Local plan scoping consultation

Please accept this response to the Local Plan Scoping Consultation. I am writing as a concerned resident, having lived in Cheshire for most of my life — well over 50 years. I am also deeply concerned about the proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, which is set to cross much of this borough, and the issues raised in this consultation give yet another reason why it should not go ahead.
Timing of the Consultation
It is very disappointing that the Council has decided to run this consultation to coincide with the school summer holidays. Almost all parish and town councils do not meet for six weeks over this period, and many local community organisations will also have had key members away on holiday at this time. This is suboptimal, to say the least.
The Cheshire East Local Plan is vital to all of us, and this consultation should be planned and run in a way that gets the best information from all residents, to ensure the resulting plan is fit for purpose and looks after our beautiful county for the benefit of its residents, biodiversity, wildlife, character, businesses, food production, and everything else that matters. It should not be done quietly, in a way that simply pushes forward government agendas that are not appropriate for where we live and will cause far more damage than any benefit they bring. The benefits, as I see them, amount to little more than profit for developers .I very much doubt the housing provided will be housing that is genuinely needed in the area, and I see this destroying greenfield land and environments that are totally irreplaceable. Frankly, any government or any council pushing through their own political agendas and sacrificing these areas is being deeply irresponsible, and is failing in its duty to the people, wildlife, and environment it is meant to serve.
Housing Targets
I am very concerned by the proposed 156% increase in housing targets for Cheshire East, particularly bearing in mind the borough's population. I despair at this target. The number of houses built in the borough between 2009 and now has considerably exceeded the housing targets set for that period, and this has not been taken into account in the current housing supply or housing target figures.
Housing for an Ageing Population
The Local Plan also needs to ensure it delivers the right kind of housing, not just qnuantity. Cheshire's population aged 55 and over is increasing, yet many in this demographic are unable to downsize due to a lack of appropriate housing suited to their needs. Nationally, more than 4 million people aged 55 and over are actively seeking to move home but are unable to find a suitable, appropriate alternative (Centre for Ageing Better, "Locked Out: A New Perspective on Older People's Housing Choices," 2023). The Local Plan should include more housing designed for older residents, including residential and nursing homes, rather than focusing solely on general housing numbers that do not reflect what the borough actually needs. I would also ask that the Council produce Supplementary Planning Guidance specifically addressing older people's housing, including residential and nursing homes, to ensure this need is properly planned for rather than left to general housing policy alone.
The Peak Cluster CO2 Pipeline and Housing Deliverability
I am especially concerned that the proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, running for around 121 miles and crossing much of this borough, has direct implications for the deliverability of the Local Plan itself. The Council's own officers' report to the Corporate Policy Committee (30 April 2026) flagged that the pipeline threatens the deliverability of strategic housing allocations that the current and emerging Local Plan rely on, including around 760 homes at Middlewich (Warmingham Lane phase 2 and Glebe Farm) and Macclesfield sites, including 300 homes at Congleton Road and approximately 95 hectares of safeguarded land in south-west Macclesfield , this at a time when Cheshire East already lacks a five-year housing land supply. This is yet another reason why the Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline should not go ahead.
Delay in Starting the New Local Plan
The Council should have started developing the new Local Plan in December 2024. This delay means there will be an additional eighteen months of speculative housing development, destruction of Green Belt and agricultural land, and further urban sprawl in the borough.
Brownfield Land First
Brownfield land should be used first. Once farmland and habitats are gone, they're gone — they cannot simply be replaced. They are home to precious, often endangered wildlife, and are places it needs to survive.
The new Local Plan needs to be more proactive and ensure that the Council uses all of its available powers to incentivise brownfield development. The Labour government's changes to the planning system have instead incentivised development on open farmland and in the countryside. There are a large number of brownfield sites around Macclesfield that should be prioritised for redevelopment, including through changes to the tax treatment of such development, as well as the use of Cheshire East Council's wider powers. The failure of vision and proactive action regarding the land around the old telephone exchange on Hibel Road in Macclesfield is one example of this. The Council is also a landowner for some of these sites, including the old depot on Hurdsfield Road in Macclesfield, and should and could have been more proactive in developing or facilitating the development of these sites.
Repurposing Town Centre Buildings
The repurposing of buildings in our declining town centres should also be given serious consideration. Reimagining empty and underused buildings for residential use, alongside appropriate amenities, would bring much-needed life and vitality back to these centres. This approach would also benefit CO2 emissions, since repurposing existing buildings uses far less concrete than new-build construction. This is something the Council should very much consider as part of its plan, providing incentives and a clear vision for how it could be achieved. This gesture could become a shining light, leading the way for other councils to follow, for the benefit of all.
Green Belt and "Grey Belt"
Safeguarding countryside from encroachment is one of the key purposes of the Green Belt, and countryside is essential for maintaining connectivity between ecologically valuable areas. Where land clearly performs this connective function, it should not be classified as "grey belt" , it should retain full Green Belt protection. The proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline itself is set to cross significant areas of countryside and Green Belt performing exactly this connective function ,yet another reason why this pipeline should not go ahead.
Urban Sprawl
Urban sprawl should be prevented at all costs, and the Local Plan should include and make clear the substantial evidence base on the negative consequences of urban sprawl, to ensure appropriate protections are maintained and prevent Cheshire East from becoming a suburb of Greater Manchester. This matters not only for the wildlife corridors mentioned above, but also for public health and economic growth.
Environmental Protection and Reversing Biodiversity Loss
Environmental protection and reversing biodiversity loss should be key considerations in decision-making. Irreplaceable habitats should not be destroyed , the term "irreplaceable habitat" is significant because it is used in planning policy to define habitats that cannot be easily recreated, meaning that once destroyed, they are lost for good. These include ancient woodlands, lowland raised bog, and species-rich wildflower grasslands. There is no excuse for their loss. All wildlife sites should be protected, whether designated locally (Local Wildlife Sites) or nationally (such as Sites of Special Scientific Interest) and other areas of high biodiversity value. Protection should extend not just to the site itself but to neighbouring land too, as this acts as a buffer and potential wildlife corridor ,giving wildlife somewhere to go in the event of natural disasters, including wildfires.
The Local Plan should be driven by the good work already done in the Local Nature Recovery Strategy. If it isn't, there is a real risk that the biodiversity crisis will worsen, with wildlife simply not having enough space to sustain itself in East Cheshire. This would lead to local extinctions and exacerbate national declines. I don't want East Cheshire to end up as a scattered collection of isolated important sites with no wildlife corridors connecting them , a risk that the 121-mile Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline corridor would make worse, and yet another reason why it should not go ahead.
Natural spaces on the edge of urban areas are valuable for biodiversity, but they are also essential for the recreation and mental wellbeing of residents. They need to be preserved from development.
Carbon Stores and Peatland
Farmland, soils, and habitats act as natural carbon stores, and development should aim to reduce the release of additional CO2 rather than add to it. This didn't happen at Weaver Green, where the resulting emissions have helped fuel climate change. In addition, the disturbance caused by trenching to lay the CO2 pipeline will itself release stored carbon into the atmosphere , an impact that cannot be ignored. Peatland is especially precious, and the pipeline route crosses moorland and other peatland; no development of any kind should be considered on peatland.
Flooding
With the ongoing impact of climate change, avoiding flood risk should be an important factor in site location.
Food Security and Agriculture
Green Belt and prime agricultural land should never be sacrificed for housing, CO2 pipelines, solar panels, or anything else. Food security matters to all of us, and this summer has shown that climate change could threaten food supply sooner than anticipated. Food security is of prime importance, and farms should be given high priority, protected, and certainly not built on.
Heritage and Rural Character
Cheshire's heritage and rural way of life including the contribution its beautiful green character makes to tourism, and the many jobs that support the local economy through dairy farming and agriculture more broadly, as well as the many associated business supporting these sectors, must be respected and protected above all else. This heritage is also directly at risk from the Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, which threatens to cut through the working farmland and countryside that this way of life depends on . This is yet another reason why this pipeline should not go ahead. Food security, local jobs, and our heritage are the character, heart, and soul of where we live; We are its custodians, and that responsibility must be honoured. Food scarcity, biodiversity loss, and climate change are all reasons to protect our green spaces. Housing should be built on brownfield sites first, in appropriate numbers and of an appropriate type, certainly not at the scale currently proposed. I am deeply concerned that farming does not appear to be valued by Cheshire East, and this must not be reflected in the Local Plan.

Please accept this response to the Local Plan Scoping Consultation. I am writing as a concerned resident, having lived in Cheshire for most of my life — well over 50 years. I am also deeply concerned about the proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, which is set to cross much of this borough, and the issues raised in this consultation give yet another reason why it should not go ahead.
Timing of the Consultation
It is very disappointing that the Council has decided to run this consultation to coincide with the school summer holidays. Almost all parish and town councils do not meet for six weeks over this period, and many local community organisations will also have had key members away on holiday at this time. This is suboptimal, to say the least.
The Cheshire East Local Plan is vital to all of us, and this consultation should be planned and run in a way that gets the best information from all residents, to ensure the resulting plan is fit for purpose and looks after our beautiful county for the benefit of its residents, biodiversity, wildlife, character, businesses, food production, and everything else that matters. It should not be done quietly, in a way that simply pushes forward government agendas that are not appropriate for where we live and will cause far more damage than any benefit they bring. The benefits, as I see them, amount to little more than profit for developers .I very much doubt the housing provided will be housing that is genuinely needed in the area, and I see this destroying greenfield land and environments that are totally irreplaceable. Frankly, any government or any council pushing through their own political agendas and sacrificing these areas is being deeply irresponsible, and is failing in its duty to the people, wildlife, and environment it is meant to serve.
Housing Targets
I am very concerned by the proposed 156% increase in housing targets for Cheshire East, particularly bearing in mind the borough's population. I despair at this target. The number of houses built in the borough between 2009 and now has considerably exceeded the housing targets set for that period, and this has not been taken into account in the current housing supply or housing target figures.
Housing for an Ageing Population
The Local Plan also needs to ensure it delivers the right kind of housing, not just qnuantity. Cheshire's population aged 55 and over is increasing, yet many in this demographic are unable to downsize due to a lack of appropriate housing suited to their needs. Nationally, more than 4 million people aged 55 and over are actively seeking to move home but are unable to find a suitable, appropriate alternative (Centre for Ageing Better, "Locked Out: A New Perspective on Older People's Housing Choices," 2023). The Local Plan should include more housing designed for older residents, including residential and nursing homes, rather than focusing solely on general housing numbers that do not reflect what the borough actually needs. I would also ask that the Council produce Supplementary Planning Guidance specifically addressing older people's housing, including residential and nursing homes, to ensure this need is properly planned for rather than left to general housing policy alone.
