council's website.(26) (2013) Principles Policy and Strategy

24 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/cheshire_east_local_plan/local_plan_consultations/development_strategy.aspx 25 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/cheshire_east_local_plan/local_plan_consultations/development_strategy.aspx 26 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/cheshire_east_local_plan/local_plan_consultations/development_strategy.aspx Development

42 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 11 Possible Additional Sites (2013)

11.1 Responses received to the Development Strategy revealed a number of other possible strategic sites that developers, landowners and others considered suitable for inclusion in the Local Plan Strategy. To make sure everyone had the opportunity to comment on these possible additional sites a further consultation stage was held on these parcels of land.

11.2 This consultation provided members of the public and other interested parties with a chance to have their say on the sites included in the document, prior to the Council making a decision on whether any of the sites should be included in the Core Strategy. It included a number of potential strategic sites submitted by developer and land interests that had not previously been subject to consultation during the evolution of the Core Strategy. The consultation on the Possible Additional Sites Proposed by Developer and Land Interests document took place between 3rd and 30th May 2012.

How stakeholders were invited to make representations

11.3 Stakeholders were invited by email to make representations, with full details of the consultation being available on Cheshire East's website. Comments could be submitted on the consultation portal, by email or by post.

11.4 The consultation documents comprised the Possible Additional Sites Proposed by Developer and Land Interests document and a comments form.

11.5 Copies of the consultation documents were made available for inspection or to take away at all of the libraries in the Borough. They were also made available at the Council’s Customer Service Centres in Crewe and Macclesfield; Cheshire East Council’s offices in Sandbach and the Planning Help Desk, Municipal Buildings, Crewe. All of the libraries and Customer Service Centres were also given an explanatory letter.

11.6 E-mails and letters, along with copies of the documents and comments forms, were sent out to Cheshire East Council Members and Parish and Town Councils to inform them that the consultation was taking place. They were also informed that copies of the documents were available at various locations. Those Parish Councils situated in adjoining Local Authority areas were also sent an e-mail.

11.7 Copies of the documents and a covering letter were sent out to MPs that cover the

Cheshire East area concerned, Natural England, English Heritage and the Environment (2013) Agency.

11.8 The consultation has included a press release on 23/04/13, announcing that the Sites Possible Additional Sites Proposed by Developer and Land Interests consultation would be commencing on 3 May 2013 and a press release on 23/05/13, reminding people that the consultation would close on 30 May 2013. The press releases resulted in a number of articles being published in the press.

11.9 There was also local radio coverage of the consultation, with Councillor Michael Jones Additional (Leader of the Council) interviewed on four different radio stations. Possible

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 43 11.10 Articles were placed on various websites including Haslington Online, Audlem Online and Alderley Edge.com as well as the ‘Good Migration’ website, in both Polish and English, which is aimed at migrant workers in Cheshire East.

11.11 Four articles were included in the internal Cheshire East Council weekly staff newsletter ‘Team Talk’.

11.12 An article was included in the internal Cheshire East Council Schools Bulletin.

11.13 An article on the consultation was included on the Mid Cheshire Hospitals Foundation Trust staff intranet.

11.14 Articles were included in three editions of the ‘Cheshire East Direct’ e-newsletter, produced by Cheshire East Council and e-mailed to about 2,200 e-mail recipients who had signed up to receive the newsletter.

11.15 Details of the consultation were also included on the customer information screens at Cheshire East Council’s Customer Service Centres, throughout the consultation period.

Possible Additional Sites main issues

11.16 There were 4,755 comments made by 2,404 different parties to the consultation. Of these, over 80% were objections with less than 10% expressing support for the possible alternative sites; the remainder submitted general comments for consideration by the Council.

11.17 In addition, a number of petitions were received to the consultation, which are included in the response figures:

Site D – land at Audlem Road, Audlem: Two petitions received from Audlem Parish Council – Petition with 315 signatures (paper petition, with 208 signatures and e-petition with 107 signatures), opposing development on the site. Sites E – Land off University Way, Crewe and F – Junction of A534 and Sydney Road, Crewe: Petition with 36 signatures received from Councillor C Thorley, objecting to the potential development of the sites. Site W – Land adjoining Lark Hall, Macclesfield: Petition, with 532 signatures, received from Councillor D Newton, objecting to the potential development of the site. Site W – Land Adjoining Lark Hall, Macclesfield: E-petition received, with 371 signatures, opposing development at the site. (2013) Site O – Ilfords, Ilford Way, Mobberley and Site P – Land at Junction of Town Lane and Smith Lane, Mobberley: An e-petition, with five signatures against proposed large housing development in Mobberley village; an e-petition, with 52 signatures and a paper petition, Sites with 191 signatures were received after the closure of the consultation period, objecting to Sites O and P.

11.18 Summaries of the representations received to the document can be found on Cheshire East's website.(27) Additional

27 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/cheshire_east_local_plan/local_plan_consultations.aspx Possible

44 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 How were these issues addressed?

11.19 The responses received to the consultation on the Possible Additional Sites were summarised by each consultation point and set out on proformas.

11.20 With the exception of White Moss Quarry, none of the possible additional sites received any majority support in favour of allocation in the emerging Core Strategy. Indeed, several sites, notably Site H (Wistaston Green Road, Wistaston) and Site J (Gorsty Hill Golf Course, Weston) received considerable objection.

11.21 Following the consideration of the consultation responses, by Officers, it was recommended that White Moss Quarry was suitable for inclusion in the Pre-Submission Core Strategy. The responses and the recommended list of sites for inclusion in the document were reported to and considered by the Strategic Planning Board on 26th September 2013; the Pre-Submission Core Strategy was approved by the Portfolio Holder, for consultation on 1st November 2013. The papers that were considered by the Strategic Planning Board on 26th September 2013 can be found on the Council's website.(28)

11.22 Cheshire East Council's website(29) includes a summary document of the comments and the Council's response to them.

11.23 Further information on this consultation, including the consultation document, summary of comments and responses and a report to Strategic Planning Board can be found on the Council's website.(30) (2013) Sites Additional

28 http://moderngov.cheshireeast.gov.uk/ecminutes/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=279&MId=5069&Ver=4 29 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/cheshire_east_local_plan/local_plan_consultations.aspx 30 http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/cheshire_east_local_plan/local_plan_consultations.aspx Possible

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 45 12 Pre-Submission Core Strategy and Non-Preferred Sites (2013)

12.1 The consultation on the Pre-Submission Core Strategy took place between 5 November and 16 December 2013. The Pre-Submission Core Strategy set out the case for sustainable economic growth and was the first draft of the strategy that the Council wished to adopt to deliver a vibrant sustainable community and for the management of development in Cheshire East up to 2030.

12.2 In advance of the formal consultation period, a report was considered by Cheshire East Council’s Strategic Planning Board on 26 September 2013; this report set out the provisional list of sites for inclusion in the Pre-Submission Core Strategy, for consideration and discussion by Councillors. This committee meeting generated media coverage, in advance of the formal Pre-Submission Core Strategy consultation period.

12.3 The consultation documents comprised the Pre-Submission Core Strategy document and the ‘Pre-Submission Core Strategy Non-Preferred Sites’ document (this set out details of the sites that had been considered for inclusion in the Pre-Submission Core Strategy, along with reasons why they had not been included). This enabled further comment to be made on all sites considered in the Development Strategy and Possible Additional Sites consultation to help make sure the final selection of sites are the most appropriate.

(2013) 12.4 A Sustainability Appraisal and a Habitats Regulations Assessment were produced and they were also subject to public consultation, for the same period of time and could be accessed in the same way as the other consultation documents. Sites 12.5 This consultation allowed interested parties a chance to have their say on the draft document prior to the Council finalising the Local Plan Strategy - Submission Version (formerly known as the Core Strategy).

How stakeholders were invited to make representations

12.6 Stakeholders were invited by e-mail or letter to make representations, with full details

Non-Preferred of the consultation being available on Cheshire East's website. The e-mails were sent to 10,490 e-mail addresses and the letter was sent to 1,736 consultees, without an e-mail address. All stakeholders are registered on Cheshire East’s Consultation Portal. and

12.7 All Cheshire East Council Members and Town and Parish Councils in and adjoining Cheshire East were also sent e-mails and letters.

12.8 Comments could be submitted on the consultation portal, by e-mail or by post. Strategy

12.9 The consultation documents comprised the Pre-Submission Core Strategy, the Pre-Submission Core Strategy Non-Preferred Sites document, Sustainability Appraisal and Core a Habitats Regulations Assessment. In addition, a number of evidence base documents were also available on the Council’s website; comments on such documents were logged in relation to the part(s) of the consultation document(s) that they related to. Pre-Submission

46 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 12.10 Comments forms were produced that could be completed for any of the consultation documents and were provided as stand alone documents. Hundreds of the comments forms were distributed. A ‘Guide to Making Comments Online’ was also produced, with copies available wherever the comments forms were available, including Cheshire East’s website.

12.11 All of the consultation documents were accessible through Cheshire East Council’s Consultation Portal and can still be viewed on Cheshire East’s website at www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/localplan.

12.12 Copies of the consultation documents were made available for inspection at all of the libraries in the Borough. They were also made available at the Council’s Customer Service Centres in Crewe and Macclesfield, Cheshire East Council’s offices in Sandbach and the Planning Help Desk, Municipal Buildings, Crewe. The comments forms were also made available to take away at the above venues and could be returned to the Spatial Planning Team, at Cheshire East Council’s offices in Sandbach. The libraries and Customer Service Centres were also given an explanatory letter and poster to put on display.

12.13 Copies of the consultation documents were provided to all Cheshire East Council Members, all Town and Parish Councils, all MPs that cover the Cheshire East area, along with Natural England, English Heritage, the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales. (2013) 12.14 The Cheshire East Council’s website home page featured the consultation in the ‘In focus’, ‘Have Your Say’ and the ‘Consultations’ sections. An advert was also placed on the

web pages for the consultation. The consultation document could be accessed through the Sites Local Plan pages and the Cheshire East Consultation Portal, all of which are linked.

12.15 The Cheshire East Consultation Portal can be accessed through the Cheshire East website; it enabled stakeholders to inspect and download the consultation document. It also enabled them to respond to the consultation electronically and to register their details, so that they can be informed of future Local Plan stages.

12.16 Between 5 November and 16 December 2013 the Local Plan web page on the Non-Preferred Cheshire East website received 3,629 unique views and 5,444 page views.

12.17 Links were also provided to Spatial Planning pages on Facebook, twitter and LinkedIn. and

12.18 Following the closure of the consultation period there were:

Facebook –121likes (an increase from 112 in May 2013); a weekly total reach peaked

at 22 on the week ending the 10 November 2013. Strategy Twitter – followers have increased from 456 in May 2013 to 467 followers in January 2014. LinkedIn – 463 Connections in January 2014 Core

12.19 The consultation included a press release on 5 November 2013. The press release resulted in a number of articles being published in the press.

12.20 There was also local radio coverage of the consultation, with Councillor Michael Jones (Leader of the Council) interviewed on BBC Radio Stoke. Pre-Submission

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 47 12.21 Articles were placed on various local websites including Audlem Online, Alderley Edge.com and Wilmslow.co.uk

12.22 Two articles were included in the internal Cheshire East Council weekly staff newsletter ‘Team Talk’.

12.23 Two articles were included in the Cheshire East Council Schools Bulletin, which is produced each week during term time and is sent to all schools in the Borough; it is also published on the Cheshire East website. The articles aimed to encourage schools, pupils, teachers, governors and parents to respond to the consultation. The articles also included the availability of a lesson plan for schools that could be used either during or after the consultation.

12.24 An article on the consultation was included on the Mid Cheshire Hospitals Foundation Trust staff intranet.

12.25 An article was included in the November 2013 edition of the Partnerships Newsletter. The newsletter is sent as an attachment to around 1,500 email addresses and is then sent on to a variety of mailing lists such as the Council for Voluntary Services and Business Chambers. It is also added to websites of organisations such as Groundwork.

12.26 Details of the consultation were also included on the customer information screens, (2013) at Cheshire East Council’s Customer Service Centres, throughout the consultation period.

12.27 Four Local Plan Panel Briefing Meetings were held during November and December Sites 2013, to which all Cheshire East Council Members were invited. Each briefing session covered different topics within the Pre-Submission Core Strategy.

12.28 A stand, with information about the Pre-Submission Core Strategy consultation and Spatial Planning Team Officers available to answer questions, was present at the Cheshire East Town and Parish Council Conference, held on 4 November 2013.

12.29 A presentation was given about the Pre-Submission Core Strategy consultation to Non-Preferred the Cheshire Association of Local Councils (CHALC), at their meeting on 6 December 2013.

and 12.30 A number of meetings with Town and Parish Councils were also attended by Spatial Planning Team Officers upon request.

Pre-Submission Core Strategy main issues

Strategy 12.31 During the Pre-Submission Core Strategy consultation 8,585 comments were received from 2,777 different people and organisations totaling over 2.5 million words.

Core 12.32 38% of comments were submitted online using the Council's consultation portal, 36% were submitted by email and 26% were submitted on paper.

12.33 Overall, 21% of comments were in support, 62% were objections and 17% were comments only.

12.34 A number of petitions were received to the Pre-Submission Core Strategy consultation, that are included in the overall consultation figures, as follows: Pre-Submission

48 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 Site CS9 – Land East of Fence Avenue, Macclesfield – Petition with 828 signatures, objecting to the inclusion of this site in the Pre-Submission Core Strategy. Site CS9 Land East of Fence Avenue – e-petition with 271 responses, objecting to the inclusion of this site in the Pre-Submission Core Strategy. Site CS9 Land East of Fence Avenue – e-petition with 271 responses, objecting to the inclusion of this site in the Pre-Submission Core Strategy. Pre-Submission Core Strategy, objection to site CS25 – Adlington Road, Wilmslow and Non-Preferred Sites document - support for the inclusion of sites NPS 56 – Land at Dean Row (Western parcel) and NPS 57 - Land at Dean Row (eastern parcel): E-petition from 'Friends of Dean Row' , with 273 names.

