Local plan scoping consultation

I live near Broken Cross in Macclesfield and I am very concerned about climate change and the biodiversity crisis. These two key issues are potentially existential for the human race in the medium term and as such they should be at the centre of the Local Plan as well as the central thinking of all other relevant key local, national and international policy, planning and action.

In a local context this means for the Local Plan that;

• There should be absolutely no development on peatland or adjacent areas that are the local catchment for individual peat areas. This is because it is of the utmost importance that the peat is kept wet or rewetted (Natural England's definition of deep peat is where more than 30cm depth of peat is present). We have seen how this was not adhered to at Weavers Green and the widespread destruction of the peat that took place.
• The work of the Cheshire and Warrington Local Nature Recovery Strategy should be fully taken on board with no development on, or damage to, any core nature areas or any connecting corridors. Such areas should be safeguarded in the Local Plan so that future connectivity can be developed even where it is not present at the moment. Connectivity is particularly important in a changing climate as it will allow mobile species to more easily move through the landscape.
• All areas of high biodiversity should be safeguarded in the local plan, not just sites with an existing wildlife designation such as LWS or SSSI. An example is Danes Moss North; this exceptionally important site for wildlife was only relatively recently awarded LWS status despite it having very high biodiversity.
• Our changing climate means that flood risk and catchment management need to be given a very high priority. There should be no development on areas that are potential flood risk areas or if the development of an area would potentially cause an increased flood risk in another part of the catchment. Peat acts like a giant sponge and as such is important in slowing the flow during periods of high rainfall and acts as a water store in periods of drought.
• Green areas in or adjacent to urban areas should not be developed as they help to reduce the urban heat island effect. This is particularly important adjacent to, or in, areas with low tree cover and a more concentrated urban form. This cooling effect will be increasingly important as climate change speeds up and we get increasingly long periods of high temperatures and drought. This move could literally save the lives of some of the most vulnerable to high temperatures i.e the elderly and the very young.
• To help adapt our urban areas to climate change, large numbers of street trees should be retrofitted into our verges, roads and streets and into all new developments. The right tree should be planted in the right place to the right specification (including an establishment phase that includes watering). Where there is space larger growing tree species provide much better benefits in terms of cooling, shading and long term placemaking. Appropriate species will need to be planted that are both drought resistant and can tolerate periods of flooding.
In addition to this I am very concerned at a neighbourhood level about;

Road congestion, traffic volumes and associated air and noise pollution. This is already a very serious issue at Broken Cross and surrounding roads. Outside of school holidays we have standing queues of traffic every weekday outside our house. The road network is already beyond capacity and cannot take any more major developments without total gridlock. This would be very bad news for residents and the local economy. It is important that new developments are only allowed where they do not add to the pressure on our existing road network.

Urban sprawl and green belt: The local plan needs to protect land to reduce urban sprawl and ensure that conurbations do not merge and exacerbate problems re traffic, loss of sense of place, and of course loss of green space for physical and mental health and climate change mitigation and adaptation (see above)

Infrastructure: Housing and other development should only be planned where schools, doctors, water supply, drainage, public transport, utilities and roads can cope. Cheshire East Council should say what extra infrastructure each growth option would need, what impact it will have on biodiversity and climate change (both mitigation and adaptation), what it would cost, who would pay for it and when it would be delivered. It should also consider whether road improvements would require the removal of hedgerows, trees and verges or would change the rural character of the area.

Housing and affordable homes: Cheshire East needs more homes, including genuinely affordable homes, but that does not mean every site is suitable. The council should first show how many homes could be provided on brownfield and underused land (excluding areas of existing or potentially high biodiversity) and in town centres.It should also consider sensible increases in housing density in places already close to shops, services and public transport.

To repeat it is essential that addressing climate change and biodiversity crisis are at the heart of the local plan - if we are not successful in addressing the challenges that these present our society and its structures will not be able to cope with an already uncertain future.

Please take these points into account when defining the scope of the new Local Plan and preparing the next consultation stage. I would also welcome a clear account of how consultation responses have influenced the plan. This response has been prepared to reflect my own views as a Broken Cross resident, and I trust it will inform the scoping of the Local Plan, its vision, objectives and evidence base.

