LITTLE NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN CONSULTATION STATEMENT

NOVEMBER 2020

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 This consultation statement has been prepared to fulfil the legal obligations of the Neighbourhood Planning Regulations 2012 in respect of the Neighbourhood Plan. The legal basis of the Statement is provided by Section 15 (2) of Part 5 of the 2012 Neighbourhood Planning Regulations, which requires that a consultation statement should:

• Contain details of the persons and bodies who were consulted about the proposed Little Bollington Neighbourhood Plan; • Explain how they were consulted; • Summarise the main issues and concerns raised by the persons consulted; • Describe how those issues and concerns have been considered and, where relevant, addressed in the proposed Little Bollington Neighbourhood Plan.

1.2 Little Bollington is a small village in north , just outside the southern edge of the conurbation. The village is located within the Green Belt, and is at the northern tip of the area governed by Council. In place of a parish council, administration takes place via a parish meeting. The parish comprises of one small settlement, the small village of Little Bollington, but is predominantly characterised by a rural landscape of arable and pastoral agriculture. The village is in a very attractive rural setting. It lies within the National Trust Estate, which is a large area of farmland centred around Hall and Park, a nationally significant heritage asset which is a major visitor attraction and one of the National Trust’s most visited properties. Although Dunham Massey lies outside of the parish, Little Bollington has strong visual and historic ties with the estate.

1.3 At the time of the 2011 census, there were 170 residents living in Little Bollington, in 75 households. The small number of residents has meant that consultation with members of the community has been possible at a manageable scale, which has helped to allow the community to become aware of the Neighbourhood Plan, and to contribute to its development through various flyers, meetings and a questionnaire.

1.4 Additionally, the Parish Meeting has published information on the village website https://www.littlebollington.org/ which has pages dedicated to the Neighbourhood Plan, where Neighbourhood Plan documents and background evidence have been published and available to view.

2 BACKGROUND

2.1 The Little Bollington Neighbourhood Plan is a community plan and must derive its vision, objectives and policies from the community. From the outset the Parish Meeting was determined that the residents should be kept informed and given opportunities to contribute to the Neighbourhood Plan. Communication and consultation, in various forms, have played a large role in formulating the Neighbourhood Plan.

2.2 Throughout the process, the neighbourhood planning steering group has consulted with stakeholders and the community, using a variety of methods in order to gain as many views as possible.

2.3 It was considered essential to:

• Promote a high degree of awareness of the project; • Encourage contributions to the development of the Neighbourhood Plan; • Promote consultation events and provide regular meetings and updates on the status of the Neighbourhood Plan and its development.

2.4 Key to this programme was publicity to gain residents’ engagement. This was gained via meetings, newsletters, postal information, emails, notices on the community notice boards, hand delivered flyers, and electronic media via the Little Bollington website. Consultation versions of the Neighbourhood Plan were available to view on the Parish website, along with other documents and reports. https://www.littlebollington.org/

2.5 Every effort has been made to ensure that the vision, objectives and policies of the Little Bollington Neighbourhood Plan reflect the views of the majority of the local residents, whilst having regard to local and national policies.

2.6 The Neighbourhood Plan has been developed through regular consultation with the residents of Little Bollington. Important stakeholders such as the National Trust, and Cheshire East Council Planning department has also been consulted throughout the process providing invaluable information and advice.

3 THE EARLY STAGES

3.1 Who was consulted and how were they consulted? In order to provide information regarding Neighbourhood Planning, and to gauge interest in developing a Neighbourhood Plan, a presentation was given entitled ‘A Neighbourhood Plan for Little Bollington?’ at the Annual Parish Meeting in May 2018. The presentation explained the purpose and the need for a Neighbourhood Plan, provided information about Neighbourhood Planning, explained how people could get involved, and clarified the next steps in the preparation of the Neighbourhood Plan.

3.2 What issues and concerns were raised? The response from residents highlighted that there was support for preparing a Neighbourhood Plan, and that people would be interested in being kept informed of its development.

3.3 How have the issues and concerns been considered? It was considered that there was support to fully begin preparing a Neighbourhood Plan for Little Bollington, and at the November 2018 Parish Meeting, it was decided to go ahead with developing the Neighbourhood Plan. A steering group was formed, and it was agreed that an application should be prepared and submitted to Cheshire East Council to designate the Neighbourhood Plan area, and so begin the Neighbourhood Plan process. The proposed Neighbourhood Plan area was therefore submitted to Cheshire East Council, and it was formally designated on 26th November 2018. 4. RESIDENTS’ QUESTIONNAIRE

4.1 Who was consulted and how were they consulted? A questionnaire was delivered to every household in the parish in February 2019. An accompanying note to residents explained that at the November Parish Meeting it had been agreed to prepare a Neighbourhood Plan, in order to give the local community more influence and control over the development of the area. The note explained that completed questionnaires could be dropped off at The No.3 Pub, The Swan with Two Nicks Pub, or emailed to [email protected]

4.2 The questionnaire asked what residents valued about Little Bollington, with suggestions including access to the open countryside; local green spaces; wildlife, watercourses; proximity to Dunham Massey; history and heritage; open views and vistas; public rights of way; civic facilities, and gave the option of adding further suggestions.