The Peak Cluster CO2 Pipeline and Housing Deliverability
I am especially concerned that the proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, running for around 121 miles and crossing much of this borough, has direct implications for the deliverability of the Local Plan itself. The Council's own officers' report to the Corporate Policy Committee (30 April 2026) flagged that the pipeline threatens the deliverability of strategic housing allocations that the current and emerging Local Plan rely on, including around 760 homes at Middlewich (Warmingham Lane phase 2 and Glebe Farm) and Macclesfield sites, including 300 homes at Congleton Road and approximately 95 hectares of safeguarded land in south-west Macclesfield , this at a time when Cheshire East already lacks a five-year housing land supply. This is yet another reason why the Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline should not go ahead.
Delay in Starting the New Local Plan
The Council should have started developing the new Local Plan in December 2024. This delay means there will be an additional eighteen months of speculative housing development, destruction of Green Belt and agricultural land, and further urban sprawl in the borough.
Brownfield Land First
Brownfield land should be used first. Once farmland and habitats are gone, they're gone — they cannot simply be replaced. They are home to precious, often endangered wildlife, and are places it needs to survive.
The new Local Plan needs to be more proactive and ensure that the Council uses all of its available powers to incentivise brownfield development. The Labour government's changes to the planning system have instead incentivised development on open farmland and in the countryside. There are a large number of brownfield sites around Macclesfield that should be prioritised for redevelopment, including through changes to the tax treatment of such development, as well as the use of Cheshire East Council's wider powers. The failure of vision and proactive action regarding the land around the old telephone exchange on Hibel Road in Macclesfield is one example of this. The Council is also a landowner for some of these sites, including the old depot on Hurdsfield Road in Macclesfield, and should and could have been more proactive in developing or facilitating the development of these sites.
Repurposing Town Centre Buildings
The repurposing of buildings in our declining town centres should also be given serious consideration. Reimagining empty and underused buildings for residential use, alongside appropriate amenities, would bring much-needed life and vitality back to these centres. This approach would also benefit CO2 emissions, since repurposing existing buildings uses far less concrete than new-build construction. This is something the Council should very much consider as part of its plan, providing incentives and a clear vision for how it could be achieved. This gesture could become a shining light, leading the way for other councils to follow, for the benefit of all.
Green Belt and "Grey Belt"
Safeguarding countryside from encroachment is one of the key purposes of the Green Belt, and countryside is essential for maintaining connectivity between ecologically valuable areas. Where land clearly performs this connective function, it should not be classified as "grey belt" , it should retain full Green Belt protection. The proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline itself is set to cross significant areas of countryside and Green Belt performing exactly this connective function ,yet another reason why this pipeline should not go ahead.
Urban Sprawl
Urban sprawl should be prevented at all costs, and the Local Plan should include and make clear the substantial evidence base on the negative consequences of urban sprawl, to ensure appropriate protections are maintained and prevent Cheshire East from becoming a suburb of Greater Manchester. This matters not only for the wildlife corridors mentioned above, but also for public health and economic growth.
Environmental Protection and Reversing Biodiversity Loss
Environmental protection and reversing biodiversity loss should be key considerations in decision-making. Irreplaceable habitats should not be destroyed , the term "irreplaceable habitat" is significant because it is used in planning policy to define habitats that cannot be easily recreated, meaning that once destroyed, they are lost for good. These include ancient woodlands, lowland raised bog, and species-rich wildflower grasslands. There is no excuse for their loss. All wildlife sites should be protected, whether designated locally (Local Wildlife Sites) or nationally (such as Sites of Special Scientific Interest) and other areas of high biodiversity value. Protection should extend not just to the site itself but to neighbouring land too, as this acts as a buffer and potential wildlife corridor ,giving wildlife somewhere to go in the event of natural disasters, including wildfires.
The Local Plan should be driven by the good work already done in the Local Nature Recovery Strategy. If it isn't, there is a real risk that the biodiversity crisis will worsen, with wildlife simply not having enough space to sustain itself in East Cheshire. This would lead to local extinctions and exacerbate national declines. I don't want East Cheshire to end up as a scattered collection of isolated important sites with no wildlife corridors connecting them , a risk that the 121-mile Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline corridor would make worse, and yet another reason why it should not go ahead.
Natural spaces on the edge of urban areas are valuable for biodiversity, but they are also essential for the recreation and mental wellbeing of residents. They need to be preserved from development.
Carbon Stores and Peatland
Farmland, soils, and habitats act as natural carbon stores, and development should aim to reduce the release of additional CO2 rather than add to it. This didn't happen at Weaver Green, where the resulting emissions have helped fuel climate change. In addition, the disturbance caused by trenching to lay the CO2 pipeline will itself release stored carbon into the atmosphere , an impact that cannot be ignored. Peatland is especially precious, and the pipeline route crosses moorland and other peatland; no development of any kind should be considered on peatland.
Flooding
With the ongoing impact of climate change, avoiding flood risk should be an important factor in site location.
Food Security and Agriculture
Green Belt and prime agricultural land should never be sacrificed for housing, CO2 pipelines, solar panels, or anything else. Food security matters to all of us, and this summer has shown that climate change could threaten food supply sooner than anticipated. Food security is of prime importance, and farms should be given high priority, protected, and certainly not built on.
Heritage and Rural Character
Cheshire's heritage and rural way of life including the contribution its beautiful green character makes to tourism, and the many jobs that support the local economy through dairy farming and agriculture more broadly, as well as the many associated business supporting these sectors, must be respected and protected above all else. This heritage is also directly at risk from the Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, which threatens to cut through the working farmland and countryside that this way of life depends on . This is yet another reason why this pipeline should not go ahead. Food security, local jobs, and our heritage are the character, heart, and soul of where we live; We are its custodians, and that responsibility must be honoured. Food scarcity, biodiversity loss, and climate change are all reasons to protect our green spaces. Housing should be built on brownfield sites first, in appropriate numbers and of an appropriate type, certainly not at the scale currently proposed. I am deeply concerned that farming does not appear to be valued by Cheshire East, and this must not be reflected in the Local Plan.

Please accept this response to the Local Plan Scoping Consultation. I am writing as a concerned resident, having lived in Cheshire for most of my life — well over 50 years. I am also deeply concerned about the proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, which is set to cross much of this borough, and the issues raised in this consultation give yet another reason why it should not go ahead.
Timing of the Consultation
It is very disappointing that the Council has decided to run this consultation to coincide with the school summer holidays. Almost all parish and town councils do not meet for six weeks over this period, and many local community organisations will also have had key members away on holiday at this time. This is suboptimal, to say the least.
The Cheshire East Local Plan is vital to all of us, and this consultation should be planned and run in a way that gets the best information from all residents, to ensure the resulting plan is fit for purpose and looks after our beautiful county for the benefit of its residents, biodiversity, wildlife, character, businesses, food production, and everything else that matters. It should not be done quietly, in a way that simply pushes forward government agendas that are not appropriate for where we live and will cause far more damage than any benefit they bring. The benefits, as I see them, amount to little more than profit for developers .I very much doubt the housing provided will be housing that is genuinely needed in the area, and I see this destroying greenfield land and environments that are totally irreplaceable. Frankly, any government or any council pushing through their own political agendas and sacrificing these areas is being deeply irresponsible, and is failing in its duty to the people, wildlife, and environment it is meant to serve.
Housing Targets
I am very concerned by the proposed 156% increase in housing targets for Cheshire East, particularly bearing in mind the borough's population. I despair at this target. The number of houses built in the borough between 2009 and now has considerably exceeded the housing targets set for that period, and this has not been taken into account in the current housing supply or housing target figures.
Housing for an Ageing Population
The Local Plan also needs to ensure it delivers the right kind of housing, not just qnuantity. Cheshire's population aged 55 and over is increasing, yet many in this demographic are unable to downsize due to a lack of appropriate housing suited to their needs. Nationally, more than 4 million people aged 55 and over are actively seeking to move home but are unable to find a suitable, appropriate alternative (Centre for Ageing Better, "Locked Out: A New Perspective on Older People's Housing Choices," 2023). The Local Plan should include more housing designed for older residents, including residential and nursing homes, rather than focusing solely on general housing numbers that do not reflect what the borough actually needs. I would also ask that the Council produce Supplementary Planning Guidance specifically addressing older people's housing, including residential and nursing homes, to ensure this need is properly planned for rather than left to general housing policy alone.
The Peak Cluster CO2 Pipeline and Housing Deliverability
I am especially concerned that the proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, running for around 121 miles and crossing much of this borough, has direct implications for the deliverability of the Local Plan itself. The Council's own officers' report to the Corporate Policy Committee (30 April 2026) flagged that the pipeline threatens the deliverability of strategic housing allocations that the current and emerging Local Plan rely on, including around 760 homes at Middlewich (Warmingham Lane phase 2 and Glebe Farm) and Macclesfield sites, including 300 homes at Congleton Road and approximately 95 hectares of safeguarded land in south-west Macclesfield , this at a time when Cheshire East already lacks a five-year housing land supply. This is yet another reason why the Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline should not go ahead.
Delay in Starting the New Local Plan
The Council should have started developing the new Local Plan in December 2024. This delay means there will be an additional eighteen months of speculative housing development, destruction of Green Belt and agricultural land, and further urban sprawl in the borough.
Brownfield Land First
Brownfield land should be used first. Once farmland and habitats are gone, they're gone — they cannot simply be replaced. They are home to precious, often endangered wildlife, and are places it needs to survive.
The new Local Plan needs to be more proactive and ensure that the Council uses all of its available powers to incentivise brownfield development. The Labour government's changes to the planning system have instead incentivised development on open farmland and in the countryside. There are a large number of brownfield sites around Macclesfield that should be prioritised for redevelopment, including through changes to the tax treatment of such development, as well as the use of Cheshire East Council's wider powers. The failure of vision and proactive action regarding the land around the old telephone exchange on Hibel Road in Macclesfield is one example of this. The Council is also a landowner for some of these sites, including the old depot on Hurdsfield Road in Macclesfield, and should and could have been more proactive in developing or facilitating the development of these sites.
