Local plan scoping consultation
Search representations
Results for Marton Parish Council search
New search
New search
Local plan scoping consultation
Creating a vision and objectives
Respondent: Marton Parish Council
Representation Summary:
Marton Parish Council welcomes the opportunity to help shape the new Cheshire East Local Plan and emphasises stronger protection for the rural countryside, wildlife, heritage settings and village character. It calls for clear and transparent Green Belt policies, extensive consultation with parish councils, and greater weight to neighbourhood plans when assessing development sites. The Council argues that housing growth should reflect local needs rather than national targets alone and that previous appeal decisions should inform site selection. It seeks stronger countryside and biodiversity protections, better assessment of traffic impacts on rural roads, protection of Jodrell Bank’s surroundings, and preservation of the distinct rural-urban balance across Cheshire East.
Full text:
Under the existing Local Plan, recent developments have caused dramatic changes to the rural landscape
here in East Cheshire significantly impacting the environment and wildlife diversity. Marton Parish Council
joins other Parish Councils in welcoming the opportunity to respond to the Cheshire East Local Plan 2030
– 2045 Scoping Consultation. We welcome, in particular, the opportunity to engage in the process of
developing the new plan and represent the voice of the rural community which has been reduced to under
20% of the population.
This document present the response of Marton Parish Council and its paragraph numbering mirrors that
of the Consultation document.
Whilst the process has not allowed Marton Parish Council to formally consult its residents, it is confident
that this response reflects the wishes of residents which underpinned our Neighbourhood Plan, taking
subsequent changes into account. Accordingly, reference to “we” may reasonable be taken to reflect the
views of both Marton Parish Council and, more widely our residents.
Creating a vision and objectives 5.2 – 5.4
It is stated that the new plan should reflect the Cheshire East plan. This is largely silent about the need to
protect the rural countryside both for the sake of future generations and the general wellbeing of existing
urban communities.
In defining what is “distinctive”, we request that maximum weight be given to the following:
• the size shape and character of each Village community
• the protection of environmental and wildlife habitats and walking routes
• the peace and quiet of the elderly and other groups who are unable to move in response to
changes
• that the ability of small Villages to adapt to changes and new social norms which the changes will
usher in
• the wellbeing of urban communities in East Cheshire and the protection of their surrounding
green and pleasant land and distinctive local villages which defines both rural areas and
associated urban communities
• whilst under planning regulations heritage sites of significance have some protection, the nonexpert
community have a requirement to see the setting heritage sites protected from creeping
change which needs to be factored in to the Local Plan. See also para 5.125 – 5.127
Planning for Growth paras 5.5 – 5.7
New planning regulations have changed the whole approach to green belts, the countryside and green
areas. The new Local Plan represents an opportunity to define an imaginative vision for the rural urban
balance in Cheshire East. In the process we urge the following:
• that the vision is practical and not just aspirational
• that the reasoning behind green belt decisions, in particular, regarding boundary definition is fully
publicised
• that the trend towards defining green areas around urban communities is extended
Identifying and assessing sites
When identifying and assessing sites for development, we urge maximum consultation with aXected
Parish Councils and that relevant Neighbourhood Plans are accorded the maximum possible weightin
addition to the factors referred to relating to paras 2 – 4.
Green Belt and Strategic green gap paras 5.15 – 5.19
We note the following:
• we strongly agree with the need to prevent urban sprawl but encourage clear definition of what
the prevention of urban sprawl means in practice. In Marton, the need to protect the area around
Congleton from urban sprawl is a priority but so too is the need to protect the area between
Manchester and Stoke and this needs to be clearly articulated in the Local Plan.
• We strongly urge Cheshire East to communicate with and consult the Parish Councils of aXected
areas.
Spatial distribution para 5.24 – 5.26 and Housing para 5.30 – 5.32
We note the following:
• A key failure of recent Cheshire East Local Plans has been the lack of information about definition
of the source of Cheshire East’s housing needs. We encourage the principle that developments
should answer local need and not simply national targets. Where planning regulations require
that homes for needs emanating from outside the local area, outside funding should be provided.
An analysis of the need should/must shape the identification of sites. This will both reduce the
establishment of new disconnected communities within communities and allow for democratic
acceptance of the changes which accompany new developments
• When assessing suitable sites we strongly urge that the results of relevant appeals be given
maximum priority. This is both to save costs of potential future appeals but recognises that
communities which have previously successfully fought against developments in the past should
not be put through the angst of a fresh confrontation.
Development in the countryside para 29
We encourage the development of local polices that protect the environment and wild life diversity at the
parish level, particularly regarding the protection of wildlife routes. We strongly urge that the views of the
relevant Parish Council be sought .
Housing standards para 5.50 – 5.59
The imposition of standards should take into account local style and ensure that materials are
appropriate for the local area.
Transport and infrastructure 5.91– 5.95
In the past, the impact of developments on quiet roads has not been properly assessed. We recommend
that greater focus to this be adopted in the new Local Plan.
The protection of quiet roads is to be encouraged to promote cycling and walking. See also para 5.112.
When protecting Heritage sites, the importance of the whole of the relevant village or community to the
public’s recognition of the site should be fully considered and discussed with the local Parish Council.
Jodrell Bank World heritage Site para 5,129 – 5.130
We strongly recommend that the protection of the area around Jodrell Bank is not weakened in the new
Local Plan to allow for a possible resurgence of the Jodrell Bank facility.