4.3 The questionnaire then asked five yes or no questions, concerning inappropriate developments; the natural environment; built character and design; access to the countryside, and local character.

4.4 What issues and concerns were raised? There was a very good response rate of 36%. The results highlighted that 100% of respondents valued access to the open countryside. 96% of respondents valued local green spaces, watercourses and the proximity of Little Bollington to Dunham Massey House and Estate. 93% of respondents valued Little Bollington’s wildlife, history and heritage, and open views and vistas. 89% of respondents valued the network of public footpaths, with 81% valuing the civic facilities. 100% of respondents wanted to protect access to the open countryside, and protect Little Bollington’s residential and agricultural character. 96% of respondents thought that Little Bollington was under threat from inappropriate development, with 96% also wanting to protect Little Bollington’s built character and design, and 96% wanting to protect the natural environment.

4.5 When asked what else they valued about Little Bollington, there were a number of responses. The community, and community spirit were mentioned, as was the peace and quiet, tranquillity, and escape from the hustle and bustle. Working farms were mentioned, as was the appreciation of the two village pubs. One respondent mentioned that they would like to see some development to help bring people into the village. Another mentioned that Little Bollington had a very mixed built character and design.

4.6 How have the issues and concerns been considered? The results highlighted what was important for local people to see included in the Neighbourhood Plan, formed the basis of the Neighbourhood Plan’s vision, objectives and policies, and helped to determine what evidence needed to be gathered to inform the policies.

4.7 Policies were specifically drawn up to cover landscape character and the importance of the Parish in relation to the setting of Dunham Massey; access to the countryside; the , and wildlife.

4.8 Additionally, the recommendations led to the decision by the steering group to commission further reports to help provide background evidence and justification for the Neighbourhood Plan policies, on topics which had been seen as important by the community. As such, a wildlife report was commissioned from Cheshire Wildlife Trust, along with a heritage report and a design guide from Urban Imprint. The reports can be viewed at https://www.littlebollington.org/neighbourhood-plan/

4.9 Additionally, the National Trust were approached and very kindly allowed the steering group to use a report that they had commissioned from LUC entitled Managing the Visual Setting of Dunham Massey as background evidence for the Neighbourhood Plan. This can also be viewed on the Little Bollington website.

5. FURTHER CONSULTATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS: MARCH – JULY 2019

5.1 Following the return of the questionnaire results, a very useful day was spent with the Neighbourhood Plan Manager from Cheshire East Council in March 2019 in order to help finalise the vision and objectives and determine what policies should be considered for inclusion in the Neighbourhood Plan to help meet the objectives, along with what evidence may be needed for specific policies. The day covered such issues as heritage; landscape and the natural environment; access to the countryside; civic facilities; design and character and the local economy.

5.2 The results of the questionnaire were discussed at the Parish Meeting in April 2019, along with the information gathered from the day spent with the Neighbourhood Plan Manager in March. A flyer summarising progress and the draft vision, along with further information on the development of the Neighbourhood Plan was circulated to all residents in July. The flyer was delivered by hand as well as by email to all residents, plus a copy was placed in the parish magazine and on the parish website, as well as being displayed on the 2 noticeboards at either end of the village.

6. LOCALLY LISTED HERITAGE ASSETS CONSULTATION WITH OWNERS – DECEMBER 2019

6.1 Who was consulted and how were they consulted? Following the receipt of the Heritage Assessment report from Urban Imprint, which suggested a number of heritage assets which should be included on a local list, it was decided that there should be a policy in the Neighbourhood Plan regarding these assets. It was considered that it would be inappropriate to simply include the suggested assets in the Neighbourhood Plan without first informing the property owners.

6.2 A letter was therefore sent to the affected residents in December 2019. This letter explained the Neighbourhood Plan process and the importance of history and heritage to the local residents. It explained that the parish had commissioned an independent assessment of all the heritage assets within Little Bollington from Urban Imprint, and that during this review, Urban Imprint discovered that there were ten buildings of historical merit within the parish which didn’t benefit from any statutory designation - including theirs. A link was given so that recipients of the letter could read the full report. (Please see http://www.littlebollington.org for a copy of their full report).

6.3 The letter explained that a ‘locally listed building’ is a building, structure or feature which, whilst not officially ‘listed’ by the Secretary of State for its national importance, is considered to be of local importance due to its architectural, historical or environmental significance. The letter clarified that by identifying a property as locally important in this way, there would be no additional restrictions or special consents required from the owner - the usual planning rules would apply, including permitted development, and that listed building consent would not be required. However any works to the property that required planning permission would need to recognise their historic or architectural interest and be sensitive to that. Further information on local listing was highlighted at https://historicengland.org.uk/advice/hpg/has/locallylistedhas/

6.4 It was explained that the Neighbourhood Plan was still in draft form, so there was an opportunity to give comments during the Regulation 14 process, and the Cheshire East regulation 16 consultation. It was stressed that the steering group would welcome and consider all comments and amend the plan where appropriate. It was explained that the draft plan would then be examined by an independent examiner, who would consider all comments before determining whether or not the plan should proceed to a referendum, with or without modifications.