Repurposing Town Centre Buildings
The repurposing of buildings in our declining town centres should also be given serious consideration. Reimagining empty and underused buildings for residential use, alongside appropriate amenities, would bring much-needed life and vitality back to these centres. This approach would also benefit CO2 emissions, since repurposing existing buildings uses far less concrete than new-build construction. This is something the Council should very much consider as part of its plan, providing incentives and a clear vision for how it could be achieved. This gesture could become a shining light, leading the way for other councils to follow, for the benefit of all.
Green Belt and "Grey Belt"
Safeguarding countryside from encroachment is one of the key purposes of the Green Belt, and countryside is essential for maintaining connectivity between ecologically valuable areas. Where land clearly performs this connective function, it should not be classified as "grey belt" , it should retain full Green Belt protection. The proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline itself is set to cross significant areas of countryside and Green Belt performing exactly this connective function ,yet another reason why this pipeline should not go ahead.
Urban Sprawl
Urban sprawl should be prevented at all costs, and the Local Plan should include and make clear the substantial evidence base on the negative consequences of urban sprawl, to ensure appropriate protections are maintained and prevent Cheshire East from becoming a suburb of Greater Manchester. This matters not only for the wildlife corridors mentioned above, but also for public health and economic growth.
Environmental Protection and Reversing Biodiversity Loss
Environmental protection and reversing biodiversity loss should be key considerations in decision-making. Irreplaceable habitats should not be destroyed , the term "irreplaceable habitat" is significant because it is used in planning policy to define habitats that cannot be easily recreated, meaning that once destroyed, they are lost for good. These include ancient woodlands, lowland raised bog, and species-rich wildflower grasslands. There is no excuse for their loss. All wildlife sites should be protected, whether designated locally (Local Wildlife Sites) or nationally (such as Sites of Special Scientific Interest) and other areas of high biodiversity value. Protection should extend not just to the site itself but to neighbouring land too, as this acts as a buffer and potential wildlife corridor ,giving wildlife somewhere to go in the event of natural disasters, including wildfires.
The Local Plan should be driven by the good work already done in the Local Nature Recovery Strategy. If it isn't, there is a real risk that the biodiversity crisis will worsen, with wildlife simply not having enough space to sustain itself in East Cheshire. This would lead to local extinctions and exacerbate national declines. I don't want East Cheshire to end up as a scattered collection of isolated important sites with no wildlife corridors connecting them , a risk that the 121-mile Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline corridor would make worse, and yet another reason why it should not go ahead.
Natural spaces on the edge of urban areas are valuable for biodiversity, but they are also essential for the recreation and mental wellbeing of residents. They need to be preserved from development.
Carbon Stores and Peatland
Farmland, soils, and habitats act as natural carbon stores, and development should aim to reduce the release of additional CO2 rather than add to it. This didn't happen at Weaver Green, where the resulting emissions have helped fuel climate change. In addition, the disturbance caused by trenching to lay the CO2 pipeline will itself release stored carbon into the atmosphere , an impact that cannot be ignored. Peatland is especially precious, and the pipeline route crosses moorland and other peatland; no development of any kind should be considered on peatland.
Flooding
With the ongoing impact of climate change, avoiding flood risk should be an important factor in site location.
Food Security and Agriculture
Green Belt and prime agricultural land should never be sacrificed for housing, CO2 pipelines, solar panels, or anything else. Food security matters to all of us, and this summer has shown that climate change could threaten food supply sooner than anticipated. Food security is of prime importance, and farms should be given high priority, protected, and certainly not built on.
Heritage and Rural Character
Cheshire's heritage and rural way of life including the contribution its beautiful green character makes to tourism, and the many jobs that support the local economy through dairy farming and agriculture more broadly, as well as the many associated business supporting these sectors, must be respected and protected above all else. This heritage is also directly at risk from the Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, which threatens to cut through the working farmland and countryside that this way of life depends on . This is yet another reason why this pipeline should not go ahead. Food security, local jobs, and our heritage are the character, heart, and soul of where we live; We are its custodians, and that responsibility must be honoured. Food scarcity, biodiversity loss, and climate change are all reasons to protect our green spaces. Housing should be built on brownfield sites first, in appropriate numbers and of an appropriate type, certainly not at the scale currently proposed. I am deeply concerned that farming does not appear to be valued by Cheshire East, and this must not be reflected in the Local Plan.

Please accept this response to the Local Plan Scoping Consultation. I am writing as a concerned resident, having lived in Cheshire for most of my life — well over 50 years. I am also deeply concerned about the proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, which is set to cross much of this borough, and the issues raised in this consultation give yet another reason why it should not go ahead.
Timing of the Consultation
It is very disappointing that the Council has decided to run this consultation to coincide with the school summer holidays. Almost all parish and town councils do not meet for six weeks over this period, and many local community organisations will also have had key members away on holiday at this time. This is suboptimal, to say the least.
The Cheshire East Local Plan is vital to all of us, and this consultation should be planned and run in a way that gets the best information from all residents, to ensure the resulting plan is fit for purpose and looks after our beautiful county for the benefit of its residents, biodiversity, wildlife, character, businesses, food production, and everything else that matters. It should not be done quietly, in a way that simply pushes forward government agendas that are not appropriate for where we live and will cause far more damage than any benefit they bring. The benefits, as I see them, amount to little more than profit for developers .I very much doubt the housing provided will be housing that is genuinely needed in the area, and I see this destroying greenfield land and environments that are totally irreplaceable. Frankly, any government or any council pushing through their own political agendas and sacrificing these areas is being deeply irresponsible, and is failing in its duty to the people, wildlife, and environment it is meant to serve.
Housing Targets
I am very concerned by the proposed 156% increase in housing targets for Cheshire East, particularly bearing in mind the borough's population. I despair at this target. The number of houses built in the borough between 2009 and now has considerably exceeded the housing targets set for that period, and this has not been taken into account in the current housing supply or housing target figures.
Housing for an Ageing Population
The Local Plan also needs to ensure it delivers the right kind of housing, not just qnuantity. Cheshire's population aged 55 and over is increasing, yet many in this demographic are unable to downsize due to a lack of appropriate housing suited to their needs. Nationally, more than 4 million people aged 55 and over are actively seeking to move home but are unable to find a suitable, appropriate alternative (Centre for Ageing Better, "Locked Out: A New Perspective on Older People's Housing Choices," 2023). The Local Plan should include more housing designed for older residents, including residential and nursing homes, rather than focusing solely on general housing numbers that do not reflect what the borough actually needs. I would also ask that the Council produce Supplementary Planning Guidance specifically addressing older people's housing, including residential and nursing homes, to ensure this need is properly planned for rather than left to general housing policy alone.
The Peak Cluster CO2 Pipeline and Housing Deliverability
I am especially concerned that the proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, running for around 121 miles and crossing much of this borough, has direct implications for the deliverability of the Local Plan itself. The Council's own officers' report to the Corporate Policy Committee (30 April 2026) flagged that the pipeline threatens the deliverability of strategic housing allocations that the current and emerging Local Plan rely on, including around 760 homes at Middlewich (Warmingham Lane phase 2 and Glebe Farm) and Macclesfield sites, including 300 homes at Congleton Road and approximately 95 hectares of safeguarded land in south-west Macclesfield , this at a time when Cheshire East already lacks a five-year housing land supply. This is yet another reason why the Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline should not go ahead.
Delay in Starting the New Local Plan
The Council should have started developing the new Local Plan in December 2024. This delay means there will be an additional eighteen months of speculative housing development, destruction of Green Belt and agricultural land, and further urban sprawl in the borough.
Brownfield Land First
Brownfield land should be used first. Once farmland and habitats are gone, they're gone — they cannot simply be replaced. They are home to precious, often endangered wildlife, and are places it needs to survive.
The new Local Plan needs to be more proactive and ensure that the Council uses all of its available powers to incentivise brownfield development. The Labour government's changes to the planning system have instead incentivised development on open farmland and in the countryside. There are a large number of brownfield sites around Macclesfield that should be prioritised for redevelopment, including through changes to the tax treatment of such development, as well as the use of Cheshire East Council's wider powers. The failure of vision and proactive action regarding the land around the old telephone exchange on Hibel Road in Macclesfield is one example of this. The Council is also a landowner for some of these sites, including the old depot on Hurdsfield Road in Macclesfield, and should and could have been more proactive in developing or facilitating the development of these sites.
Repurposing Town Centre Buildings
The repurposing of buildings in our declining town centres should also be given serious consideration. Reimagining empty and underused buildings for residential use, alongside appropriate amenities, would bring much-needed life and vitality back to these centres. This approach would also benefit CO2 emissions, since repurposing existing buildings uses far less concrete than new-build construction. This is something the Council should very much consider as part of its plan, providing incentives and a clear vision for how it could be achieved. This gesture could become a shining light, leading the way for other councils to follow, for the benefit of all.
Green Belt and "Grey Belt"
Safeguarding countryside from encroachment is one of the key purposes of the Green Belt, and countryside is essential for maintaining connectivity between ecologically valuable areas. Where land clearly performs this connective function, it should not be classified as "grey belt" , it should retain full Green Belt protection. The proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline itself is set to cross significant areas of countryside and Green Belt performing exactly this connective function ,yet another reason why this pipeline should not go ahead.
Urban Sprawl
Urban sprawl should be prevented at all costs, and the Local Plan should include and make clear the substantial evidence base on the negative consequences of urban sprawl, to ensure appropriate protections are maintained and prevent Cheshire East from becoming a suburb of Greater Manchester. This matters not only for the wildlife corridors mentioned above, but also for public health and economic growth.
Environmental Protection and Reversing Biodiversity Loss
Environmental protection and reversing biodiversity loss should be key considerations in decision-making. Irreplaceable habitats should not be destroyed , the term "irreplaceable habitat" is significant because it is used in planning policy to define habitats that cannot be easily recreated, meaning that once destroyed, they are lost for good. These include ancient woodlands, lowland raised bog, and species-rich wildflower grasslands. There is no excuse for their loss. All wildlife sites should be protected, whether designated locally (Local Wildlife Sites) or nationally (such as Sites of Special Scientific Interest) and other areas of high biodiversity value. Protection should extend not just to the site itself but to neighbouring land too, as this acts as a buffer and potential wildlife corridor ,giving wildlife somewhere to go in the event of natural disasters, including wildfires.