Local plan scoping consultation
Respondent: Marton Parish Council
Representation Summary:
Marton Parish Council welcomes the opportunity to help shape the new Cheshire East Local Plan and emphasises stronger protection for the rural countryside, wildlife, heritage settings and village character. It calls for clear and transparent Green Belt policies, extensive consultation with parish councils, and greater weight to neighbourhood plans when assessing development sites. The Council argues that housing growth should reflect local needs rather than national targets alone and that previous appeal decisions should inform site selection. It seeks stronger countryside and biodiversity protections, better assessment of traffic impacts on rural roads, protection of Jodrell Bank’s surroundings, and preservation of the distinct rural-urban balance across Cheshire East.
Full text:
Under the existing Local Plan, recent developments have caused dramatic changes to the rural landscape
here in East Cheshire significantly impacting the environment and wildlife diversity. Marton Parish Council
joins other Parish Councils in welcoming the opportunity to respond to the Cheshire East Local Plan 2030
– 2045 Scoping Consultation. We welcome, in particular, the opportunity to engage in the process of
developing the new plan and represent the voice of the rural community which has been reduced to under
20% of the population.
This document present the response of Marton Parish Council and its paragraph numbering mirrors that
of the Consultation document.
Whilst the process has not allowed Marton Parish Council to formally consult its residents, it is confident
that this response reflects the wishes of residents which underpinned our Neighbourhood Plan, taking
subsequent changes into account. Accordingly, reference to “we” may reasonable be taken to reflect the
views of both Marton Parish Council and, more widely our residents.
Creating a vision and objectives 5.2 – 5.4
It is stated that the new plan should reflect the Cheshire East plan. This is largely silent about the need to
protect the rural countryside both for the sake of future generations and the general wellbeing of existing
urban communities.
In defining what is “distinctive”, we request that maximum weight be given to the following:
• the size shape and character of each Village community
• the protection of environmental and wildlife habitats and walking routes
• the peace and quiet of the elderly and other groups who are unable to move in response to
changes
• that the ability of small Villages to adapt to changes and new social norms which the changes will
usher in
• the wellbeing of urban communities in East Cheshire and the protection of their surrounding
green and pleasant land and distinctive local villages which defines both rural areas and
associated urban communities
• whilst under planning regulations heritage sites of significance have some protection, the nonexpert
community have a requirement to see the setting heritage sites protected from creeping
change which needs to be factored in to the Local Plan. See also para 5.125 – 5.127
Planning for Growth paras 5.5 – 5.7
New planning regulations have changed the whole approach to green belts, the countryside and green
areas. The new Local Plan represents an opportunity to define an imaginative vision for the rural urban
balance in Cheshire East. In the process we urge the following:
• that the vision is practical and not just aspirational
• that the reasoning behind green belt decisions, in particular, regarding boundary definition is fully
publicised
• that the trend towards defining green areas around urban communities is extended
Identifying and assessing sites
When identifying and assessing sites for development, we urge maximum consultation with aXected
Parish Councils and that relevant Neighbourhood Plans are accorded the maximum possible weightin
addition to the factors referred to relating to paras 2 – 4.
Green Belt and Strategic green gap paras 5.15 – 5.19
We note the following:
• we strongly agree with the need to prevent urban sprawl but encourage clear definition of what
the prevention of urban sprawl means in practice. In Marton, the need to protect the area around
Congleton from urban sprawl is a priority but so too is the need to protect the area between
Manchester and Stoke and this needs to be clearly articulated in the Local Plan.
• We strongly urge Cheshire East to communicate with and consult the Parish Councils of aXected
areas.
Spatial distribution para 5.24 – 5.26 and Housing para 5.30 – 5.32
We note the following:
• A key failure of recent Cheshire East Local Plans has been the lack of information about definition
of the source of Cheshire East’s housing needs. We encourage the principle that developments
should answer local need and not simply national targets. Where planning regulations require
that homes for needs emanating from outside the local area, outside funding should be provided.
An analysis of the need should/must shape the identification of sites. This will both reduce the
establishment of new disconnected communities within communities and allow for democratic
acceptance of the changes which accompany new developments
• When assessing suitable sites we strongly urge that the results of relevant appeals be given
maximum priority. This is both to save costs of potential future appeals but recognises that
communities which have previously successfully fought against developments in the past should
not be put through the angst of a fresh confrontation.
Development in the countryside para 29
We encourage the development of local polices that protect the environment and wild life diversity at the
parish level, particularly regarding the protection of wildlife routes. We strongly urge that the views of the
relevant Parish Council be sought .
Housing standards para 5.50 – 5.59
The imposition of standards should take into account local style and ensure that materials are
appropriate for the local area.
Transport and infrastructure 5.91– 5.95
In the past, the impact of developments on quiet roads has not been properly assessed. We recommend
that greater focus to this be adopted in the new Local Plan.
The protection of quiet roads is to be encouraged to promote cycling and walking. See also para 5.112.
When protecting Heritage sites, the importance of the whole of the relevant village or community to the
public’s recognition of the site should be fully considered and discussed with the local Parish Council.
Jodrell Bank World heritage Site para 5,129 – 5.130
We strongly recommend that the protection of the area around Jodrell Bank is not weakened in the new
Local Plan to allow for a possible resurgence of the Jodrell Bank facility.