6.5 What issues and concerns were raised and how have the issues and concerns been considered? There were no comments received from the owners of the suggested locally listed heritage assets, and so the locally listed heritage assets policy (HLD5) was included in the Regulation 14 and submitted versions of the Neighbourhood Plan.

7. REGULATION 14 CONSULTATION (EXTENDED DUE TO CORONAVIRUS)

7.1 As required under Part 5, Section 14 of the Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012, the Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group completed a pre-submission consultation on the draft Little Bollington Neighbourhood Plan. The original consultation was due to take place between 2nd March 2020 and 17th April 2020, but was extended due to the coronavirus pandemic which led to lockdown at the end of March. It was therefore decided to leave the consultation period open throughout the pandemic, and extend it for a short while once the first lockdown period was over, until 31st October 2020. This was to ensure that everyone who wanted to view the plan and make comments was as able as possible to do so, and would not be disadvantaged from not being able to view a physical copy of the plan if they so wished by virtue of having to either shield indoors or from being unable to view the documents at the proposed venues, which had had to remain closed over lockdown. Residents were informed of the extended period, with information as to where the Neighbourhood Plan could be viewed online, or how they could view a paper copy upon request. Responses could be by email, or if preferred written responses could be collected, or discussed in person.

7.2 Within this extended regulation 14 period the following was undertaken -

• Consultation with statutory consultation bodies • Notification as to where the pre-submission Little Bollington Neighbourhood Plan could be inspected • Information on how to make representations, and the date by which these should be received • A copy of the pre-submission Little Bollington Neighbourhood Plan was sent to the Cheshire East Spatial Planning department

7.3 Cheshire East Council supplied approximately 100 e-mail addresses of interested parties which were all sent the Regulation 14 information letter and links to the Neighbourhood Plan website where they could view the Neighbourhood Plan and accompanying documents. This was supplemented with contacts for local organisations and individuals which it was considered might have opinions on the Plan. All households in the Parish were notified of the consultation process and a further meeting and presentation, via a hand delivered flyer sent out in February 2020. A copy of the Plan was available for viewing at The Swan with Two Nicks pub and Ye Olde No3 Pub. An online version could be viewed on the village website at https://www.littlebollington.org/neighbourhood-plan/

7.4 Comments on the Neighbourhood Plan could be made on response forms available at the two pubs, or could be downloaded from the website at: https://www.littlebollington.org/neighbourhood-plan/ Completed response forms could be sent via the online form, or via the drop boxes located at the two pubs, or sent by post or email to the Parish clerk.

7.5 A drop in session was due to be held on Thursday March 19th 2020 at Ye Olde No.3 Pub between 6pm and 8pm, to enable people to ask questions, view the draft Neighbourhood Plan and background documents, and give their comments. However, due to the coronavirus pandemic, unfortunately it was decided that this event should not go ahead. However, there had been a well attended and advertised Parish Meeting on Thursday 5th March at 7pm in the Village School, where Kirsty, the project manager, had presented and explained the plan, answered questions, and had the plan available for viewing. Residents were encouraged to respond to the regulation 14 consultation, and it was explained to them the process for doing this, along with the next steps for the plan, following Regulation 14.

7.6 Along with local residents, the following people and groups were consulted as part of the Regulation 14 consultation:-

Cheshire East Council Malpas Parish Council Council Parish Council Derbyshire Dales Council Beeston Parish Council Derbyshire Council Tiverton Parish Council Peak District Council Audley Parish Council Halton Council Chapel and Hill Chorlton Parish Council Lancashire Council Keele Parish Council Manchester Council Kidsgrove Parish Council Newcastle (Staffs) Council Loggerheads Parish Council Staffordshire Moorlands Council Biddulph Council Stoke Council Madeley Parish Council Council Whaley Bridge Parish Council Stockport Council New Mills Town Council South Derbyshire Council Woodford Community Council Cyfoeth Naturiol Cymru Agden Parish Cheshire West and Council Millington Parish Council Warringron Council Warburton Parish Council Shropshire Council Parish Council Parish Council Dunham Massey Parish Council Appleton Parish Council Parish Council and Parish Council Ashley Parish Council Stretton Parish Council Coal Authority O2 Homes Scottish Power Natural England Wast Cheshire Primary Care Trust Environment Agency Greater Manchester Health Care English Heritage Liverpool pct Network Rail East Cheshire pct Highways Authority English Nature Marine Management United Utilities National Trust Novo Property National Grid Tatton Estates Management Historic England James Ramsbottom (Old Nags Head) North Cheshire Chamber of Industry Enterprise Inns East Cheshire Chamber of Industry Church https://wcnwchamber.org.uk/contact/ Little Bollington School School Cheshire and Growth Hub Frank Cookson (local farmer) Stoke and Staffs LEP National Trust Dunham – Estate & General Manager Cheshire and Warrington LEP Conservation Group 2 x B & Bs Cheshire Wildlife Trust The Small Animal Hotel Cheshire Federation of Women’s Institutes Nursery/after school club Local Councillor Kate Parkinson 2 pub’s landlords CHALC The Adventure Farm Trust & Bowdon Civic Society Age Concern Cheshire Gardens Trust Disability Rights UK Peel Holdings Riding for the Disabled Canal & River Trust Christian Concern Little Bollington WI British Red Cross Lymm Historic Society YMCA Groundwork Warrington Civic Society Cheshire Police CPRE Altrincham Football Club The National Association of Boat Owners: Cheshire Young Farmers DEFRA NFU Sustrans Girl Guiding Altrincham Walking Group British Cycling Lymm U3A Walking Group Cycling UK Guild Walking Group Scouts Local Narrow Boat Charity Small Farms Association Tenant Farmers Association