The Local Plan should be driven by the good work already done in the Local Nature Recovery Strategy. If it isn't, there is a real risk that the biodiversity crisis will worsen, with wildlife simply not having enough space to sustain itself in East Cheshire. This would lead to local extinctions and exacerbate national declines. I don't want East Cheshire to end up as a scattered collection of isolated important sites with no wildlife corridors connecting them , a risk that the 121-mile Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline corridor would make worse, and yet another reason why it should not go ahead.
Natural spaces on the edge of urban areas are valuable for biodiversity, but they are also essential for the recreation and mental wellbeing of residents. They need to be preserved from development.
Carbon Stores and Peatland
Farmland, soils, and habitats act as natural carbon stores, and development should aim to reduce the release of additional CO2 rather than add to it. This didn't happen at Weaver Green, where the resulting emissions have helped fuel climate change. In addition, the disturbance caused by trenching to lay the CO2 pipeline will itself release stored carbon into the atmosphere , an impact that cannot be ignored. Peatland is especially precious, and the pipeline route crosses moorland and other peatland; no development of any kind should be considered on peatland.
Flooding
With the ongoing impact of climate change, avoiding flood risk should be an important factor in site location.
Food Security and Agriculture
Green Belt and prime agricultural land should never be sacrificed for housing, CO2 pipelines, solar panels, or anything else. Food security matters to all of us, and this summer has shown that climate change could threaten food supply sooner than anticipated. Food security is of prime importance, and farms should be given high priority, protected, and certainly not built on.
Heritage and Rural Character
Cheshire's heritage and rural way of life including the contribution its beautiful green character makes to tourism, and the many jobs that support the local economy through dairy farming and agriculture more broadly, as well as the many associated business supporting these sectors, must be respected and protected above all else. This heritage is also directly at risk from the Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, which threatens to cut through the working farmland and countryside that this way of life depends on . This is yet another reason why this pipeline should not go ahead. Food security, local jobs, and our heritage are the character, heart, and soul of where we live; We are its custodians, and that responsibility must be honoured. Food scarcity, biodiversity loss, and climate change are all reasons to protect our green spaces. Housing should be built on brownfield sites first, in appropriate numbers and of an appropriate type, certainly not at the scale currently proposed. I am deeply concerned that farming does not appear to be valued by Cheshire East, and this must not be reflected in the Local Plan.

Please accept this response to the Local Plan Scoping Consultation. I am writing as a concerned resident, having lived in Cheshire for most of my life — well over 50 years. I am also deeply concerned about the proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, which is set to cross much of this borough, and the issues raised in this consultation give yet another reason why it should not go ahead.
Timing of the Consultation
It is very disappointing that the Council has decided to run this consultation to coincide with the school summer holidays. Almost all parish and town councils do not meet for six weeks over this period, and many local community organisations will also have had key members away on holiday at this time. This is suboptimal, to say the least.
The Cheshire East Local Plan is vital to all of us, and this consultation should be planned and run in a way that gets the best information from all residents, to ensure the resulting plan is fit for purpose and looks after our beautiful county for the benefit of its residents, biodiversity, wildlife, character, businesses, food production, and everything else that matters. It should not be done quietly, in a way that simply pushes forward government agendas that are not appropriate for where we live and will cause far more damage than any benefit they bring. The benefits, as I see them, amount to little more than profit for developers .I very much doubt the housing provided will be housing that is genuinely needed in the area, and I see this destroying greenfield land and environments that are totally irreplaceable. Frankly, any government or any council pushing through their own political agendas and sacrificing these areas is being deeply irresponsible, and is failing in its duty to the people, wildlife, and environment it is meant to serve.
Housing Targets
I am very concerned by the proposed 156% increase in housing targets for Cheshire East, particularly bearing in mind the borough's population. I despair at this target. The number of houses built in the borough between 2009 and now has considerably exceeded the housing targets set for that period, and this has not been taken into account in the current housing supply or housing target figures.
Housing for an Ageing Population
The Local Plan also needs to ensure it delivers the right kind of housing, not just qnuantity. Cheshire's population aged 55 and over is increasing, yet many in this demographic are unable to downsize due to a lack of appropriate housing suited to their needs. Nationally, more than 4 million people aged 55 and over are actively seeking to move home but are unable to find a suitable, appropriate alternative (Centre for Ageing Better, "Locked Out: A New Perspective on Older People's Housing Choices," 2023). The Local Plan should include more housing designed for older residents, including residential and nursing homes, rather than focusing solely on general housing numbers that do not reflect what the borough actually needs. I would also ask that the Council produce Supplementary Planning Guidance specifically addressing older people's housing, including residential and nursing homes, to ensure this need is properly planned for rather than left to general housing policy alone.
The Peak Cluster CO2 Pipeline and Housing Deliverability
I am especially concerned that the proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, running for around 121 miles and crossing much of this borough, has direct implications for the deliverability of the Local Plan itself. The Council's own officers' report to the Corporate Policy Committee (30 April 2026) flagged that the pipeline threatens the deliverability of strategic housing allocations that the current and emerging Local Plan rely on, including around 760 homes at Middlewich (Warmingham Lane phase 2 and Glebe Farm) and Macclesfield sites, including 300 homes at Congleton Road and approximately 95 hectares of safeguarded land in south-west Macclesfield , this at a time when Cheshire East already lacks a five-year housing land supply. This is yet another reason why the Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline should not go ahead.
Delay in Starting the New Local Plan
The Council should have started developing the new Local Plan in December 2024. This delay means there will be an additional eighteen months of speculative housing development, destruction of Green Belt and agricultural land, and further urban sprawl in the borough.
Brownfield Land First
Brownfield land should be used first. Once farmland and habitats are gone, they're gone — they cannot simply be replaced. They are home to precious, often endangered wildlife, and are places it needs to survive.
The new Local Plan needs to be more proactive and ensure that the Council uses all of its available powers to incentivise brownfield development. The Labour government's changes to the planning system have instead incentivised development on open farmland and in the countryside. There are a large number of brownfield sites around Macclesfield that should be prioritised for redevelopment, including through changes to the tax treatment of such development, as well as the use of Cheshire East Council's wider powers. The failure of vision and proactive action regarding the land around the old telephone exchange on Hibel Road in Macclesfield is one example of this. The Council is also a landowner for some of these sites, including the old depot on Hurdsfield Road in Macclesfield, and should and could have been more proactive in developing or facilitating the development of these sites.
Repurposing Town Centre Buildings
The repurposing of buildings in our declining town centres should also be given serious consideration. Reimagining empty and underused buildings for residential use, alongside appropriate amenities, would bring much-needed life and vitality back to these centres. This approach would also benefit CO2 emissions, since repurposing existing buildings uses far less concrete than new-build construction. This is something the Council should very much consider as part of its plan, providing incentives and a clear vision for how it could be achieved. This gesture could become a shining light, leading the way for other councils to follow, for the benefit of all.
Green Belt and "Grey Belt"
Safeguarding countryside from encroachment is one of the key purposes of the Green Belt, and countryside is essential for maintaining connectivity between ecologically valuable areas. Where land clearly performs this connective function, it should not be classified as "grey belt" , it should retain full Green Belt protection. The proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline itself is set to cross significant areas of countryside and Green Belt performing exactly this connective function ,yet another reason why this pipeline should not go ahead.
Urban Sprawl
Urban sprawl should be prevented at all costs, and the Local Plan should include and make clear the substantial evidence base on the negative consequences of urban sprawl, to ensure appropriate protections are maintained and prevent Cheshire East from becoming a suburb of Greater Manchester. This matters not only for the wildlife corridors mentioned above, but also for public health and economic growth.
Environmental Protection and Reversing Biodiversity Loss
Environmental protection and reversing biodiversity loss should be key considerations in decision-making. Irreplaceable habitats should not be destroyed , the term "irreplaceable habitat" is significant because it is used in planning policy to define habitats that cannot be easily recreated, meaning that once destroyed, they are lost for good. These include ancient woodlands, lowland raised bog, and species-rich wildflower grasslands. There is no excuse for their loss. All wildlife sites should be protected, whether designated locally (Local Wildlife Sites) or nationally (such as Sites of Special Scientific Interest) and other areas of high biodiversity value. Protection should extend not just to the site itself but to neighbouring land too, as this acts as a buffer and potential wildlife corridor ,giving wildlife somewhere to go in the event of natural disasters, including wildfires.
The Local Plan should be driven by the good work already done in the Local Nature Recovery Strategy. If it isn't, there is a real risk that the biodiversity crisis will worsen, with wildlife simply not having enough space to sustain itself in East Cheshire. This would lead to local extinctions and exacerbate national declines. I don't want East Cheshire to end up as a scattered collection of isolated important sites with no wildlife corridors connecting them , a risk that the 121-mile Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline corridor would make worse, and yet another reason why it should not go ahead.
Natural spaces on the edge of urban areas are valuable for biodiversity, but they are also essential for the recreation and mental wellbeing of residents. They need to be preserved from development.
Carbon Stores and Peatland
Farmland, soils, and habitats act as natural carbon stores, and development should aim to reduce the release of additional CO2 rather than add to it. This didn't happen at Weaver Green, where the resulting emissions have helped fuel climate change. In addition, the disturbance caused by trenching to lay the CO2 pipeline will itself release stored carbon into the atmosphere , an impact that cannot be ignored. Peatland is especially precious, and the pipeline route crosses moorland and other peatland; no development of any kind should be considered on peatland.
Flooding
With the ongoing impact of climate change, avoiding flood risk should be an important factor in site location.
Food Security and Agriculture
Green Belt and prime agricultural land should never be sacrificed for housing, CO2 pipelines, solar panels, or anything else. Food security matters to all of us, and this summer has shown that climate change could threaten food supply sooner than anticipated. Food security is of prime importance, and farms should be given high priority, protected, and certainly not built on.
Heritage and Rural Character
Cheshire's heritage and rural way of life including the contribution its beautiful green character makes to tourism, and the many jobs that support the local economy through dairy farming and agriculture more broadly, as well as the many associated business supporting these sectors, must be respected and protected above all else. This heritage is also directly at risk from the Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, which threatens to cut through the working farmland and countryside that this way of life depends on . This is yet another reason why this pipeline should not go ahead. Food security, local jobs, and our heritage are the character, heart, and soul of where we live; We are its custodians, and that responsibility must be honoured. Food scarcity, biodiversity loss, and climate change are all reasons to protect our green spaces. Housing should be built on brownfield sites first, in appropriate numbers and of an appropriate type, certainly not at the scale currently proposed. I am deeply concerned that farming does not appear to be valued by Cheshire East, and this must not be reflected in the Local Plan.