Local plan scoping consultation
Respondent: Marton Parish Council
Representation Summary:
Marton Parish Council welcomes the opportunity to help shape the new Cheshire East Local Plan and emphasises stronger protection for the rural countryside, wildlife, heritage settings and village character. It calls for clear and transparent Green Belt policies, extensive consultation with parish councils, and greater weight to neighbourhood plans when assessing development sites. The Council argues that housing growth should reflect local needs rather than national targets alone and that previous appeal decisions should inform site selection. It seeks stronger countryside and biodiversity protections, better assessment of traffic impacts on rural roads, protection of Jodrell Bank’s surroundings, and preservation of the distinct rural-urban balance across Cheshire East.
Full text:
Under the existing Local Plan, recent developments have caused dramatic changes to the rural landscape
here in East Cheshire significantly impacting the environment and wildlife diversity. Marton Parish Council
joins other Parish Councils in welcoming the opportunity to respond to the Cheshire East Local Plan 2030
– 2045 Scoping Consultation. We welcome, in particular, the opportunity to engage in the process of
developing the new plan and represent the voice of the rural community which has been reduced to under
20% of the population.
This document present the response of Marton Parish Council and its paragraph numbering mirrors that
of the Consultation document.
Whilst the process has not allowed Marton Parish Council to formally consult its residents, it is confident
that this response reflects the wishes of residents which underpinned our Neighbourhood Plan, taking
subsequent changes into account. Accordingly, reference to “we” may reasonable be taken to reflect the
views of both Marton Parish Council and, more widely our residents.
Creating a vision and objectives 5.2 – 5.4
It is stated that the new plan should reflect the Cheshire East plan. This is largely silent about the need to
protect the rural countryside both for the sake of future generations and the general wellbeing of existing
urban communities.
In defining what is “distinctive”, we request that maximum weight be given to the following:
• the size shape and character of each Village community
• the protection of environmental and wildlife habitats and walking routes
• the peace and quiet of the elderly and other groups who are unable to move in response to
changes
• that the ability of small Villages to adapt to changes and new social norms which the changes will
usher in
• the wellbeing of urban communities in East Cheshire and the protection of their surrounding
green and pleasant land and distinctive local villages which defines both rural areas and
associated urban communities
• whilst under planning regulations heritage sites of significance have some protection, the nonexpert
community have a requirement to see the setting heritage sites protected from creeping
change which needs to be factored in to the Local Plan. See also para 5.125 – 5.127
Planning for Growth paras 5.5 – 5.7
New planning regulations have changed the whole approach to green belts, the countryside and green
areas. The new Local Plan represents an opportunity to define an imaginative vision for the rural urban
balance in Cheshire East. In the process we urge the following:
• that the vision is practical and not just aspirational
• that the reasoning behind green belt decisions, in particular, regarding boundary definition is fully
publicised
• that the trend towards defining green areas around urban communities is extended
Identifying and assessing sites
When identifying and assessing sites for development, we urge maximum consultation with aXected
Parish Councils and that relevant Neighbourhood Plans are accorded the maximum possible weightin
addition to the factors referred to relating to paras 2 – 4.
Green Belt and Strategic green gap paras 5.15 – 5.19
We note the following:
• we strongly agree with the need to prevent urban sprawl but encourage clear definition of what
the prevention of urban sprawl means in practice. In Marton, the need to protect the area around
Congleton from urban sprawl is a priority but so too is the need to protect the area between
Manchester and Stoke and this needs to be clearly articulated in the Local Plan.
• We strongly urge Cheshire East to communicate with and consult the Parish Councils of aXected
areas.
Spatial distribution para 5.24 – 5.26 and Housing para 5.30 – 5.32
We note the following:
• A key failure of recent Cheshire East Local Plans has been the lack of information about definition
of the source of Cheshire East’s housing needs. We encourage the principle that developments
should answer local need and not simply national targets. Where planning regulations require
that homes for needs emanating from outside the local area, outside funding should be provided.
An analysis of the need should/must shape the identification of sites. This will both reduce the
establishment of new disconnected communities within communities and allow for democratic
acceptance of the changes which accompany new developments
• When assessing suitable sites we strongly urge that the results of relevant appeals be given
maximum priority. This is both to save costs of potential future appeals but recognises that
communities which have previously successfully fought against developments in the past should
not be put through the angst of a fresh confrontation.
Development in the countryside para 29
We encourage the development of local polices that protect the environment and wild life diversity at the
parish level, particularly regarding the protection of wildlife routes. We strongly urge that the views of the
relevant Parish Council be sought .
Housing standards para 5.50 – 5.59
The imposition of standards should take into account local style and ensure that materials are
appropriate for the local area.
Transport and infrastructure 5.91– 5.95
In the past, the impact of developments on quiet roads has not been properly assessed. We recommend
that greater focus to this be adopted in the new Local Plan.
The protection of quiet roads is to be encouraged to promote cycling and walking. See also para 5.112.
When protecting Heritage sites, the importance of the whole of the relevant village or community to the
public’s recognition of the site should be fully considered and discussed with the local Parish Council.
Jodrell Bank World heritage Site para 5,129 – 5.130
We strongly recommend that the protection of the area around Jodrell Bank is not weakened in the new
Local Plan to allow for a possible resurgence of the Jodrell Bank facility.