I live near Broken Cross in Macclesfield and I am very concerned about climate change and the biodiversity crisis. These two key issues are potentially existential for the human race in the medium term and as such they should be at the centre of the Local Plan as well as the central thinking of all other relevant key local, national and international policy, planning and action.

In a local context this means for the Local Plan that;

• There should be absolutely no development on peatland or adjacent areas that are the local catchment for individual peat areas. This is because it is of the utmost importance that the peat is kept wet or rewetted (Natural England's definition of deep peat is where more than 30cm depth of peat is present). We have seen how this was not adhered to at Weavers Green and the widespread destruction of the peat that took place.
• The work of the Cheshire and Warrington Local Nature Recovery Strategy should be fully taken on board with no development on, or damage to, any core nature areas or any connecting corridors. Such areas should be safeguarded in the Local Plan so that future connectivity can be developed even where it is not present at the moment. Connectivity is particularly important in a changing climate as it will allow mobile species to more easily move through the landscape.
• All areas of high biodiversity should be safeguarded in the local plan, not just sites with an existing wildlife designation such as LWS or SSSI. An example is Danes Moss North; this exceptionally important site for wildlife was only relatively recently awarded LWS status despite it having very high biodiversity.
• Our changing climate means that flood risk and catchment management need to be given a very high priority. There should be no development on areas that are potential flood risk areas or if the development of an area would potentially cause an increased flood risk in another part of the catchment. Peat acts like a giant sponge and as such is important in slowing the flow during periods of high rainfall and acts as a water store in periods of drought.
• Green areas in or adjacent to urban areas should not be developed as they help to reduce the urban heat island effect. This is particularly important adjacent to, or in, areas with low tree cover and a more concentrated urban form. This cooling effect will be increasingly important as climate change speeds up and we get increasingly long periods of high temperatures and drought. This move could literally save the lives of some of the most vulnerable to high temperatures i.e the elderly and the very young.
• To help adapt our urban areas to climate change, large numbers of street trees should be retrofitted into our verges, roads and streets and into all new developments. The right tree should be planted in the right place to the right specification (including an establishment phase that includes watering). Where there is space larger growing tree species provide much better benefits in terms of cooling, shading and long term placemaking. Appropriate species will need to be planted that are both drought resistant and can tolerate periods of flooding.
In addition to this I am very concerned at a neighbourhood level about;

Road congestion, traffic volumes and associated air and noise pollution. This is already a very serious issue at Broken Cross and surrounding roads. Outside of school holidays we have standing queues of traffic every weekday outside our house. The road network is already beyond capacity and cannot take any more major developments without total gridlock. This would be very bad news for residents and the local economy. It is important that new developments are only allowed where they do not add to the pressure on our existing road network.

Urban sprawl and green belt: The local plan needs to protect land to reduce urban sprawl and ensure that conurbations do not merge and exacerbate problems re traffic, loss of sense of place, and of course loss of green space for physical and mental health and climate change mitigation and adaptation (see above)

Infrastructure: Housing and other development should only be planned where schools, doctors, water supply, drainage, public transport, utilities and roads can cope. Cheshire East Council should say what extra infrastructure each growth option would need, what impact it will have on biodiversity and climate change (both mitigation and adaptation), what it would cost, who would pay for it and when it would be delivered. It should also consider whether road improvements would require the removal of hedgerows, trees and verges or would change the rural character of the area.

Housing and affordable homes: Cheshire East needs more homes, including genuinely affordable homes, but that does not mean every site is suitable. The council should first show how many homes could be provided on brownfield and underused land (excluding areas of existing or potentially high biodiversity) and in town centres.It should also consider sensible increases in housing density in places already close to shops, services and public transport.

To repeat it is essential that addressing climate change and biodiversity crisis are at the heart of the local plan - if we are not successful in addressing the challenges that these present our society and its structures will not be able to cope with an already uncertain future.

Please take these points into account when defining the scope of the new Local Plan and preparing the next consultation stage. I would also welcome a clear account of how consultation responses have influenced the plan. This response has been prepared to reflect my own views as a Broken Cross resident, and I trust it will inform the scoping of the Local Plan, its vision, objectives and evidence base.