Please accept this response to the Local Plan Scoping Consultation. I am writing as a concerned resident, having lived in Cheshire for most of my life — well over 50 years. I am also deeply concerned about the proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, which is set to cross much of this borough, and the issues raised in this consultation give yet another reason why it should not go ahead.
Timing of the Consultation
It is very disappointing that the Council has decided to run this consultation to coincide with the school summer holidays. Almost all parish and town councils do not meet for six weeks over this period, and many local community organisations will also have had key members away on holiday at this time. This is suboptimal, to say the least.
The Cheshire East Local Plan is vital to all of us, and this consultation should be planned and run in a way that gets the best information from all residents, to ensure the resulting plan is fit for purpose and looks after our beautiful county for the benefit of its residents, biodiversity, wildlife, character, businesses, food production, and everything else that matters. It should not be done quietly, in a way that simply pushes forward government agendas that are not appropriate for where we live and will cause far more damage than any benefit they bring. The benefits, as I see them, amount to little more than profit for developers .I very much doubt the housing provided will be housing that is genuinely needed in the area, and I see this destroying greenfield land and environments that are totally irreplaceable. Frankly, any government or any council pushing through their own political agendas and sacrificing these areas is being deeply irresponsible, and is failing in its duty to the people, wildlife, and environment it is meant to serve.
Housing Targets
I am very concerned by the proposed 156% increase in housing targets for Cheshire East, particularly bearing in mind the borough's population. I despair at this target. The number of houses built in the borough between 2009 and now has considerably exceeded the housing targets set for that period, and this has not been taken into account in the current housing supply or housing target figures.
Housing for an Ageing Population
The Local Plan also needs to ensure it delivers the right kind of housing, not just qnuantity. Cheshire's population aged 55 and over is increasing, yet many in this demographic are unable to downsize due to a lack of appropriate housing suited to their needs. Nationally, more than 4 million people aged 55 and over are actively seeking to move home but are unable to find a suitable, appropriate alternative (Centre for Ageing Better, "Locked Out: A New Perspective on Older People's Housing Choices," 2023). The Local Plan should include more housing designed for older residents, including residential and nursing homes, rather than focusing solely on general housing numbers that do not reflect what the borough actually needs. I would also ask that the Council produce Supplementary Planning Guidance specifically addressing older people's housing, including residential and nursing homes, to ensure this need is properly planned for rather than left to general housing policy alone.
The Peak Cluster CO2 Pipeline and Housing Deliverability
I am especially concerned that the proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, running for around 121 miles and crossing much of this borough, has direct implications for the deliverability of the Local Plan itself. The Council's own officers' report to the Corporate Policy Committee (30 April 2026) flagged that the pipeline threatens the deliverability of strategic housing allocations that the current and emerging Local Plan rely on, including around 760 homes at Middlewich (Warmingham Lane phase 2 and Glebe Farm) and Macclesfield sites, including 300 homes at Congleton Road and approximately 95 hectares of safeguarded land in south-west Macclesfield , this at a time when Cheshire East already lacks a five-year housing land supply. This is yet another reason why the Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline should not go ahead.
Delay in Starting the New Local Plan
The Council should have started developing the new Local Plan in December 2024. This delay means there will be an additional eighteen months of speculative housing development, destruction of Green Belt and agricultural land, and further urban sprawl in the borough.
Brownfield Land First
Brownfield land should be used first. Once farmland and habitats are gone, they're gone — they cannot simply be replaced. They are home to precious, often endangered wildlife, and are places it needs to survive.
The new Local Plan needs to be more proactive and ensure that the Council uses all of its available powers to incentivise brownfield development. The Labour government's changes to the planning system have instead incentivised development on open farmland and in the countryside. There are a large number of brownfield sites around Macclesfield that should be prioritised for redevelopment, including through changes to the tax treatment of such development, as well as the use of Cheshire East Council's wider powers. The failure of vision and proactive action regarding the land around the old telephone exchange on Hibel Road in Macclesfield is one example of this. The Council is also a landowner for some of these sites, including the old depot on Hurdsfield Road in Macclesfield, and should and could have been more proactive in developing or facilitating the development of these sites.
Repurposing Town Centre Buildings
The repurposing of buildings in our declining town centres should also be given serious consideration. Reimagining empty and underused buildings for residential use, alongside appropriate amenities, would bring much-needed life and vitality back to these centres. This approach would also benefit CO2 emissions, since repurposing existing buildings uses far less concrete than new-build construction. This is something the Council should very much consider as part of its plan, providing incentives and a clear vision for how it could be achieved. This gesture could become a shining light, leading the way for other councils to follow, for the benefit of all.
Green Belt and "Grey Belt"
Safeguarding countryside from encroachment is one of the key purposes of the Green Belt, and countryside is essential for maintaining connectivity between ecologically valuable areas. Where land clearly performs this connective function, it should not be classified as "grey belt" , it should retain full Green Belt protection. The proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline itself is set to cross significant areas of countryside and Green Belt performing exactly this connective function ,yet another reason why this pipeline should not go ahead.
Urban Sprawl
Urban sprawl should be prevented at all costs, and the Local Plan should include and make clear the substantial evidence base on the negative consequences of urban sprawl, to ensure appropriate protections are maintained and prevent Cheshire East from becoming a suburb of Greater Manchester. This matters not only for the wildlife corridors mentioned above, but also for public health and economic growth.
Environmental Protection and Reversing Biodiversity Loss
Environmental protection and reversing biodiversity loss should be key considerations in decision-making. Irreplaceable habitats should not be destroyed , the term "irreplaceable habitat" is significant because it is used in planning policy to define habitats that cannot be easily recreated, meaning that once destroyed, they are lost for good. These include ancient woodlands, lowland raised bog, and species-rich wildflower grasslands. There is no excuse for their loss. All wildlife sites should be protected, whether designated locally (Local Wildlife Sites) or nationally (such as Sites of Special Scientific Interest) and other areas of high biodiversity value. Protection should extend not just to the site itself but to neighbouring land too, as this acts as a buffer and potential wildlife corridor ,giving wildlife somewhere to go in the event of natural disasters, including wildfires.
The Local Plan should be driven by the good work already done in the Local Nature Recovery Strategy. If it isn't, there is a real risk that the biodiversity crisis will worsen, with wildlife simply not having enough space to sustain itself in East Cheshire. This would lead to local extinctions and exacerbate national declines. I don't want East Cheshire to end up as a scattered collection of isolated important sites with no wildlife corridors connecting them , a risk that the 121-mile Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline corridor would make worse, and yet another reason why it should not go ahead.
Natural spaces on the edge of urban areas are valuable for biodiversity, but they are also essential for the recreation and mental wellbeing of residents. They need to be preserved from development.
Carbon Stores and Peatland
Farmland, soils, and habitats act as natural carbon stores, and development should aim to reduce the release of additional CO2 rather than add to it. This didn't happen at Weaver Green, where the resulting emissions have helped fuel climate change. In addition, the disturbance caused by trenching to lay the CO2 pipeline will itself release stored carbon into the atmosphere , an impact that cannot be ignored. Peatland is especially precious, and the pipeline route crosses moorland and other peatland; no development of any kind should be considered on peatland.
Flooding
With the ongoing impact of climate change, avoiding flood risk should be an important factor in site location.
Food Security and Agriculture
Green Belt and prime agricultural land should never be sacrificed for housing, CO2 pipelines, solar panels, or anything else. Food security matters to all of us, and this summer has shown that climate change could threaten food supply sooner than anticipated. Food security is of prime importance, and farms should be given high priority, protected, and certainly not built on.
Heritage and Rural Character
Cheshire's heritage and rural way of life including the contribution its beautiful green character makes to tourism, and the many jobs that support the local economy through dairy farming and agriculture more broadly, as well as the many associated business supporting these sectors, must be respected and protected above all else. This heritage is also directly at risk from the Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, which threatens to cut through the working farmland and countryside that this way of life depends on . This is yet another reason why this pipeline should not go ahead. Food security, local jobs, and our heritage are the character, heart, and soul of where we live; We are its custodians, and that responsibility must be honoured. Food scarcity, biodiversity loss, and climate change are all reasons to protect our green spaces. Housing should be built on brownfield sites first, in appropriate numbers and of an appropriate type, certainly not at the scale currently proposed. I am deeply concerned that farming does not appear to be valued by Cheshire East, and this must not be reflected in the Local Plan.

Please accept this response to the Local Plan Scoping Consultation. I am writing as a concerned resident, having lived in Cheshire for most of my life — well over 50 years. I am also deeply concerned about the proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, which is set to cross much of this borough, and the issues raised in this consultation give yet another reason why it should not go ahead.
Timing of the Consultation
It is very disappointing that the Council has decided to run this consultation to coincide with the school summer holidays. Almost all parish and town councils do not meet for six weeks over this period, and many local community organisations will also have had key members away on holiday at this time. This is suboptimal, to say the least.
The Cheshire East Local Plan is vital to all of us, and this consultation should be planned and run in a way that gets the best information from all residents, to ensure the resulting plan is fit for purpose and looks after our beautiful county for the benefit of its residents, biodiversity, wildlife, character, businesses, food production, and everything else that matters. It should not be done quietly, in a way that simply pushes forward government agendas that are not appropriate for where we live and will cause far more damage than any benefit they bring. The benefits, as I see them, amount to little more than profit for developers .I very much doubt the housing provided will be housing that is genuinely needed in the area, and I see this destroying greenfield land and environments that are totally irreplaceable. Frankly, any government or any council pushing through their own political agendas and sacrificing these areas is being deeply irresponsible, and is failing in its duty to the people, wildlife, and environment it is meant to serve.
Housing Targets
I am very concerned by the proposed 156% increase in housing targets for Cheshire East, particularly bearing in mind the borough's population. I despair at this target. The number of houses built in the borough between 2009 and now has considerably exceeded the housing targets set for that period, and this has not been taken into account in the current housing supply or housing target figures.
Housing for an Ageing Population
The Local Plan also needs to ensure it delivers the right kind of housing, not just qnuantity. Cheshire's population aged 55 and over is increasing, yet many in this demographic are unable to downsize due to a lack of appropriate housing suited to their needs. Nationally, more than 4 million people aged 55 and over are actively seeking to move home but are unable to find a suitable, appropriate alternative (Centre for Ageing Better, "Locked Out: A New Perspective on Older People's Housing Choices," 2023). The Local Plan should include more housing designed for older residents, including residential and nursing homes, rather than focusing solely on general housing numbers that do not reflect what the borough actually needs. I would also ask that the Council produce Supplementary Planning Guidance specifically addressing older people's housing, including residential and nursing homes, to ensure this need is properly planned for rather than left to general housing policy alone.