12.35 In relation to the Non-Preferred Sites document the following petitions were received:

Site NPS53 - Land at junction of Town Lane and Smith Lane, Mobberley and site NPS54 – Ilfords, Mobberley – e-petition with 79 signatures, supporting the inclusion of the sites in this document. Site NPS53 - Land at junction of Town Lane and Smith Lane, Mobberley and site NPS54 – Ilfords, Mobberley - petition with 170 signatures, supporting the inclusion of the sites in this document. Support for the inclusion of sites NPS 56 – Land at Dean Row (Western parcel) and NPS 57 - Land at Dean Row (eastern parcel): E-petition from 'Friends of Dean Row' with 273 names. (2013)

12.36 A summary of the main issues raised during the Pre-Submission Core Strategy consultation and the Council's responses can be found in Appendix C. Sites

12.37 A summary of the main issues raised during the Non Preferred Sites consultation and the Council's responses can be found in Appendix D.

How were these issues addressed?

12.38 In order to allow an analysis of the vast amount of comments received, Cheshire

East Council adopted a method used by South Cambridge during their plan preparations. Non-Preferred

12.39 The Pre-Submission Core Strategy was divided up into about 170 individual and consultation points. All issues raised through the consultation were recorded against all applicable consultation points as an objection, support, a comment or a suggested change to an individual policy, site or development principle.

12.40 Every comment received was logged against one or more of the appropriate Strategy consultation points and all comments and issues raised have been made available on the Cheshire East Council Consultation Portal(31) along with the names of individuals or agents

that submitted them for complete transparency. Core

12.41 A proforma was produced for each consultation point or subject heading. All objections, support, comments and suggested changes received for each point were quantified and summarised. In some cases, it was necessary to amalgamate very similar consultation

31 http://cheshireeast-consult.limehouse.co.uk/portal/planning/cs/cspre Pre-Submission

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 49 points, such as a chapter heading and a policy, where the issues raised were one and the same (for example Sustainable Development and MP1). In these cases, the overall number of supporters, objectors and commentators and suggested changes were added together.

12.42 Whilst the issues raised were many and various, at this stage of the plan making process all comments had to be assessed against the objective of ultimately producing a ‘sound’ Local Plan Strategy at Inspection. To this end, it was necessary to make sure that all comments received and issues raised that related to the issue of soundness were addressed and responded to. Each consultation point proforma was reviewed and the issues raised were looked at objectively by a panel of Planning Officers, to decide if specific wording changes or material changes to policy should be made.

12.43 A recommended Council response was added to each proforma, setting out the reasons for accepting or rejecting suggested changes. Issues relating to 'soundness' of policy wording were given very careful consideration, to make sure that the Local Plan Strategy - Submission version has responded appropriately to the points made and will be considered sound.

12.44 Where legitimate material considerations were raised, material changes were recommended to be made to the policy wording, along with specific wording change requests in the related chapters. In some cases, it was felt that issues raised about a particular

(2013) consultation point had been adequately covered elsewhere in the document and therefore a material change was not required under that consultation point.

Sites 12.45 All minor and major changes that are recommended to be taken forward in the Local Plan Strategy - Submission version are recorded at the end of each individual Consultation Proforma in a shaded ‘Recommendation’ box.

12.46 This process was also followed in relation to the comments that were received on the ‘Non Preferred Sites’ document.

12.47 All of the recommendations were then considered and approved by Cheshire East Council Members at Strategic Planning Board on 26 February 2014 and at Full Council on Non-Preferred 28 February 2014.

and 12.48 The following documents form appendices to the Committee Reports that were considered and approved at the above meetings:

1. The proformas for the Pre-Submission Core Strategy consultation points and the ‘Non Preferred Sites’ consultation points (as detailed above); Strategy 2. The recommended changes from the proformas are summarised in the document ‘Pre-Submission Core Strategy – Summary of Recommended Changes’; 3. The comments received on the Habitats Regulations Assessment and the Sustainability Core Appraisal, are summarised, along with the recommended response and changes, in separate documents.(32)

32 http://cheshireeast-consult.limehouse.co.uk/portal/planning/cs/cspre Pre-Submission

50 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 12.49 The above documents can be found by following the web link to Strategic Planning Board (33) and Full Council (34) (2013) Sites Non-Preferred and Strategy Core

33 http://moderngov.cheshireeast.gov.uk/ecminutes/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=279&MId=5188&Ver=4 34 http://moderngov.cheshireeast.gov.uk/ecminutes/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=239&MId=5187&Ver=4 Pre-Submission

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 51 13 Local Plan Strategy - Submission Version (2014)

13.1 The formal six week representation period for the Local Plan Strategy - Submission Version took place between 14 March and 5pm on 25 April 2014.

13.2 This represents the formal representation period as required under Regulations 18, 19, 20 and 35 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012.

13.3 The formal representation period was carried out in accordance with the requirements included within Cheshire East Council’s ‘Statement of Community Involvement’ (adopted by Cheshire East Council on 14 October 2010).

13.4 In advance of this formal representation period, a report was considered by Cheshire East Council’s Strategic Planning Board on 26 February 2014. This report included the Local Plan Strategy – Submission Version document and appendices including a Report of Consultation for the Pre-Submission Core Strategy consultation and summaries of the consultation responses that had been received along with the recommended responses. A number of amendments were proposed by the Strategic Planning Board. The proposed amendments and all of the above documents were then considered at the Full Council meeting on 28 February 2014, where the Local Plan Strategy – Submission Version document was approved for publication and submission to the Secretary of State.

How stakeholders were invited to make representations

13.5 Stakeholders were invited by email or letter to make representations, with full details of the Local Plan Strategy submission documents and representation period being available on Cheshire East's website. The emails were sent to 11,429 email addresses and the letter was sent to 2,370 consultees, without an email address. All stakeholders are registered on (2014) Cheshire East’s Consultation Portal.

13.6 All Cheshire East Council Members and Town and Parish Councils in and adjoining

ersion Cheshire East were also sent emails and letters. V 13.7 Representations could be submitted on the consultation portal, by email or by post.

13.8 The documents upon which representations could be made comprised the Local Plan Strategy – Submission Version document; the Policies Map; the Sustainability Appraisal and the Habitats Regulations Assessment.

Submission 13.9 In addition, the following supporting documents were also available: - Infrastructure Delivery Plan Submission Sites Justification Paper Submission Non-Preferred Sites Justification Paper Statement of Consultation Strategy Duty to Co-operate Statement of Compliance Housing Background Paper

Plan Employment Background Paper Population Projections and Forecasts Background Paper Local

52 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 Statement of Community Involvement Local Development Scheme Statement of Representations Procedure

13.10 A number of evidence base documents were also available to view on the Council’s website.

13.11 An Overview document was produced that explained the process that has been followed to produce the Local Plan Strategy – Submission Version document; copies were made available for people to take away.

13.12 Representation forms (including guidance notes) were produced, which could be completed for any of the documents upon which representations could be made and were provided as stand alone documents. The representation forms and guidance notes were based on the Planning Inspectorate’s model forms and guidance contained in their document ‘Examining Local Plans Procedural Practice’ (December 2013). Hundreds of the representation forms and guidance notes were distributed.

13.13 A ‘Guide to Making Representations Online’ was also produced, with copies available wherever the representation forms were available, including Cheshire East’s website.

13.14 All of the documents upon which representations could be made and the supporting documents were accessible through Cheshire East Council’s Consultation Portal and can still be viewed on Cheshire East’s website at: www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/localplan.

13.15 Copies of the documents upon which representations could be made and the supporting documents were available for inspection at all of the libraries in the Borough. They were also made available at the Council’s Customer Service Centres, in Crewe and Macclesfield; Cheshire East Council’s offices in Sandbach; and the Planning Help Desk, Municipal Buildings, Crewe. All of the libraries and Customer Service Centres were also (2014) given an explanatory letter, a laminated copy of the Statement of Representations Procedure and a poster to display. The representation forms and guidance notes were also made

available to take away at the above venues and could be returned to the Spatial Planning ersion

Team, at Cheshire East Council’s offices in Sandbach. V

13.16 A Statement of Representations Procedure was produced; the wording of which was as required by Regulation 17 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012. This was displayed in all of the venues where the Local Plan Strategy – Submission Version documents were available for inspection. It was also displayed on Cheshire East’s Consultation Portal and the Statutory Public Notices section of the Cheshire East website and sent to all consultees that were informed of the formal six week Submission - representation period. A copy of the Statement of Representations Procedure can be found in Appendix F.

13.17 Emails and letters, a copy of the Statement of Representations Procedure, along with copies of the Local Plan Strategy – Submission Version document, an Overview document Strategy and representation forms, were provided to all Cheshire East Council Members and all of the Parish and Town Councils in the Borough, to inform them that the formal representation Plan Local

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 53 period was about to commence. They were also informed that copies of the documents were available at the locations listed in the paragraph above. Those Parish Councils situated in adjoining Local Authority areas were also sent an email, along with other Consultees.

13.18 Copies of the Local Plan Strategy – Submission Version document, an Overview document, representation forms, a covering letter and a copy of the Statement of Representations Procedure were sent out to all Cheshire East MPs, all adjoining Local Authorities, Natural England, English Heritage, the Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales.

13.19 As required by Cheshire East Council’s Statement of Community Involvement, a statutory notice was published in the following local newspapers: Crewe Chronicle on 12 March 2014, the Macclesfield Express on 12 March 2014 and the Congleton Chronicle on 13 March 2014. The wording of the statutory notice was the same as the Statement of Representations Procedure.

13.20 The Cheshire East Council’s website home page featured the formal six week representation period in the ‘In focus’, ‘Have Your Say’ and ‘Consultations’ sections. The Local Plan Strategy - Submission Version and associated documents could be accessed through the Local Plan pages and the Cheshire East Consultation Portal, all of which are linked.

13.21 Between 14 March and 25 April 2014 the Local Plan web page, on the Cheshire East website, received 1,560 unique views and a total of 2,195 page views.

13.22 Links were also provided to the Cheshire East Council Spatial Planning twitter pages.

13.23 Following the closure of the representation period the number of twitter followers had increased from 467 followers in January 2014 to 487 followers by the end of April 2014. (2014) 13.24 A press release was issued on 20 February 2014 in advance of the Strategic Planning Board meeting on 26 February 2014 and Full Council on 28 February 2014. The press release explained that the Local Plan Strategy – Submission Version was due to be considered ersion

V at the aforementioned Council meetings, before its formal submission to the Secretary of State.

13.25 As required by Cheshire East Council’s Statement of Community Involvement, a press release was made on 18 March 2014, which stated that the Local Plan Strategy – Submission Version was undergoing a six week representation period.

Submission 13.26 The press releases resulted in a number of associated articles being published in

- the press.

13.27 There was also local radio coverage relating to the Local Plan Strategy – Submission Version, with Councillor Michael Jones (Leader of the Council) interviewed on BBC Radio Stoke. Strategy 13.28 Councillor Michael Jones was also interviewed on the television programme BBC North West Tonight, on 19/02/14, in relation to the Local Plan Strategy – Submission Version. Plan Local

54 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 13.29 Articles were placed on various websites including Audlem Online, Alderley Edge.com and Wilmslow.co.uk.

13.30 Three articles were included in the internal Cheshire East Council weekly staff newsletter ‘Team Talk’.

13.31 An article on the formal six week representation period was included on the Mid Cheshire Hospitals Foundation Trust staff intranet.

13.32 An article was included in the March/April 2014 edition of the Partnerships Newsletter. The newsletter is sent as an attachment to around 1,500 email addresses and is then sent on to a variety of mailing lists such as the Council for Voluntary Services and Business Chambers. It is also added to websites of organisations such as Groundwork.

13.33 Details of the six week formal representation period were also included on the customer information screens at Cheshire East Council’s Customer Service Centres, throughout the period.

13.34 Two articles about the formal six week representation period were included in the Cheshire East Council ‘Schools Bulletin’, which is sent to schools electronically once a week. The articles are also published on Cheshire East Council’s website. The articles aimed to raise awareness of the formal six week consultation period within schools and pupils, teachers, governors and parents. The articles also included the availability of a lesson plan for schools that could be used either during or after the representation period.

13.35 A number of meetings took place during the representation period. They included presentations given at the ‘Make it Macclesfield’ Business Breakfast on 4 April 2014 and Bollington Town Council on 8 April 2014.

Local Plan Strategy - Submission Version main issues (2014)

13.36 The number of representations received on each document, by the number of parties, are set out in Table 13.1. ersion V Document Representations Parties

Local Plan Strategy 3,402 655

Proposals Map 19 14

SA 29 13 Submission

HRA 8 4 -

Total 3,458 657

Table 13.1 Number of Representations Received Strategy Plan Local

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 55 13.37 The method of submission of representations is set out in Table 13.2.

Method Representations

Online 931

Email 2,270

Paper 257

Total 3,458

Table 13.2 Method of Submission of Representations

13.38 The responses to question 5 on the form, which asked if the documents were sound, are set out in Table 13.3.

Question Yes No Blank

Legally compliant 424 576 2,458

Sound 245 1,827 1,386

Compliant with Duty to Cooperate 319 594 2,545

Table 13.3 Representations on Soundness

13.39 The total number of representations received was 3,458. This is in contrast to the 11,489 comments that were received to the Development Strategy, Policy Principles, Sustainability Appraisal and Habitats Regulations Assessment documents in January and February 2013. This represents a 70% reduction in the number of representations made. (2014) 13.40 This is also reflected in the number of different parties that made those comments, which has reduced from 4,127 in January and February 2013 to 657 representations made during the formal representation period. This represents an 84% reduction in the number of

ersion different parties that made representations. V 13.41 A number of representations are considered to be inadmissible, however they will be submitted to the Secretary of State for consideration. The number of such representations and the reasons why they are considered to be inadmissible are set out in Table 13.4. A List of Inadmissible Representations can be found in Appendix H of this document.

