Cheshire East consults on next phase of Local Plan
A public consultation has begun on the second part of the council’s Local Plan, which includes site allocations for more employment land in Crewe and housing development on Poynton Sports Club.
The consultation covers the council’s site allocations and development policies document, which allocates additional sites for development alongside the borough’s Local Plan, which was adopted in 2017 and runs to 2030.
Of the local centres in the report, the largest housing allocation is in Holmes Chapel where sites will support the delivery of 880 homes. Haslington has the second-largest at 480, followed by Bollington with 390; Shavington with 365; Alderley Edge with 250; and Disley and Audlem with 245 apiece.
Other towns and villages to have land allocated for housing include Chelford, where land for 220 homes is to be allocated; Prestbury with 115; and Mobberley with 60. In addition to the Local Plan, three extra sites are also proposed in Middlewich; these will provide a total of 210 homes. Poynton has also received an additional allocation of 80 homes on Poynton Sports Club, while a further 25 acres is to be allocated to allow the sports club to relocate.
Employment land also features in the document along with housing; again, Holmes Chapel has the largest allocation at 13 acres, while smaller allocations of under two acres are proposed at Shavington, Wrenbury, Disley, and Alderley Edge.
Two additional site allocations are proposed in Crewe to support the development of Bentley Motors’ campus, and land off Gresty Road to support further investment by Morning Foods in its existing site.
The latest consultation on the plan will run until 30 September, and can be accessed here.
Cllr Toni Fox, the council’s cabinet member for planning, said: “The current version of the SADPD document follows two previous rounds of public consultation and extensive engagement with town and parish councils during 2017 and 2018.
“We want to ensure that everyone who wants to comment on this plan is able to do so as simply and easily as possible. For that reason we have a range of ways available for people to view the document and to submit their comments as part of the consultation process.”
I object to more housing being built in Poynton with the existing flooding of the field at top of Dickens Lane being a particular concern. Following the severe flooding last month the Coppice bridge was completely destroyed and the brook breached its banks flooding the proposed building site! Poynton drains and lack of flood management systems means these types of flooding will become a regular occurrence if nothing is done to combat it!
I propose more trees be planted instead of bricks.
By Jane Barlow
I object to more houses being built , the issues regarding recent flooding need to be resolved
By Julie griffiths
I object to more housing in and around Poynton given the very poor drainage infrastructure and rising traffic congestion.
The soul of Poynton has long been it’s green location bounded as it is by fields and green belt. This is slowly being eroded and the cost to residents and visitors is hard to quantify but easy to feel. Poynton needs more green space not less and new housing should be concentrated on brown field sites already earmarked for redevelopment
By Iain Reddy
I object to more housing in and around Poynton given the very poor drainage infrastructure and rising traffic congestion.
The recent floods saw the sports club flood, building on this would have a catastrophic outcome!
Poynton needs more green space and more trees not less.
New housing should be concentrated on brown field sites already earmarked for redevelopment.
The traffic needs sorting.
More doctors need appointing to meet the current need before more pressure is added.
By Nicola Brundrett
The consultation process on the Poynton plan has not been clearly communicated. I have only heard about the consultation through neighbours and friends. I live opposite Poynton Sports club and have had no written communication on the proposals to build houses on the Sports club and move the Sports club to Glastonbury Drive. The plan talks about preserving green belt but then states that green belt will be used for new sports facilities!!! Both the sports club and Glastonbury were flooded in the recent months. No proposals should be progressed until the outcome of the flood enquiry is available. I echo other concerns raised about traffic congestion in the village. It feels like this plan is being pushed through without full consultation. I understand that there is now to be a referendum on the plan. How can a detailed plan be reduced to a single question of support/objection? The government have tried that course of action with disastrous outcomes.
By Clara Kenyon