The Peak Cluster CO2 Pipeline and Housing Deliverability
I am especially concerned that the proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, running for around 121 miles and crossing much of this borough, has direct implications for the deliverability of the Local Plan itself. The Council's own officers' report to the Corporate Policy Committee (30 April 2026) flagged that the pipeline threatens the deliverability of strategic housing allocations that the current and emerging Local Plan rely on, including around 760 homes at Middlewich (Warmingham Lane phase 2 and Glebe Farm) and Macclesfield sites, including 300 homes at Congleton Road and approximately 95 hectares of safeguarded land in south-west Macclesfield , this at a time when Cheshire East already lacks a five-year housing land supply. This is yet another reason why the Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline should not go ahead.
Delay in Starting the New Local Plan
The Council should have started developing the new Local Plan in December 2024. This delay means there will be an additional eighteen months of speculative housing development, destruction of Green Belt and agricultural land, and further urban sprawl in the borough.
Brownfield Land First
Brownfield land should be used first. Once farmland and habitats are gone, they're gone — they cannot simply be replaced. They are home to precious, often endangered wildlife, and are places it needs to survive.
The new Local Plan needs to be more proactive and ensure that the Council uses all of its available powers to incentivise brownfield development. The Labour government's changes to the planning system have instead incentivised development on open farmland and in the countryside. There are a large number of brownfield sites around Macclesfield that should be prioritised for redevelopment, including through changes to the tax treatment of such development, as well as the use of Cheshire East Council's wider powers. The failure of vision and proactive action regarding the land around the old telephone exchange on Hibel Road in Macclesfield is one example of this. The Council is also a landowner for some of these sites, including the old depot on Hurdsfield Road in Macclesfield, and should and could have been more proactive in developing or facilitating the development of these sites.
Repurposing Town Centre Buildings
The repurposing of buildings in our declining town centres should also be given serious consideration. Reimagining empty and underused buildings for residential use, alongside appropriate amenities, would bring much-needed life and vitality back to these centres. This approach would also benefit CO2 emissions, since repurposing existing buildings uses far less concrete than new-build construction. This is something the Council should very much consider as part of its plan, providing incentives and a clear vision for how it could be achieved. This gesture could become a shining light, leading the way for other councils to follow, for the benefit of all.
Green Belt and "Grey Belt"
Safeguarding countryside from encroachment is one of the key purposes of the Green Belt, and countryside is essential for maintaining connectivity between ecologically valuable areas. Where land clearly performs this connective function, it should not be classified as "grey belt" , it should retain full Green Belt protection. The proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline itself is set to cross significant areas of countryside and Green Belt performing exactly this connective function ,yet another reason why this pipeline should not go ahead.
Urban Sprawl
Urban sprawl should be prevented at all costs, and the Local Plan should include and make clear the substantial evidence base on the negative consequences of urban sprawl, to ensure appropriate protections are maintained and prevent Cheshire East from becoming a suburb of Greater Manchester. This matters not only for the wildlife corridors mentioned above, but also for public health and economic growth.
Environmental Protection and Reversing Biodiversity Loss
Environmental protection and reversing biodiversity loss should be key considerations in decision-making. Irreplaceable habitats should not be destroyed , the term "irreplaceable habitat" is significant because it is used in planning policy to define habitats that cannot be easily recreated, meaning that once destroyed, they are lost for good. These include ancient woodlands, lowland raised bog, and species-rich wildflower grasslands. There is no excuse for their loss. All wildlife sites should be protected, whether designated locally (Local Wildlife Sites) or nationally (such as Sites of Special Scientific Interest) and other areas of high biodiversity value. Protection should extend not just to the site itself but to neighbouring land too, as this acts as a buffer and potential wildlife corridor ,giving wildlife somewhere to go in the event of natural disasters, including wildfires.
The Local Plan should be driven by the good work already done in the Local Nature Recovery Strategy. If it isn't, there is a real risk that the biodiversity crisis will worsen, with wildlife simply not having enough space to sustain itself in East Cheshire. This would lead to local extinctions and exacerbate national declines. I don't want East Cheshire to end up as a scattered collection of isolated important sites with no wildlife corridors connecting them , a risk that the 121-mile Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline corridor would make worse, and yet another reason why it should not go ahead.
Natural spaces on the edge of urban areas are valuable for biodiversity, but they are also essential for the recreation and mental wellbeing of residents. They need to be preserved from development.
Carbon Stores and Peatland
Farmland, soils, and habitats act as natural carbon stores, and development should aim to reduce the release of additional CO2 rather than add to it. This didn't happen at Weaver Green, where the resulting emissions have helped fuel climate change. In addition, the disturbance caused by trenching to lay the CO2 pipeline will itself release stored carbon into the atmosphere , an impact that cannot be ignored. Peatland is especially precious, and the pipeline route crosses moorland and other peatland; no development of any kind should be considered on peatland.
Flooding
With the ongoing impact of climate change, avoiding flood risk should be an important factor in site location.
Food Security and Agriculture
Green Belt and prime agricultural land should never be sacrificed for housing, CO2 pipelines, solar panels, or anything else. Food security matters to all of us, and this summer has shown that climate change could threaten food supply sooner than anticipated. Food security is of prime importance, and farms should be given high priority, protected, and certainly not built on.
Heritage and Rural Character
Cheshire's heritage and rural way of life including the contribution its beautiful green character makes to tourism, and the many jobs that support the local economy through dairy farming and agriculture more broadly, as well as the many associated business supporting these sectors, must be respected and protected above all else. This heritage is also directly at risk from the Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, which threatens to cut through the working farmland and countryside that this way of life depends on . This is yet another reason why this pipeline should not go ahead. Food security, local jobs, and our heritage are the character, heart, and soul of where we live; We are its custodians, and that responsibility must be honoured. Food scarcity, biodiversity loss, and climate change are all reasons to protect our green spaces. Housing should be built on brownfield sites first, in appropriate numbers and of an appropriate type, certainly not at the scale currently proposed. I am deeply concerned that farming does not appear to be valued by Cheshire East, and this must not be reflected in the Local Plan.

Please accept this response to the Local Plan Scoping Consultation. I am writing as a concerned resident, having lived in Cheshire for most of my life — well over 50 years. I am also deeply concerned about the proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, which is set to cross much of this borough, and the issues raised in this consultation give yet another reason why it should not go ahead.
Timing of the Consultation
It is very disappointing that the Council has decided to run this consultation to coincide with the school summer holidays. Almost all parish and town councils do not meet for six weeks over this period, and many local community organisations will also have had key members away on holiday at this time. This is suboptimal, to say the least.
The Cheshire East Local Plan is vital to all of us, and this consultation should be planned and run in a way that gets the best information from all residents, to ensure the resulting plan is fit for purpose and looks after our beautiful county for the benefit of its residents, biodiversity, wildlife, character, businesses, food production, and everything else that matters. It should not be done quietly, in a way that simply pushes forward government agendas that are not appropriate for where we live and will cause far more damage than any benefit they bring. The benefits, as I see them, amount to little more than profit for developers .I very much doubt the housing provided will be housing that is genuinely needed in the area, and I see this destroying greenfield land and environments that are totally irreplaceable. Frankly, any government or any council pushing through their own political agendas and sacrificing these areas is being deeply irresponsible, and is failing in its duty to the people, wildlife, and environment it is meant to serve.
Housing Targets
I am very concerned by the proposed 156% increase in housing targets for Cheshire East, particularly bearing in mind the borough's population. I despair at this target. The number of houses built in the borough between 2009 and now has considerably exceeded the housing targets set for that period, and this has not been taken into account in the current housing supply or housing target figures.
Housing for an Ageing Population
The Local Plan also needs to ensure it delivers the right kind of housing, not just qnuantity. Cheshire's population aged 55 and over is increasing, yet many in this demographic are unable to downsize due to a lack of appropriate housing suited to their needs. Nationally, more than 4 million people aged 55 and over are actively seeking to move home but are unable to find a suitable, appropriate alternative (Centre for Ageing Better, "Locked Out: A New Perspective on Older People's Housing Choices," 2023). The Local Plan should include more housing designed for older residents, including residential and nursing homes, rather than focusing solely on general housing numbers that do not reflect what the borough actually needs. I would also ask that the Council produce Supplementary Planning Guidance specifically addressing older people's housing, including residential and nursing homes, to ensure this need is properly planned for rather than left to general housing policy alone.
The Peak Cluster CO2 Pipeline and Housing Deliverability
I am especially concerned that the proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, running for around 121 miles and crossing much of this borough, has direct implications for the deliverability of the Local Plan itself. The Council's own officers' report to the Corporate Policy Committee (30 April 2026) flagged that the pipeline threatens the deliverability of strategic housing allocations that the current and emerging Local Plan rely on, including around 760 homes at Middlewich (Warmingham Lane phase 2 and Glebe Farm) and Macclesfield sites, including 300 homes at Congleton Road and approximately 95 hectares of safeguarded land in south-west Macclesfield , this at a time when Cheshire East already lacks a five-year housing land supply. This is yet another reason why the Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline should not go ahead.
Delay in Starting the New Local Plan
The Council should have started developing the new Local Plan in December 2024. This delay means there will be an additional eighteen months of speculative housing development, destruction of Green Belt and agricultural land, and further urban sprawl in the borough.
Brownfield Land First
Brownfield land should be used first. Once farmland and habitats are gone, they're gone — they cannot simply be replaced. They are home to precious, often endangered wildlife, and are places it needs to survive.
The new Local Plan needs to be more proactive and ensure that the Council uses all of its available powers to incentivise brownfield development. The Labour government's changes to the planning system have instead incentivised development on open farmland and in the countryside. There are a large number of brownfield sites around Macclesfield that should be prioritised for redevelopment, including through changes to the tax treatment of such development, as well as the use of Cheshire East Council's wider powers. The failure of vision and proactive action regarding the land around the old telephone exchange on Hibel Road in Macclesfield is one example of this. The Council is also a landowner for some of these sites, including the old depot on Hurdsfield Road in Macclesfield, and should and could have been more proactive in developing or facilitating the development of these sites.