Local plan scoping consultation
Respondent: Marton Parish Council
Representation Summary:
Marton Parish Council welcomes the opportunity to help shape the new Cheshire East Local Plan and emphasises stronger protection for the rural countryside, wildlife, heritage settings and village character. It calls for clear and transparent Green Belt policies, extensive consultation with parish councils, and greater weight to neighbourhood plans when assessing development sites. The Council argues that housing growth should reflect local needs rather than national targets alone and that previous appeal decisions should inform site selection. It seeks stronger countryside and biodiversity protections, better assessment of traffic impacts on rural roads, protection of Jodrell Bank’s surroundings, and preservation of the distinct rural-urban balance across Cheshire East.
Full text:
Under the existing Local Plan, recent developments have caused dramatic changes to the rural landscape
here in East Cheshire significantly impacting the environment and wildlife diversity. Marton Parish Council
joins other Parish Councils in welcoming the opportunity to respond to the Cheshire East Local Plan 2030
– 2045 Scoping Consultation. We welcome, in particular, the opportunity to engage in the process of
developing the new plan and represent the voice of the rural community which has been reduced to under
20% of the population.
This document present the response of Marton Parish Council and its paragraph numbering mirrors that
of the Consultation document.
Whilst the process has not allowed Marton Parish Council to formally consult its residents, it is confident
that this response reflects the wishes of residents which underpinned our Neighbourhood Plan, taking
subsequent changes into account. Accordingly, reference to “we” may reasonable be taken to reflect the
views of both Marton Parish Council and, more widely our residents.
Creating a vision and objectives 5.2 – 5.4
It is stated that the new plan should reflect the Cheshire East plan. This is largely silent about the need to
protect the rural countryside both for the sake of future generations and the general wellbeing of existing
urban communities.
In defining what is “distinctive”, we request that maximum weight be given to the following:
• the size shape and character of each Village community
• the protection of environmental and wildlife habitats and walking routes
• the peace and quiet of the elderly and other groups who are unable to move in response to
changes
• that the ability of small Villages to adapt to changes and new social norms which the changes will
usher in
• the wellbeing of urban communities in East Cheshire and the protection of their surrounding
green and pleasant land and distinctive local villages which defines both rural areas and
associated urban communities
• whilst under planning regulations heritage sites of significance have some protection, the nonexpert
community have a requirement to see the setting heritage sites protected from creeping
change which needs to be factored in to the Local Plan. See also para 5.125 – 5.127
Planning for Growth paras 5.5 – 5.7
New planning regulations have changed the whole approach to green belts, the countryside and green
areas. The new Local Plan represents an opportunity to define an imaginative vision for the rural urban
balance in Cheshire East. In the process we urge the following:
• that the vision is practical and not just aspirational
• that the reasoning behind green belt decisions, in particular, regarding boundary definition is fully
publicised
• that the trend towards defining green areas around urban communities is extended
Identifying and assessing sites
When identifying and assessing sites for development, we urge maximum consultation with aXected
Parish Councils and that relevant Neighbourhood Plans are accorded the maximum possible weightin
addition to the factors referred to relating to paras 2 – 4.
Green Belt and Strategic green gap paras 5.15 – 5.19
We note the following:
• we strongly agree with the need to prevent urban sprawl but encourage clear definition of what
the prevention of urban sprawl means in practice. In Marton, the need to protect the area around
Congleton from urban sprawl is a priority but so too is the need to protect the area between
Manchester and Stoke and this needs to be clearly articulated in the Local Plan.
• We strongly urge Cheshire East to communicate with and consult the Parish Councils of aXected
areas.
Spatial distribution para 5.24 – 5.26 and Housing para 5.30 – 5.32
We note the following:
• A key failure of recent Cheshire East Local Plans has been the lack of information about definition
of the source of Cheshire East’s housing needs. We encourage the principle that developments
should answer local need and not simply national targets. Where planning regulations require
that homes for needs emanating from outside the local area, outside funding should be provided.
An analysis of the need should/must shape the identification of sites. This will both reduce the
establishment of new disconnected communities within communities and allow for democratic
acceptance of the changes which accompany new developments
• When assessing suitable sites we strongly urge that the results of relevant appeals be given
maximum priority. This is both to save costs of potential future appeals but recognises that
communities which have previously successfully fought against developments in the past should
not be put through the angst of a fresh confrontation.
Development in the countryside para 29
We encourage the development of local polices that protect the environment and wild life diversity at the
parish level, particularly regarding the protection of wildlife routes. We strongly urge that the views of the
relevant Parish Council be sought .
Housing standards para 5.50 – 5.59
The imposition of standards should take into account local style and ensure that materials are
appropriate for the local area.
Transport and infrastructure 5.91– 5.95
In the past, the impact of developments on quiet roads has not been properly assessed. We recommend
that greater focus to this be adopted in the new Local Plan.
The protection of quiet roads is to be encouraged to promote cycling and walking. See also para 5.112.
When protecting Heritage sites, the importance of the whole of the relevant village or community to the
public’s recognition of the site should be fully considered and discussed with the local Parish Council.
Jodrell Bank World heritage Site para 5,129 – 5.130
We strongly recommend that the protection of the area around Jodrell Bank is not weakened in the new
Local Plan to allow for a possible resurgence of the Jodrell Bank facility.