Submission Reason Number - Duplicate portal submissions 2

Late email submissions 16

Late postal submissions 5 Strategy Anonymous submissions 1

Plan Table 13.4 Inadmissible Representations Local

56 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 13.42 A summary of the main issues raised during the Local Plan Strategy - Submission Version formal representation period can be found in Appendix E of this document. All of the representations received can be viewed on Cheshire East Council’s Consultation Portal.(35) (2014) ersion V Submission - Strategy Plan

35 http://cheshireeast-consult.limehouse.co.uk/portal/planning/cs/sub?pointId=2792765 Local

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 57 14 Next Steps

14.1 The next stage of the production of the Local Plan is formal submission of the Local Plan Strategy to the Secretary of State, for formal Examination. If the Inspector concludes that the Local Plan Strategy complies with the legal requirements and is considered to be sound, with or without modifications, the Council will then adopt the Local Plan Strategy.

14.2 Work has commenced on the Local Plan Site Allocations and Development Policies Document, which is the next part of the Local Plan. This document will allocate remaining sites for future development and provide detailed policies to be used when considering planning applications for new development across the Borough. Work on this was launched at the Town and Parish Councils conference on 1 May 2014.

14.3 A Local Plan Waste Development Plan Document will also be produced which will set out policies for dealing with waste and identify specific sites for waste management facilities. Steps Next

58 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 Appendices Appendices

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 59 60 Consultation Stages CHESHIRE Appendix A: Consultation Stages

Undertaken at stage:

EAST Consultation/publicity Issues Place Rural Minerals Town Town Town Development Possible Pre-Submission Local and Shaping (1) Issues Strategy Strategy Strategy Strategy and Additional /Non-Preferred Plan Local Issues Options Phase1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Policy Sites Sites Strategy Principles Plan Standard consultation methods stipulated in the Statement of Community Involvement Strategy Council's website Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Documents available to Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Statement inspect

Documents available to Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes view

of Publication of press Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Consultation notices/releases

Invited representations Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Notification from Local Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Plan database (Reg Notification to Town and Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 22): Parish Councils

May Consultation portal Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

2014 Optional consultation methods stipulated in the Statement of Community Involvement

Meetings Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Leaflets and brochures Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes

Newsletters Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Local radio Yes Yes No No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Undertaken at stage: Consultation/publicity Issues Place Rural Minerals Town Town Town Development Possible Pre-Submission Local (1) and Shaping Issues Issues Strategy Strategy Strategy Strategy and Additional /Non-Preferred Plan Options Phase1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Policy Sites Sites Strategy Principles

CHESHIRE Presentations Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Focus groups/workshops Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes No

Exhibitions and displays Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes No No No No EAST Questionnaires/surveys Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Local Theme-based forums Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No

Plan Consultation methods not stipulated in the Statement of Community Involvement

Strategy Postcards No No No No No No Yes No No No No

Touch screens No Yes No No No No No No No No No

Statement Competitions No Yes No No No No Yes No No No No

Films No Yes No No No No No Yes No No No

Your Place No Yes No No No No No No No No No of

Consultation Posters No Yes No No Yes No No No No Yes Yes

Customer Service Centre Yes Yes No No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes screens

Blog No Yes No No Yes No No No No No No (Reg Tops and pants activity No Yes No No No No No No No No No 22): Annotation of aerial No Yes No No No No No No No No No May photos

2014 Out and about events No Yes No No No No No No No No No

61 Consultation Stages 62 Consultation Stages CHESHIRE Undertaken at stage: Consultation/publicity Issues Place Rural Minerals Town Town Town Development Possible Pre-Submission Local and Shaping (1) Issues Strategy Strategy Strategy Strategy and Additional /Non-Preferred Plan

EAST Issues Options Phase1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Policy Sites Sites Strategy Principles Local Vinyl banner No Yes No No No No No No No No No

Plan Blue tooth No Yes No No No No No No No No No

Strategy QR code No No No No Yes No Yes No No No No

T-shirts No No No No No No Yes No No No No

Statement Social media No No No No Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes

External websites Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Working with young

of Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes people Consultation FAQ sheet No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No

Television No No No No No No No Yes No No Yes

Table A.1 Consultation methods at each stage of Local Plan Strategy preparation (Reg

1. This was a targeted consultation 22): May 2014 Appendix B: List of Bodies and Persons Invited to Make Representations

Organisation Organisation

Age Concern Age Concern East Cheshire

Age UK Cheshire Alsager Residents Action Group

Autism Networks Bollington Civic Society

British Red Cross Campaign for Better Transport

Campaign to Protect Rural England Canal and River Trust

Cheshire and Warrington Sports Partnership Cheshire Centre for Independent Living

Cheshire Community Action Cheshire East CAB North

Cheshire East Cycling Campaign Cheshire East Rail Users Group

Cheshire East Federation of Women's Institutes Cheshire Gardens Trust

Cheshire Interim LINk Board - Carers Federation Cheshire Wildlife Trust

Community Transport Association Community Transport Macclesfield DAR

Congleton Eduction Community Partnership Congleton LAP

Congleton Partnership Congleton Sustainability Group

Connexions Cheshire and Warrington Crewe Local Area Partnership Representations

Crewe to Manchester Community Rail Crewe to Shrewsbury Passenger Association Partnership Make Crewe YMCA Crewe, Nantwich and Congleton Dial-a-Ride to CycleKnutsford East Cheshire Ramblers

Energy Projects Plus Friends of Dean Row Invited Gawsworth Parish Plan Implementation Group Groundwork Cheshire

Hands off Wistaston Action Group High Legh Parish Council Localism Sub Committee

High Legh Parish Plan Implementation Group Keep it Green Cheshire Persons

Knutsford Conservation and Heritage Group Knutsford League of Hospital Friends and Knutsford Town Plan Land Access and Recreation Association

LEFA London Road/Butley Town Community

LSP Environment and Sustainability Theme LSP Health and Wellbeing Theme Bodies

LSP Safer Cheshire East Partnership Lyme Natural History Recording Society of List

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 63 Organisation Organisation

Macclesfield Canal Society Macclesfield Civic Society

Macclesfield LAP Mid Cheshire Community Rail Partnership

Mid Cheshire Rail Users Association Middlewich Rail Campaign

Nantwich Civic Society National Trust

Nether Wood Community Group North Cheshire Rail User Group

North Staffordshire Community Rail Partnership North West Transport Roundtable

Passenger Focus Residents Against Mobberley Sprawl

RSPB Shropshire Union Canal Society

South Cheshire Friends of the Earth South Cheshire Transition Network

Sustrans The Stockton Road, Links Road, Chesham Road and Welton Drive Group

The Woodland Trust Thorngrove Park Area Residents Group

Transition Wilmslow Travel Watch North West

West Heath Action Group Willaston Community Opportunities Group

Wistaston Gardeners Society, Wistaston and Wistaston Jubilee Tennis Club District Flower Club

Representations Woodford Neighbourhood Forum Wychwood Village CW2 Community Group

Youth Parliament Youth Service/Youth Voice Make Table B.1 General Consultation Bodies: Voluntary Bodies to Organisation Organisation

CHAWREC Cheshire Gypsy and Travellers Voice

Invited Friends, Families and Traveller Law Reform Project Gypsy Council

Irish Community Care Merseyside Irish Traveller Movement

National Federation of Gypsy Liaison Groups O.C.E.A.N Persons The Romany Society The Showmen's Guild of Great Britain

and Traveller Times

Table B.2 General Consultation Bodies: Racial, Ethnic or National Groups

Organisation Organisation Bodies

of Christian Concern Church Commissioners for England List

64 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 Organisation Organisation

Churches Together in Wilmslow Crewe North Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses

Elim International Manchester Gospel Hall Trust

Manchester Meeting Room Trust Middlewich Community Church

St Michael's Church Peter's Church

St. Chad's Church Union Street Baptist Church (USBC)

Woodlands Meeting Trust

Table B.3 General Consultation Bodies: Religious Groups

Organisation Organisation

Carers Federation Cheshire Carers Centre

Cheshire Local Access Forum Congleton Disabled Access Group

DIAL (Disability, Information & Advice) Disability Information Bureau

Disability Services EDGE Inclusion Partners

Macclesfield Disability Information Bureau NeuroMuscular Centre

Odd Rode Parish Plan Elderly and Disabled Residents Group

Table B.4 General Consultation Bodies: Disabled Groups Representations

Organisation Organisation

AECOM Ainscough Strategic Land Make

Alcock and Bailey AMEC to

Arcadian Estates (North West) Ltd Argonaught Holdings Ltd

Ashtenne Industrial Fund AstraZeneca Invited BAE Systems Properties Limited Barratt Homes

Barton Willmore LLP Batley Architects

Bellway Homes Ltd (North West and Manchester BC Transport Persons Division)

Beacon Land Limited Bentley Motors Limited and

Bloor Homes Ltd Boughey Distribtuion Ltd

Bovale Limited Bovis Homes Ltd and Silk Park Ltd Bodies British Salt Bruntwood Estates Ltd of List

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 65 Organisation Organisation

Business Link North West BXB Ltd

Cardway Limited Cashtal Properties

CBRE Ltd Chambers of Commerce for North West

Cheshire and Warrington Enterprise Commission Cheshire & Warrington Local Enterprise Partnership

Cranford Estates Crosby Five Trust

David Holmes Planning David Wilson Homes North West

Derby, Derbyshire, Nottingham and Dewscope Ltd Nottinghamshire LEP

Dolphin Land and Development Consultancy Ltd Eddie Stobart Ltd

EMC Properties (Cheshire) Ltd Emerson Group

Extra Motorway Service Group Footprint Land and Development Ltd

Frost Planning Ltd Gladman Developments

Greater Manchester Local Enterprise Partnership GVA

Haddon Property Developments Ltd Harwill Development Ltd

Heine Planning Henshaws Waste Management Plc

Herring Properties Ltd Hiltons Cafe Representations HIMOR (Land) Ltd Home Builders Federation

Inventive Energy Job Centre Plus Make

to Jones Homes Joseph Holt Ltd

JR Consulting Lawson Motor Company

Lex Northwest Ltd Liverpool City Region Local Enterprise Invited Partnership

Lyme Green Settlement Macclesfield Chamber of Commerce

Macclesfield Rugby Football Club Lt Mactaggart and Mickel

Persons Mail Boxes Etc Manchester Airport Group

and Manchester Metropolitan University Margin Music

Martins Amenities McCarthy & Stone Retirement Lifestyles Limited

Morris Homes Mrs.E.Witter & Sons Bodies Muller Property Group Murdoch Planning of List

66 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 Organisation Organisation

Nantwich Town Football Club Limited National Farmers' Union

Ned Yates Garden Centre New River Retail (Scottish Widows Investment Partnership)

Northern Property Investment Company Ltd Park House Care Home Ltd

PDA Planning Services (Broughton Road) Ltd PDT Planning

Persimmon Homes Philip Brown Associates Ltd

Plant Developments Ltd Prima Hotels Ltd SSAS

Property Capital PLC Rail Freight Group

Raleigh Hall Properties Ltd Reaseheath College

Renew Land Developments Limited Rowland Homes Ltd

Royal London RPS Planning and Development

Rural Solutions Sainsbury's Supermarket Plc

Seddon Homes Ltd Senior Aerospace Bird Bellows

Sibelco UK South Cheshire Chamber of Commerce

Stoke-On-Trent & Staffordshire Enterprise Tata Chemicals/British Salt Ltd Partnership

The Emerson Group The Marches Local Enterprise Partnership Representations Wainhomes (NW) Ltd Warrington Chamber of Commerce

Table B.5 General Consultation Bodies: Business Interests Make

Organisation Organisation to

Acton Edleston and Henhull Parish Council Adderley Parish Council

Adlington Parish Council Agden Parish Meeting Invited

Alderley Edge Parish Council Allostock Parish Council

Alpraham Parish Council Alsager Town Council

Antrobus Parish Council Appleton Parish Council Persons

Arclid Parish Council Ashley Parish Council and Aston by Budworth Parish Council Audlem Parish Council

Audley Parish Council Barthomley Parish Council

Beeston Parish Council Betchton Parish Council Bodies of Betley, Balterley and Wrinehill Parish Council Bickerton and Egerton Parish Council List

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 67 Organisation Organisation

Biddulph Parish Council Bollington Town Council

Bosley Parish Council Bradwall Parish Council

Brereton Parish Council Brindley and Faddiley Parish Council

Broxton District Parish Council Buerton Parish Council

Bulkeley and Ridley Parish Council Bunbury Parish Council

Burland Parish Council Burwardsley Parish Council

Byley Parish Council Calveley Parish Council

Chelford Parish Council Cheshire Association of Local Councils

Cheshire West and Chester Borough Council Cholmondeley and Chorley Parish Council

Cholmondeston and Wettenhall Parish Council Chorley Parish Council

Church Lawton Parish Council Church Minshull Parish Council

Congleton Town Council Cranage Parish Council

Crewe Charter Trustees Crewe Green Parish Council

Crewe Town Council Cumbria County Council

Darnhall Parish Council Derbyshire County Council

Disley Parish Council Dodcott-cum-Wilkesley Parish Council Representations Doddington and District Parish Council Dunham Massey Parish Council

Eaton Parish Council Flintshire County Council Make

to Gawsworth Parish Council Goostrey Parish Council

Great Budworth Parish Council Great Warford Parish Council

Greater Manchester Geological Unit Greater Manchester Integrated Transport Authority Invited Handforth Parish Council Halton Borough Council

Hartington Upper Quarter Parish Council Hankelow Parish Council

Hassall Parish Council Haslington Parish Council Persons Haughton Parish Meeting Hatherton and Walgherton Parish Council

and Henbury Parish Council Heaton Parish Council

High Peak Borough Council High Legh Parish Council

Bodies Holmes Chapel Parish Council Higher Hurdsfield Parish Council of List

68 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 Organisation Organisation

Hulme Walfield and Somerford Booths Parish Hough and Chorlton Parish Council Council