7.7 What issues and concerns were raised? A total of 39 comments were received at the Regulation 14 stage, from 16 consultees. These were from 9 residents, 5 statutory bodies, 1 local business and Cheshire East Council. The issues raised included comments about wording to strengthen and give clarity to policies and ensure conformity, the possible need for affordable housing, comments on design and the need to ensure that all existing house types are included, comments on soakaways and comments on traffic.

7.8 How have the issues and concerns been considered? The issues and concerns have been given full consideration, and changes have been made to the Neighbourhood Plan accordingly, in preparation for formal submission. Various wording in the text and policies have been amended, as per suggestions, to add clarity to the Neighbourhood Plan. Changes were made to policies HLD1 – Landscape Character ; HLD2 – Views and Setting; HLD3 - Design; HLD4 - Heritage; NE1 – Wildlife Habitats, Wildlife Corridors and Biodiversity; AC2 – The Bridgewater Canal; and LE1 – The Local Economy. Additionally, a new map detailing the Community Assets was included. A total of 17 changes were made to the draft plan following Regulation 14.

7.9 A summary of the representations made, along with the Steering Groups response and recommended amendments to the Neighbourhood Plan is detailed in Appendix 1.

8. CONCLUSION

8.1 The publicity, engagement and consultation completed throughout the production of the Little Bollington Neighbourhood Plan has been open and transparent, with opportunities provided for both statutory consultees and those that live and work within the Neighbourhood Area to feed into the process, make comment, and to raise issues, priorities and concerns for consideration. Whilst as much face to face consultation as had been planned was not possible, due to the restrictions brought on by the COVID 19 pandemic, the consultation period was extended to try to make sure that residents and consultees were able to view the draft plan and accompanying documents, and to raise any questions and make comments.

8.2 All statutory requirements have been met and consultation, engagement and research has been completed. This Consultation Statement has been produced to document the consultation and engagement process and is considered to comply with Part 5, Section 15 of the Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012.

APPENDIX 1: REPRESENTATIONS FROM REGULATION 14 PRE-SUBMISSION CONSULTATION

Ref Consultee Comment Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group response 1 Cheshire East This plan is clearly the result of much hard Noted, with thanks. No action Council work and dedicated effort by the Parish required. Council, steering group and local residents who have contributed to its production and should be applauded for embracing the concept of local plan making. The ideas presented have the real potential to help shape sustainable development in Little Bollington parish over the coming years ahead. In particular the detailed approach to design, heritage and landscape issues is especially welcome. 2 Cheshire East The Plan is very well laid out, clear to Noted, with thanks. No action Council understand and follows a logical progression required. with inclusion of appropriate and helpful background information, maps and diagrams. The vision and objectives of the plan are clear and provide a natural and clear link between the overall objectives of the plan and the policies chosen. The vision for Little Bollington sets out a positive set of objectives covering many issues related to sustainable planning. 3 Cheshire East HLD1 – Landscape Character Agree – amend the first sentence of Council The policy appears to seek to protect the policy HLD1 as suggested, to read setting of Dunham Massey and the general landscape character of Little Bollington. To The landscape character of Little make the policy more specific, the following Bollington and the setting of alteration is suggested to the first sentence: Dunham Massey must be protected and enhanced. ‘…and the setting of Dunham Massey must be protected and enhanced’ 4 Cheshire East HLD2 – Views and Setting Agree, amend the first sentence of Council The national planning policy framework Policy HLD2 as suggested, to read makes no allowance to protect ‘views’, however the policy is based in a recognition New development should - that the local landscape, and in particular the setting of Dunham Massey and its role in the landscape, is of special significance. The term ‘views’ is generally too imprecise to meaningfully apply in development management, however the criteria of the policy offer very specific guidance and are helpful. Therefore rather than allude to generalities around views, it is suggested that the sentence is replaced with: ‘New development should:’ 5 Cheshire East HLD4 – Heritage Agree – amend the second Council It is suggested that the second sentence of sentence of paragraph 2, policy paragraph 2 is amended to: ‘Proposals for HLD4 as suggested, to read development must take into account the scale of any possible harm or loss and to the Proposals for development must significance of any heritage assets.’ take into account the scale of any possible harm or loss and to the significance of any heritage assets. 6 Cheshire East NE1 – Wildlife Habitats, Wildlife Corridors Agree. Amend the policy to read Council and Biodiversity It is unclear what the purpose of a 15m Development which will have buffer zone is. The policy would benefit from unacceptable impacts on the areas clarifying what is permitted, or not, within of high value habitat the 15m buffer zone (including whether distinctiveness and wildlife residential gardens are permitted and how corridors identified in Figures I and they should be treated). If development is J will not be supported. In excluded here, the policy should say so. exceptional circumstances, where the reasons for proposed development clearly outweigh the value of the ecological feature adversely affected and there are no appropriate alternatives, suitable mitigation and/ or compensation must be provided to address the adverse impacts of the proposed development.