I live near Broken Cross in Macclesfield and I am very concerned about climate change and the biodiversity crisis. These two key issues are potentially existential for the human race in the medium term and as such they should be at the centre of the Local Plan as well as the central thinking of all other relevant key local, national and international policy, planning and action.

In a local context this means for the Local Plan that;

• There should be absolutely no development on peatland or adjacent areas that are the local catchment for individual peat areas. This is because it is of the utmost importance that the peat is kept wet or rewetted (Natural England's definition of deep peat is where more than 30cm depth of peat is present). We have seen how this was not adhered to at Weavers Green and the widespread destruction of the peat that took place.
• The work of the Cheshire and Warrington Local Nature Recovery Strategy should be fully taken on board with no development on, or damage to, any core nature areas or any connecting corridors. Such areas should be safeguarded in the Local Plan so that future connectivity can be developed even where it is not present at the moment. Connectivity is particularly important in a changing climate as it will allow mobile species to more easily move through the landscape.
• All areas of high biodiversity should be safeguarded in the local plan, not just sites with an existing wildlife designation such as LWS or SSSI. An example is Danes Moss North; this exceptionally important site for wildlife was only relatively recently awarded LWS status despite it having very high biodiversity.
• Our changing climate means that flood risk and catchment management need to be given a very high priority. There should be no development on areas that are potential flood risk areas or if the development of an area would potentially cause an increased flood risk in another part of the catchment. Peat acts like a giant sponge and as such is important in slowing the flow during periods of high rainfall and acts as a water store in periods of drought.
• Green areas in or adjacent to urban areas should not be developed as they help to reduce the urban heat island effect. This is particularly important adjacent to, or in, areas with low tree cover and a more concentrated urban form. This cooling effect will be increasingly important as climate change speeds up and we get increasingly long periods of high temperatures and drought. This move could literally save the lives of some of the most vulnerable to high temperatures i.e the elderly and the very young.
• To help adapt our urban areas to climate change, large numbers of street trees should be retrofitted into our verges, roads and streets and into all new developments. The right tree should be planted in the right place to the right specification (including an establishment phase that includes watering). Where there is space larger growing tree species provide much better benefits in terms of cooling, shading and long term placemaking. Appropriate species will need to be planted that are both drought resistant and can tolerate periods of flooding.
In addition to this I am very concerned at a neighbourhood level about;

Road congestion, traffic volumes and associated air and noise pollution. This is already a very serious issue at Broken Cross and surrounding roads. Outside of school holidays we have standing queues of traffic every weekday outside our house. The road network is already beyond capacity and cannot take any more major developments without total gridlock. This would be very bad news for residents and the local economy. It is important that new developments are only allowed where they do not add to the pressure on our existing road network.

Urban sprawl and green belt: The local plan needs to protect land to reduce urban sprawl and ensure that conurbations do not merge and exacerbate problems re traffic, loss of sense of place, and of course loss of green space for physical and mental health and climate change mitigation and adaptation (see above)

Infrastructure: Housing and other development should only be planned where schools, doctors, water supply, drainage, public transport, utilities and roads can cope. Cheshire East Council should say what extra infrastructure each growth option would need, what impact it will have on biodiversity and climate change (both mitigation and adaptation), what it would cost, who would pay for it and when it would be delivered. It should also consider whether road improvements would require the removal of hedgerows, trees and verges or would change the rural character of the area.

Housing and affordable homes: Cheshire East needs more homes, including genuinely affordable homes, but that does not mean every site is suitable. The council should first show how many homes could be provided on brownfield and underused land (excluding areas of existing or potentially high biodiversity) and in town centres.It should also consider sensible increases in housing density in places already close to shops, services and public transport.

To repeat it is essential that addressing climate change and biodiversity crisis are at the heart of the local plan - if we are not successful in addressing the challenges that these present our society and its structures will not be able to cope with an already uncertain future.

Please take these points into account when defining the scope of the new Local Plan and preparing the next consultation stage. I would also welcome a clear account of how consultation responses have influenced the plan. This response has been prepared to reflect my own views as a Broken Cross resident, and I trust it will inform the scoping of the Local Plan, its vision, objectives and evidence base.