Ightfield Parish Council Kettleshulme Parish Council

Kidsgrove Town Council Knutsford Town Council

Knutsford Town Plan Leekfrith/Rushton/Heaton Parish Council

Lancashire County Council Little Budworth Parish Council

Little Bollington Parish Meeting Lostock Gralam Parish Council

Little Warford Parish Council Lower Withington Parish Council

Lower Peover Parish Council Lymm Parish Council

Lyme Handley Parish Council Macclesfield Forest and Wildboarclough Parish Meeting

Macclesfield Charter Trustees Manchester City Council

Madeley Parish Council Marston Parish Council

Marbury and District Parish Council Marton Parish Council

Mere Parish Council Merseyside Environment Advisory Service

Middlewich Town Council Millington Parish Council

Minshull Vernon and District Parish Council Mobberley Parish Council Representations Moston Parish Council Mottram St Andrew Parish Council

Nantwich Town Council Nether Alderley Parish Council Make

New Mills Town Council Newbold Astbury-cum-Moreton Parish Council to

Newcastle under Lyme Borough Council Newcastle under Lyme Borough Council

Newhall Parish Council No Mans Heath and District Parish Council Invited North Rode Parish Council Norton In Hales Parish Council

Odd Rode Parish Council Ollerton with Marthall Parish Council

Over Alderley Parish Council Peak District National Park Authority Persons Peckforton Parish Meeting Peover Inferior and Peover Superior Parish Council Pickmere Parish Council

Plumley with Toft & Bexton Parish Council Pott Shrigley Parish Council

Poynton Town Council Prestbury Parish Council Bodies

Quarnford Parish Council Rainow Parish Council of List

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 69 Organisation Organisation

Ringway Parish Council, Manchester Rope Parish Council

Rostherne Parish Council Rushton Parish Council

Sandbach Town Council Shavington-cum-Gresty Parish Council

Shropshire Council Siddington Parish Council

Smallwood Parish Council Snelson Parish Council

Somerford Parish Council Sound and District Parish Council

Sproston Parish Council Spurstow Parish Council

Staffordshire County Council Staffordshire Moorlands District Council

Stapeley and District Parish Council Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council

Stoke and Hurleston Parish Council Stoke-on-Trent City Council

Styal Parish Council Sutton Parish Council

Swettenham Parish Council Tabley Parish Council

Tiverton and Tilstone Fearnall Parish Council Trafford Council

Tushingham, Macefen and Bradley Parish Transport for Greater Manchester Meeting

Warburton Parish Council Twemlow Parish Council

Representations Warmingham Parish Council Wardle Parish Council

Weston and Basford Parish Council Warrington Borough Council

Make Whitchurch Rural Parish Council Whaley Bridge Town Council to Willaston Parish Council Wilmslow Parish Council

Wilmslow Town Council Wincle Parish Meeting

Invited Wincham Parish Council Wistaston Parish Council

Winsford Town Council Worleston Parish Council

Woore Parish Council Wrenbury-cum-Frith Parish Council

Persons Wrenbury Parish Council Wybunbury Parish Council

Table B.6 Specific Consultation Bodies: Councils and

Organisation Organisation

20:20 Mobile British Gas (Centrica) Bodies British Gas PLC (North West) BT/Openreach of List

70 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 Organisation Organisation

Central and Eastern Cheshire Primary Care Trust Cheshire Brine Subsidence Compensation Board

Cheshire Constabulary Dart Energy (Europe) Ltd

E.ON East Cheshire NHS Trust

Eastern Cheshire Clinical Commissioning Group Electricity NW Ltd

English Heritage Environment Agency

Highways Agency Homes and Communities Agency

Hutchinson 3G (mobile) Local Nature Partnership

Mid Cheshire Hospital NHS Foundation Trust Mobile Operators Association

National Grid Natural England

Natural Resources Wales Network Rail

NHS Central Commissioning Group NHS England

NHS England Cheshire, Warrington and Wirral Area NTL Broadcast (Virgin Media) Team

O2 SKY

South Cheshire Clinical Commissioning Group SP Network Connections Limited

Sport England Telecom Securicor Cellular Radio Representations Telewest The Coal Authority

United Utilities United Utilities Electricity Connections Make

Western Power Distribution to

Table B.7 Specific Consultation Bodies: Excluding Councils Invited Persons and Bodies of List

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 71 72 Pre-Submission Core Strategy Main Issues and Council's Responses CHESHIRE Appendix C: Pre-Submission Core Strategy Main Issues and Council's Responses

Consultation Comment Cheshire East Council Response and Explanation EAST Policies Local Over-supply of employment land. The level of growth and development proposed is based on objectively assessed needs and the recognition of balancing such growth against the Green Belt constraint. Policy PG1 has Plan been positively prepared to reflect the evidence base to provide a level of growth appropriate to the delivery of the objectively assessed needs of the Borough. In terms of research and Strategy defining employment needs, the Employment Land Review provides part of a robust evidence base in support of the plan policies and proposals.

Statement A higher proportion of dwellings should go to Local The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) requires that Local Plans should meet Service Centres. objectively assessed needs. The Settlement hierarchy has been drawn up using the principles in the NPPF and has been tested at various stages in the development of the Local Plan Strategy. Detailed allocations in Local Service Centres will be set out in the Site Allocations of and Development Policies document. Consultation Object to removal of sustainable villages from policy This category is not used in the Local Plan Strategy as by implication some villages would be PG2. classified as unsustainable, which is not the case. The vision states that the objective for other settlements is to see some small scale residential and employment development, to help to retain and sustain local services and reduce the need to travel. Detailed allocations in Other

(Reg Settlements will be set out in the Site Allocations and Development Policies document.

22): Support the objective of sustainable, job-lead growth. The objective lies at the heart of the Local Plan Strategy.

May Support priority to Green Belt over housing and the The Council recognises the strategic importance of Green Belts and has carried out a review focus on brownfield sites. of the existing Green Belt and is proposing a further area of Green Belt. However the objective 2014 of jobs-led growth means that Green Belt boundaries are being reviewed and some sustainable development will take place on greenfield sites.

Proposals are divisive and reinforce the North-South In the south of Cheshire East, Crewe has been identified as a high growth centre, whereas in divide in the Borough. the north the Manchester Green Belt and National Park are major constraints on development. However, the Local Plan Strategy (LPS) seeks to promote jobs-led growth throughout Cheshire East, as illustrated by the proposals for Macclesfield and the Key Service Centres of Knutsford, Consultation Comment Cheshire East Council Response and Explanation

Handforth and Wilmslow, together with the proposals for Alderley Park. The LPS also proposes a new area of Green Belt around Crewe.

An assessment of viability is required in view of the The issue of viability has been given full consideration in the preparation of the Local Plan

CHESHIRE level of developer contributions sought. Strategy.

The requirements for developer contributions and/or on-site provision for each site are based on an assessment of planning issues and policies. The requirements will be refined as part of the site allocations and development policies document, and as part of consideration of EAST planning applications. Local Congleton should be identified as a Principal Town The level of growth in Congleton will be high in the plan period but the roles of both Congleton

Plan rather than a Key Service Centre (one comment and Macclesfield are correctly identified, taking account of the Spatial Portrait and the Town makes a comparison with Macclesfield). Strategies. The settlement hierarchy has been drawn up under the principles of the NPPF and

Strategy has been tested at various stages in the development of the Local Plan Strategy.

Creation of green infrastructure amongst other This is part of the policies (particularly SE6) and the sites proposals. measures to manage surface water and reduce run Statement off helping to alleviate danger of flooding supported.

Water is a precious resource and needs appropriate This is part of the policies (particularly SE13) and the sites proposals. management for example reduce flood risk by the use of of SuDS. Consultation Need to make sure there are suitable This is part of the policies (particularly IN1 and IN2) and the sites proposals. amenities/infrastructure available for the proposed level of development.

(Reg Support the identification of safeguarded land, which This is explained in policy PG4. is a well established planning tool in forward planning

22): an area.

May No need or justification to safeguard Green Belt land The need for safeguarded land is established. The justification for safeguarded sites within for development beyond the plan period. Green Belts is set out in the safeguarded land section of chapter 15 and in more detail in policy 2014 PG4. The proposals to safeguard land derive from the NPPF, paragraph 85. It is correct that

73 Pre-Submission Core Strategy Main Issues and Council's Responses 74 Pre-Submission Core Strategy Main Issues and Council's Responses CHESHIRE Consultation Comment Cheshire East Council Response and Explanation

the Local Planning Authority (LPA) should seek to safeguard sites for the longer term to meet

EAST future needs for development.

Welcome the inclusion of the provision for habitats for This is part of policy SE3 and the site allocations. Local great crested newts and other protected species.

Plan It is essential to attract inward investment, provide This is supported by Strategic Priority 1 and policy EG1. more employment and retain young and qualified

Strategy people.

Priority should be given to infill and regeneration of The NPPF and policies MP1, SD1 and SD2 confirm the presumption in favour of sustainable old housing stock. development. It is not necessary to frame additional policies to permit infilling and regeneration Statement in settlements in the Local Plan Strategy, but further guidance will be included in the Site Allocations and Development Policies document.

Grade 2 and 3a agricultural land should be protected A restriction on development of the best and most versatile (grades 1, 2 and 3a) agricultural of in the Core Strategy. land would not be in accordance with the NPPF paragraph 112. Agricultural land quality has Consultation been a consideration in site allocations, and is covered by Policy PG5. Consultation with DeFRA will be carried out for major developments on best and most versatile land.

With higher densities now being achieved on Policy SC4 refers to the need to the need to provide a mix of housing tenures, types and sizes. brownfield sites, the number of dwellings that that land

(Reg can support has grown considerably.

22): Most of the materials used to build houses are Specific reference is made in policy SE9 to Building Regulations, Code for Sustainable Homes, imported into the UK. BREEAM, CEEQUAL and Building for Life/Lifetime homes. The source of building materials May is taken into account in the sustainable building assessment regimes.

2014 The case for growth needs to be tempered by a proper This is part of the Local Plan Strategy, for example Strategic Priority 3 and policies PG4 and regard to other considerations such as the need to PG5. protect the countryside for its own sake, to preserve longstanding Green Belt.

An ageing population can best be accommodated by Policy SP1 supports flexible working and investment in new communication technologies to ensuring that they can remain in employment as long allow home working, and SP2 will make sure that development provides the opportunity for as possible. The plan does not address this issue. Consultation Comment Cheshire East Council Response and Explanation

healthier lifestyles. Policy SC4 addresses the issues of increased longevity of the Borough’s older residents in relation to housing policies.

The plan as it stands is for growth, not for sustainable From the very start of the Local Plan Strategy where the objective is to deliver ‘Sustainable,

CHESHIRE development. jobs led growth and sustainable, vibrant communities’, at policy MP1, in the strategic priorities and throughout the Plan, it is emphasised that protecting the quality of the environment is essential to the Plan.

The countryside of Cheshire East provides spaces of This is reflected by several policies including PG3, PG5, EG2 and SE4. EAST great tranquillity relative to the urban areas in and around the Borough. This tranquillity should be Local recognised as a specific asset and protected accordingly. Plan The visitor economy is crucial to Cheshire East’s This is supported by policy EG2 and EG4.

Strategy identity and brand and to creating the conditions for sustainable growth.

Any plan will, inevitably, attract widespread criticism The timely delivery of the Local Plan Strategy with full community involvement and in the Statement and objection. It is essential for the future continued required legal framework is a priority for the Council. prosperity of the region that a formal Development Plan is implemented without further delay. of Detailed knowledge of IT is required to access the The consultation has been carried out in accordance with Cheshire East Council’s Statement Consultation Local Plan consultation information. The consultation of Community Involvement. The use of electronic documents and communications is now an is not accessible to those unable to do this or visit a accepted part of National and Local Government business and provides an accessible and library. cost effective tool in communication. Other forms of communication are accepted.

The number of consultations and the volume of The process that has been followed to produce the Local Plan Strategy adheres to the

(Reg information have been too great. requirements set out by Central Government and in Cheshire East Council’s Statement of Community Involvement. The supporting documentation has been produced to make sure that

22): the Plan is based on a sound evidence base. May 2014

75 Pre-Submission Core Strategy Main Issues and Council's Responses 76 Pre-Submission Core Strategy Main Issues and Council's Responses CHESHIRE Consultation Comment Cheshire East Council Response and Explanation

Sites

EAST Disproportionate level of housing proposed around Crewe is Cheshire East’s biggest spatial priority and the Council has developed the ‘All Change Crewe versus the rest of the Borough. for Crewe: High Growth City strategy’ in response to this and has outlined the position Crewe Local will be in by 2030.

Plan Around Crewe to the south and west of the town a new area of Green Belt is proposed, to prevent the merging of Crewe with Nantwich and other surrounding settlements. This is is

Strategy considered further in Policy PG3 of the Plan.

Level of housing development is too low: additional The Local Plan Strategy sets out the Council’s core ambition and the overall approach to Statement sites should be considered. accommodating growth, and identifies strategic sites and locations for development. The reasons and rationale underpinning the approach to delivery of objectively assessed needs is established through policies PG1, PG2 and PG6 and throughout the document. Chapter 8 Planning for Growth states that the figures in policy PG6 and table 8.4 are intended as a guide of and are neither a ceiling nor a target. Consultation Shavington should not be treated as part of Crewe for The housing allocations in Shavington reflect an outline planning permission for up to 360 housing allocation purposes. dwellings on the Shavington triangle site (CS6) and a current application for up to 275 dwellings at East Shavington (CS7).

(Reg The development of the sites will contribute towards the strategic vision for and housing needs of Crewe. 22): Both sites have been selected as opportunities to provide high quality sustainable residential May development with associated developments and are well located in relation to the proposed

2014 housing and employment sites at Basford East and West.

Objections to the removal of land from the Green Belt. The reasons for reviewing Green Belt boundaries are fully explained in policy PG3. The Green The exceptional circumstances for altering the Green Belt Assessment considers where the identified development needs could be accommodated. Belt have not been demonstrated. The justification for safeguarded sites in Green Belts is set out in the Safeguarded Land section of chapter 15 and in more detail in policy PG4. The proposals to safeguard land derive from Consultation Comment Cheshire East Council Response and Explanation

the NPPF, paragraph 85. It is correct that the LPA should seek to safeguard sites for the longer term to meet future needs for development.

