Local plan scoping consultation

Comment

Representation ID: 6773

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Environment Agency

In line with the Environment Agency EA20301 strategy and the Strategic Policy Statement for the Environment Agency, we welcome and support local plans that focus on achieving "sustainable growth" by balancing economic development with environmental protection and climate resilience.

Our initial reaction would be the scoping consultation is brief and lacks sufficient information and detail to inform the proposed strategic thinking the Council is at this stage considering. However, we do recognise this is an early public consultation and the plan making process will foster proactive participation, which we welcome.

Comment

Representation ID: 6774

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Environment Agency

For the avoidance of doubt, local plans can (and should) contribute to the protection and enhancement of our natural environment, promote and ensure the sustainable use of our natural resources and promote a truly integrated approach to sustainable water management (collaborated approach to managing the water cycle rather than considering them as individual problems).

Comment

Representation ID: 6775

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Environment Agency

We are aware of the introduction of a standardised way of calculating local housing need. In the case of Cheshire East, this will create overall higher building volumes which if planned inappropriately can lead to increased pressure on our natural environment. However, if planned appropriately can provide opportunities for strategic environmental protection, enhancement and/or mitigation.

Comment

Representation ID: 6776

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Environment Agency

To clarify there are a number of important watercourses throughout the borough which provide a multitude of uses, including those relating to the Dane, Bollin and Weaver catchments. There are also a number of meres, lakes and reservoirs. These all contribute to the overall environmental value and importance of the borough.

Comment

Representation ID: 6777

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Environment Agency

In terms of priority matters for inclusion within the plan, we advocate the plan is strongly aligned with our own long-term strategic goals:
1. Healthier air, land and water supporting nature’s recovery. Reversing nature’s decline and supporting recovery.
2. Sustainable growth. Balancing development needs, such as housing and infrastructure, within environmental limits.
3. A nation (or borough) resilient to climate change. Preparing the nation (or borough) for extreme weather, flooding, and droughts while moving toward net-zero targets

Comment

Representation ID: 6778

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Environment Agency

The respondent supports considering infrastructure capacity and environmental constraints when planning growth but argues the natural environment should also be viewed as an opportunity for enhancement. Development could deliver habitat improvements and ecosystem services, including improved water management, while supporting landscape-scale Biodiversity Net Gain and Local Nature Recovery Strategy objectives. They suggest habitat creation could facilitate appropriate development on adjoining land of lower ecological value. The respondent also questions how future housing need will be determined, noting a potential inconsistency between the statement that overall development will be informed by evidence and earlier references to the standard method as the principal basis for establishing housing need.

Comment

Representation ID: 6779

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Environment Agency

Minerals - The respondent recommends publishing initial site assessments and potential allocation options early enough to allow proper consideration of hydrological and geohydrological constraints. They seek greater clarity on the criteria, thresholds and weighting used to determine whether sites are unsuitable. They recognise that mineral extraction and restoration can provide opportunities for landscape-scale habitat creation and environmental enhancement, including beyond quarry boundaries. However, they emphasise that mineral allocations and restoration proposals should fully assess wider geohydrological effects, including impacts on groundwater and surface-water levels and the rights of abstraction licence holders, to ensure development remains within environmental limits.

Comment

Representation ID: 6780

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Environment Agency

Waste - The respondent considers waste planning evidence and potential allocations should be addressed earlier in the Local Plan process to allow sufficient assessment of waste needs, site availability, deliverability and environmental constraints. They highlight the importance of considering compatibility between waste facilities and surrounding land uses. New or extended waste facilities near built-up areas could create amenity impacts and nuisance complaints, while new residential or other sensitive development near established waste facilities could require substantial mitigation. The respondent considers these relationships should be assessed carefully during site selection, avoiding situations where established waste operators are subsequently expected to significantly modify their activities.

Comment

Representation ID: 6781

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Environment Agency

The respondent highlights wider environmental benefits associated with undeveloped Green Belt land beyond its primary planning purposes. These include protecting drinking water catchments, limiting runoff and pressure on wastewater infrastructure, supporting natural flood management, carbon sequestration, temperature regulation and maintaining interconnected habitats and ecological corridors. The respondent considers these functions can contribute to biodiversity and wider nature recovery objectives. When considering Green Belt release, they recommend assessing the broader sustainability and environmental functions of the land. Potential adverse effects should be identified early, with appropriate measures established to avoid impacts where possible and otherwise provide effective mitigation or compensation before development proceeds.

Comment

Representation ID: 6782

Received: 01/09/2026

Respondent: Environment Agency

Under Landscape Character we assume ‘blue infrastructure’ is included under the consideration of ‘Green Infrastructure’.
We appreciate and acknowledge the council must consider a wider range of options in terms of the distribution of development. New settlements and large-scale urban
extensions can place significant pressure on the natural environment. The council should be mindful of environmental concerns when developing options to take forward in this regard. For example, some geographical areas should be avoided so not to exacerbate the risk of flooding now and in the future, safeguard finite natural resource sources (including water) and safeguard other sensitive natural environments and biodiversity.