I live near Broken Cross in Macclesfield and I am very concerned about climate change and the biodiversity crisis. These two key issues are potentially existential for the human race in the medium term and as such they should be at the centre of the Local Plan as well as the central thinking of all other relevant key local, national and international policy, planning and action.

In a local context this means for the Local Plan that;

• There should be absolutely no development on peatland or adjacent areas that are the local catchment for individual peat areas. This is because it is of the utmost importance that the peat is kept wet or rewetted (Natural England's definition of deep peat is where more than 30cm depth of peat is present). We have seen how this was not adhered to at Weavers Green and the widespread destruction of the peat that took place.
• The work of the Cheshire and Warrington Local Nature Recovery Strategy should be fully taken on board with no development on, or damage to, any core nature areas or any connecting corridors. Such areas should be safeguarded in the Local Plan so that future connectivity can be developed even where it is not present at the moment. Connectivity is particularly important in a changing climate as it will allow mobile species to more easily move through the landscape.
• All areas of high biodiversity should be safeguarded in the local plan, not just sites with an existing wildlife designation such as LWS or SSSI. An example is Danes Moss North; this exceptionally important site for wildlife was only relatively recently awarded LWS status despite it having very high biodiversity.
• Our changing climate means that flood risk and catchment management need to be given a very high priority. There should be no development on areas that are potential flood risk areas or if the development of an area would potentially cause an increased flood risk in another part of the catchment. Peat acts like a giant sponge and as such is important in slowing the flow during periods of high rainfall and acts as a water store in periods of drought.
• Green areas in or adjacent to urban areas should not be developed as they help to reduce the urban heat island effect. This is particularly important adjacent to, or in, areas with low tree cover and a more concentrated urban form. This cooling effect will be increasingly important as climate change speeds up and we get increasingly long periods of high temperatures and drought. This move could literally save the lives of some of the most vulnerable to high temperatures i.e the elderly and the very young.
• To help adapt our urban areas to climate change, large numbers of street trees should be retrofitted into our verges, roads and streets and into all new developments. The right tree should be planted in the right place to the right specification (including an establishment phase that includes watering). Where there is space larger growing tree species provide much better benefits in terms of cooling, shading and long term placemaking. Appropriate species will need to be planted that are both drought resistant and can tolerate periods of flooding.
In addition to this I am very concerned at a neighbourhood level about;

Road congestion, traffic volumes and associated air and noise pollution. This is already a very serious issue at Broken Cross and surrounding roads. Outside of school holidays we have standing queues of traffic every weekday outside our house. The road network is already beyond capacity and cannot take any more major developments without total gridlock. This would be very bad news for residents and the local economy. It is important that new developments are only allowed where they do not add to the pressure on our existing road network.

Urban sprawl and green belt: The local plan needs to protect land to reduce urban sprawl and ensure that conurbations do not merge and exacerbate problems re traffic, loss of sense of place, and of course loss of green space for physical and mental health and climate change mitigation and adaptation (see above)

Infrastructure: Housing and other development should only be planned where schools, doctors, water supply, drainage, public transport, utilities and roads can cope. Cheshire East Council should say what extra infrastructure each growth option would need, what impact it will have on biodiversity and climate change (both mitigation and adaptation), what it would cost, who would pay for it and when it would be delivered. It should also consider whether road improvements would require the removal of hedgerows, trees and verges or would change the rural character of the area.

Housing and affordable homes: Cheshire East needs more homes, including genuinely affordable homes, but that does not mean every site is suitable. The council should first show how many homes could be provided on brownfield and underused land (excluding areas of existing or potentially high biodiversity) and in town centres.It should also consider sensible increases in housing density in places already close to shops, services and public transport.

To repeat it is essential that addressing climate change and biodiversity crisis are at the heart of the local plan - if we are not successful in addressing the challenges that these present our society and its structures will not be able to cope with an already uncertain future.

Please take these points into account when defining the scope of the new Local Plan and preparing the next consultation stage. I would also welcome a clear account of how consultation responses have influenced the plan. This response has been prepared to reflect my own views as a Broken Cross resident, and I trust it will inform the scoping of the Local Plan, its vision, objectives and evidence base.