Objection to possible inclusion of land around Crewe The rationale for this proposal is set out in section 8 of the Local Plan Strategy and the

CHESHIRE and Nantwich in the Green Belt. justification for policy PG 3. The area of search for a new Green Belt recognises the past and future growth of Crewe and the need to protect the countryside between Crewe and Nantwich and other small settlements around the Principal Town.

Level of housing is too great in Macclesfield. An Economic Masterplan for the town was adopted in 2010, with the key elements of EAST redevelopment of the town centre and delivery of the South Macclesfield development area. The Local Plan Strategy complements the Masterplan. Local Level of development will give rise to additional traffic Strategic infrastructure requirements are set out in the Local Plan Strategy in the Site Specific

Plan problems on congested roads. A full transport Principles of Development for each allocation or strategic location and in the Infrastructure assessment is required. Delivery Plan. The Proposals have been subject to consultation with the highway authorities

Strategy and will be subject to further assessment as part of any planning applications, when a Transport Assessment and Travel Plan will be required for major schemes.

New housing sites are too far from employment areas. The selection of sites has taken careful account of transport links and accessibility. Several Statement major allocations are for mixed use developments including employment and local services, to reduce travelling, following the recommendations of the NPPF (paragraphs 37 and 38).

Some indicated development areas in Knutsford are Knutsford has been identified as one of the Key Service Centres for Cheshire East and as of subject to high levels of Aircraft Noise. The proposed such the vitality and growth of this town is important to the prosperity of the Borough as a Consultation housing numbers are too high and infrastructure will whole. A number of Local Plan Strategy sites, and areas of safeguarded land, have been not cope identified around the town to deliver appropriate sustainable economic growth up to 2030. Section 106 contributions will be sought to improve road networks and social infrastructure. Consultation will take place with relevant agencies on individual planning applications with regard to airport safeguarding and noise issues, as appropriate. (Reg Local Infrastructure is inadequate for the level of Existing infrastructure has been a key consideration in the Local Plan Strategy, as outlined in

22): development proposed. policy IN1. Infrastructure improvements have been identified for each site allocation and will be further developed in the Infrastructure Delivery Plan. May 2014

77 Pre-Submission Core Strategy Main Issues and Council's Responses 78 Pre-Submission Core Strategy Main Issues and Council's Responses CHESHIRE Consultation Comment Cheshire East Council Response and Explanation

Development should occur on brownfield sites only. The objective of jobs-led growth will mean that some sustainable development will take place

EAST on greenfield sites. It is important to note that not all brownfield sites are available or developable and whilst the Plan is supportive of the principle of brownfield sites redevelopment, there is no policy hook within the NPPF that would allow a Local Plan policy to require that all Local identified brownfield sites are developed before greenfield sites.

Plan Congleton link road is only a partial solution to traffic The Congleton Link Road will meet a number of objectives including the reduction of town problems and will result in imbalanced growth. Road centre congestion, supporting the regeneration of Congleton and improving access to Congleton Strategy should link to the A34. Business Park and Radnor Park Trading Estate. It is also considered that the reduction of traffic through the town centre will improve air quality in the town.

Growth in Middlewich will result in its shape being Middlewich Town Strategy has significantly informed both the vision for the town and selection Statement even more distorted. of sites which will contribute to delivery of that vision. The Town Map shows new employment development and the Eastern Bypass, and together with the requirements for new pedestrian and cycle links, will improve connections in the town. of There has already been significant development within The Local Plan Strategy recognises that Nantwich is a Key Service Centre and the allocation Consultation Nantwich area over the last 10 years and the Town of sites is in accordance with the Strategy. The scale of development allows for planned cannot take this sort of increase. development and will bring significant contributions to local infrastructure and amenities in the town.

There is sufficient brownfield land in Wilmslow to The justification for the sites in Wilmslow is set out in the Local Plan Strategy. The level of (Reg accommodate the required development. development proposed will support the vitality and growth of the town as a Key Service Centre. This will not rule out smaller developments within the town, and these will be examined as part 22): of the Site Allocations and Development Policies document. May North Cheshire Growth Village should be deleted from The need to meet objectively assessed needs and remove land from the Green Belt in the

2014 policy. north of the borough is established through Chapter 8 ‘Planning for Growth’ and policies PG1, PG2, PG3, and is supported by the Cheshire East Employment Land Review 2012, Strategic Housing Market Assessment update 2013 and the Green Belt Review 2013. The NPPF advises that sustainable development may be achieved through the allocation of new settlements. The case for the allocation of a major mixed-use development at Handforth East was canvassed as part of the public consultation on the Handforth Town strategy. It is been favoured over the allocation of development sites in restricted, unsustainable locations. Consultation Comment Cheshire East Council Response and Explanation

The Council should be prioritising housing sites in or The decisions to support new settlements have been made in the context of the National on the edge of settlements, and not entirely new Planning Policy Framework and other key planning documents underpinning the Local Plan settlements as is proposed. Strategy, including the Green Belt Review.

CHESHIRE New housing in Sandbach will only be utilised by As a Key Service Centre for Cheshire East, the vitality and growth of Sandbach contributes to commuters. Sandbach an ancient town which could the prosperity of the Borough as a whole. There are a number of committed housing sites be destroyed for ever, resulting in urban sprawl and (shown on the Sandbach Town Plan) that are likely to come forward in the early part of the the danger of being flooded with applications. Local Plan period. The strategic mixed use site adjacent to the Junction 17 of the M6 is situated

EAST in a sustainable location, adjacent to the M6 motorway. This will help to improve the economy of Sandbach, and increase the number of job opportunities for the local population, in line with the new dwelling numbers. The site is expected to be largely developed as an employment Local site with some small scale ancillary housing to help fund improved access and infrastructure of the site. Plan Basford East is not a sustainable site as demonstrated The site presents the opportunity for a high quality employment led vibrant development, Strategy by the Sustainability Appraisal. adjacent to the existing urban area of Crewe with good access to existing transport infrastructure (the A500/M6 and railway). The site performs a strategic economic function in a key location to the south of Crewe. It is proposed that in the site a new local centre will be created that will include a new primary school; retail provision; a community facility and so on. The site will Statement therefore be a sustainable mixed use development.

Table C.1 Pre-Submission Core Strategy Main Issues and Council's Response of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014

79 Pre-Submission Core Strategy Main Issues and Council's Responses 80 Non-Preferred Sites Main Issues and Council's Reponses CHESHIRE Appendix D: Non-Preferred Sites Main Issues and Council's Reponses

Site Consultation Comment Cheshire East Council Response and Explanation EAST NPS1: One representation of support stating that the site should not be The site is outside the Green Belt Area of Search as set out

Local Coppenhall developed and should be included in the Green Belt. in Figure 8.2 of the Local Plan Strategy. It is detached from East most of the existing residential development to the north of Extension, Two representations of objection stating that the site should be included Crewe with the railway line forming a strong boundary to the Plan Crewe as an allocation as it compares well with other. west. It is also located outside the maximum recommended

Strategy distance to a range of forms of open space and key services and facilities.

There are other, more appropriate sites, with fewer constraints Statement and better access to services, facilities and the transport network that are capable of meeting objectively assessed housing needs. of

Consultation NPS5: 257 representations received supporting the non-inclusion of this site, The site is within the Green Belt Area of Search and a former Gorsty Hall referring to the isolated location, lack of infrastructure and planning recreation facility. Golf Course, history. The site should be retained as a recreation facility as required Crewe by a legal agreement and the golf course should be restored. The site's outlying location means its access to existing Development of the site would reduce the gap between Crewe and the services and facilities is limited and the costs of delivering a

(Reg Potteries. sustainable development and other mitigation measures are likely to be significantly high. The appropriateness and viability

22): Adverse impact on wildlife and ecology. of such improvements necessary to mitigate against development harm in this location are not considered May achievable. Two representations of objection stating that the site should be allocated 2014 and referring to the non-viability of the golf course. The site compares The site is a former recreational area (golf course) in an area well with the South Cheshire Growth Village and would bring the of open countryside. opportunity to create a Garden Village. There are other, more appropriate sites, with fewer constraints One comment received, referring to habitat and wildlife. and better access to services, facilities and the transport network that are capable of meeting objectively assessed housing and development needs. Site Consultation Comment Cheshire East Council Response and Explanation

NPS: 10 30 representations received supporting the non-inclusion of the site. The site does not relate well to achieving the Vision and South West, Development would erode the Green Gap between Crewe and Wistaston Strategic Priorities. It is somewhat detached from the main Crewe and would have an adverse impact on local amenities. urbanised areas to the north and east, and is only partially located adjacent to existing residential development. The site

CHESHIRE Two representations received stating that a detailed masterplan has is outside the maximum recommended distance to a range of been drawn up for the site concluding that a sustainable scheme for 320 forms of open space and a range of key services and facilities. dwellings was deliverable. Development here will lead to the loss of a large area of open countryside and area designated as Green Gap. EAST The Cheshire East Council Green Belt and Strategic Open Gap Study recognised the fragility of this gap between the Local built up areas of Crewe and Nantwich and the importance in its role and retention. To preserve separation of settlements Plan in this area, the Local Plan Strategy proposes the establishment of new Green Belt in this location. Strategy

There are other, more appropriate sites, with fewer constraints and better access to services, facilities and the transport

Statement network that are capable of meeting objectively assessed housing and development needs.

NPS 38: Six representations of support received. The site serves to maintain The site does not relate well to the achievement of the Vision of

Consultation Land the identity of Henbury as a village. There is no justification for invasion and Strategic Priorities of the Local Plan Strategy. Although between of the Green Belt in this location. it is located adjacent to the existing urban edge of Macclesfield Chelford the site is at significant distance from services and would Road and One representation of objection received stating that the site should be require high levels of investment in local services and Whirley allocated for development. infrastructure.

(Reg Road, Macclesfield One comment received referring to the continued growth of the town by This area has an important Green Belt function as it forms an extension to urban areas.

22): important gap between Macclesfield and Henbury and development of this site could lead to Henbury being merged May into the Macclesfield urban area. 2014

81 Non-Preferred Sites Main Issues and Council's Reponses 82 Non-Preferred Sites Main Issues and Council's Reponses CHESHIRE Site Consultation Comment Cheshire East Council Response and Explanation

There are other, more appropriate sites, with fewer constraints

EAST and better access to services, facilities and the transport network that are capable of meeting objectively assessed housing and development needs. Local

Plan NPS 40: Three representations of support, stating that the site provides a valuable The site does not relate well to the achievement of the Vision Land to the buffer zone between Macclesfield and Prestbury, helping both to retain and Strategic Priorities of the Local Plan Strategy. Although

Strategy west of their identities. The development would create additional traffic problems it is located adjacent to the existing urban area with good Priory Lane, and would cause upheaval to the rugby club. access to local services and existing infrastructure, the site’s Macclesfield location within a valuable area of Green Belt would undermine One objection referring to the location of the site close to schools and environmental protection and undermine the separation of the Statement amenities and suitable terrain. settlements of Prestbury and Macclesfield.

Three comments referring to suitability of site for recreation and As recreation land the site falls outside the definition of education use and possible development of part of the site. previously developed land and would not be regarded as a of brownfield site. Consultation

There are other, more appropriate sites, with fewer constraints and better access to services, facilities and the transport network which are capable of meeting objectively assessed housing and development needs. (Reg

22): NPS 42: 63 representations of support including points relating to the importance The site does not relate well to the achievement of the Vision

May Land of the site as a green buffer to the National Park. The area is well used and Strategic Priorities of the Local Plan Strategy. Although Adjoining by walkers. it is close to the existing developed area it does not have good

2014 Lark Hall, access to local services and existing infrastructure. It is Macclesfield One objection stating that development of the site would be a rounding outside the maximum recommended distance to a range of off of the town and it does not form an important part of the Green Belt. forms of open space and a range of key services and facilities. It has access and is available for development. Development of the site would not meet objectives of the Local Plan Strategy, which seek to protect and promote One comment referring to the need for low density development retaining environmental quality. the site’s natural features. Site Consultation Comment Cheshire East Council Response and Explanation

The site is within the Peak Park fringe Local Landscape designation and is of high environmental value.

