Local plan scoping consultation

I am writing as a resident of High Legh to comment on the Cheshire East Local Plan scoping consultation.

I believe that there should be no significant further development of High Legh. The fundamental issue is that the village already lacks many of the facilities and services that would normally be expected to support a population of its existing size. There are no shops, doctors' surgery or dentists within the village, and public transport provision is very limited. The village is therefore highly dependent on private cars for access to many everyday services.

In my view, this is an important consideration when determining where future housing growth should be concentrated. Rather than adding significant numbers of houses to relatively small rural settlements that lack the infrastructure and services to support them, development should be directed towards larger centres where shops, healthcare, schools, employment, public transport and other amenities are already available, ideally within walking or cycling distance. This would both make better use of existing infrastructure and help reduce the additional car travel associated with new development.

This consideration is particularly important today given the much greater emphasis that needs to be placed on climate change, carbon emissions, air quality, biodiversity and the protection of the natural environment than was the case when much of the development of High Legh took place.

High Legh is also a village with a particular rural character and relatively limited road and pedestrian infrastructure. Significant additional development would inevitably increase traffic and place further pressure on roads and other infrastructure that were not designed to accommodate substantial population growth.

If, notwithstanding these considerations, the Council concludes that some further development of High Legh is necessary, I would ask that the location of any such development is considered very carefully.

In particular, I believe that the area proposed to the east of the existing village is the least appropriate location. Its access arrangements are poor and further development in that direction would extend the village in a way that does not make good use of its existing facilities or create a particularly coherent settlement pattern.

If development in High Legh cannot be avoided, areas to the south of the A50 and/or to the west of West Lane would, in my view, be preferable. Development in these locations would have the potential to create a more compact and balanced settlement around the existing village centre, church and village hall, rather than extending the village predominantly in one direction. I recognise that any such locations would of course need to be assessed against all the relevant planning, environmental, Green Belt, access and infrastructure considerations.

More generally, I would encourage the emerging Local Plan to give significant weight to the relationship between the scale of development proposed for individual settlements and their existing infrastructure, services and accessibility by sustainable modes of transport. Housing numbers should not be considered in isolation from the ability of a settlement to support the resulting population.

In summary, my preference is that significant further housing development should not be directed towards High Legh. Future growth should instead be concentrated in locations where existing facilities and sustainable transport infrastructure can support additional residents and where new development can reduce, rather than increase, dependence on the private car.