Local plan scoping consultation
Respondent: Marton Parish Council
Representation Summary:
Marton Parish Council welcomes the opportunity to help shape the new Cheshire East Local Plan and emphasises stronger protection for the rural countryside, wildlife, heritage settings and village character. It calls for clear and transparent Green Belt policies, extensive consultation with parish councils, and greater weight to neighbourhood plans when assessing development sites. The Council argues that housing growth should reflect local needs rather than national targets alone and that previous appeal decisions should inform site selection. It seeks stronger countryside and biodiversity protections, better assessment of traffic impacts on rural roads, protection of Jodrell Bank’s surroundings, and preservation of the distinct rural-urban balance across Cheshire East.
Full text:
Under the existing Local Plan, recent developments have caused dramatic changes to the rural landscape
here in East Cheshire significantly impacting the environment and wildlife diversity. Marton Parish Council
joins other Parish Councils in welcoming the opportunity to respond to the Cheshire East Local Plan 2030
– 2045 Scoping Consultation. We welcome, in particular, the opportunity to engage in the process of
developing the new plan and represent the voice of the rural community which has been reduced to under
20% of the population.
This document present the response of Marton Parish Council and its paragraph numbering mirrors that
of the Consultation document.
Whilst the process has not allowed Marton Parish Council to formally consult its residents, it is confident
that this response reflects the wishes of residents which underpinned our Neighbourhood Plan, taking
subsequent changes into account. Accordingly, reference to “we” may reasonable be taken to reflect the
views of both Marton Parish Council and, more widely our residents.
Creating a vision and objectives 5.2 – 5.4
It is stated that the new plan should reflect the Cheshire East plan. This is largely silent about the need to
protect the rural countryside both for the sake of future generations and the general wellbeing of existing
urban communities.
In defining what is “distinctive”, we request that maximum weight be given to the following:
• the size shape and character of each Village community
• the protection of environmental and wildlife habitats and walking routes
• the peace and quiet of the elderly and other groups who are unable to move in response to
changes
• that the ability of small Villages to adapt to changes and new social norms which the changes will
usher in
• the wellbeing of urban communities in East Cheshire and the protection of their surrounding
green and pleasant land and distinctive local villages which defines both rural areas and
associated urban communities
• whilst under planning regulations heritage sites of significance have some protection, the nonexpert
community have a requirement to see the setting heritage sites protected from creeping
change which needs to be factored in to the Local Plan. See also para 5.125 – 5.127
Planning for Growth paras 5.5 – 5.7
New planning regulations have changed the whole approach to green belts, the countryside and green
areas. The new Local Plan represents an opportunity to define an imaginative vision for the rural urban
balance in Cheshire East. In the process we urge the following:
• that the vision is practical and not just aspirational
• that the reasoning behind green belt decisions, in particular, regarding boundary definition is fully
publicised
• that the trend towards defining green areas around urban communities is extended
Identifying and assessing sites
When identifying and assessing sites for development, we urge maximum consultation with aXected
Parish Councils and that relevant Neighbourhood Plans are accorded the maximum possible weightin
addition to the factors referred to relating to paras 2 – 4.
Green Belt and Strategic green gap paras 5.15 – 5.19
We note the following:
• we strongly agree with the need to prevent urban sprawl but encourage clear definition of what
the prevention of urban sprawl means in practice. In Marton, the need to protect the area around
Congleton from urban sprawl is a priority but so too is the need to protect the area between
Manchester and Stoke and this needs to be clearly articulated in the Local Plan.
• We strongly urge Cheshire East to communicate with and consult the Parish Councils of aXected
areas.
Spatial distribution para 5.24 – 5.26 and Housing para 5.30 – 5.32
We note the following:
• A key failure of recent Cheshire East Local Plans has been the lack of information about definition
of the source of Cheshire East’s housing needs. We encourage the principle that developments
should answer local need and not simply national targets. Where planning regulations require
that homes for needs emanating from outside the local area, outside funding should be provided.
An analysis of the need should/must shape the identification of sites. This will both reduce the
establishment of new disconnected communities within communities and allow for democratic
acceptance of the changes which accompany new developments
• When assessing suitable sites we strongly urge that the results of relevant appeals be given
maximum priority. This is both to save costs of potential future appeals but recognises that
communities which have previously successfully fought against developments in the past should
not be put through the angst of a fresh confrontation.
Development in the countryside para 29
We encourage the development of local polices that protect the environment and wild life diversity at the
parish level, particularly regarding the protection of wildlife routes. We strongly urge that the views of the
relevant Parish Council be sought .
Housing standards para 5.50 – 5.59
The imposition of standards should take into account local style and ensure that materials are
appropriate for the local area.
Transport and infrastructure 5.91– 5.95
In the past, the impact of developments on quiet roads has not been properly assessed. We recommend
that greater focus to this be adopted in the new Local Plan.
The protection of quiet roads is to be encouraged to promote cycling and walking. See also para 5.112.
When protecting Heritage sites, the importance of the whole of the relevant village or community to the
public’s recognition of the site should be fully considered and discussed with the local Parish Council.
Jodrell Bank World heritage Site para 5,129 – 5.130
We strongly recommend that the protection of the area around Jodrell Bank is not weakened in the new
Local Plan to allow for a possible resurgence of the Jodrell Bank facility.