Development proposals should be supported by habitat assessments where areas of High or Medium value are potentially affected.

The enhancement of the areas of high distinctiveness and wildlife corridors identified in Figures I and J will be supported. Where possible new developments must not create divisions between existing wildlife corridors (Figure J) and where possible should contribute to the creation of new or improved links.

Development proposals where the primary objective is to conserve or enhance biodiversity shall be supported.

New developments should demonstrate a net gain in biodiversity using appropriate evaluation methodologies and avoidance/mitigation strategies. Compensatory measures (for example biodiversity offsetting) will be required if a net loss of biodiversity is likely.

Add to para 6.7

Ways to enhance connections could include the restoration of hedgerows, creation of low maintenance field margins and sowing locally sourced (local genetic stock) wildflower meadows.

7 Cheshire East AC2 – The Bridgewater Canal Agree. Amend paragraph 3 of Council The policy could go further in line with policy AC2 to read paragraphs 170 and 174 of the NPPF to require net gains in biodiversity and require Development should not adversely applicants to set out how such affect the canal’s wildlife, and improvements will be achieved. should, where possible, demonstrate a net gain in biodiversity using appropriate evaluation methodologies and avoidance/mitigation strategies. Compensatory measures (for example biodiversity offsetting) will be required if a net loss of biodiversity is likely. Where possible, complementary connective habitats should be provided.

8 Cheshire East CCA1 – Community and Civic Assets Noted, with thanks. A map of the Council Given the prominence of this policy in the assets will be included in the objectives, it would assist decision makers to submitted version of the understand when and where the policy Neighbourhood Plan. should be applied. A map of specific assets would ensure this was achieved and could Action – include a map of the help identify where the policy should apply assets as Figure L in the to. CEC can assist in producing such a map if Neighbourhood Plan. Amend given the relevant information. contents page accordingly. 9 Cheshire East LE1 – The Local Economy Agree – amend the first sentence of Council The detail of the first sentence is policy LE1 as suggested, to read unnecessary to include and introduces vague references that are either addressed in full in other parts of the development plan, by the When considering proposals for neighbourhood plan or cannot be considered employment uses, the following without further specific detail. It is therefore will be supported: suggested that the sentence is altered to read:

‘When considering proposals for employment uses, the following will be supported:’ 10 Homes England I would like to thank you for the opportunity Noted. No action required. to comment on Little Bollington Neighbourhood Plan. Homes England does not have any land holdings affected by the consultation and therefore we do not propose to make any representations at this point. 11 National Grid National Grid has assets in the Noted. No action required. Neighbourhood Area – two gas transmission pipelines and two overhead electricity lines. Guidance on development near to these assets has been provided. No specific comments on policies to make. 12 The Coal Thank you for consulting The Coal Authority. Noted. No action required. Authority Having reviewed the document, I confirm that there are no specific comments to make on it. 13 United Utilities Policy HLD3 D - Design Agree – add to policy HLD3 C – Design Detailing Guidance vi) as We recommend the following is added as a suggested. separate point to policy HLD3 D - Design:

Development proposals should:

vi) Incorporate SUDS which minimises surface water run-off. These may include features such as ponds, swales and permeable paving designed as part of the development and to reflect the rural character of the area. Every option should be investigated before discharging surface water into a public sewerage network, in line with the surface water hierarchy. 14 United Utilities Policy AC2 – The Bridgewater Canal Agree – add a new sentence to policy AC2 to read We note that there is a separate policy within the neighbourhood plan for The Discharge of surface water to the Bridgewater Canal. It is important that the Bridgewater Canal must be discharge of surface water to this explored as early as possible in the watercourse is explored during the site design process, during investigation of the surface water hierarchy. investigation of the surface water On this basis, we recommend the addition of hierarchy. Early consultation with a further point in Policy AC2 – The the Bridgewater Canal Trust should Bridgewater Canal stating the following: be undertaken.

Discharge of surface water to the Bridgewater Canal must be explored as early as possible in the site design process, during investigation of the surface water hierarchy. Early consultation with the owner of this waterway is recommended. 15 United Utilities We suggest the following text is also added A surface water management and to the plan as a separate policy: flood risk policy will be included in the Cheshire East Local Plan Site “Surface water should be discharged in the Allocations and Development following order of priority: Policies Document. Action – add • An adequate soakaway or some other the recommended text to the form of infiltration system. evidence and justification section • An attenuated discharge to surface of policy HLD3 –Design. water body. • An attenuated discharge to public surface water sewer, highway drain or another drainage system. • An attenuated discharge to public combined sewer.