There are other, more appropriate sites, with fewer constraints

CHESHIRE and better access to services, facilities and the transport network that are capable of meeting objectively assessed housing and development needs. EAST NPS 17: One representation of support received, stating that there are better The site does not relate well to the achievement of the Vision MMU sites available for development. and Strategic Priorities. To build on this greenfield site would Local Extension, be a less sustainable option than the alternatives that have Alsager Two objections received, stating that the development of the site would been identified and would therefore not relate well to the

Plan form a logical rounding off of the town adjacent to the existing former achievement of the Vision. university site. It is considered preferable to development of other sites

Strategy west of the town. The site contains protected trees and a Public Right of Way. The site has not been progressed at this time in the Local Plan Strategy because to build on this greenfield site would be a less sustainable option than the brownfield and greenfield Statement alternatives that have been identified. The site is therefore not being progressed due to the availability of better, alternative sites that are more capable of delivering the Plan’s sustainable housing and regeneration priorities. of Consultation

NPS 36: 11 representations of support making points such as the need to limit The site does not relate well to the achievement of the Vision Congleton urban creep into the countryside, the lack of suitable infrastructure and and Strategic Priorities. Although it is located adjacent to the West the fact that the development would not contribute towards the Congleton existing edge of Congleton, it does not have very good access Link Road. to local services and existing infrastructure and is in an area (Reg of open countryside with a watercourse and natural features. Seven objections referring to recent planning permissions in the vicinity, 22): good access to the M6 and the limited environmental value of the site. The site has not been progressed at this time in the Local Plan

May Strategy because development here would not contribute to the provision of the Congleton Link Road, which is a key 2014 element to facilitate economic prosperity; a major component

83 Non-Preferred Sites Main Issues and Council's Reponses 84 Non-Preferred Sites Main Issues and Council's Reponses CHESHIRE Site Consultation Comment Cheshire East Council Response and Explanation

of the Local Plan Strategy Vision. There are other, more

EAST suitable sites available which would contribute better towards the Local Plan Strategy Vision and Strategic priorities. Local NPS 50: One representation of support received stating that the site should not The site does not relate well to the achievement of the Vision

Plan Land south be considered for allocation as development or safeguarded land. and Strategic Priorities. Sited adjacent to the existing urban of area, access to local services and existing infrastructure is

Strategy Longridge, Four objections received stating that the site is derelict and could be somewhat limited. The site has limited access to public Knutsford used for housing development, avoiding expansion on the north side of transport provision, and is subject to significant constraints of the town. Green Belt designation, existing buildings, designated heritage assets, and important nature conservation assets. Statement Two comments received referring to the accessibility of the site. The site includes Booths Mere, a designated Site of Biological Importance, and several trees. It contains a Public Right of Way and several informal paths. of Consultation This site has not been progressed at this time in the Local Plan Strategy because of the need to protect historic landscape and because of its Green Belt designation. There are other, more appropriate sites, with fewer constraints and better access to services, facilities and the transport network (Reg that are capable of meeting housing and other development

22): needs. May NPS 16: 13 representations of support received regarding the value of the site The site does not relate well to the achievement of the Vision

2014 Land to the for wildlife, recreation and agriculture. The site helps to retain the rural and Strategic Priorities. The site's outlying location means its South of character and atmosphere of Stapeley. The development would add to access to existing services and facilities is limited and the Nantwich existing traffic problems and the town has sufficient development appropriateness and viability of such improvements necessary allocated to meet its needs. to mitigate against development harm in this location are not considered achievable. Three objections received stating that development of the site would be a rounding off of the town’s southern boundary and would not lead to extension into open countryside. Site Consultation Comment Cheshire East Council Response and Explanation

The site has not been progressed at this time in the Local Plan Strategy because of its inability to contribute to Cheshire East’s housing requirements without significant investment and provision of infrastructure, loss of landscape character and

CHESHIRE the constraints to development on site.

There are other, more appropriate sites, with fewer constraints and better access to services, facilities and the transport

EAST network that are capable of meeting housing and other development need whilst supporting the sustainable growth of Nantwich. Local

Plan NPS 32: 78 representations of support received, stating that the development The site does not relate well to the achievement of the Vision Land at would be a significant distance from the town centre, and increased and Strategic Priorities. To build on this greenfield site would Strategy Yeowood traffic problems. The site performs an important function in providing a be a less sustainable option than the committed sites and Farm, green area between Ettiley Heath and Sandbach/Elworth and is of high identified alternatives. The potential loss of heritage assets Sandbach agricultural quality. and agricultural land are further concerns. Statement Two objections received stating that the site is well related to Sandbach The site is therefore not being progressed due to the and could provide new community and recreation facilities including a availability of better, alternative sites that have fewer marina and local retail provision. constraints and are more capable of delivering the Plan’s Strategic Priorities. of Two comments received referring to the need for a new primary school. Consultation

NPS 60: One representation of support received agreeing with the non-allocation This site currently does not relate well to the achievement of Rotherwood of the site and referring to the value of the peat bog. the Vision or Strategic Priorities, as growth in this area is Road, anticipated to be delivered within the North Cheshire Growth Wilmslow Two objections stating that the site is a brownfield site that could form Village east of Handforth. (Reg a small scale extension of Wilmslow, either as allocated or safeguarded land. The site has not been progressed at this time in the Local Plan 22): Strategy because it contains significant physical and policy

May constraints including contaminated land, Green Belt 2014

85 Non-Preferred Sites Main Issues and Council's Reponses 86 Non-Preferred Sites Main Issues and Council's Reponses CHESHIRE Site Consultation Comment Cheshire East Council Response and Explanation

One comment received referring to the importance of safeguarding land designation, natural and conservation assets and existing

EAST in the area for future needs. buildings. Apart from the existing buildings the site as a whole does not constitute previously developed land.

Local There are other, more appropriate sites, with fewer constraints and better access to services, facilities and the transport

Plan network that are capable of meeting housing and other development need. In addition the Green Belt exerts Strategy significant constraint on the expansion and growth of towns in the north of the Borough. Statement Table D.1 Non-Preferred Sites Main Issues and Council's Responses of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 Appendix E: Local Plan Strategy - Submisson Version Main Issues

Employment

The basis for the overall amount of employment land planned and whether the amount of additional employment land is justified. Types of employment land and its provision in the Local Plan Strategy (for example under provision of B8 employment land).

Housing

The role of the Government’s household projections (2008 based and 2011 interim projections) in identifying objectively assessed needs. Windfall/brownfield approach. Housing Land Supply – objectively assessed need/not enough sites to meet the need. The Plan would not realistically provide for or maintain a five year supply on adoption. Queries over the potential sources of supply for new housing. What are the assumptions about the scale and timing of supply and rates of delivery from these sources? Are these realistic and supported by evidence? Phasing of housing delivery cannot be justified and will be a brake on economic growth.

Objectively assessed needs for development

Objectively assessed needs figure presented in the Local Plan Strategy are too high/too low. The assumptions for the proposed level of housing provision in terms of population Issues growth, migration, jobs growth, commuting patterns and build rates. What is the basis for these assumptions in terms of evidence and are they realistic?

Objectively assessed needs identified do not fit with the Councils own evidence base Main and economic growth agenda.

Distribution of development ersion

Queries over whether the settlement hierarchy is appropriate and justified. V The distribution of development does not seek to deliver new development in sustainable locations. The spatial distribution of development does not reflect objectively assessed needs with figures too high/too low for areas of the Borough. Support for spatial distribution policy, particularly the emphasis upon development needs

being largely met in the defined Principal Towns and the Key Service Centres. Submisson - Infrastructure

Background evidence for proposed infrastructure not available to view. Concerns regarding the need for Congleton Link Road and associated housing. M6 Junction improvements required. Strategy Concerns over delivery, implementation and funding for major infrastructure including

road schemes included in the Local Plan Strategy. Plan Infrastructure (especially road(s)) related to the North Cheshire Growth Village. Local

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 87 Sites

Questioning the deliverability of sites in the plan in respect viability/build rates and flexibility. Site selection process – no clear explanation why one site is preferred over another that is not allocated in the plan. Level of on-site/contribution levels required as part of the site policies. Phasing of sites is not in line with the availability of sites. The justification and inclusion of sites, in particular CS30 (North Cheshire Growth Village) in the Local Plan Strategy. Query the approach to the inclusion of two villages in the Local Plan Strategy over the approach to appropriate urban extension of existing settlements. A number of additional sites have been proposed to be included in the Local Plan Strategy.

Green Belt and safeguarded land

No exceptional circumstances have been provided for development within the existing Green Belt; timing of Green Belt Assessment and site selection process. Lack of strategic approach to the consideration of Green Belt and Green Belt release. New Green Belt is not safeguarding large towns from development. NPPF does not require land to be safeguarded in the Green Belt beyond the plan period; consistency with the NPPF. The need for Green Belt release is clear and the recognition and positive reference to land being removed from the Green Belt is appropriate and welcomed. Issues Policies

Main The Local Plan Strategy should identify primary and secondary shopping areas and provide retail floorspace for retail and leisure uses. Policy SC5 (Affordable homes) is not sufficiently flexible and does not take adequate account of viability and is therefore not consistent with national policy. ersion

V Duty to Cooperate

Whether the Council has complied with the legal and soundness test in the preparation of the Plan. Lack of consideration of highway issues affecting adjoining authorities from developments planned in Cheshire East. Submisson

- Sustainability Appraisal

Technical difficulties and uncertainties - Throughout the development of the Local Plan Strategy and the SA, data gaps and uncertainties have been uncovered. It has not always possible to accurately predict sustainability effects when considering plans at

Strategy such a strategic scale with certain impacts depending on more detailed information and studies at a site-level. Plan Local

88 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 Habitats Regulations Assessment

Additional policy wording proposed for policies contained in the Local Plan Strategy. Additional policy wording proposed for a number of strategic sites close to nearby European sites. Issues Main ersion V Submisson - Strategy Plan Local

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 89 Appendix F: Statement of Representations Procedure

The Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012 (Regulations 18, 19 and 20)

Statement of Representations Procedure

Title of document: Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy – Submission Version

Subject Matter: The Local Plan Strategy – Submission Version sets out Cheshire East Council's spatial policy framework for delivering sustainable economic growth and represents the strategy the Council wishes to adopt to deliver a vibrant sustainable community and for the management of development in Cheshire East up to 2030. It has been published for a period of public representations before Submission to the Secretary of State.

Area Covered: Whole of the administrative area of Cheshire East, excluding the Peak District National Park.

Representation Period: A six week period – Friday 14th March 2014 until 5pm on Friday 25th April 2014. To be valid, all representations must be submitted within this period and received by the Council at Westfields, Middlewich Road, Sandbach CW11 1HZ by 5:00 pm on Friday 25th April 2014. Parties submitting representations after this deadline lose the right to appear at the public examination stage. Anonymous representations will not be considered.

Representations: can be made electronically by way of the Council’s website www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/localplan or in writing on a representation form available from the following locations: all libraries in Cheshire East; the Customer Service Centres at Delamere House, Crewe and the Town Hall, Macclesfield; Planning Help Desk, Municipal Buildings, Crewe; and Westfields, Middlewich Road, Sandbach. The representation forms must be returned to: Spatial Planning, Cheshire East Council, Westfields, Middlewich Road, Sandbach CW11 1HZ by 5:00 pm on Friday 25th April 2014.

All comments received will be submitted to the Secretary of State and considered as part of a public examination by an independent Planning Inspector. Representations at this stage

Procedure should only be made with respect to the legal compliance of the Local Plan Strategy and to its soundness. The Council considers the Local Plan Strategy – Submission Version to be sound, so representations should specify in what respect(s) the Plan is considered to be unsound and what change(s) would be needed to be made to make it sound.

Further notification: Representations may be accompanied by a request for you to be notified at a specified address that:

The Local Plan Strategy has been submitted for independent examination;

Representations The recommendations of the person appointed to carry out the independent examination of the Local Plan Strategy have been published; and of The Local Plan Strategy has been adopted. Statement

90 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 Location of Documents for Inspection - Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy – Submission Version

The Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy – Submission Version and supporting documentation (Sustainability Appraisal; Habitat Regulations Assessment; Policies Map; Statement of Consultation; Infrastructure Delivery Plan; Duty to Co-operate Statement of Compliance; Submission Sites Justification Paper; Submission Non-Preferred Sites Justification Paper; Housing Background Paper; Employment Background Paper; Background Paper - Population Projections and Forecasts; Local Plan Strategy Overview Document; Statement of Community Involvement; and Local Development Scheme) are available for inspection at:

The Customer Service Centres at Delamere House, Crewe and the Town Hall, Macclesfield; Planning Help Desk, Municipal Buildings, Crewe; and Westfields, Middlewich Road, Sandbach (9am to 5pm Monday to Friday) and all libraries in Cheshire East - opening times for the libraries can be found at http://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/libraries/libraries_opening_hours.aspx

An electronic copy of the Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy – Submission Version; all of the supporting documents listed above; the evidence base that has been used to inform the Plan and guidance on how to make a representation will be available to view on the Council’s website: www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/localplan

Paper copies of the Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy – Submission Version and all of the supporting documentation listed above, can be requested from the Spatial Planning Team by emailing [email protected] or by telephoning 01270 685893. Please note that a reasonable charge will be made, to cover printing and postal costs, for each document. Procedure Representations of Statement

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 91 Appendix G: List of Media Coverage for All Stages

G.1 Below are lists of the media coverage for the consultation stages undertaken as part of the preparation of the Local Plan Strategy.

Core Strategy Issues and Options Paper (2010)

Press

Press Release 1st November 2010 Press Release 29th November 2010

Articles in:

Consultation was publicised on Cheshire East website (throughout whole of the consultation period) Article on Good Migration website (throughout whole of the consultation period) Information published on screens in Customer Service Centres (all Council offices/buildings with screens) throughout whole of the consultation period Article in ‘Partnerships’ newsletter November 2010 Crewe Blog Crewe and Nantwich Guardian 4th November 2010 Team Talk – internal Cheshire East publication to all staff 5th November and 10 December 2010 Poynton Times 11th November 2010 Crewe and Nantwich Guardian 18th November 2010 Crewe and Nantwich Chronicle November 24th – Article inviting local businesses to have their say Crewe and Nantwich Chronicle December 1st 2010 – two articles Crewe and Nantwich Chronicle December 8th 2010 Crewe Chronicle December 8th 2010 Cheshire East News December 2010 edition Your Place – internal Cheshire East Places Departmental publication – December 2010 Poynton Times 27th January 2011 Stages Article in ‘Partnerships’ newsletter November 2010

All Article on Poynton Town Council website

for Radio

Item on Radio Stoke, during December 2010, on the Willaston Green Gap

Place Shaping Consultation (2011)

Coverage Intranet Sites

East Cheshire Primary Care Trust Intranet – 19 August 2011

Media Leighton Hospital, Crewe Intranet – 22 August 2011 of List

92 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 Newsletters

Cheshire East Council ‘Your Place’ Newsletter – Summer 2011 Cheshire East Council internal staff newsletter ‘Team Talk’ – 8 July 2011, 15 July 2011, 26 August 2011, 2 September 2011, 9 September 2011, 16 September 2011, 23 September 2011, 21 October 2011 Cheshire East Council Schools Bulletin – 18 July 2011, 5 September 2011, 26 September 2011, 17 October 2011, 31 October 2011, 7 November 2011, 14 November 2011 Cheshire East News – Summer 2011, Autumn 2011 Congleton Town Council ‘Bear Necessities’ newsletter – July 2011 East Cheshire Chamber Newsletter – July 2011 East Cheshire Primary Care Trust Staff Newsletter – 19 August 2011 Kingsley Fields, Nantwich leaflet – August 2011 Partnerships newsletter – May 2011, July 2011, September 2011, November 2011