Local plan scoping consultation
Respondent: Marton Parish Council
Representation Summary:
Marton Parish Council welcomes the opportunity to help shape the new Cheshire East Local Plan and emphasises stronger protection for the rural countryside, wildlife, heritage settings and village character. It calls for clear and transparent Green Belt policies, extensive consultation with parish councils, and greater weight to neighbourhood plans when assessing development sites. The Council argues that housing growth should reflect local needs rather than national targets alone and that previous appeal decisions should inform site selection. It seeks stronger countryside and biodiversity protections, better assessment of traffic impacts on rural roads, protection of Jodrell Bank’s surroundings, and preservation of the distinct rural-urban balance across Cheshire East.
Full text:
Under the existing Local Plan, recent developments have caused dramatic changes to the rural landscape
here in East Cheshire significantly impacting the environment and wildlife diversity. Marton Parish Council
joins other Parish Councils in welcoming the opportunity to respond to the Cheshire East Local Plan 2030
– 2045 Scoping Consultation. We welcome, in particular, the opportunity to engage in the process of
developing the new plan and represent the voice of the rural community which has been reduced to under
20% of the population.
This document present the response of Marton Parish Council and its paragraph numbering mirrors that
of the Consultation document.
Whilst the process has not allowed Marton Parish Council to formally consult its residents, it is confident
that this response reflects the wishes of residents which underpinned our Neighbourhood Plan, taking
subsequent changes into account. Accordingly, reference to “we” may reasonable be taken to reflect the
views of both Marton Parish Council and, more widely our residents.
Creating a vision and objectives 5.2 – 5.4
It is stated that the new plan should reflect the Cheshire East plan. This is largely silent about the need to
protect the rural countryside both for the sake of future generations and the general wellbeing of existing
urban communities.
In defining what is “distinctive”, we request that maximum weight be given to the following:
• the size shape and character of each Village community
• the protection of environmental and wildlife habitats and walking routes
• the peace and quiet of the elderly and other groups who are unable to move in response to
changes
• that the ability of small Villages to adapt to changes and new social norms which the changes will
usher in
• the wellbeing of urban communities in East Cheshire and the protection of their surrounding
green and pleasant land and distinctive local villages which defines both rural areas and
associated urban communities
• whilst under planning regulations heritage sites of significance have some protection, the nonexpert
community have a requirement to see the setting heritage sites protected from creeping
change which needs to be factored in to the Local Plan. See also para 5.125 – 5.127
Planning for Growth paras 5.5 – 5.7
New planning regulations have changed the whole approach to green belts, the countryside and green
areas. The new Local Plan represents an opportunity to define an imaginative vision for the rural urban
balance in Cheshire East. In the process we urge the following:
• that the vision is practical and not just aspirational
• that the reasoning behind green belt decisions, in particular, regarding boundary definition is fully
publicised
• that the trend towards defining green areas around urban communities is extended
Identifying and assessing sites
When identifying and assessing sites for development, we urge maximum consultation with aXected
Parish Councils and that relevant Neighbourhood Plans are accorded the maximum possible weightin
addition to the factors referred to relating to paras 2 – 4.
Green Belt and Strategic green gap paras 5.15 – 5.19
We note the following:
• we strongly agree with the need to prevent urban sprawl but encourage clear definition of what
the prevention of urban sprawl means in practice. In Marton, the need to protect the area around
Congleton from urban sprawl is a priority but so too is the need to protect the area between
Manchester and Stoke and this needs to be clearly articulated in the Local Plan.
• We strongly urge Cheshire East to communicate with and consult the Parish Councils of aXected
areas.
Spatial distribution para 5.24 – 5.26 and Housing para 5.30 – 5.32
We note the following:
• A key failure of recent Cheshire East Local Plans has been the lack of information about definition
of the source of Cheshire East’s housing needs. We encourage the principle that developments
should answer local need and not simply national targets. Where planning regulations require
that homes for needs emanating from outside the local area, outside funding should be provided.
An analysis of the need should/must shape the identification of sites. This will both reduce the
establishment of new disconnected communities within communities and allow for democratic
acceptance of the changes which accompany new developments
• When assessing suitable sites we strongly urge that the results of relevant appeals be given
maximum priority. This is both to save costs of potential future appeals but recognises that
communities which have previously successfully fought against developments in the past should
not be put through the angst of a fresh confrontation.
Development in the countryside para 29
We encourage the development of local polices that protect the environment and wild life diversity at the
parish level, particularly regarding the protection of wildlife routes. We strongly urge that the views of the
relevant Parish Council be sought .
Housing standards para 5.50 – 5.59
The imposition of standards should take into account local style and ensure that materials are
appropriate for the local area.
Transport and infrastructure 5.91– 5.95
In the past, the impact of developments on quiet roads has not been properly assessed. We recommend
that greater focus to this be adopted in the new Local Plan.
The protection of quiet roads is to be encouraged to promote cycling and walking. See also para 5.112.
When protecting Heritage sites, the importance of the whole of the relevant village or community to the
public’s recognition of the site should be fully considered and discussed with the local Parish Council.
Jodrell Bank World heritage Site para 5,129 – 5.130
We strongly recommend that the protection of the area around Jodrell Bank is not weakened in the new
Local Plan to allow for a possible resurgence of the Jodrell Bank facility.