Repurposing Town Centre Buildings
The repurposing of buildings in our declining town centres should also be given serious consideration. Reimagining empty and underused buildings for residential use, alongside appropriate amenities, would bring much-needed life and vitality back to these centres. This approach would also benefit CO2 emissions, since repurposing existing buildings uses far less concrete than new-build construction. This is something the Council should very much consider as part of its plan, providing incentives and a clear vision for how it could be achieved. This gesture could become a shining light, leading the way for other councils to follow, for the benefit of all.
Green Belt and "Grey Belt"
Safeguarding countryside from encroachment is one of the key purposes of the Green Belt, and countryside is essential for maintaining connectivity between ecologically valuable areas. Where land clearly performs this connective function, it should not be classified as "grey belt" , it should retain full Green Belt protection. The proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline itself is set to cross significant areas of countryside and Green Belt performing exactly this connective function ,yet another reason why this pipeline should not go ahead.
Urban Sprawl
Urban sprawl should be prevented at all costs, and the Local Plan should include and make clear the substantial evidence base on the negative consequences of urban sprawl, to ensure appropriate protections are maintained and prevent Cheshire East from becoming a suburb of Greater Manchester. This matters not only for the wildlife corridors mentioned above, but also for public health and economic growth.
Environmental Protection and Reversing Biodiversity Loss
Environmental protection and reversing biodiversity loss should be key considerations in decision-making. Irreplaceable habitats should not be destroyed , the term "irreplaceable habitat" is significant because it is used in planning policy to define habitats that cannot be easily recreated, meaning that once destroyed, they are lost for good. These include ancient woodlands, lowland raised bog, and species-rich wildflower grasslands. There is no excuse for their loss. All wildlife sites should be protected, whether designated locally (Local Wildlife Sites) or nationally (such as Sites of Special Scientific Interest) and other areas of high biodiversity value. Protection should extend not just to the site itself but to neighbouring land too, as this acts as a buffer and potential wildlife corridor ,giving wildlife somewhere to go in the event of natural disasters, including wildfires.
The Local Plan should be driven by the good work already done in the Local Nature Recovery Strategy. If it isn't, there is a real risk that the biodiversity crisis will worsen, with wildlife simply not having enough space to sustain itself in East Cheshire. This would lead to local extinctions and exacerbate national declines. I don't want East Cheshire to end up as a scattered collection of isolated important sites with no wildlife corridors connecting them , a risk that the 121-mile Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline corridor would make worse, and yet another reason why it should not go ahead.
Natural spaces on the edge of urban areas are valuable for biodiversity, but they are also essential for the recreation and mental wellbeing of residents. They need to be preserved from development.
Carbon Stores and Peatland
Farmland, soils, and habitats act as natural carbon stores, and development should aim to reduce the release of additional CO2 rather than add to it. This didn't happen at Weaver Green, where the resulting emissions have helped fuel climate change. In addition, the disturbance caused by trenching to lay the CO2 pipeline will itself release stored carbon into the atmosphere , an impact that cannot be ignored. Peatland is especially precious, and the pipeline route crosses moorland and other peatland; no development of any kind should be considered on peatland.
Flooding
With the ongoing impact of climate change, avoiding flood risk should be an important factor in site location.
Food Security and Agriculture
Green Belt and prime agricultural land should never be sacrificed for housing, CO2 pipelines, solar panels, or anything else. Food security matters to all of us, and this summer has shown that climate change could threaten food supply sooner than anticipated. Food security is of prime importance, and farms should be given high priority, protected, and certainly not built on.
Heritage and Rural Character
Cheshire's heritage and rural way of life including the contribution its beautiful green character makes to tourism, and the many jobs that support the local economy through dairy farming and agriculture more broadly, as well as the many associated business supporting these sectors, must be respected and protected above all else. This heritage is also directly at risk from the Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, which threatens to cut through the working farmland and countryside that this way of life depends on . This is yet another reason why this pipeline should not go ahead. Food security, local jobs, and our heritage are the character, heart, and soul of where we live; We are its custodians, and that responsibility must be honoured. Food scarcity, biodiversity loss, and climate change are all reasons to protect our green spaces. Housing should be built on brownfield sites first, in appropriate numbers and of an appropriate type, certainly not at the scale currently proposed. I am deeply concerned that farming does not appear to be valued by Cheshire East, and this must not be reflected in the Local Plan.

Please accept this response to the Local Plan Scoping Consultation. I am writing as a concerned resident, having lived in Cheshire for most of my life — well over 50 years. I am also deeply concerned about the proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, which is set to cross much of this borough, and the issues raised in this consultation give yet another reason why it should not go ahead.
Timing of the Consultation
It is very disappointing that the Council has decided to run this consultation to coincide with the school summer holidays. Almost all parish and town councils do not meet for six weeks over this period, and many local community organisations will also have had key members away on holiday at this time. This is suboptimal, to say the least.
The Cheshire East Local Plan is vital to all of us, and this consultation should be planned and run in a way that gets the best information from all residents, to ensure the resulting plan is fit for purpose and looks after our beautiful county for the benefit of its residents, biodiversity, wildlife, character, businesses, food production, and everything else that matters. It should not be done quietly, in a way that simply pushes forward government agendas that are not appropriate for where we live and will cause far more damage than any benefit they bring. The benefits, as I see them, amount to little more than profit for developers .I very much doubt the housing provided will be housing that is genuinely needed in the area, and I see this destroying greenfield land and environments that are totally irreplaceable. Frankly, any government or any council pushing through their own political agendas and sacrificing these areas is being deeply irresponsible, and is failing in its duty to the people, wildlife, and environment it is meant to serve.
Housing Targets
I am very concerned by the proposed 156% increase in housing targets for Cheshire East, particularly bearing in mind the borough's population. I despair at this target. The number of houses built in the borough between 2009 and now has considerably exceeded the housing targets set for that period, and this has not been taken into account in the current housing supply or housing target figures.
Housing for an Ageing Population
The Local Plan also needs to ensure it delivers the right kind of housing, not just qnuantity. Cheshire's population aged 55 and over is increasing, yet many in this demographic are unable to downsize due to a lack of appropriate housing suited to their needs. Nationally, more than 4 million people aged 55 and over are actively seeking to move home but are unable to find a suitable, appropriate alternative (Centre for Ageing Better, "Locked Out: A New Perspective on Older People's Housing Choices," 2023). The Local Plan should include more housing designed for older residents, including residential and nursing homes, rather than focusing solely on general housing numbers that do not reflect what the borough actually needs. I would also ask that the Council produce Supplementary Planning Guidance specifically addressing older people's housing, including residential and nursing homes, to ensure this need is properly planned for rather than left to general housing policy alone.
The Peak Cluster CO2 Pipeline and Housing Deliverability
I am especially concerned that the proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, running for around 121 miles and crossing much of this borough, has direct implications for the deliverability of the Local Plan itself. The Council's own officers' report to the Corporate Policy Committee (30 April 2026) flagged that the pipeline threatens the deliverability of strategic housing allocations that the current and emerging Local Plan rely on, including around 760 homes at Middlewich (Warmingham Lane phase 2 and Glebe Farm) and Macclesfield sites, including 300 homes at Congleton Road and approximately 95 hectares of safeguarded land in south-west Macclesfield , this at a time when Cheshire East already lacks a five-year housing land supply. This is yet another reason why the Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline should not go ahead.
Delay in Starting the New Local Plan
The Council should have started developing the new Local Plan in December 2024. This delay means there will be an additional eighteen months of speculative housing development, destruction of Green Belt and agricultural land, and further urban sprawl in the borough.
Brownfield Land First
Brownfield land should be used first. Once farmland and habitats are gone, they're gone — they cannot simply be replaced. They are home to precious, often endangered wildlife, and are places it needs to survive.
The new Local Plan needs to be more proactive and ensure that the Council uses all of its available powers to incentivise brownfield development. The Labour government's changes to the planning system have instead incentivised development on open farmland and in the countryside. There are a large number of brownfield sites around Macclesfield that should be prioritised for redevelopment, including through changes to the tax treatment of such development, as well as the use of Cheshire East Council's wider powers. The failure of vision and proactive action regarding the land around the old telephone exchange on Hibel Road in Macclesfield is one example of this. The Council is also a landowner for some of these sites, including the old depot on Hurdsfield Road in Macclesfield, and should and could have been more proactive in developing or facilitating the development of these sites.
Repurposing Town Centre Buildings
The repurposing of buildings in our declining town centres should also be given serious consideration. Reimagining empty and underused buildings for residential use, alongside appropriate amenities, would bring much-needed life and vitality back to these centres. This approach would also benefit CO2 emissions, since repurposing existing buildings uses far less concrete than new-build construction. This is something the Council should very much consider as part of its plan, providing incentives and a clear vision for how it could be achieved. This gesture could become a shining light, leading the way for other councils to follow, for the benefit of all.
Green Belt and "Grey Belt"
Safeguarding countryside from encroachment is one of the key purposes of the Green Belt, and countryside is essential for maintaining connectivity between ecologically valuable areas. Where land clearly performs this connective function, it should not be classified as "grey belt" , it should retain full Green Belt protection. The proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline itself is set to cross significant areas of countryside and Green Belt performing exactly this connective function ,yet another reason why this pipeline should not go ahead.
Urban Sprawl
Urban sprawl should be prevented at all costs, and the Local Plan should include and make clear the substantial evidence base on the negative consequences of urban sprawl, to ensure appropriate protections are maintained and prevent Cheshire East from becoming a suburb of Greater Manchester. This matters not only for the wildlife corridors mentioned above, but also for public health and economic growth.
Environmental Protection and Reversing Biodiversity Loss
Environmental protection and reversing biodiversity loss should be key considerations in decision-making. Irreplaceable habitats should not be destroyed , the term "irreplaceable habitat" is significant because it is used in planning policy to define habitats that cannot be easily recreated, meaning that once destroyed, they are lost for good. These include ancient woodlands, lowland raised bog, and species-rich wildflower grasslands. There is no excuse for their loss. All wildlife sites should be protected, whether designated locally (Local Wildlife Sites) or nationally (such as Sites of Special Scientific Interest) and other areas of high biodiversity value. Protection should extend not just to the site itself but to neighbouring land too, as this acts as a buffer and potential wildlife corridor ,giving wildlife somewhere to go in the event of natural disasters, including wildfires.
The Local Plan should be driven by the good work already done in the Local Nature Recovery Strategy. If it isn't, there is a real risk that the biodiversity crisis will worsen, with wildlife simply not having enough space to sustain itself in East Cheshire. This would lead to local extinctions and exacerbate national declines. I don't want East Cheshire to end up as a scattered collection of isolated important sites with no wildlife corridors connecting them , a risk that the 121-mile Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline corridor would make worse, and yet another reason why it should not go ahead.