No surface water will be expected to discharge to the public sewerage system. Applicants wishing to discharge to public sewer will need to submit clear evidence demonstrating why alternative options are not available as part of the determination of their application. 16 Highways Thank you for consulting Highways England Noted, no action required. England in relation to the Little Bollington Neighbourhood Plan. Highways England have no comments to make at this stage. 17 Resident 1 The draft Little Bollington Neighbourhood Noted. See response to comments Plan has been researched and written to a below. high standard. However there are some important matters which are overlooked or not adequately covered – see comments below. 18 Resident 1 CHARACTER OF THE VILLAGE Noted. The design guide recognises The Neighbourhood Plan does not fully that there are six local archetypes, describe the character of the village. It including the municipal dwelling portrays a traditional village of historic archetype, and paragraph 2.3 of buildings and fails to take sufficient note of the Neighbourhood Plan states that post WWII properties which make up 50% of there is an estate of 30 former the village. council houses, in an area of just 75 The NP highlights selective areas and households. However, in order for describes them in an idealised way to clarification and to ensure that the portray a pretty village, while ignoring areas policy covers all housing types in which may be seen as less attractive. (See eg Little Bollington, the design policy section 5.22 Design Guide.) The NP fails to will be amended as follows. recognise the number of modern (ie post WWII) properties in the village. The former council estate off Park Lane represents 36% Policy HLD3 – Design of the housing stock in the village. The total number of post WWII properties make up In order to reflect the pattern of 50% of the village. These should be given development within the parish, and greater attention. Policy HLD3 and the reinforce local character, Design Guide should be modified to allow for development proposals should this. demonstrate consideration of the Design Guide – Little Bollington 2019 (or any updated version). Development proposals should consider the character area to which the scheme relates along with the local archetypes, with character, form and scale following the pattern of original and nearby buildings. Proposals should -

HLD3 A - Scale Mass and Siting

i)not exceed 2 storeys in height ii)reflect the traditional character of the area and local archetype in terms of the scale and mass of development, avoiding buildings of large mass iii)be sited so as to present wide elevations to the road (as a principle elevation) behind a front garden area, where this reflects the local archetype iv)ensure that where possible the majority of the plot remains free from built form, contributing to the green setting and allowing for appropriate landscape and planting v)maintain the openness of the Green Belt

HLD3 B - Parking and Servicing

i)avoid the frontage of buildings being dominated by car parking or other hard standing ii)ensure that new hard surfaces are integrated into the landscape design of the development and are of neutral colours and permeable in nature iii) ensure that there are appropriate spaces for the storage and sorting of refuse, so that bins and their store are not visually intrusive in the street scene or landscape iv)carefully integrate parking into designs so that it does not dominate the street scene or frontage and provides sufficient off-street spaces in accordance with Cheshire East Council Parking Standards

HLD3 C – Design Detailing Guidance i)have a simple roofscape, avoiding hipped and stepped roofs, but making use of gables where this allows the use of the roof space. Whilst flat roofs and mono pitches will be discouraged, designs will be considered on their merit, and all roof alterations or roofs on new developments must be delivered in a sensitive manner in relation to the local archetype and character area ii)include chimneys and fenestration in a way that stresses verticality and is sympathetic to the principal elevations iii)only use simple detailing, often using brick, including details under the eaves, as part of window surrounds iv)include brick detailing either in the form of traditional bonds (English or Flemish bonding) or through the inclusion of decorative string courses v)include measures to lessen potential impacts on wildlife, such as the installation of bat/otter sensitive lighting, the installation of durable bat and bird boxes and hedgehog friendly fencing, and ensuring surface water is directed away from sensitive areas vi) Incorporate SUDS which minimises surface water run-off. These may include features such as ponds, swales and permeable paving designed as part of the development and to reflect the rural character of the area. Every option should be investigated before discharging surface water into a public sewerage network, in line with the surface water hierarchy

HLD3 D – Materials i)have a simple materials palette which in most cases will be led by red Cheshire brick, with simple brick, stone and wooden detailing. ii)only use render sparingly as a detail, unless on smaller cottages, and should be in a white, cream or off-white colour only iii)be roofed in either slate or deep red clay tile, or a visually similar modern material avoiding ridged concrete tiles iv)ensure that, for conversions or changes of use, any important characteristics and features of the original buildings are retained, that the urbanisation of the development is kept to a minimum, and that development is kept to the footprint of the original buildings as far as possible v)seek to be carbon neutral, where possible using environmentally sustainable technology and materials and incorporating renewable energy measures.