Local plan scoping consultation
Respondent: Marton Parish Council
Representation Summary:
Marton Parish Council welcomes the opportunity to help shape the new Cheshire East Local Plan and emphasises stronger protection for the rural countryside, wildlife, heritage settings and village character. It calls for clear and transparent Green Belt policies, extensive consultation with parish councils, and greater weight to neighbourhood plans when assessing development sites. The Council argues that housing growth should reflect local needs rather than national targets alone and that previous appeal decisions should inform site selection. It seeks stronger countryside and biodiversity protections, better assessment of traffic impacts on rural roads, protection of Jodrell Bank’s surroundings, and preservation of the distinct rural-urban balance across Cheshire East.
Full text:
Under the existing Local Plan, recent developments have caused dramatic changes to the rural landscape
here in East Cheshire significantly impacting the environment and wildlife diversity. Marton Parish Council
joins other Parish Councils in welcoming the opportunity to respond to the Cheshire East Local Plan 2030
– 2045 Scoping Consultation. We welcome, in particular, the opportunity to engage in the process of
developing the new plan and represent the voice of the rural community which has been reduced to under
20% of the population.
This document present the response of Marton Parish Council and its paragraph numbering mirrors that
of the Consultation document.
Whilst the process has not allowed Marton Parish Council to formally consult its residents, it is confident
that this response reflects the wishes of residents which underpinned our Neighbourhood Plan, taking
subsequent changes into account. Accordingly, reference to “we” may reasonable be taken to reflect the
views of both Marton Parish Council and, more widely our residents.
Creating a vision and objectives 5.2 – 5.4
It is stated that the new plan should reflect the Cheshire East plan. This is largely silent about the need to
protect the rural countryside both for the sake of future generations and the general wellbeing of existing
urban communities.
In defining what is “distinctive”, we request that maximum weight be given to the following:
• the size shape and character of each Village community
• the protection of environmental and wildlife habitats and walking routes
• the peace and quiet of the elderly and other groups who are unable to move in response to
changes
• that the ability of small Villages to adapt to changes and new social norms which the changes will
usher in
• the wellbeing of urban communities in East Cheshire and the protection of their surrounding
green and pleasant land and distinctive local villages which defines both rural areas and
associated urban communities
• whilst under planning regulations heritage sites of significance have some protection, the nonexpert
community have a requirement to see the setting heritage sites protected from creeping
change which needs to be factored in to the Local Plan. See also para 5.125 – 5.127
Planning for Growth paras 5.5 – 5.7
New planning regulations have changed the whole approach to green belts, the countryside and green
areas. The new Local Plan represents an opportunity to define an imaginative vision for the rural urban
balance in Cheshire East. In the process we urge the following:
• that the vision is practical and not just aspirational
• that the reasoning behind green belt decisions, in particular, regarding boundary definition is fully
publicised
• that the trend towards defining green areas around urban communities is extended
Identifying and assessing sites
When identifying and assessing sites for development, we urge maximum consultation with aXected
Parish Councils and that relevant Neighbourhood Plans are accorded the maximum possible weightin
addition to the factors referred to relating to paras 2 – 4.
Green Belt and Strategic green gap paras 5.15 – 5.19
We note the following:
• we strongly agree with the need to prevent urban sprawl but encourage clear definition of what
the prevention of urban sprawl means in practice. In Marton, the need to protect the area around
Congleton from urban sprawl is a priority but so too is the need to protect the area between
Manchester and Stoke and this needs to be clearly articulated in the Local Plan.
• We strongly urge Cheshire East to communicate with and consult the Parish Councils of aXected
areas.
Spatial distribution para 5.24 – 5.26 and Housing para 5.30 – 5.32
We note the following:
• A key failure of recent Cheshire East Local Plans has been the lack of information about definition
of the source of Cheshire East’s housing needs. We encourage the principle that developments
should answer local need and not simply national targets. Where planning regulations require
that homes for needs emanating from outside the local area, outside funding should be provided.
An analysis of the need should/must shape the identification of sites. This will both reduce the
establishment of new disconnected communities within communities and allow for democratic
acceptance of the changes which accompany new developments
• When assessing suitable sites we strongly urge that the results of relevant appeals be given
maximum priority. This is both to save costs of potential future appeals but recognises that
communities which have previously successfully fought against developments in the past should
not be put through the angst of a fresh confrontation.
Development in the countryside para 29
We encourage the development of local polices that protect the environment and wild life diversity at the
parish level, particularly regarding the protection of wildlife routes. We strongly urge that the views of the
relevant Parish Council be sought .
Housing standards para 5.50 – 5.59
The imposition of standards should take into account local style and ensure that materials are
appropriate for the local area.
Transport and infrastructure 5.91– 5.95
In the past, the impact of developments on quiet roads has not been properly assessed. We recommend
that greater focus to this be adopted in the new Local Plan.
The protection of quiet roads is to be encouraged to promote cycling and walking. See also para 5.112.
When protecting Heritage sites, the importance of the whole of the relevant village or community to the
public’s recognition of the site should be fully considered and discussed with the local Parish Council.
Jodrell Bank World heritage Site para 5,129 – 5.130
We strongly recommend that the protection of the area around Jodrell Bank is not weakened in the new
Local Plan to allow for a possible resurgence of the Jodrell Bank facility.