Natural spaces on the edge of urban areas are valuable for biodiversity, but they are also essential for the recreation and mental wellbeing of residents. They need to be preserved from development.
Carbon Stores and Peatland
Farmland, soils, and habitats act as natural carbon stores, and development should aim to reduce the release of additional CO2 rather than add to it. This didn't happen at Weaver Green, where the resulting emissions have helped fuel climate change. In addition, the disturbance caused by trenching to lay the CO2 pipeline will itself release stored carbon into the atmosphere , an impact that cannot be ignored. Peatland is especially precious, and the pipeline route crosses moorland and other peatland; no development of any kind should be considered on peatland.
Flooding
With the ongoing impact of climate change, avoiding flood risk should be an important factor in site location.
Food Security and Agriculture
Green Belt and prime agricultural land should never be sacrificed for housing, CO2 pipelines, solar panels, or anything else. Food security matters to all of us, and this summer has shown that climate change could threaten food supply sooner than anticipated. Food security is of prime importance, and farms should be given high priority, protected, and certainly not built on.
Heritage and Rural Character
Cheshire's heritage and rural way of life including the contribution its beautiful green character makes to tourism, and the many jobs that support the local economy through dairy farming and agriculture more broadly, as well as the many associated business supporting these sectors, must be respected and protected above all else. This heritage is also directly at risk from the Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, which threatens to cut through the working farmland and countryside that this way of life depends on . This is yet another reason why this pipeline should not go ahead. Food security, local jobs, and our heritage are the character, heart, and soul of where we live; We are its custodians, and that responsibility must be honoured. Food scarcity, biodiversity loss, and climate change are all reasons to protect our green spaces. Housing should be built on brownfield sites first, in appropriate numbers and of an appropriate type, certainly not at the scale currently proposed. I am deeply concerned that farming does not appear to be valued by Cheshire East, and this must not be reflected in the Local Plan.

Please accept this response to the Local Plan Scoping Consultation. I am writing as a concerned resident, having lived in Cheshire for most of my life — well over 50 years. I am also deeply concerned about the proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, which is set to cross much of this borough, and the issues raised in this consultation give yet another reason why it should not go ahead.
Timing of the Consultation
It is very disappointing that the Council has decided to run this consultation to coincide with the school summer holidays. Almost all parish and town councils do not meet for six weeks over this period, and many local community organisations will also have had key members away on holiday at this time. This is suboptimal, to say the least.
The Cheshire East Local Plan is vital to all of us, and this consultation should be planned and run in a way that gets the best information from all residents, to ensure the resulting plan is fit for purpose and looks after our beautiful county for the benefit of its residents, biodiversity, wildlife, character, businesses, food production, and everything else that matters. It should not be done quietly, in a way that simply pushes forward government agendas that are not appropriate for where we live and will cause far more damage than any benefit they bring. The benefits, as I see them, amount to little more than profit for developers .I very much doubt the housing provided will be housing that is genuinely needed in the area, and I see this destroying greenfield land and environments that are totally irreplaceable. Frankly, any government or any council pushing through their own political agendas and sacrificing these areas is being deeply irresponsible, and is failing in its duty to the people, wildlife, and environment it is meant to serve.
Housing Targets
I am very concerned by the proposed 156% increase in housing targets for Cheshire East, particularly bearing in mind the borough's population. I despair at this target. The number of houses built in the borough between 2009 and now has considerably exceeded the housing targets set for that period, and this has not been taken into account in the current housing supply or housing target figures.
Housing for an Ageing Population
The Local Plan also needs to ensure it delivers the right kind of housing, not just qnuantity. Cheshire's population aged 55 and over is increasing, yet many in this demographic are unable to downsize due to a lack of appropriate housing suited to their needs. Nationally, more than 4 million people aged 55 and over are actively seeking to move home but are unable to find a suitable, appropriate alternative (Centre for Ageing Better, "Locked Out: A New Perspective on Older People's Housing Choices," 2023). The Local Plan should include more housing designed for older residents, including residential and nursing homes, rather than focusing solely on general housing numbers that do not reflect what the borough actually needs. I would also ask that the Council produce Supplementary Planning Guidance specifically addressing older people's housing, including residential and nursing homes, to ensure this need is properly planned for rather than left to general housing policy alone.
The Peak Cluster CO2 Pipeline and Housing Deliverability
I am especially concerned that the proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, running for around 121 miles and crossing much of this borough, has direct implications for the deliverability of the Local Plan itself. The Council's own officers' report to the Corporate Policy Committee (30 April 2026) flagged that the pipeline threatens the deliverability of strategic housing allocations that the current and emerging Local Plan rely on, including around 760 homes at Middlewich (Warmingham Lane phase 2 and Glebe Farm) and Macclesfield sites, including 300 homes at Congleton Road and approximately 95 hectares of safeguarded land in south-west Macclesfield , this at a time when Cheshire East already lacks a five-year housing land supply. This is yet another reason why the Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline should not go ahead.
Delay in Starting the New Local Plan
The Council should have started developing the new Local Plan in December 2024. This delay means there will be an additional eighteen months of speculative housing development, destruction of Green Belt and agricultural land, and further urban sprawl in the borough.
Brownfield Land First
Brownfield land should be used first. Once farmland and habitats are gone, they're gone — they cannot simply be replaced. They are home to precious, often endangered wildlife, and are places it needs to survive.
The new Local Plan needs to be more proactive and ensure that the Council uses all of its available powers to incentivise brownfield development. The Labour government's changes to the planning system have instead incentivised development on open farmland and in the countryside. There are a large number of brownfield sites around Macclesfield that should be prioritised for redevelopment, including through changes to the tax treatment of such development, as well as the use of Cheshire East Council's wider powers. The failure of vision and proactive action regarding the land around the old telephone exchange on Hibel Road in Macclesfield is one example of this. The Council is also a landowner for some of these sites, including the old depot on Hurdsfield Road in Macclesfield, and should and could have been more proactive in developing or facilitating the development of these sites.
Repurposing Town Centre Buildings
The repurposing of buildings in our declining town centres should also be given serious consideration. Reimagining empty and underused buildings for residential use, alongside appropriate amenities, would bring much-needed life and vitality back to these centres. This approach would also benefit CO2 emissions, since repurposing existing buildings uses far less concrete than new-build construction. This is something the Council should very much consider as part of its plan, providing incentives and a clear vision for how it could be achieved. This gesture could become a shining light, leading the way for other councils to follow, for the benefit of all.
Green Belt and "Grey Belt"
Safeguarding countryside from encroachment is one of the key purposes of the Green Belt, and countryside is essential for maintaining connectivity between ecologically valuable areas. Where land clearly performs this connective function, it should not be classified as "grey belt" , it should retain full Green Belt protection. The proposed Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline itself is set to cross significant areas of countryside and Green Belt performing exactly this connective function ,yet another reason why this pipeline should not go ahead.
Urban Sprawl
Urban sprawl should be prevented at all costs, and the Local Plan should include and make clear the substantial evidence base on the negative consequences of urban sprawl, to ensure appropriate protections are maintained and prevent Cheshire East from becoming a suburb of Greater Manchester. This matters not only for the wildlife corridors mentioned above, but also for public health and economic growth.
Environmental Protection and Reversing Biodiversity Loss
Environmental protection and reversing biodiversity loss should be key considerations in decision-making. Irreplaceable habitats should not be destroyed , the term "irreplaceable habitat" is significant because it is used in planning policy to define habitats that cannot be easily recreated, meaning that once destroyed, they are lost for good. These include ancient woodlands, lowland raised bog, and species-rich wildflower grasslands. There is no excuse for their loss. All wildlife sites should be protected, whether designated locally (Local Wildlife Sites) or nationally (such as Sites of Special Scientific Interest) and other areas of high biodiversity value. Protection should extend not just to the site itself but to neighbouring land too, as this acts as a buffer and potential wildlife corridor ,giving wildlife somewhere to go in the event of natural disasters, including wildfires.
The Local Plan should be driven by the good work already done in the Local Nature Recovery Strategy. If it isn't, there is a real risk that the biodiversity crisis will worsen, with wildlife simply not having enough space to sustain itself in East Cheshire. This would lead to local extinctions and exacerbate national declines. I don't want East Cheshire to end up as a scattered collection of isolated important sites with no wildlife corridors connecting them , a risk that the 121-mile Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline corridor would make worse, and yet another reason why it should not go ahead.
Natural spaces on the edge of urban areas are valuable for biodiversity, but they are also essential for the recreation and mental wellbeing of residents. They need to be preserved from development.
Carbon Stores and Peatland
Farmland, soils, and habitats act as natural carbon stores, and development should aim to reduce the release of additional CO2 rather than add to it. This didn't happen at Weaver Green, where the resulting emissions have helped fuel climate change. In addition, the disturbance caused by trenching to lay the CO2 pipeline will itself release stored carbon into the atmosphere , an impact that cannot be ignored. Peatland is especially precious, and the pipeline route crosses moorland and other peatland; no development of any kind should be considered on peatland.
Flooding
With the ongoing impact of climate change, avoiding flood risk should be an important factor in site location.
Food Security and Agriculture
Green Belt and prime agricultural land should never be sacrificed for housing, CO2 pipelines, solar panels, or anything else. Food security matters to all of us, and this summer has shown that climate change could threaten food supply sooner than anticipated. Food security is of prime importance, and farms should be given high priority, protected, and certainly not built on.
Heritage and Rural Character
Cheshire's heritage and rural way of life including the contribution its beautiful green character makes to tourism, and the many jobs that support the local economy through dairy farming and agriculture more broadly, as well as the many associated business supporting these sectors, must be respected and protected above all else. This heritage is also directly at risk from the Peak Cluster CO2 pipeline, which threatens to cut through the working farmland and countryside that this way of life depends on . This is yet another reason why this pipeline should not go ahead. Food security, local jobs, and our heritage are the character, heart, and soul of where we live; We are its custodians, and that responsibility must be honoured. Food scarcity, biodiversity loss, and climate change are all reasons to protect our green spaces. Housing should be built on brownfield sites first, in appropriate numbers and of an appropriate type, certainly not at the scale currently proposed. I am deeply concerned that farming does not appear to be valued by Cheshire East, and this must not be reflected in the Local Plan.