Local plan scoping consultation

Comment

Representation ID: 6766

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Muller Property Group

Muller Property Group considers housing growth should be directed towards Cheshire East’s most sustainable settlements and locations, particularly those with good rail accessibility. Their assessment identifies Crewe, Macclesfield, Holmes Chapel, Nantwich and Sandbach as suitable settlements for growth, taking account of physical constraints, highway capacity, accessibility and walking distances. They particularly highlight national policy support for residential and mixed-use development within reasonable walking distance of well-connected railway stations and physically well-related to settlements. MPG considers the Local Plan should reflect these principles when determining housing allocations, directing development towards sustainable locations where rail travel can reduce reliance on private vehicles and support sustainable patterns of growth.

Comment

Representation ID: 6767

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Muller Property Group

Muller Property Group highlights significant differences in population growth across Cheshire East between 2001 and 2021. They argue that Macclesfield, despite being the Borough’s second-largest settlement, experienced only 6% growth, substantially below Nantwich, Sandbach, Holmes Chapel, Congleton and Crewe. They attribute Macclesfield’s comparatively low growth partly to Green Belt constraints and contrast this with proportionately greater growth in some smaller settlements. MPG considers the Local Plan should address this imbalance by directing future housing towards sustainable settlements with existing infrastructure and capacity. They particularly advocate increasing Macclesfield’s contribution to future growth to achieve a fairer and more sustainable distribution of development.

Comment

Representation ID: 6768

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Muller Property Group

Muller Property Group considers Crewe one of Cheshire East’s most sustainable locations for housing growth due to its railway connections, services and facilities. They particularly advocate development to the north-east of Crewe, which they consider more accessible to the town centre and railway station than many existing peripheral areas. They argue this location avoids accessibility barriers created by railway infrastructure elsewhere around Crewe and benefits from existing highway connections via the A534 towards Sandbach. MPG also considers the A534 could provide a defensible boundary preventing coalescence with Haslington. Overall, they identify north-east Crewe as a logical and sustainable direction for future growth.

Comment

Representation ID: 6769

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Muller Property Group

Muller Property Group considers Macclesfield has historically accommodated insufficient housing growth, partly due to Green Belt constraints and the abandonment of the Danes Moss allocation. They argue replacement housing sites are required to address market and affordable housing needs, including concealed households. While recognising constraints including peat, topography, the canal and potential settlement coalescence, MPG considers some Green Belt land makes a limited contribution to Green Belt purposes. They particularly identify land east of Prestbury Road as a sustainable growth opportunity, citing its proximity to Macclesfield and Prestbury, surrounding development and access to existing services, facilities, infrastructure and rail connections.

Comment

Representation ID: 6770

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Muller Property Group

Muller Property Group considers Holmes Chapel should be promoted from Local Service Centre to Key Service Centre, reflecting its population, range of services, employment, transport connections and railway accessibility. They argue that Jodrell Bank consultation-zone constraints need not prevent further growth because modern construction methods can mitigate radio interference, citing development at Congleton. MPG considers Holmes Chapel capable of accommodating significant sustainable growth and identifies land west of the settlement and south of Middlewich Road as a potential housing location. They highlight its A54 access, surrounding physical boundaries and position away from Jodrell Bank as factors supporting consideration for future housing allocation.

Comment

Representation ID: 6771

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Muller Property Group

Muller Property Group considers Nantwich’s future growth options significantly constrained despite the absence of Green Belt. They identify settlement coalescence, Common Land, the historic battlefield, canal and Dorfold Hall as constraints to development north, east and west of the town. They therefore consider land south of Nantwich the most appropriate direction for future growth. This area benefits from existing access via the A529 Audlem Road and A51 London Road, bus services and pedestrian infrastructure. MPG argues that these connections make southern Nantwich a sustainable and accessible area for future housing allocations capable of supporting the continued expansion of the town.

Comment

Representation ID: 6772

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Muller Property Group

Muller Property Group assesses potential growth directions around Sandbach and considers development to the west constrained by nature reserves, the canal, rail infrastructure, listed buildings and potential coalescence with Middlewich. Northern growth is limited by highway capacity, while eastern expansion is possible but affected by M6 noise. They consider southern Sandbach offers the widest range of opportunities, particularly where development can access the A534 and minimise pressure on constrained local roads. The River Wheelock floodplain and Trent and Mersey Canal could provide defensible boundaries to southern expansion. Existing highway infrastructure could also reduce the need for additional publicly funded link roads.