Local plan scoping consultation
Jodrell Bank World Heritage Site
Respondent: Marton Parish Council
Representation Summary:
Marton Parish Council welcomes the opportunity to help shape the new Cheshire East Local Plan and emphasises stronger protection for the rural countryside, wildlife, heritage settings and village character. It calls for clear and transparent Green Belt policies, extensive consultation with parish councils, and greater weight to neighbourhood plans when assessing development sites. The Council argues that housing growth should reflect local needs rather than national targets alone and that previous appeal decisions should inform site selection. It seeks stronger countryside and biodiversity protections, better assessment of traffic impacts on rural roads, protection of Jodrell Bank’s surroundings, and preservation of the distinct rural-urban balance across Cheshire East.
Full text:
Under the existing Local Plan, recent developments have caused dramatic changes to the rural landscape
here in East Cheshire significantly impacting the environment and wildlife diversity. Marton Parish Council
joins other Parish Councils in welcoming the opportunity to respond to the Cheshire East Local Plan 2030
– 2045 Scoping Consultation. We welcome, in particular, the opportunity to engage in the process of
developing the new plan and represent the voice of the rural community which has been reduced to under
20% of the population.
This document present the response of Marton Parish Council and its paragraph numbering mirrors that
of the Consultation document.
Whilst the process has not allowed Marton Parish Council to formally consult its residents, it is confident
that this response reflects the wishes of residents which underpinned our Neighbourhood Plan, taking
subsequent changes into account. Accordingly, reference to “we” may reasonable be taken to reflect the
views of both Marton Parish Council and, more widely our residents.
Creating a vision and objectives 5.2 – 5.4
It is stated that the new plan should reflect the Cheshire East plan. This is largely silent about the need to
protect the rural countryside both for the sake of future generations and the general wellbeing of existing
urban communities.
In defining what is “distinctive”, we request that maximum weight be given to the following:
• the size shape and character of each Village community
• the protection of environmental and wildlife habitats and walking routes
• the peace and quiet of the elderly and other groups who are unable to move in response to
changes
• that the ability of small Villages to adapt to changes and new social norms which the changes will
usher in
• the wellbeing of urban communities in East Cheshire and the protection of their surrounding
green and pleasant land and distinctive local villages which defines both rural areas and
associated urban communities
• whilst under planning regulations heritage sites of significance have some protection, the nonexpert
community have a requirement to see the setting heritage sites protected from creeping
change which needs to be factored in to the Local Plan. See also para 5.125 – 5.127
Planning for Growth paras 5.5 – 5.7
New planning regulations have changed the whole approach to green belts, the countryside and green
areas. The new Local Plan represents an opportunity to define an imaginative vision for the rural urban
balance in Cheshire East. In the process we urge the following:
• that the vision is practical and not just aspirational
• that the reasoning behind green belt decisions, in particular, regarding boundary definition is fully
publicised
• that the trend towards defining green areas around urban communities is extended
Identifying and assessing sites
When identifying and assessing sites for development, we urge maximum consultation with aXected
Parish Councils and that relevant Neighbourhood Plans are accorded the maximum possible weightin
addition to the factors referred to relating to paras 2 – 4.
Green Belt and Strategic green gap paras 5.15 – 5.19
We note the following:
• we strongly agree with the need to prevent urban sprawl but encourage clear definition of what
the prevention of urban sprawl means in practice. In Marton, the need to protect the area around
Congleton from urban sprawl is a priority but so too is the need to protect the area between
Manchester and Stoke and this needs to be clearly articulated in the Local Plan.
• We strongly urge Cheshire East to communicate with and consult the Parish Councils of aXected
areas.
Spatial distribution para 5.24 – 5.26 and Housing para 5.30 – 5.32
We note the following:
• A key failure of recent Cheshire East Local Plans has been the lack of information about definition
of the source of Cheshire East’s housing needs. We encourage the principle that developments
should answer local need and not simply national targets. Where planning regulations require
that homes for needs emanating from outside the local area, outside funding should be provided.
An analysis of the need should/must shape the identification of sites. This will both reduce the
establishment of new disconnected communities within communities and allow for democratic
acceptance of the changes which accompany new developments
• When assessing suitable sites we strongly urge that the results of relevant appeals be given
maximum priority. This is both to save costs of potential future appeals but recognises that
communities which have previously successfully fought against developments in the past should
not be put through the angst of a fresh confrontation.
Development in the countryside para 29
We encourage the development of local polices that protect the environment and wild life diversity at the
parish level, particularly regarding the protection of wildlife routes. We strongly urge that the views of the
relevant Parish Council be sought .
Housing standards para 5.50 – 5.59
The imposition of standards should take into account local style and ensure that materials are
appropriate for the local area.
Transport and infrastructure 5.91– 5.95
In the past, the impact of developments on quiet roads has not been properly assessed. We recommend
that greater focus to this be adopted in the new Local Plan.
The protection of quiet roads is to be encouraged to promote cycling and walking. See also para 5.112.
When protecting Heritage sites, the importance of the whole of the relevant village or community to the
public’s recognition of the site should be fully considered and discussed with the local Parish Council.
Jodrell Bank World heritage Site para 5,129 – 5.130
We strongly recommend that the protection of the area around Jodrell Bank is not weakened in the new
Local Plan to allow for a possible resurgence of the Jodrell Bank facility.
For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our
help guide.