I live near Broken Cross in Macclesfield and I am very concerned about climate change and the biodiversity crisis. These two key issues are potentially existential for the human race in the medium term and as such they should be at the centre of the Local Plan as well as the central thinking of all other relevant key local, national and international policy, planning and action.

In a local context this means for the Local Plan that;

• There should be absolutely no development on peatland or adjacent areas that are the local catchment for individual peat areas. This is because it is of the utmost importance that the peat is kept wet or rewetted (Natural England's definition of deep peat is where more than 30cm depth of peat is present). We have seen how this was not adhered to at Weavers Green and the widespread destruction of the peat that took place.
• The work of the Cheshire and Warrington Local Nature Recovery Strategy should be fully taken on board with no development on, or damage to, any core nature areas or any connecting corridors. Such areas should be safeguarded in the Local Plan so that future connectivity can be developed even where it is not present at the moment. Connectivity is particularly important in a changing climate as it will allow mobile species to more easily move through the landscape.
• All areas of high biodiversity should be safeguarded in the local plan, not just sites with an existing wildlife designation such as LWS or SSSI. An example is Danes Moss North; this exceptionally important site for wildlife was only relatively recently awarded LWS status despite it having very high biodiversity.
• Our changing climate means that flood risk and catchment management need to be given a very high priority. There should be no development on areas that are potential flood risk areas or if the development of an area would potentially cause an increased flood risk in another part of the catchment. Peat acts like a giant sponge and as such is important in slowing the flow during periods of high rainfall and acts as a water store in periods of drought.
• Green areas in or adjacent to urban areas should not be developed as they help to reduce the urban heat island effect. This is particularly important adjacent to, or in, areas with low tree cover and a more concentrated urban form. This cooling effect will be increasingly important as climate change speeds up and we get increasingly long periods of high temperatures and drought. This move could literally save the lives of some of the most vulnerable to high temperatures i.e the elderly and the very young.
• To help adapt our urban areas to climate change, large numbers of street trees should be retrofitted into our verges, roads and streets and into all new developments. The right tree should be planted in the right place to the right specification (including an establishment phase that includes watering). Where there is space larger growing tree species provide much better benefits in terms of cooling, shading and long term placemaking. Appropriate species will need to be planted that are both drought resistant and can tolerate periods of flooding.
In addition to this I am very concerned at a neighbourhood level about;

Road congestion, traffic volumes and associated air and noise pollution. This is already a very serious issue at Broken Cross and surrounding roads. Outside of school holidays we have standing queues of traffic every weekday outside our house. The road network is already beyond capacity and cannot take any more major developments without total gridlock. This would be very bad news for residents and the local economy. It is important that new developments are only allowed where they do not add to the pressure on our existing road network.

Urban sprawl and green belt: The local plan needs to protect land to reduce urban sprawl and ensure that conurbations do not merge and exacerbate problems re traffic, loss of sense of place, and of course loss of green space for physical and mental health and climate change mitigation and adaptation (see above)

Infrastructure: Housing and other development should only be planned where schools, doctors, water supply, drainage, public transport, utilities and roads can cope. Cheshire East Council should say what extra infrastructure each growth option would need, what impact it will have on biodiversity and climate change (both mitigation and adaptation), what it would cost, who would pay for it and when it would be delivered. It should also consider whether road improvements would require the removal of hedgerows, trees and verges or would change the rural character of the area.

Housing and affordable homes: Cheshire East needs more homes, including genuinely affordable homes, but that does not mean every site is suitable. The council should first show how many homes could be provided on brownfield and underused land (excluding areas of existing or potentially high biodiversity) and in town centres.It should also consider sensible increases in housing density in places already close to shops, services and public transport.

To repeat it is essential that addressing climate change and biodiversity crisis are at the heart of the local plan - if we are not successful in addressing the challenges that these present our society and its structures will not be able to cope with an already uncertain future.

Please take these points into account when defining the scope of the new Local Plan and preparing the next consultation stage. I would also welcome a clear account of how consultation responses have influenced the plan. This response has been prepared to reflect my own views as a Broken Cross resident, and I trust it will inform the scoping of the Local Plan, its vision, objectives and evidence base.