Newspapers

Cheshire Independent – October 2011 Congleton Chronicle – 7 July 2011, 21 July 2011, 28 July 2011, 18 August 2011, 25 August 2011, 29 September 2011, 6 October 2011, 10 November 2011, 24 November 2011 Crewe Chronicle – 6 July 2011, 20 July 2011, 24 August 2011, 31 August 2011, 28 September 2011, 23 November 2011 Crewe and Nantwich Guardian – 30 June 2011, 14 July 2011, 28 July 2011, 18 August 2011, 10 November 2011 Macclesfield Express – 11 January 2012 Nantwich Chronicle – 7 September 2011 Poynton Post – August 2011, September 2011 Sandbach Chronicle – 28 July 2011 The Advertiser – 29 September 2011 The Sentinel - 29 June 2011, 5 July 2011, 6 September 2011 Wilmslow Express – 17 November 2011

Radio Stages

Chester Radio Dee 106.3 – transcript of interview with Councillor Brown, 5 September All 2011 for Websites

Alsager Camera Club – 5 July 2011 Audlem Online – 4 July 2011 Burland Parish Council – 28 June 2011 Cheshire East Council – July to October 2011 Coverage Cheshire East Council Spatial Planning Blog – July to October 2011 Cheshire East Council Spatial Planning facebook page – July to October 2011

Cheshire Magazines – 1 July 2011 Media

CPRE Cheshire – 14 August 2011 of List

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 93 Crewe and Nantwich Guardian – 7 July 2011 Crewe Chronicle – 6 July 2011, 7 July 2011 Crewe News – 2 July 2011; 12 August 2011 CVS Cheshire – 5 August 2011 Diocese of Cheshire eBulletin – July 2011 Good Migration Green Gap Facebook Profile page – 28 June 2011 Haslington Online – 13 September 2011 Holmes chapel community website – 14 August 2011 Kirkwells Planning Blog – 6 July 2011 Knutsford.Com – 2 July 2011; 16 August 2011 Knutsford Guardian website – 2 August 2011, 19 August 2011, 31 August 2011, 17 September 2011 Love Nantwich website – 29 June 2011, 7 July 2011, 15 August 2011, 12 September 2011 Macclesfield Forum – 31 August 2011 Make it Macclesfield – 9 August 2011 Middlewich Guardian website – 12 July 2011 Mumsnet Crewe – 22 August 2011 Mumsnet Handforth – 22 August 2011 Mumsnet Haslington – 22 August 2011 Mumsnet Knutsford – 22 August 2011 Mumsnet Nantwich – 22 August 2011 Mumsnet Wilmslow – 22 August 2011 Nantwich Civic Society – 11 September 2011 Nantwich News Blog – 16 July 2011, 12 August 2011 North West Housing News – 4 July 2011 Poynton Forum – 9 July 2011 Poynton Town Council – 24 June 2011 Prestbury.Com – 14 August 2011 Rope Parish Council – 5 July 2011 The Best of Crewe and Nantwich – 24 August 2011

Stages This is Staffordshire – 4 July 2011, 13 August 2011 Wilmslow – 2 July 2011 All Wilmslow Express – 1 September 2011

for Wrenbury Parish Council – 1 July 2011

Minerals Issues Discussion Paper (2012)

Schools Bulletin - 27/02/12 Crewe Chronicle - 29/02/12 Coverage Crewe and Nantwich Guardian - 15/03/12 Congleton Chronicle - 01/03/12 Media of List

94 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 Draft Town Strategies for Alsager, Congleton, Middlewich and Sandbach (2012)

Community and Voluntary Services Cheshire East website – 02/03/12 Congleton Chronicle – 23/02/12 (two articles), 01/03/12 (two articles), 08/03/12, 22/03/12 (two articles), 29/03/12, 31/03/12, 05/04/12, 26/04/12 Crewe Chronicle – 25/01/12, 29/02/12, 21/03/12 Crewe Guardian – 01/03/12 Good Migration website Mid Cheshire Hospitals Foundation Trust Intranet Middlewich Guardian – 23/01/12, 01/03/12 Partnerships Newsletter – March 2012 edition Place North West website – 27/02/12 PLANNET – RTPI North West Region Newsletter – Spring 2012 Planning Magazine – 09/03/12 Sandbach Chronicle – 01/02/12 Schools Bulletin – 27/02/12, 19/03/12 The Sentinel – 02/04/12 Team Talk (Cheshire East internal staff weekly newsletter) – 09/03/12, 30/03/12

Draft Wilmslow Vision (2012)

Cheshire Today – 30/03/12 Wilmslow.co.uk – 20/03/12, 28/03/12, 03/04/12, 09/05/12, 11/05/12, 15/05/12, 22/05/12 Wilmslow Express – 29/03/12, 05/04/12, 09/05/12, 17/05/12, 26/06/12

Draft Town Strategies for Crewe, Handforth, Knutsford, Macclesfield, Nantwich and Poynton (2012)

Audlem Online – 3/09/12 CPRE Cheshire website – 25/09/12 Cheshire East News – September 2012 edition Community and Voluntary Services Cheshire East website – 17/09/12 Congleton Chronicle – 09/08/12, 16/08/12, 27/09/12 Stages

Crewe Chronicle – 08/08/12, 15/08/12, 22/08/12, 29/08/12 (two articles), 05/09/12, All 12/09/12 (six articles), 19/09/12, 26/09/12, 24/10/12, 31/10/12

Crewe and Nantwich Guardian – 16/09/12, 20/09/12, 26/09/12, 27/09/12. for Crewe News – 24/08/12 The Dabber – 25/09/12, October 2012 Good Migration website – 11/09/12 Haslington Online – 26/08/12

High Legh Parish Council website – 23/09/12 Coverage Knutsford.Com – 22/08/12, 29/08/12, 07/09/12, 14/09/12, 18/09/12, 19/09/12, 20/09/12, 26/09/12, 19/07/12 Knutsford Guardian – 29/08/12 (two articles), 12/09/12, 19/09/12, 27/09/12 Media Macclesfield Express – 08/08/12, 29/08/12, 12/09/12, 19/09/12, 26/09/12 Macclesfield Town FC – 24/08/12 of List

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 95 Make It Macclesfield website – 03/09/12 Mid Cheshire Hospitals Foundation Trust Intranet – 06/09/12 Nantwich News – 04/09/12, 13/09/12 Nantwich Town Council website – 24/09/12 Nether Alderley Parish Council – 07/09/12 Partnerships Newsletter – September 2012 edition Place North West website – 17/09/12, October 2012 Poynton Updates and News website – 31/08/12 Prestbury.com – 04/09/12 Sandbach Chronicle – 26/07/12 Schools Bulletin – 03/09/12, 17/09/12 The Sentinel – 07/08/12, 03/09/12 Team Talk (Cheshire East internal staff weekly newsletter) – 03/08/12, 10/08/12, 23/08/12, 31/08/12, 07/09/12, 14/09/12, 21/09/12, 28/09/12, 05/10/12 Wilmslow.co.uk – 23/08/12, 30/08/12, 31/08/12, 09/09/12, 18/09/12, 25/09/12, 26/09/12 Wilmslow Express – 19/07/12, 30/08/12, 06/09/12, 13/09/12 (three articles)

Development Strategy and Emerging Policy Principles (2013)

Alderley Edge.com – 21/12/12, 6/02/13, 21/02/13, 04/03/13 Alsager Chronicle – 10/01/13 Audlem Online – 7/02/13, 19/02/13, 25/02/13 Bear Necessities Newsletter – Winter 2013 Cheshire East Council – Council Tax booklet March 2013 Cheshire East Council ‘Round-up of Business and Development News in Cheshire East’ (internal newsletter) 8/02/13 Congleton Chronicle – 13/12/12 (two articles), 20/12/13, 3/01/13, 10/01/13, 17/01/13, 24/01/13 (three articles), 7/02/13 (four articles), 14/02/13 (six articles), 21/02/13 (three articles), 28/02/13 (three articles), 7/03/13 (four articles), 14/03/13 (two articles), Crewe Chronicle – 28/11/12 (three articles), 2/01/13, 9/01/13, 23/01/13, 30/01/13, 6/02/13 (two articles), 13/02/13 (two articles), 20/02/13 (two articles), 27/02/13 (five articles), 6/03/13 (three articles) Crewe and Nantwich Guardian – 12/12/12, 21/02/13 Stages Good Migration website – January 2013

All Haslington Online – 25/02/13 Kirkwells web page – 7/02/13

for Knutsford.Com – 5/12/12, 21/12/12 Knutsford Guardian – 21/12/12, 2/01/13, 20/02/13 Macclesfield Express – 2/01/13, 9/01/13, 16/01/13, 23/01/13 (two articles), 30/01/13, 6/02/13, 13/02/13, 20/02/13 Manchester Evening News – 12/03/13

Coverage Mid Cheshire Hospitals Foundation Trust Intranet –30/01/13 Middlewich Guardian – 22/12/12, 13/01/13 Nantwich Chronicle – 6/02/13

Media Nantwich News – 24/12/12 Nantwich Town Council Newsletter – February 2013 of Partnerships Newsletter –November 2012 and January 2013 editions List

96 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 Place North West – 6/02/13 Planning Magazine – 11/01/13 Planning Resource website – 11/01/13 Prestbury.com – 21/12/12 Sandbach Chronicle – 10/01/13 (two articles), 17/01/13, 31/01/13 Schools Bulletin – 03/09/12, 17/09/12 The Sentinel –10/01/13, 21/01/13, 11/02/13, 20/02/13, 23/02/13 The Thread – web article – 8/02/13 Team Talk (Cheshire East internal staff weekly newsletter) – 18/01/13, 8/02/13, 22/02/13 Wilmslow.co.uk – 4/12/12, 21/12/12, 23/01/13, 24/01/13, 6/02/13, 7/02/13, 21/02/13 (2 articles), Wilmslow Express – 3/01/13, 10/01/13 (two articles), 17/01/13 (two articles), 7/02/13 (two articles), 14/02/13 (two articles), 21/02/13 Wilmslow Town Council leaflet re the consultation January 2013 Wulvern wifi web article – January 2013

Radio coverage

25/12/12 – Councillor Jones featured on the news, talking about the forthcoming Local Plan consultation. 31/1/13 - Councillor Jones featured on the Radio Stoke evening ‘drive time’ slot, talking about the Local Plan consultation. 04/2/13 – Article on Radio Stoke, regarding the Barthomley Action Group opposing the new settlement at Barthomley identified in the Development Strategy; article included Edward Timpson MP. 05/2/13 – BBC Radio Manchester – Councillor Michael Jones did a live interview at about 5.15pm talking about a ‘brownfield first’ policy when it comes to development. 12/02/13 – Pre-recorded interview with Councillor Michael Jones talking about the Council’s approval of the five year housing land supply (SHLAA) and broadcast on ‘drive time’ slot. 13/2/13 - Councillor Brown was interviewed on Radio Stoke. 21/2/13 Radio Interview on Radio Stoke with Cllr Jones during the drive time show. Reference made to the Local Plan.

22/2/13 - Audio Recording with Cllr Brown regarding the Local Plan sent to local radio Stages stations. 26/2/13 - Radio Stoke interview with Cllr David Brown reporting the end of the All consultation. for 26/2/13 – Signal One – the radio station used pre-recorded clips of an interview with Councillor David Brown urging residents to respond on the final day of the local Plan consultation. 8/3/13 - BBC Radio Stoke - Councillor Michael Jones did a live interview on the breakfast show explaining why he did not attend a meeting in the village of Oakhanger last night to discuss residents’ concerns about housing proposals. Coverage 18/3/13 – Councillor David Brown was interviewed by Tim Wedgwood at BBC Radio Stoke about the Local Plan and its impact on unwanted development.

21/03/13 - BBC Radio Stoke - Councillor Michael Jones did a live interview on the drive Media time programme talking about proposals by the Duchy of Lancaster for a number of of homes near Barthomley. List

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 97 Television coverage

8/3/13 – BBC Northwest News (television) - Councillor Michael Jones did a live interview on the lunchtime news about the plans for houses in the Barthomley area and the widening of the A500. 17/03/13 - BBC Politics Show (television) - Councillor Michael Jones was interviewed about planning matters, including the Local Plan.

Press Releases

21 December 2012 – Council extends Local Plan consultation 13 February 2013 – Leader seeks legal advice over Abbey Fields (included information about the Local Plan) 18 February 2013 – Five year housing plan signals victory over speculative developers (included information about the Local Plan) 19 February 2013 – Local Plan consultation is coming to an end – get involved today

Possible Additional Sites Proposed by Developer and Land Interests (2013)

Alderley Edge.com – 26/04/13 Audlem Online – 13/05/13 Cheshire East Council ‘Cheshire East Direct’ newsletter – articles regarding the consultation – 26/04/13, 03/05/13, 22/05/13 Congleton Chronicle – 24/04/13, 25/04/13 (two articles), 30/05/13 CPRE website – 30/05/13 Crewe Chronicle – 01/05/13, 08/05/13, 15/05/13, 22/05/13 (three articles), 29/05/13 Crewe and Nantwich Guardian – 26/04/13, 16/05/13 Good Migration website – May 2013 (in English and Polish) Haslington Online – 09/05/13 Mid Cheshire Hospitals Foundation Trust Intranet – 03/05/13 Schools Bulletin – 06/05/13 Team Talk – (Cheshire East internal staff weekly newsletter) – 26/04/13, 03/05/13, 17/05/13, 24/05/13 Wilmslow.co.uk – 26/04/13 Stages Radio Coverage All 23/04/13 – Councillor Michael Jones speaking on Radio Stoke regarding the forthcoming for consultation 24/04/13 - Councillor Michael Jones speaking on Signal Radio regarding the forthcoming consultation 25/04/13 - Councillor Michael Jones speaking on Silk 106 regarding the forthcoming consultation Coverage 14/05/13 - Councillor Michael Jones speaking on Canalside Radio regarding the forthcoming consultation Media of List

98 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 Press Releases

23/04/13 – Press release re forthcoming consultation. 23/05/13 - Press release reminding people of the closing date of the consultation.