Materials should reflect the local archetype, and exceptions may be acceptable in areas of post war development where more modern architectural styles and design are dominant. Where a more contemporary or contrasting design approach is promoted, a high standard of design, materials and detailing must be demonstrated, and the proposal should reflect the existing scale, form and patterns within the street scene. 19 Resident 1 Policy HLD3 – Design Noted. Please see amendments to This policy refers to “local character” but Policy HLD3 as detailed above. does not cover the varied character of Policy HLD5 is a separate policy, properties in the village. It focuses on the drafted specifically to focus on Locally Listed Heritage Assets (HLD5) but locally listed heritage assets. pays little attention to less historic properties. These include the “estate of 30 former council houses” (mentioned briefly in section 2.3) and modern properties along Spode Green Lane and Reddy Lane. The design of these buildings does not have the historic look and feel of the locally listed heritage assets, but is nevertheless of value and should not be ignored. Any new development in the vicinity of these modern buildings should reflect their style rather than adopting the style of older properties, which would be inappropriate. 20 Resident 1 5.22 Design Guide Amend sentence three of para 5.22 The Design Guide describes the area as to read having “two ‘village zones’” which “reflect the two dominant character areas”. The The townscape analysis (Figure F) northern zone is described as “the traditional clearly shows how two ‘village village arranged around the central space”. zones’ are created – the traditional This is incorrect - there is no central space village which is situated to the and no properties arranged around a single north of the parish, where the space. A number of traditional properties are Swan with Two Nicks pub now scattered in a linear pattern along Park Lane. Stands, and the civic zone around And there is a large cluster of post WWII the junctions of the A56 Lymm properties forming a small, modern housing Road (the Turnpike) with Reddy estate just off Park Lane (the former council Lane and Park Lane. houses). 21 Resident 1 ADDITIONAL HOUSING Noted. The Neighbourhood Plan must be in general conformity with The Plan does not consider the present and local and national policies. The future need for additional housing. Neighbourhood Plan fully aligns with Cheshire East’s strategic policy The NP does not present the arguments for direction. Little Bollington is in the or against the provision of additional housing Green Belt, and it is not identified as in the village. There are arguments to an infill village within the Cheshire support the case for new housing. East Local Plan Sites Allocations and Development Policies Document. There is a demand for housing in the area, Rural exception schemes policy is which is considered a desirable place to live. covered in the Cheshire East Local Many people living in the nearby villages of Plan Strategy (Part One). There is Dunham Massey are in National Trust owned no requirement for a properties which are only available for rent. Neighbourhood Plan to include There is a developing need for new housing policies on additional housing or as local children grow into adults and need housing need. For these reasons, to find homes of their own. Given that the after consideration, it was not residents of the village are of mixed social considered necessary to have a class and income this should include some specific policy for housing within the social housing provision. Neighbourhood Plan at this current time. No action required. New housing would enlarge and enhance the community and help to make it more vibrant and sustainable. It would bring more children to the local school making it more viable and helping guarantee its future. The school has been threatened with closure in recent years. The school is strongly committed to and engaged in community life and its closure would be a severe blow. An enlarged population would strengthen the case for the reinstatement of the bus service terminated in 2018. The village has no public transport connecting it to essential services in the local centres of Altrincham and Lymm. A bus service would be a great benefit to the community, and would contribute to policies addressing the climate emergency by reducing dependence on private cars.

There is considerable scope to build new homes to moderately enlarge the village without changing its character. Many areas of the village consist of properties arranged in linear form with large gaps between them, providing locations for additional housing on individual plots. Some locations, such as the area around Ye Olde No. 3 on Lymm Road, offer scope for small scale housing developments. Prior to WWII the area around The Swan With Two Nicks also had a shop and cottages forming a village hub. These suffered WWII damage and were demolished. There is scope to reinstate properties of an appropriate character to enhance this area and recreate a village hub. 22 Resident 1 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Noted. Policy LE1 supports the development of new businesses, the The Plan does not include any proposals to expansion of existing businesses, achieve the objective of a thriving local home working, conversions to economy. business and enterprise, farm and rural business diversification, One objective of the NP is to “support and agricultural and horticultural encourage a thriving local economy”. The NP enterprises, and rural based does not contain proposals to enable this to attractions and visitor and be achieved. The development of the local recreational uses. No action economy would be welcome to provide required. employment opportunities for local people including children becoming adults and seeking first time employment. The plan could include encouragement and support for small businesses and home based employment. The creation of local employment for local people would bring many benefits, including contributing to climate emergency policies. 23 Resident 1 ACTION PLAN Noted. The purpose of the Neighbourhood Plan is to be a The Plan does not provide an action plan to statutory planning document that ensure objectives are achieved and the contains policies to be used by vision realised. Cheshire East Council when determining planning applications 1.6 Vision etc for Little Bollington. No action This section refers to the vision, objectives required. and policies. However there is no mention of an action plan. Policies do not drive action, they only guide action if it should happen. There is an implication that the community wishes to see no change and no development of the place or of the community. This is not wise, as some degree of change and adaptation is essential to maintain a viable village and a healthy community. The NP should therefore include a plan of action.