Provisional Core Strategy Sites (Strategic Planning Board 26 September 2013)

Alderley Edge.com – 18/09/13 BBC News Manchester – BBC.co.uk – 18/09/13, 26/09/13 The Business Desk.Com – 18/09/13 Congleton Chronicle – 19/09/13 (two articles) Crewe Chronicle – 18/09/13, 02/10/13 Crewe Chronicle.co.uk – 18/09/13, 02/10/13 (four articles) Crewe Guardian.co.uk – 19/09/13 Macclesfield Express.co.uk – 18/09/13, 26/09/13 Macclesfield Today – 26/09/13 Partnerships Newsletter – September 2013 Place North West – 24/09/13 Sandbach Chronicle - 18/09/13 Team Talk – (Cheshire East internal staff weekly newsletter) – 19/09/13 Wilmslow.co.uk – 18/09/13 (two articles), 26/09/13, 01/10/13

Radio Coverage

17/09/13 – news item re the provisional Core Strategy sites on BBC Radio Manchester 17/09/13 – news item regarding the provisional Core Strategy sites on BBC Radio Stoke 18/09/13 – Councillor Michael Jones – speaking on BBC Radio Stoke re the provisional Core Strategy sites 26/09/13 – Councillor Michael Jones – speaking on BBC Radio Manchester re the Local Plan

Press Release

17/09/13 – Press release re the provisional Core Strategy sites Stages

Pre-Submission Core Strategy and Non-Preferred Sites (2013) All for Alderley Edge.com – 05/11/13 Audlem Online – 10/10/13, 05/11/13, 09/11/13 BBC News Manchester – BBC.co.uk The Business Desk.Com Cheshire Borders Independent – November 2013 Coverage Congleton Chronicle – 26/09/13, 3/10/13, 10/10/13, 17/10/13, 7/11/13, 21/11/13, 12/12/13 (two articles) Crewe Chronicle – 6/11/13, 13/11/13, 27/11/13 Crewe Chronicle.co.uk – 2/10/13 Media

Crewe and Nantwich Guardian.co.uk – 18/12/13 of List

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 99 Knutsford Guardian.co.uk – 14/11/13, 27/11/13 Macclesfield Express.co.uk – 14/11/13 Macclesfield Today Mid Cheshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust Intranet – 06/11/13 Nantwich Town Council web page – 14/11/13 Partnerships Newsletter – November 2013 Place North West Poynton Post – November 2013 Sandbach Chronicle Schools Bulletin – (produced by Cheshire East Council and provided to all schools, as well as being on the Cheshire East Council website) - 04/11/3, 09/12/13 Stoke Sentinel.co.uk – 19/11/13 Team Talk – (Cheshire East internal staff weekly newsletter) – 6/11/13, 11/12/13 The Saxon – December 2013 The Voice CVS Cheshire East newsletter – 5/12/13 Wilmslow.co.uk – 10/12/13, 13/12/13

Radio Coverage

05/11/13 – news item re the Pre-Submission Core Strategy consultation on BBC Radio Stoke

Press Release

05/11/13 – press release regarding the start of the consultation on the Pre-Submission Core Strategy

Local Plan Strategy - Submission Version (2014)

Alderley Edge.com – 4/2/14, 18/2/14 (two articles), 25/2/14, 4/3/14 (two articles), 18/3/14, 22/3/14, 28/4/14, 13/5/14 Alsager Chronicle – 27/2/14 p37, p56; 6/3/14 p1, p4, p5, p26, p40, p56; 13/3/14 p1, p3, p24, p40; 20/3/14 p15, p36; 27/3/14 p4, p38, p44, p47, p64; 3/4/14 p7, p42, p44; 10/4/14 p5, p37, p41; 17/4/14 p42, p45, p64 Stages Audlem Online – 4/2/14, 15/2/14, 19/02/14, 20/2/14, 21/2/14, 5/3/14, 14/3/14, 19/3/14 Cheshire Borders Independent – March 2014 All Cheshire Independent – Issue 66 p1, p2, p5

for Cheshire-Today.co.uk – 26/2/14, 8/3/14, 13/3/14, 14/03/14, 18/3/14, 19/3/14 Congleton Chronicle – 27/2/14 p37, p56; 6/3/14 p4, p5, p43; 13/3/14 p3, p37; 20/3/14 p15, p36; 27/3/14 p4, p44, p47; 3/4/14 p7, p42, p44; 10/4/14 p5, p41; 17/4/14 p42, p45, 24/4/14 p36 Crewe Chronicle – 19/02/14, 05/03/14 (two articles), 12/03/14, 26/03/14, 7/05/14

Coverage Crewe Chronicle.Co.Uk – 19/02/14, 04/03/14, 27/03/14, 23/04/14 Crewe & Nantwich Guardian – 20/02/14 Crewe & Nantwich Guardian.Co.Uk – 06/03/14, 10/03/14, 20/03/14 Knutsford Guardian – 19/2/14 p18; 19/3/14 p9 Media Knutsford Guardian.Co.Uk – 19/02/14, 28/02/14, 27/03/14 of List

100 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 Macclesfield Express – 26/2/14 p4; 5/3/14 p7, p14, p31; 12/3/14 p4, p14, p56; 19/3/14 p26, p43; 2/4/14 p14; 9/4/14 p14; 23/4/14 p31; 30/4/14 p4 Macclesfield Today – 27/3/14 to13/4/14 p5, p10; 10/4/14 to 24/4/14 p10 Manchester Evening News.Co.Uk - 13/214, 13/4/14 Mid Cheshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust Intranet – article placed on the news page on 14 March 2014 Middlewich Guardian.co.uk – 21/02/14, 03/03/14 Nantwich Chronicle – 26/3/14 p13; 5/3/14 p6, p7, p8, p9, p16; 12/3/14 p1, p3, p7, p16, p41; 26/3/14 p33; 9/3/14 p33; 23/4/14 p16, p17, p18, p25; 30/4/14 p16, p17 Nantwich News.Co.Uk – 01/03/14, 01/4/14 Nantwich Town Council web page – 24/2/14, 6/3/14 Northwich, Winsford and Middlewich Guardian – 26/2/14 p31; 19/3/14 p21, p34; 12/3/14 p23 Partnerships Newsletter – March/April 2014 Place North West – 17/2/14 Sandbach Chronicle – 27/2/14 p56; 6/3/14 p4, p5; 13/3/14 p1, p3, p37, p40, p56; 20/3/14 p15, p36; 27/3/14 p4, p27, p44, p47; 3/4/14 p1, p7, p42, p44; 10/4/14 p1, p5, p41, p64; 17/4/14 p42, p45; 24/4/14 p1, p36 Schools Bulletin (produced by Cheshire East Council and provided to all schools, as well as being on the Cheshire East Council website) – 17/03/14, 31/03/14 Stoke Sentinel – 28/4/14 p28 Talk of the Town (the newsletter of Nantwich Town Council) – April 2014 Team Talk (Cheshire East internal staff weekly newsletter) – 26/2/14, 6/3/14, 13/3/14 The Saxon – March 2014 This Is Cheshire.Co.Uk – 6/2/14, 20/2/14, 20/3/14, 28/2/14, 28/2/14, 3/3/14, 3/3/14, 5/3/14, 12/3/14, 12/3/14, 19/3/14, 19/3/14, 21/3/14, 18/4/14, 20/4/14 Wilmslow Express – 27/2/14 p2; 13/3/14 p6; 20/3/14 p4; 27/3/14 p17; 3/4/14 p3; 10/4/14 p2; 24/4/14 p11 Wilmslow.co.uk – 18/2/14, 18/2/14, 25/2/14, 4/3/14 (two articles), 17/3/14, 21/3/14, 16/4/14, 25/4/14, 28/4/14

Radio Coverage

19/02/14 – news item and feature, including an interview with Councillor Jones, regarding Stages the Local Plan Strategy Submission document, on BBC Radio Stoke 28/02/14 - news item and feature, including an interview with Councillor Jones, regarding All the Local Plan Strategy Submission document being considered by the Full Council meeting that day, on BBC Radio Stoke for 01/03/14 - news item, regarding the Local Plan Strategy Submission document being approved at the Full Council meeting on 20/02/14, on BBC Radio Stoke

Television Coverage Coverage 19/02/14 - feature, including an interview with Councillor Jones, regarding the Local Plan Strategy Submission document, on BBC North West Tonight. Media of List

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 101 Press Release

20/02/14 - press release entitled 'Council to decide on final Local Plan Blueprint’ 18/03/14 - press release entitled 'Cheshire East Council Local Plan – Formal Representation Period’ Stages All for Coverage Media of List

102 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 Appendix H: Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy - Submission Version: List of Inadmissible Representations

H.1 The following representations were received but have been marked as inadmissible.

Ref Person/Organisation Reason for Broad Content of Representation(s) Marking as Inadmissible

IR01 Mr Brian McGavin Duplicate Portal Related to development around Wilmslow. Representations submission Duplicate of processed representation SUB12.

IR02 Adlington Parish Duplicate Portal Related to Green Belt and safeguarded land Council (Mrs Helen submission issues in the Parish of Adlington. Duplicate of Richard) processed representation SUB219.

IR03 Mark Williams Late email Analysis of the Cheshire East Strategic submission Housing Market Assessment. Inadmissible

IR04 Persimmon Homes Late email Representations on sustainable development: of North West (Bobby submission scale and distribution of development; housing Williams) land supply; land at Crewe Road, Shavington; Settlement Hierarchy; The Green Gap; Recent List Appeals; Green Belt and Strategic Open Gap Study; and landscape appraisal.

IR05 Persimmon Homes Late email Representations on sustainable development: ersion:

North West (Bobby submission scale and distribution of development; housing V Williams) land supply; settlement hierarchy; land at Centurion Way, Middlewich; ensuring deliverability – development on brownfield sites; recent appeals; landscape appraisal.

IR06 Fiona Young Late email Objection to site CS 25. submission Submission - IR07 Martin Kinsey Late email Objection to sites CS 26 and CS 27. submission

IR08 Emelia Bray Late email Objection to Green Belt development south submission of Macclesfield. Strategy IR09 Estate of Marques Late email Copy of representation to the examination on Kingsley Dec’d (Mr submission public for the Cheshire 2011 Replacement

Michael Kingsley) Structure Plan by Michael Kingsley on behalf Plan of the estate of Marques Kingsley Dec’d.

IR10 Terry Roeves Late email Representation regarding brownfield sites in submission Wilmslow. Local

IR11 Weston and Basford Late email Rebuttal statement to the statement made by Parish Council (Agent – submission the Co-operative Group in respect of their land East Mr Andrew Thomson of holdings in Weston Parish and the comments Thomson Planning they have made with regard to the Green Belt Partnership) Cheshire

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 103 Ref Person/Organisation Reason for Broad Content of Representation(s) Marking as Inadmissible

area of search and the submissions already made by the Parish Council.

IR12 Persimmon Homes Late email Further late representations regarding land at North West (Bobby submission Centurion Way, Middlewich. Williams)

Representations IR13 Persimmon Homes Late email Additional further late representations North West (Bobby submission regarding land at Centurion Way, Middlewich. Williams)

IR14 Bloor Homes (Agent – Late email Location plan of land at School Lane, Bunbury Justin Cove of Nexus submission that was omitted from the original Planning) representation.

Inadmissible IR15 Wychwood Community Late email Request to appear at the examination in public

of Group (Trevor Sandry, submission in response to representations received from Chairman) Haddon Property Developments Ltd regarding Gorstyhill area. List IR16 Cashtal Properties Late email Representation made by a party with an (Agent – Mr Mark submission ownership interest in site CS 30. Aylward or Aylward Planning) ersion: V IR17 Desmond Williams OBE Late email Related to development around Wilmslow. and Susan Williams submission

IR18 Royal London (Agent – Late postal Email sent to Cheshire East Council but not Gary Halman of HOW submission received by them. Appendices to Planning) representations received processed during the representations period mainly regarding Submission site CS 26: Appendix 1 (Red Edge Plan); - Appendix 2 (Royal London, a Growing Company- Economic and Social Contribution to Wilmslow and Cheshire East, Regeneris Consulting June 2013); Appendix 3 (Letter from Royal London to Mike Suarez, Chief Strategy Executive, Cheshire East Council); Appendix 4 (Wilmslow Housing Requirements: Regeneris Consulting December 2013); Plan Appendix 5 (RL Planning Statement for “Site F”- Land East of Alderley Road, Wilmslow); Appendix 6 (Suggested revised policy text for

Local CS26); Appendix 7 (RL Planning Statement for “Site F”- Land East of Alderley Road, Wilmslow); Appendix 8 (Extract from CEC

East Open Space Survey for Wilmslow); and Appendix 9 (Suggested new draft policy text for CS26A). Cheshire

104 CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 Ref Person/Organisation Reason for Broad Content of Representation(s) Marking as Inadmissible

IR19 E Hickson Late postal Do not support the plan as it relates to submission Handforth

IR20 Fiona Robinson Late postal Copy of a standard letter received from submission numerous parties regarding site CS 29.

IR21 David Brierley Late postal Copy of a standard letter received from submission numerous parties regarding site CS 29. Representations

IR22 Mr Malcolm Rawlinson Late postal Representation made by a party with an (Agent – JR Seed of submission ownership interest in site CS 30 supporting Brown Rural the proposals. Partnership)

IR23 Unknown Anonymous Representation regarding Green Belt, site CS representation 30 and brownfield sites. Inadmissible of IR24 Crown Estate (Agent – Late email Barton Willmore’s Green Belt Review Joanne Russell of submission

Barton Willmore) List

Table H.1 List of Inadmissible Representations ersion: V Submission - Strategy Plan Local East Cheshire

CHESHIRE EAST Local Plan Strategy Statement of Consultation (Reg 22): May 2014 105 Back Cover Green.pdf 11/02/2014 14:26:18

CMY

Cheshire East Council Email: [email protected] www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/localplan Tel: 01270 685893