4.3 Objectives The NP does not make clear how the objectives will be achieved. How will it “ensure that local heritage is celebrated” and “support and encourage a thriving local economy”? This again highlights the need for an action plan. 24 Resident 1 ENGAGEMENT OF LOCAL PEOPLE Noted. The Neighbourhood Plan has been prepared with input from More should be done to engage local people and engagement with local in the Plan residents, through meetings, newsletters, emails, flyers, 3.4 Questionnaire information on notice boards, mail, The questionnaire of February 2019 and through the Little Bollington presented a small number of closed and website. Local residents have given leading questions eg “would you like to their comments at every stage in protect the natural environment?” It made the development of the no invitation of open comments, ideas or Neighbourhood Plan. The suggestions. It failed to bring out the range consultation methods and feedback of views and opinions within the community. can be viewed in the Consultation Statement. The Neighbourhood Summary document Plan has only eleven policies. It was The NP should include a summary / overview considered, from the outset, that document. This would greatly help local the plan should be short and distinct people to gain some appreciation of the to Little Bollington. Whilst providing Plan. It would help them engage with the a summary of the policies was Plan and encourage them to take an interest. considered, it was thought that the It may also provoke debate about key issues Neighbourhood Plan policies should in the plan. be viewed along with their evidence justification and accompanying maps. No action required. 25 Resident 2 What a fantastic job has been carried out Noted, with thanks. No action putting the plan together. I applaud the required. group for their time and efforts. The plan sets out a good vision for the future of Little Bollington and how we would like to retain the character of the village. 26 Resident 3 Having never seen a Neighbourhood Plan Noted, with thanks. No action before, I have nothing to compare this with. required. I have no comment or suggestion to add, other than to commend Kirsty and the team for a very well produced and researched document. Well done. 27 Resident 4 I would like to see a bus route re-established Noted. Bus routes are outside the along Lymm Road, so that there is a public scope of the Neighbourhood Plan. transport alternative to the private car to No action required. connect the residents of the village to Altrincham and Lymm. This is particularly important if the development at the former Stamford Arms goes ahead, so that families, and young people in particular, have a public transport connection. 28 Resident 5 The Neighbourhood Plan seems to consist of Noted, hopefully the policies within background information, regulations and the Neighbourhood Plan will help to policy details. I see no point in commenting ensure that development/change is on any of the content. When propositions appropriate and acceptable. No for development/change are made, I will action required. happily share my comments. 29 Resident 6 I think this plan is absolutely fabulous and Noted, with thanks. No action should be adopted by the community. required. 30 Resident 7 I think the plan is a very well researched Noted, with thanks. No action document that I look forward to seeing required. adopted by Cheshire East – it covers everything I would hope for, for our Parish. 31 Resident 8 The plan is very comprehensive and well put Noted, hopefully the policies within together. I do however feel that it is more of the Neighbourhood Plan will help to a design guide rather than a plan. A plan is ensure that the village can move giving the village the opportunity to move forward and develop. No action forward and develop. required. 32 Resident 8 The latest development of any size in the Noted, please see responses to village is Parkview, Stamford Road and comments 18, 19 and 21. Policy Highfield, seventy years ago. The plan gives HLD3 – Design has been amended. the estate scant reference in the report, stating that architecturally they stand out when they actually account for 30% of the dwellings in the village. If we do not set out welcoming development in our village, I feel the village will die, just as Ashley and have. We will lose our school and church, as we have lost our shop and post office. We need more affordable housing to stop the village stagnating. The development at the Stamford Arms by Novo demonstrates progressive planning with traffic calming and improving the footpaths to the school. 33 Resident 8 I do not agree with policy LE1 that we will Noted, any proposals would need to support the conversion of existing buildings comply with policy HLD3 – Design for business and enterprise. Farm buildings and include measures to lessen are the habitat of many species of wildlife impacts on wildlife. Additionally, at including swallows, house martins, sparrows, the planning application stage, it is starlings and many rodents, barn owls and likely that evidence would need to bats. It would prove to be eco-unfriendly to be submitted to highlight how any develop Bollington Hall Farm. impacts on wildlife had been considered, and planning conditions may be placed to ensure that wildlife is protected. No action required. 34 Resident 8 HDL3 c Design Guidance. Flat roofs Noted. Please see response to discouraged???? 17 properties in the village comment 18 and amendments to have flat roofs as part of their design. Policy HLD3 – Design. 35 Resident 8 The Olde Post Office B&B is situated in the Noted. Amend page 61, house, not the outbuildings. description, last sentence to read

The Old Post Office has rooms for bed and breakfast and additionally has a number of outbuildings. 36 Resident 8 There are 28 buildings in Little Bollington These buildings are not mentioned from the post war period – Highfield, specifically as being proposed to be Stamford Road and Park View are again not locally listed. No action required. mentioned. 37 Resident 9 I feel that we would benefit greatly by Noted. The National Trust have closely liaising with the National Trust, our been consulted, and they kindly biggest landowner in the village, and pursue permitted the steering group to use the viability of more affordable homes being the LUC report: 'Managing the built in the village. Visual Setting of Dunham Massey' which they commissioned. Little Bollington is in the Green Belt, and it is not identified as an infill village within the Cheshire East Local Plan Sites Allocations and Development Policies Document. Rural exception schemes policy is covered in the Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy (Part One). There is no requirement for a Neighbourhood Plan to include policies on additional housing or housing need. For these reasons, after consideration, it was not considered necessary to have a specific policy for housing within the Neighbourhood Plan at this current time. No action required. 38 Quay Inns Ltd No mention of the flood plains and the Flood risk is covered by policy in the increasing danger of flooding. No proposals Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy. for action to help. This is going to be a No action required. constant problem for the Swan with Two Nicks and surrounding properties. 39 Quay Inns Ltd Stamford Arms site –the cellar in the old Individual proposals for building is prone to flooding due to being in development will be considered at the flood plain. New proposals by Novo do the planning application stage. No not seem to comply with directives in the action required. plan a) new buildings look too modern and do not conform with the plan and b) lack of parking will lead to traffic parking at the top of Park Lane.